City Commission - Regular Meeting

Just do it. Do what feels right, you know?

Good evening and welcome to the Monday, July 6th, 2026 West Fargo City Commission meeting. Please join me in the Pledge of Allegiance.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

All right, the next item is roll call. Emily?

Commissioner Jorgensen.

Present by Zoom.

Commissioner Zundel. Here. Commissioner Erickson.

Here.

Commissioner Steadman. Here. Commissioner Jurdwik.

Here. All right, next item is to approve the order of the agenda.

Movely approve. Second.

Any discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor, please say aye.

Aye. Aye.

Aye. Motion passes, all right. Approval of the minutes from the June 15th, 2026 commission meeting.

I'll move to approve.

Is there a second? Second, all right. Any discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor please say aye. Aye. Opposed? Passes. Building permits, item number F. Mayor?

Yes. I need to recuse myself from voting on the building permits, please.

All right.

I move we approve.

Is there a second?

I'll second. We have a motion and a second. Any further discussion?

Hearing none, all those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed? Motion passes. Our consent agenda, items A through B.

Any questions or comments?

I'll make a motion to approve the consent agenda.

All right, we have a motion to approve. Second. We have a second. Any discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed? The consent agenda passes. On to the regular agenda, and I don't believe we have any public comment tonight, is that correct?

That is correct.

All right. And no public hearing. So we will jump to item number three, the first reading of ordinance number 1281 relating to discharge of firearms and carrying loaded firearms in vehicles. Chief of Police, Peter Nielsen.

Good evening, Commission President Jerdavig, fellow commissioners. I stand before you tonight with the first reading of ordinance 1281, discharge of firearms, dangerous weapons within the city. The proposed change to this ordinance would be in section two, subsection number five. And what that states is persons lawfully participating in a management plan or program approved by the city commission for the control of deer or other animals within the city limits. Just a little bit of feedback on this. Back in June of 2022, the police department came to, in front of the commission, and regarding some firearm usage by the USDA. The USDA was contracted out by different entities, mainly Cargill in the city of West Fargo, and to have them come out and to euthanize some of the animals that would be coming up past on the property. The commission granted that conditional usage, but that only lasted for one year. So what we're proposing is to bring this change of the ordinance so we could go into a MOU or MOA with the USDA to allow them access to come into the city and to use a firearm to euthanize these animals. But with this gives us more clarity, more control over the situation because of the fact that now we have an actual MOA with them. It strictly advises the USDA what they can and cannot do. It also advises them of a procedure of how we'd like that to be done and what that would be was contacting Red River Dispatch, contacting the on-duty sergeant to know that they're gonna be at those, facilities during different times. So we think this is a good ordinance. We've had help with our city attorney and we believe that that this would be something that could benefit the USDA along with the Police Department. We also have Mr Brandon Nooner here. He's representative from USDA. If you have any questions, but at this time I stand for any questions on the first reading. Any questions?

I know you had mentioned that it would be basically number five on that first section. On that copy that we have, G and H are also underlined under number two. Are those additions due to century code changes? I'm assuming that's why that's in there?

Yes.

Okay. Sounds good. Thank you. That's all I have.

I just have a quick question, Chief Nielsen. Who will be monitoring to ensure that the rules set up that they do let you know that there's going to be firearm discharge? What happens if they don't? Who monitors that?

So if they wouldn't do that, they would break the MOA. So at that point, we would believe at that time the MOA would not be in accordance and it wouldn't be valid any longer. So they would not be able to utilize the procedures that they're looking to do.

Did I see that in the changes? That's the question.

I don't know if the MOA is actually in the agenda packet at this time because it hasn't been sent to the mayor and the city attorney, or the city manager. So I don't think that's, or maybe it is in there.

It's attached. It's attached, yeah. So presumably that person who did that not under the MOA would be, I presume, charged with discharging a firearm within city limits because they wouldn't be doing so under accordance of a contract, would that be?

Correct.

Okay.

Any additional questions? What's your preference?

I move that we approve the first reading.

All right. We have a motion.

I'll second that.

And a second. Any further discussion?

Hearing none, all those in favor? Oh, actually, we're We, a slight change moving forward, almost screwed it up, Emily. A slight change is moving forward on the regular agenda items. We're gonna be doing a roll call vote. So Emily, you wanna take over?

And it'll also be a random shuffle. I just did a literal shuffle button on the website.

So are we ready? Yeah, it's gonna be a surprise who gets to go first.

Jorgensen.

Here. I'm sorry, yay.

Zundel? Yes. Erickson?

Yes.

Steadman?

Yes.

Jurdovic?

Yes. Motion passes. Thank you. Item number four, Improvement District number 3006, Westwood Reconstruction, City Engineer Jerry Walsh.

Yes, thank you, Mr. Commission President and commissioners. Here before you tonight with an item for the Westwood Reconstruct Project, Improvement District number 3006. Essentially, this is a change order for the amount shown there, $154,911.80, where we would be installing the final asphalt lift to complete the streets for the neighborhood. Again, as you can see in the packet there, funding would be proposed to come from the Capital Improvement Sales Tax Fund. When we originally scoped this work, that was how we had anticipated completing that work, so no change from the intent there. Essentially, just a brief background and history behind this. It was desired, when we originally scoped the project, there was meetings with engineering staff, public work staff, our consultant engineer, about looking at essentially holding off on the final lift of asphalt. There's several communities in the area that's a common practice. And we wanted to try to see if it was something that we could implement in West Fargo. Over the course of the project now, you know, we've had some, you know, call it growing pains. We've learned some things. You know, one thing that, you know, Public Works had commented on is that, you know, it made their operations more difficult, more challenging. So that was something that, you know, we're certainly considering at this point. The other thing that was noted is just because there's that little lip, you know, between the curb and the asphalt, there is going to be some standing water that... you know, just commonly sits there until it, you know, evaporates. And then there was also identified that, you know, it is a potential tripping hazard throughout the neighborhood. you know, just something else to think about. But essentially at this point now, you know, we've observed pretty minimal sediment. There's been one full freeze-thaw cycle on the roads and the underground in the neighborhood. We have three options. We can install the final wear course now under the existing contract as is shown in the change order in the packet. We could potentially look to bid this work as a separate future project. Or we could delay the installation. Initially we had talked about just having Public Works put the final lift of asphalt in since for several years now they've been completing mill and overlays. Unfortunately, I'm sure everybody's aware of the pending litigation on that. So the jury's still out as to whether or not we'll be able to continue to do that. But again, here before you tonight, with that change order, our recommendation is that we proceed with approving the change order and install that final lift with the contractor we have under contract right now. And with that, I'm available for any questions you may have. Does anyone have any questions?

Just a quick question. Maybe it's terminology. When you say it's a change order, this is part of the original project. So the reason it's a change order is because we didn't do it originally, so we're coming back now to finish the project, and that's why it's a change order?

Great question. So essentially, this was not going to be part of the original project. And Public Works had intended, like I said, to just do this with likely capital improvement sales tax. And so now we're making it part of the project. Great question. Great clarification.

Thank you.

Any other questions?

I'll make a motion to approve.

All right, we have a motion to approve. Is there a second? Second. We have a second. Any additional discussion?

Hearing none. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Wallace, if you feel comfortable answering the question, moving forward with this project and foregoing doing the work ourselves internally, that doesn't have any bearing on anything with that litigation, does it?

NOPE, NOT THAT I'M AWARE, COMMISSIONER. GREAT QUESTION.

OKAY. THANK YOU.

YOU BET.

ALL RIGHT.

ALL RIGHT, I'LL DO THE ROLL CALL. JORGENSEN? ZUNDEL? YES. ERIKSON?

YES.

STEDMAN? YES. JORDEVICK?

YES. Motion passes. Thank you. All right. Number five is our proposed organizational appointments and assignments. That one is assigned to me. How fun. I won't go through all of this, but just to kind of make sure to call out a couple changes from how this has been done in the past. You'll notice that the portfolio assignments have changed to really just have a primary portfolio and getting rid of the secondary portfolios, which is about driving some clarity, and also to map our portfolio assignments to our city leadership structure. So that's kind of the main item. The only other one that I will call out, just so that people don't think it's a typo, because it's not, is former Mayor Dardis is going to be appointed to continue to be in the seat for the Lake Agassiz Water Authority. So, any questions or discussion? Since it's my motion, or my topic, I will make the motion to approve. Second. All right, we have a motion and a second. Any further discussion? All right, we can vote. Emily?

Jorgensen? YES.

THE PORTFOLIO ASSIGNMENTS HAVE PASSED. ITEM NUMBER 6, DIRECT STAFF TO WORK ON POLICY OPTIONS REGARDING THE USE OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT SALES TAX FUNDS. SO TO TRY TO SIMPLIFY AND HELP PEOPLE UNDERSTAND WHAT THIS ASK IS. ANY TIME OVER QUITE A FEW YEARS THAT THE CITY HAS PROVIDED SOME TYPE OF AN INCENTIVE FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, THE CONSTRUCTION OF A BUILDING, FOR EXAMPLE, AND IF IT WAS A PILOT OR A TIF, SOME TYPE OF TAX INCENTIVE THAT WAS PASSED. So for example, if a property was paying $5,000 a year in property tax and that building gets torn down and it's now, the new structures should be being taxed 50 grand a year, but for maybe a period of five years they're continuing to only pay the five. So that has an impact in theory on our budget. What I'm suggesting is to look at the options and to come back to the commission to to approve that, but to look at paying for that out of economic development sales tax. So basically as part of our budgeting process, we would look like, what are those, those incentive dollars that we would sort of be missing, I guess you could say for the, you know, 2027 and in conversations, the estimate is probably four to $500,000 in that ballpark. And to sort of make the budget and I'm, Dustin might not like me using this word, but I'll say it, make the budget whole for the dollars that we would have otherwise had if those incentives hadn't been given out and the building had been built. So that's the general idea. I don't know if you guys have any questions. Hopefully I explained that well enough.

Mayor Dernvig, I was just going to mention, I fully support exactly what you're... This isn't an actionable item, by the way, is it? This is just...

Well, we are taking a vote to direct city staff to, so it is.

So fully support this. So when I was campaigning the last six months, there were a lot of different conversations about the idea of how there's a clear opportunity cost with giving out incentives that you're losing out on that tax revenue, property tax revenue, over the duration of those incentives being in place. And this, if feasible, on multiple fronts, I think it's a really good idea. So I just wanted to tell you that. I thought it was a good idea.

I appreciate that. Any other discussion or questions?

Do you have sort of a guideline of what you're looking for so that the staff doesn't just kind of wonder what you're talking about? Yeah.

So, I mean, it's very specific in the conversations I've had around commercial development. So this is not looking at housing incentives or anything like that. It is specific to commercial properties because those, you know, arguably any incentive that has been provided by the Commission has been done so I would assume under the belief of economic development and you know voters have given us you know an economic development sales tax that we can utilize to offset that. Any other questions? You look like you have a question. All right, well again, since this is mine, I'll make the motion to direct city staff to work on a policy options regarding the use of these dollars as discussed.

Second.

We have a second. Any further discussion? Hearing none, Emily.

Jorgensen.

Yes.

ZUNDEL? YES. ERIKSON?

YES.

STEDMAN? YES. JERDIFICK?

YES. MOTION PASSES. ITEM NUMBER 7, DIRECT STAFF TO WORK ON COMMUNITY OUTREACH OPTIONS REGARDING DATA CENTERS. Trying to make this quick, first off, so there's no rumors. There's no conversation being had. There's nothing I'm aware of. But through the campaign and in talking with people and just around the entire country, there's a lot of challenges within communities around data centers. And even locally we can see with what Applied Digital stepping into Harwood a year ago. And those projects come really quick. They can be... There can be a lot of misinformation in the public. And there's a lot of opinions on both sides of that. And just under the belief of wanting to be proactive, I really, as part of this commission, don't want to wait until the day an opportunity could present itself and then not have had the opportunity before that to gather community input. And so this motion is really to direct city staff to look at options for community outreach. both to maybe dispel some of the rumors and misinformation out there, but also to kind of try to get a gauge as to where the community is. Is West Fargo open to that kind of development? Are we not? And that empowers us as a commission. I think it empowers us from an economic development perspective, knowing that answer. And so that's the general idea.

Do you, I'm presuming this is gonna have a fiscal loan attached to it, so are you proposing that this would come out of economic development sales tax?

IN TERMS OF LIKE DOING LIKE A PUBLIC FORM OR SOMETHING, ANY SMALL COST.

OR LIKE SURVEYS OR I MEAN ANYTHING, MAILERS, ANYTHING THAT WE WOULD HAVE.

YEAH, I THINK IT'S DIRECTING CITY STAFF TO COME BACK WITH A LITTLE BIT OF A PLAN, WHETHER THAT'S A SURVEY, WHETHER THAT'S A COMMUNITY FORM. OKAY. IF THERE IS A REQUEST FOR DOLLARS, THEN THAT WOULD PROBABLY.

SO YOU'RE JUST LOOKING FOR LIKE HOW WE WOULD APPROACH THE PUBLIC ON THAT.

YEP, THIS IS REALLY ABOUT, YOU KNOW, DIRECTING CITY STAFF SO THE TIME COMMITMENT TO COME UP WITH A PLAN AND COME BACK. so that we can be proactive, I guess, in terms of how we look at this topic.

I like it. Do you want to make the primary motion? Because you go three for three. Question or comment?

You're okay? Mayor, I just wanted to add one thing. So if you've been following the legislative interim committees that have been happening, and in the spirit of expedition because of, you know, because things are happening so quickly out, you know, in the private landscape, If the only revision if I could add to it is if we could add a duration or kind of a deadline for staff to get back to us by the end of the third Wednesday, or the third Monday next month, if that is feasible.

Okay, so be timely is what we're looking for. Yes, yep.

I completely would agree with that. Just to add exactly what you were saying, because things, we wouldn't want to pass on something because we didn't do our due diligence with getting industry, different coalition groups to come in and educate us, so.

Yeah. I think that sounds wonderful.

Awesome.

Any further questions? If none, again, I will make my own motion to direct staff along with what Commissioner Erickson suggested in terms of time frame. Is there a second?

Second.

All right. Any further discussion? Hearing none, we'll go ahead and vote.

Jorgensen.

Yes.

Zundel? Yes. Erickson? Yes. Stedman? Yes. Chertovich?

Yes. All right. Our city administrator's report. Dustin Scott, city administrator.

Well, good evening, Mayor and commissioners. It's great to see fresh new faces up there. Looking forward to working with all of you. Just a few updates tonight. First, the first draft of the preliminary budget as has been scheduled will be in front of you at the next commission meeting. That again is the first draft of the entire preliminary budget. What we presented last month to the prior commission was really just an outline and an estimated position line. So what you'll see on July 20th will be a lot more detail as it will be again our preliminary budget. In the coming days and over the next couple weeks prior to that meeting, you will receive a lot of budget information. That'll be all of the departmental detail as well as some of the other, the special funds that we have and really all of the meat of that budget so that you are fully prepared to provide feedback and comments at the July 20th meeting. Any questions on the preliminary budget?

All right.

along the financial lines, update on our 2025 annual audit. Work is progressing nicely. We hope that I'd Bailey could even have a draft ready for that July 20th commission meeting as well. Our finance director Willie is gonna touch base with him here and solidify that schedule. If not, hopefully the first meeting in August. So again, things are going well with our 2025 audit. And last, just more of a save the date announcement. We are planning to hold our annual employee appreciation event September 24th. That is a Thursday. And similar to last year, we are proposing to hold this at the city plaza at the lights. Pending weather, if there is bad weather, we will pivot to a backup plan. But right now, just save the date for September 24th at the lights. With that, any other questions for me? Thank you.

Correspondence? All right. Any non-agenda items? All right. Do we have a motion to adjourn? So moved. Second?

Second.

All right. We stand adjourned. 25 minutes, not bad.