City Commission - Regular Meeting

motion carried. Next order of business is B building permits. Commissioner Jorgensson. I would like to recuse myself from voting on this. Commissioner Jorgensson is recused from bu voting on the building permits due to a conflict. Moved to approve. Commissioner Anderson moves to approve the building permits as presented. Is there a second? Second. Commissioner Zundell seconds. We have a motion and the second to approve the building permits as presented. Is there any discussion? Hearing none. All those in favor, please signify by saying I. I.

Opposed. Motion carried. We are now on the consent agenda. The consent agenda cons is items A through I. Motion to approve. Commissioner Jorgensson moves to approve the consent agenda. Items A through I. Is there a second? Second. Commissioner Anderson second. We have a motion and a second to approve the consent agenda as presented. Items A through I. Is there any discussion? Hearing none. All those in favor, please signify by saying I.

I. opposed. Motion carried. Moving on, we are now on the regular agenda. First order of business is public comment. Madam Secretary, do we have anybody signed up for public comment? Uh yes, we have one uh person signed up for public comment. That is Trinity Shaw. All right, Mr. Shoff, please take the microphone. Thank you. Yes.

This is in regards to number six of what's on the agenda for this evening. Energy Tech Systems asserts the request for quotation process for the security camera and door access upgrades was administered inconsistently and alleges that the select vendor had access to information and requirements that were not provided to ETSS. ETS states that it was the original designer for the Genitech security conversion and has been coordinating with city IT staff since early February 2024. ETS reports submitting multiple proposals following discussions and site walkthroughs. ETS states that it was asked to modify its proposal totals to remain under financial thresholds. First it was 250,000 and later 500,000 to align with procurement guidelines based on the understanding that the project would be would proceed under ETS who had developed the scope of work. ETS states that despite the understanding, the project was later issued as a public RFQ. ETS further notes that an article in the Fargo forum publicly cited a cost estimate matching ETSs's total proposal for access control, video, and camera upgrades. ETS states that during the RFQ process, it was not informed of certain mandatory requirements until after the deadline had passed. specifically that many cameras over 4 megapixels needed to be replaced as well. We were also told hours before the first deadline that our proposals needed to be separated, not giving us enough time and it affected our ability to submit a responsive proposal. ETS disputes the city stated reason for rejection which included minimal configuration and site visit considerations. ETSs contends that its proposal matched the agreed requirements, that it did conduct site visits, and that its

history with the city demonstrates reliability. In summary, ETSS feels they were ultimately misled throughout a long collaboration, denied key information during the RFQ process, and rejected for reasons they believe are inaccurate or unfair. That's all I have.

Thank you, M. Shock. As the secretary stated there, there is only one person signed up for public comment. We move on to item number two in the regular agenda, which is public hearings. We have no items on the agenda this evening that require us by law to have a public hearing. Thus, we move on to item number three. Item number three is a Capital Credit Union neighborhood revitalization program. We're going to call on Mr. Erin Nelson, the director of planning and zoning for this presentation. Good evening and welcome.

Good evening, President Dardis and commissioners. So, item three is a request to approve Capital Credit Union as an additional financial partner for the city's neighborhood revitalization program. Uh, as a quick reminder, the neighborhood revitalization program is intended to encourage reinvestment in the city's older neighborhoods by providing low interest home improvement loans for qualifying homes in West Fargo located north of I94 and with an assessed value of $300,000 or less. Uh historically the city has partnered with Gate City Bank to offer this program since uh annually since 2019 and you may recall I was here in front of you at the last meeting uh to renew the program in partnership with Gate City Bank for 2026 um just last uh meeting. But with the uh addition of Capital Credit Union as a loan provider, applicants would be able to choose between two different uh lenders with comparable interest rates. There would be no other changes to the program details or qualification criteria. So essentially, we're just adding an additional um lender option to the program. So the recommended action tonight is to approve Capital Credit Union as a neighborhood revitalization partner and to direct staff to coordinate this partnership. However, prior to taking action, uh Lauren Vandal with Capital Credit Union is here tonight and I know she'd like to say a few words as well. Uh outside of that, I'm happy to answer any questions you may have for staff. Thank you.

Hand over to Lauren. Good evening and welcome.

Good evening. Thank you. Um, hello. My name is Lauren and I'm the consumer loan manager at our Fargo Veterans location. And I'm here to say that Capital Credit Union is excited to be joining Gate City Bank with this neighborhood revital revitalization program that provides equity support to qualifying homes. This is our first year offering the program in West Fargo. Uh, we are currently offering it in our Bismar and Mandan markets. Um, and we look forward to expanding these opportunities and strengthening the neighborhoods in West Fargo. So, if you have any questions, please let me know. Thank you. All right, commissioners. Any questions for the lady? Any questions for Aaron? I motion to approve. Commissioner Jorgensson moves to approve the Capital Credit Union neighborhood revitalization program as presented. Is there a second?

Second. Commissioner Zundell seconds. We have a motion and a second to approve the revitalization program offered by Capital Credit Union. Is there any discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor, please signify by saying I. I opposed. Thank you. Thank you on behalf of the community of West Fargo. We appreciate that very much. Thank you. Thank you.

Uh as stated earlier, item number four has been withdrawn from the agenda for this evening. Next order of business is item number five. Item number five is a CIP project tree planting 9inth Street West from 32nd Avenue to 52nd Avenue. We calling on Logan Jacobson uh excuse me I have down that uh that Matthew is going to be also with you. He's in the audience. So Logan please. Good evening Commission President Dardis and commissioners. Yes. Tonight I am here to uh talk about the CIP tree planting project for the year which goes on 9th Street West from 32nd Avenue down to 52nd Avenue. Um there will be 129 29 trees planted in this area. Uh they'll be filling in the gaps in both the east and west boulevards. Um we have went out for request for proposals and we selected a bid of 52,000 from Greenear Landscaping. Um so tonight I am asking for approval of the project uh for the contract with Greenear Landscaping and the total $52,000 from CIP funds. And I stand for any questions you might have.

Are there any questions for Mr. Jacobson? Move to approve. Commissioner Anderson moves to approve item number five, the tree planning from 9th Street West from 32nd Avenue to 52nd Avenue as presented. Is there a second? Second. Commissioner Jorgensson seconds. We have a motion and a second. Is there any more any discussion? Excuse me. Hearing none. All those in favor, please signify by saying I. I. Opposed. Motion carried. Thank you, sir.

Thank you. Next order of business is item number six, a request to award a contract for a security camera and door access improvements. We call on Haidider Howitzer, director of information technology. Good evening and welcome,

Commission President and Commissioners. Good evening. The city has issued um RFP for Genitech video surveillance and access control system as part of the approved 2024 CIP. Uh we received three proposals and one was rejected leaving two to evaluate. The staff evaluated the proposals based on overall value for the city including the system design, coverage and cost. Based on the evaluation, uh staff recommends awarding the contract to High Point Networks in the amount of $483,76 as their proposal met all requirements and provides the best value for the project. The project is within the budget and is anticipated anticipated to begin in June and complete by Q4 and 2026. And this price is valid through um April 13. Any questions?

Questions for Haidider? I guess based on public comment today, have we reviewed with legal the bidding process? And if we legally rejected a bit of it, we have not uh legal I don't think but um the one that was rejected it was uh based on other criteria. It was not ETS. ETSs was not rejected. Do you have any thoughts on that, Miss Schmidt?

It's tough not having seen the the RFQ or been involved in the process. So when the RFP went out, was it a qualification bid or a low bidder? Was there any statements made in the RFP with regard to how this would, you know, the final award would go? It would be based on know the overall um and not cost. You're saying qualifications as well as Yep. Okay. Was the bid that we received the low bidder overall? Would they have been had the bid been accepted, would have they been the lowest bidder? No,

it the package was basically um it's the design, coverage, and cost. So, who were uh who did we have from your team, your IT team? Who was the procurement team that reviewed the bids? It was all of us. It five uh six staff. Six staff members from IT. Yes. Okay. Any staff from administration? Um I have Nick and Dustin looked over Okay. Very good. The process when the Mr. When the items were brought up, was everybody on the same playing field? Was everybody notified of everything at the same time?

We had a discussion about it. Um and majority of the guys were leaning toward High Point. No, I was asking when there's if there was changes made to the the bids in the process like that, it was stated that, you know, he only had a couple hours. Was everybody given the same notification of those bids? Yeah. At the same time. Okay. Um, it wasn't a few hours. Okay. But everybody was notified of all the changes at the same time. Yes. Okay. That clarifies it. Thank you. So for clarification on on my emails, please keep your comments to yourself.

So I'm less familiar with the bidding process and some of these intricacies. Commissioner Jorgensson, you probably have a better understanding than than I do or or anybody else on staff, but in a situation like this, I guess, were you notified prior to this meeting that there was some items in question as to how the bid went would be my question number one. And number two, if we tabled this to do a legal review of the bidding process, how does that work? If you said the if the bid is good through the 13th, would we have to subsequently call a special meeting and approve the bid before the 13th so that we don't have to start all over? I would that

good questions.

Yeah, I would think we might need to if we want to keep the price as it is. The problem with the prices they went up on March 17 from Genitech themselves due to shortage with um hard drives and RAM. So, we don't really know and we don't have a solid number on how many how long it's going to take for them to push the next increase in the price. Okay. Anything else? How would you like to proceed, commissioners? Not that I'm trying to sign us all up for an extra meeting, but I tend to lean towards

Well, we do have a board of equalization, which is a city commission on the 14th, I believe. But that's after the 13th. That's after the 17th. Well, it's the 13th, Mr. Howitzer, that you said. Uh, yes. Sorry. Uh, was uh April 13. And I have High Point um right here. I was just going to I'm wondering if you if you have any insight. Kyle, what do you think? Do we have time? If do you want me to come up to the mic or just stop from here? Probably the mic if that's okay with you, please.

So, these price increases are being driven by the manufacturers. There's a a shortage of RAM and hard drives in the market today. Um, and so manufacturer quotes all across the board, not just Genitech, they're typically only good for 7 to 14 days now because of these price increases. It's fluctuating that much. So my quote from Genitech says it's good till the 13th. I can't guarantee that they will honor the pricing after that date. So even on like the 14th? No. Well, you wouldn't get the 14th of their meetings not until the night of the 14th. Yeah. So be the 15th.

But I think we need to do our due diligence. I think that's more important than anything. I think it's more important than anything else that we do our due diligence and we we look at this. So I'm I'm in favor of tableabling this until and then setting up a special meeting before Well, we could do it at the equalization. We can't because the equalization is after

well the deadline. Yep. By day. So if we miss the deadline with this process, okay, so we we do a legal review, let's say we risk it, we wait till the 14th. Well, again, this is a special meeting that I think would take 15 minutes to say we met the we did it legal, eyes dotted, tees crossed. So I I would be in favor of Mishmid if you think you could do a review before the 13th and even if you can't because I think that's probably more important. But um I would tend towards leaning to try and schedule a special meeting. Okay.

Prior if Mishmid can review it and provide some or the other question I would have is we could approve the bid contingent upon legal review. Is are we allowed to do that? What if you want to resend the bid if it something shows up? But if we if we approve a bid contingent upon legal approval, does that cover that? I'd be much more comfortable just tableabling it. Yeah. Yeah. I don't I mean in terms of if you're making it contingent upon legal review, if I find something, I'd want to bring it back to you and have you make the decision as opposed to

So I would make the motion that we table this item pending legal review and schedule a special meeting before April 13th. I have a motion. Is there a second? Second. Commissioner Anderson. Second. We have a motion and a second to u table the security camera and door access improvements till a later date. We're not going to say a date yet because of the review that is required. Um giving legal enough time to do whatever they have to do. So, uh I hope that that's acceptable to the motion maker and the second that we don't put any time on it. So, Is there any discussion?

I think it's a great idea. We need to do things right and some flags were raised. So, we have a motion in a second to uh table the security camera and door access improvements as presented by the director of technology Haidider Howitzer. Thank you. Is there any further discussion? Hearing none. All those in favor, please signify by saying I. I. Opposed. Motion carried. Thank you, gentlemen. Thank you. So, clarification. Do we schedule a special meeting tonight? What is the requirement for how many day notice? One week. There's a specific date. It's ample time, right?

Yeah. Okay. Well, I mean, as soon as you set the date, we'll provide. Very good. So, if you'd be in communication with Mr. Scott, obviously Mr. Scott's not with us this evening and myself if as to when you've uh concluded your legal review and then uh at that point in time Mr. Scott and I will set forth and reach out to the commissioners uh on a potential date. Okay, that sounds good. Just a heads up, I'm headed for Texas for a conference tomorrow afternoon. So I will probably be remote. Okay, through the end of the week. So

that's fine as long as you can provide your legal expertise on it. We appreciate it. We move on. Moving on to item number seven. It's project vote. Did we vote? Sorry. Did we vote? I was distracted. I'm so sorry. Continue. I'm the one that's supposed to goof that up. I know. I know. I'm sorry. Item number seven is project number 1352, sanitary sewie system rehabilitation, spot repairs. We're going to call in Dan Hansen, our senior director of community and development. The order of this discussion is about to approve both an engineers report and a task order and direct the engineer to prepare plans and specification. Good evening, Mr. Hansen. Welcome.

Uh thank you commissioner, president Dartis and commissioners. Uh on July 7th, uh the city commission directed the engineer to prepare this engineers report uh for this reference project. It's been completed and it is attached for reference. Uh basically uh in our core area um study uh this project was identified very high in the priority of projects that we need to do. Uh one of the things that is in the algorithm of what of project priorities sanitary sewer was paramount as far as scoring goes. Uh, one thing that we've we're at the tail end of completing our rear yard alley and access uh uh sanitary sewer repairs project that we've been doing over the past it'll be this will be the third summer now that we're finishing that project up. What we discovered during that project is a lot of that old uh uh VCP uh clay tile pipe is in very poor condition. Uh and so we've done uh public works and more engineering have worked together uh public works to televise the the area more engineering to take a look at all those televising tapes and work with uh public works to identify areas that we need to go in and make repairs uh on on the piping. Uh what we found is there is there is a lot of need out there. Uh we took a look through all of the televising. We had, I believe, three scoping meetings with public works and and more engineering to go through what the scope of this project would be. I um the original 2024 CIP identified this as a $1.69 million project. Uh all to be paid for using capital improvement sales tax. After reviewing the televising, there really wasn't anything that we said we should just wait on on this. So the areas that they did televise that public works wanted to uh pursue corrections with more engineering and and engineering staff all uh were in agreement that we we definitely don't want to leave some of these areas

because a collapsed sewer pipe could lead to um sewage backups and issues with homes. So uh there is a map in the packet uh that you can see uh a number of different areas. These are basically for the most part spot repairs uh where there's issues. Got lots of sanitary pictures that I am not showing you tonight that make it uh very visible that there are issues uh in need of correction. So we're looking to uh approve both the engineers report and the task order to direct the engineer to prepare the plans and specifications. Uh in that engineers report, let's see if I can find here. There we go. uh the total cost of the estimated cost of the project with uh we put a 30% contingency in there uh which is quite a high contingency compared to what we would do for a normal project. However, this is based off of experience with the rear yard alley project. The things that once we got into it and dug into it that we found. Um there was many things that we dug up that we found that we went that there was it was impossible to know until it got dug up that we couldn't leave. We ended up fixing it. So, we're leaving a higher contingency amount in this report just due to the fact that based off of experience, we know there are going to be issues that we find. And every time we find them, the contractor standing there saying, should I fix it or bury it? And we always leaned towards fixing it. We did not want to leave anything in the ground that shouldn't be fixed prior to to backfilling. So, uh, with that, we would be looking to approve the engineers report and task order directing the engineer to prepare plans and specifications. And with that, I would entertain any questions.

Questions for Mr. Hansen on projects 1352? Would this be something?

Sorry. Would this be something to be looking to get done this year yet? uh we'd have a completion date just because we we are a little bit late in the bidding process and uh we have triaged the what's the what's the worst um and we're going to have interim completion dates of this year for those but the completion date uh for the project is going to be in 2027 to allow contractors the ability um cuz in in between bigger jobs they can come and they can take take over a couple different spots. Uh I don't envision this is one where a contractor just mobilizes in and just start to finish it. I think this is going to be a great filler job that you're going to find for contractors. And by giving them the leeway of having into next year, given that we're doing the worst ones this year, but uh there are the some of them that aren't the worst, um letting them fit that into their schedule is going to lead towards us getting better bid prices in our opinion. So,

thank you. Yep. I would have everyone note that capital improvement sales tax is how we're going to pay the $2,266,000. There are no special assessments going to the taxpayers on this project. I'll move to approve. Commissioner Anderson moves to approve project number 1352. Is there a second, please? I'll second. Commissioner Jorgensson seconds. We have a motion and a second to approve project 1352, the sanitary sewer system rehabilitation spot repairs. Is there any further discussion? Hearing none. All those in favor, please signify by saying I. I.

Opposed? Motion carried. Thank you, Mr. Hansen. Thank you. We move on to item number eight, uh, downtown pedestrian improvements. Dan Hansen, senior director of community development. Again, he's going to be a busy man this evening. Create project number 2305 and authorize the purchase and installation of RRFB. Mr. Hansen.

Thank you, Commissioner, President Dartis, and Commissioners. Uh this is a project uh that was brought to our attention and uh ba basically in our downtown area um as far as traffic uh goes and as far as the amount of luminires that you need to hit the ground from the street lights that we have downtown it is designed adequately. However, in low light conditions, uh it is um brought to our attention that it would be good to have uh some higher level visibility, pedestrian improvements, uh such as these um they're called rapid reflecting flashing beacons. That's what an RRFB is. It's a solar powered push button uh light that that activates upon pushing the light. Uh and that uh basically just helps alert drivers to know that there is somebody that's going to be crossing the street. Uh there's an exhibit in here. Uh we took a look at all nine intersections downtown and we came up with the ones that are identified uh the three different streets, four different crossings uh for this work to be done. Uh the work would be the signs would be ordered and then the work would be installed by our public works staff and the estimated cost is approximately $5400 per crosswalk. So, with those four different crosswalks, we're looking at $21,600 uh for these to be installed. Uh, one thing that I would say is uh a street signal does need warrants to be installed. A hawk system needs warrants to be installed. These RFBs do not need warrants to be installed. They are uh standard equipment that you see throughout the community. So, I believe a lot of the traveling public are familiar with these and and I do think that it would be a good safety feature to be able to put in in our downtown area during low light conditions. So, with that, we would look to create the project and authorize the purchase and the installation of these RFBs in our downtown area.

Stand. If I recall correctly, I believe it was Commissioner Anderson that had concerns about this with the additional foot traffic that as our downtown has been uh um developing that uh pedestrian safety was becoming a concern. Uh so this is money well spent I believe. Uh I often see people trying to attempt to cross uh downtown Cheyenne and so on. very pleased with this. And again, there will be no special assessments to any of the adjoining uh businesses or the like. This will be paid for by capital improvement sales tax.

Correct. And the RR um what the heck is it here? RFBS. Yeah, that's the the actual term is a rapid reflecting flashing beacons. Correct. Commissioners move we appro Oh, I'm so sorry. No, I was going to let Robin run. Goes back to his idea. Really? We've been fighting over motions all night and just really can't seem to find a cadence. So, all right. Well, I will move to approve. Commissioner Anderson moves to approve. Is there a second? I will second.

Commissioner Glendell second. We have a motion and a second to approve the downtown pedestrian improvements and create a project uh 2305. Is there any discussion? Hearing none. All those in favor, please signify by saying I. I. Opposed.

Motion carries. Item number nine, improvement district number 309, 1st Avenue East reconstruction, Cheyenne Street to 4th Street East. Again, we call on Mr. Hansen, our senior director of community and development. The purpose of this discussion is to accept the bid and award a contract comp contingent upon the North Dakota uh environmental review of approval. Mr. Hansen.

Thank you, Commissioner President Dartis and Commissioners. Um this was a project that was also identified as a highly uh needed project uh for a couple different reasons. One is there is an existing uh sanitary lift station uh that was originally placed uh to be temporary. It was supposed to be decommissioned. Part of this project is taking in decommissioning that lift station and redirecting that sanitary sewage over from fourth over to Second. Uh with that the streets uh to the west of second are in very much in disrepair and need of replacement. The existing water mane on the project is uh for the most part asbestous uh concrete pipe and um there we would be looking to reconstruct that entire corridor from Cheyenne Street all the way east to fourth. Uh this is a project that was originally brought uh forth uh I'm sorry maybe not originally brought but the engineers report was produced uh in September of last year and it was brought forth with an opinion of probable cost of about $2.5 million. On March uh 26th uh we opened bids that we received and we received two bids in the amount of 3,56,778 and $3,878,325. Seline Brothers was the low bid. And in the first paragraph of my um of my council packet there, it says their amount was $2,56,778. That's a typo. They were the low bid in the amount of $3,56,778. That amount is about 39.45% higher than what the engineers statement of cost was uh in the in the engineers report in September. Um by the time that uh when that original statement of cost

was produced in that engineers report, the project had not been designed yet. By the time that we got through design, the engineer had a bidding cost estimate and I can I put together a chart that I can find here. Um, so this kind this kind of shows uh where we started from in the engineers report on September 22nd of 2025. Uh, total cost of the project $3.86 million. But if you look towards the top, the construction without contingencies was that $2,514,000. Again, by the time that the project was designed and went out for bids and advertised for bids, the estimate of the cost of the project was $3,50,000 when that went out to bid. When bids came in, again, the low bid as the results uh and presented tonight is $3,56,778. So, the actual bid is about 16.67% 67% higher than the pre-bid engineers estimate, but again it's 39.45% higher than what was originally presented in September. So that kind of paints a picture of the history of the estimates and the finances of the project. A couple things that I would add to this is that um this does not include any of uh water main uh the grant funds. You can see in the engineers report uh we were hoping to get $992,400 worth of uh DWR water main grant funds. Uh they had their preliminary meeting uh la couple weeks ago and in that meeting they announced that their funding had been cut quite a bit uh short. So they had a list of projects and they were going to start funding it from the top and they were going to quit once they ran out of money. our project was a ways below the point where they ran out of money for the funding of the projects.

In two days from now on April 8th, they are going to have their official meeting at the state where they are going to make the final determination of where they give those grant dollars to. I actually called the state today uh to get their um just to get an idea what they were thinking if there was anything that had been new since that first meeting and I was told uh that at this point there was no discussion of changing that funding criteria and so it is very likely in two days we'll we'll still show up and see but is very likely in two days we're going to find that the grant funding that we receive for this project is limited to the $46,66 that we've already received. D and that was for some of the preliminary work on the project. So it doesn't paint a great picture. Uh the bids came in about a million dollars over what the original engineers estimate was and we didn't get the grant funds. So that paints the poor picture of the project. Um I think a couple different reasons for this is we are getting uh further out in the bidding environment by the time that we had this bid. If you go back one month and we bid out Meadow Ridge and we had four biders on that and we got very very low bids on that project. If we were to take the bids that the bid unit prices that we got on the Meadow Ridge project and apply them to this project, we would see a significantly less a significantly less dollar amount. But that being said, uh we are where our bids are. Um, one thing that I would mention is that there are a couple different things in the bids uh that came back for a unit price that was a bit surprisingly high. Uh, we've worked with more engineering and the contractor and identified a couple different things uh that we would be able to do post award via change order um that we can do different things to save costs to the project. For example, we were going to basically pipe burst a water mane, turn it into slurry, reinsert a new one in there using a new technology. Um, during design, we were

told that that was probably going to bid out at about $150 to $175 a foot, and it came in at $525 per foot. That was a significantly huge change. So, um, that's included in the bid. um post bid we would look to just boring the water man beside the old one and abandoning the old one and there would be some significant cost savings that we can get from doing that. Uh the other thing is is uh talking to the contractor if we were to allow more time and uh in that change order um move the completion date back further towards the end of September beginning of October uh they would be willing to come down on their on their price because it would give them more time to be able to do the project. So, all told, we've identified approximately up towards uh an amount of about $250,000 that we think we're going to be able to eventually lower this um this cost of this project for. Um but again, that's not in front of you. That's a future change order, but it is something that the contractor has offered as a a concession to get the project cheaper. So, we have a couple different options. Uh first option would be to award the project tonight, move forward uh and award the project to Sleen Brothers. Great contractor. They did very good work in Westwood. Uh so they're they're a good contractor to do this. Um and then uh we just move forward with the project. We find out in a couple days on Wednesday whether we did receive any more funding for the water main grant. If we did, it would be a surprise, but uh then that number, that amount would just come off of the top of the cost of the project and then uh move forward with the project. The other option would be we could table this and wait in two weeks. Then I could come back and say this is what happened at the state level. Uh and then we would have all the information with regards to the water main grant funding. Um if we go with option A where we just awarded, I would still come back at the next meeting and give an update on did we what did we

receive if any and then uh but if we did table it then we would be presenting it again for award at the next meeting knowing what we actually got. Uh the third meeting uh option would be to reject all bids and bid it out this fall uh say in December uh and be one of the first off the off the block uh for 2027 funding. you do run the risk of potentially um having uh you know different things that are outside our control such as inflation, tariffs, gas, diesel prices, all those things uh could increase the cost of the project. Example of that is a couple years ago had bid out a project that was estimated um a lot cheaper than what it came in at 16 million. They rebid the project to see if it would come in cheaper and it came back at $19 million. So there's no guarantee that if we rebid this this fall uh that we'll get cheaper prices. We have received feedback from the contractors that bid the project that their prices are pretty stable as far as what they think they would put on it based unless there is inflation. So ultimately with those three choices my recommendation would be to award it tonight and move forward with the project. The project was identified as a a very valuable project on the CIP. It is in need. Uh we did when we did have produced any type of information for the project to the people that are in the assess uh improvement district for their assessments. We did not we we never communicated with them a dollar amount that included a reduction due to a grant that we didn't receive yet. We had a policy that we don't we don't give information to residents on grants that we haven't secured yet. So we we've not produced those numbers to the public. uh the numbers that we have produced to the public were based off of the original engineers report and given where we are at with today's uh environment. If you

recall this is a reconstruct so the assessments on a local reconstruct are 30% the city picks up 70% of the cost of the project. So when you take into account the increased price, the if you took that 30% and took a look at a standard single family residential home in this improvement district, it does raise the overall assessment approximately $3,750 for a single family residential home. That amounts to about $192 per year over a 25-year assessment based on an assumed uh interest rate. uh we are still moving forward with looking to get low interest uh 2% loans from the state to do the work on the project. So that will help for the cost of the project. But I feel if we if we were to rebid that this fall, we wouldn't be going back to the original engineers report on September 22nd as the estimated cost of the project. We would likely be in the neighborhood of that $3,50,000 or slightly higher for a new engineer's estimate for the project. we would probably uh amend the engineers report uh that was presented to reflect more current numbers that we have. And when we go out to bid, say we save um $100,000 or $200,000, there's also the risk of that amount being taken up in inflation, which when you're only talking a couple hundred,000 over the course of this project, that's not much inflation to be able to sway those numbers. also realizing the second low bid was about $3.8 million. So, um there's no guarantee that we're going to rebid it out and get cheaper pricing. If we even get the same pricing, we're a year later down the road moving forward with a project that's that's necessary. And if we do move forward tonight, we would still uh with an award, we still would um come back and if we do receive

any water main uh grant funding or any type of uh funding for that, we would still use that to pay down the cost of the project and therefore the assessments as well. So the recommendation tonight would be to accept the bid and award the project to Selen Brothers in the amount of $3,56,778. And with that, I'm sure you have questions that I can answer. Questions? Commissioner Zundell,

is there another round of DWR water main grant funds? So, let's say sounds like it's pretty safe to assume we will only get the 46,000 that we've currently gotten. Um, when does the next grant cycle for that open? And if we take a layer off of the people that are currently going through it, are we more likely to get it next round if we wait? And does taking a bid now take us out of the running for it if so? So to answer the second part of the question, awarding the bid now does take us out because it's two years down the road. Does take us out or doesn't? It does. It does. We would not be we would not get any additional funding from that grant source.

Not from that grant source. There is a chance that the state comes back and says, "Hey, we found some additional money. This is a good place to put it." A lot of times they look for shovel ready projects. And if the state were to decide that they wanted to fund this current program, they would have the ability to go back to previous projects. That has nothing to do with us reapplying. Is it estimated that there will be another round of this funding? Like their funding was cut, so we didn't make the cut, but is there going to be another round?

Yeah, this is a continuous program right now. I mean, any funding program can be cut, but um but what it would be is uh we would be applying for it. Well, right now you can see in the consent agenda we actually have that we're applying for some to put some future projects on the water list. That's the list that you have to be on. Eventually, you apply for it. The application process and when we would find out that we would be successful in receiving those funds would be the fall of 27. So, this would turn into a 2028 project. So, we would actually be bidding this project out in two years from now if we were to apply for and be successful in getting the next round of funds for this project.

Question number two, Miss Schmidt, is there century code requirement on bidding? Is it 39.5% that's the threshold difference or is that a different thing that I'm crossing over? That's a different thing. Different thing. Okay. Any additional questions there? Commissioner Jorgens, I see there's a meeting coming up on uh the 27th. Will that have like dates and stuff on it for the people that this is affecting like when it'll affect their block and stuff like that? My main concern is First Avenue West. Mhm. You got the fire department, you got that apartment building, you know, access for everything and parking. It's going to be a nightmare.

So, what what I'll say is yes. Um if we award tonight, we would have that meeting. If we don't award tonight, we're not going to have the meeting. Um, but assuming that we would award tonight, there will be that meeting and there will we will have a contractor, Selene Brothers. They will be at the meeting and we'll be talking schedules. But what I can tell you about uh the fire department is we were in direct conversation with them during design. We actually have do the road up to halfway through their driveway, you know, for uh an interim completion date for that. We have another interim completion date to do the other half and the fire department was satisfied with the solutions there. There's also um there's there's summer school that is uh happens on that roadway. So there are a couple different um things that are in the contract that was bid out uh for the contractor to work with those different schedules and get it completed.

Yeah. I had conversations with the chief. So

Yep. And and then I I would say the other thing for that is another reason to award tonight is because a lot you know for if we award tonight we have to get the contracts in place. It's likely the soonest would be the next meeting that we would be able to uh accept the contract documents and uh proceed with the project. Then we still have to have precons ordering the materials and we're into probably miday by the time that we we're out there. um delaying the award even a couple different weeks talking about those interim completion dates that are put into the contract it just tighten things up tightens things up for that too. So uh that is another reason that would support awarding it tonight if we so choose.

Anyone else? Motion to approve the project. Commissioner Jorgensson moves to approve. Commissioner Zendel, something else. I was just going to ask if we if we tabled tonight, we would still have time. We're not out anything if we table it tonight. You have 60 days to award the project after 60 days. So, we can table tonight till the next meeting. And in theory, we're not out. We're not out money. It it does create time crunches for the contractor, but we're that they have to honor the bid if we were to table it for two weeks. I have a motion. Is there a second? Second.

Commissioner Anderson. Second. I have a motion and a second to approve improvement district number 309. Accept a bid and water contract uh on the First Avenue East reconstruction. I have a motion and second. Is there any discussion? All those in favor, please signify by saying I. I. Opposed.

Motion carried. Thank you, Mr. Hansen. We move on to item number 10. Item number 10 is improvement district number 310 beaten drive reconstruction Cheyenne Street to Cheyenne River. Uh again, Mr. Hansen's going to be presenting. Purpose of this discussion is to approve a task order. Mr. Hansen.

Thank you, Commissioner Darnis and Commissioners. Uh this is a a great project uh beaten drive. Uh basically there's uh there's a there's concrete drive uh roadway up to a point near Cheyenne and there's concrete roadway up to a point out front of Bobcat and uh we're looking to reconstruct that old county rural asphalt roadway into uh the same uh concrete section that we have coming in and out of it. Also uh there's multi-use path that's projected to go in on the north side of it. Uh and we have been very successful in going out and getting different funding sources for this project. Uh we received 3.871 million in North Dakota flex funding uh for the roadway as and also uh 1.44 million in uh surface transportation block grants, STBG funding uh for the reconstructing of the existing roadway and bike path multi-use trail. Uh so we do have a lot of grant money that is coming into this uh fund and with the type of funding that we've received for the project there are some things that we need to get moving on uh such as rightaway environmental public uh environmental uh the public outreach some private utility and permitting analysis. One of the complexities of this project is we're going to be putting a force mane under the Cheyenne River and also extending the box culverts in the river to be able to facilitate the construction of the multi-use uh trail over that. So those things uh do take some time to get through the core. So, we wanted to get this uh this task order approved to have more engineering who has been working on this project through concept um for a number of years uh and helped us apply for those grant funds. Um so to to get them going on the feasibility study because there are assessments associated with this project. Um that would be uh there are some uh sanitary sewer, water man, those type of uh things that are incorporated into this project as well

as the roadway uh pieces of it. So all the grant money that I talked about would be used to pay the project down. Uh and we also, if you recall from a previous commission, uh Mr. Wallace had presented that uh the owner of the the larger properties to the west did petition for these improvements to happen as as well. So um so looking to approve task order number 105 uh with more engineering in the amount of $141,000 for a number of diff different additional uh related services needed um for not only public outreach but also to get ahead of the curve on getting those environmental and permits uh approved. So with that I would entertain questions.

Questions for Mr. Hansen? Move to approve. Commissioner Anderson moves to approve uh improvement district number 310 as presented on beaten drive reconstruction from Cheyenne Street to the Cheyenne River. Is there a second? Second. Commissioner Zundell second. We have a motion and a second. Is there any discussion? Hearing none. All those in favor, please signify by saying I. I. Opposed? Motion carried. Thank you.

Thank you. Item number 11 is project number 2293. This is 9inth Street Northeast. A grade separation. Again, we call on Mr. Hansen to approve the overpass agreement and CNM agreement.

Thank you, Commissioner Darson and Commissioners. Uh yeah, the the CNM agreement is the construction and management agreement. Uh that's a standard agreement with BNSF. Uh there's also an easement agreement uh for separated grade crossings. Uh that that is the construction management agreement. And then also uh there's an overpass agreement that is included in the packet. I won't get into a lot of specifics about those agreements. They're in the packets. Uh they are fairly standard agreements through BNSF. They have been uh reviewed by our city attorney. uh and uh provided some comments and they took into account the limited comments that we did have and uh these are basically to allow us to work within their rightway to construct the the bridge and also uh some um BNSF also would need to have some construction management oversight of the project which is standard uh for bridges going in over over their tracks. Uh there is a cost uh to these easements and fees uh which also includes temporary and permanent easement. The vast majority of the cost is to uh temporary and permanent easement needed uh for the project. And the total fees uh total $44,845 to BNSF. Uh BNSF also has uh uh given us uh a grant of approximately $600,000 towards the construction of the bridge. Um we will be entering into a contract eventually with BNSF where they do the construction management and some inspection of the bridge and there would be they charge us for that as well. So um that would be a future meeting but uh this this is critical for us to um to get in place and along with this uh it's a big week for this project as we are bidding it out on Wednesday as well. So, we're going to find out after a number of years of planning and trying to get money and design and everything for this project. Uh, we'll find out in two days

what the final number is. So, cross your fingers for that. Um, but with for tonight's uh motion that we've just looked to approve the overpass agreement and the construction management agreement with BNSF questions for Mr. Hansen, I just have one quick Commissioner Jordan. Bridge is getting bid on Wednesday. Yes. So many people have been asking who's doing it. I don't have an answer. Yeah, we don't. Nobody does. Um, we have 35 plan holders right now, but I would say that there's really probably four serious bridge builders that are in there and a lot of the others are sub subcontractors to it. So, thank you.

Um, I'm I'm optimistic uh that we're going to get good bids for this. It's been a one that we've been getting calls from contractors every month for a year. When is this thing coming out? And uh a lot of the work on the diversion has forces and equipment in town. They're looking to reallocate it and if they can keep it in town, they they sure would like to. So, I motion to approve. Commissioner Jorgensson moves to approve project number 2293, which is to approve an or overpass agreement and a cons construction management agreement. Second. Burlington Northern. We have a second by Commissioner Anderson. We have a motion and a second. Is there any further discussion?

Hearing none. All those in favor, please signify by saying I. I opposed. Motion carried. Thank you. Thank you. We move on to item number 12. Item number 12 is a gateway fiber project. Again, we call on Dan Hansen, our senior director of community development. Purpose of this discussion is to uh approve a right ofway and construction agreement with Gateway Infrastructure LLC. Mr. Hansen.

Thank you, Commissioner Daris and Commissioners. uh in the next couple years, you're going to see a number of different companies that are looking to move into West Fargo and provide uh high-speed internet uh through fiber uh projects. And uh Gateway is a company uh Gateway Infrastructure LLC. They're a company that's currently installing that infrastructure in Fargo. Uh they are looking to start uh doing work and uh installing that utility in within our city limits, West Fargo. And uh with us tonight, I believe uh gentleman from Gateway that is going to just introduce their company uh to you and answer any questions you would have as far as the company goes and then I'll come back as far as looking for the approval on those agreements.

Good evening and welcome. Good evening. Thank you. Appreciate the opportunity to be here. Derrick Lefford. I head of government affairs for Gateway Fiber Nationwide and just wanted to come and give you guys a quick overview of kind of what Gateway is and kind of what our plans are uh as it relates to construction here in West Fargo. Uh as Dan mentioned, we uh are actively building in Fargo, in Morehead, uh and other areas uh both uh in North Dakota, outside North Dakota, all across the United States. uh our our goal and our role is really to kind of help communities uh thrive through a fairer faster uh internet experience. And so we don't really need to sell you on the actual service itself. Am I accidentally clicking through that? I'll give you that so you can actually

Oh, got it. Okay, there we go. Uh everybody needs highspeed internet. That's there. I think co probably proved that. So I don't need to sell you on that. But I do want to talk to you a little bit about kind of who our company is uh and kind of how we approach things. So uh let's see here. Just use the wheel to scroll down. Got it. There you go.

Okay. So right now uh we are uh we just need to add one more state to that. We are we're headquartered in Missouri. That's where we were started uh back in 2019. We were actually started to bring town to or to bring internet to a town that was about 300 people. uh kind of a fiber to the forgotten sort of a situation. And uh that that uh we were started by a guy that lives our founder is a guy that lives in a town of about 800 people. Uh and so the reason that I mention that is because that local that local flavor is really what has kind of permeated the DNA at Gateway. And so whether we're building in Fargo, whether we're building in a small community, wherever we're building at, we want to make sure that we're very collaborative, we're invested in the communities that we're in, uh, and that we're working, uh, side by side with your folks as well, uh, as a commission to keep you guys informed about what we're doing, uh, how we're operating, and address any issues that that may come up. Um, it it goes without saying that that fiber internet is is certainly a better alternative to the traditional copper. uh fiber internet uh for us we've had a a fantastic uh period of uptime. Our our reliability uh is just below 100% of the time. Uh we have speeds ranging anywhere from uh 300 megabytes all the way up to uh 8 meg uh 8 gigabytes. Uh so you don't need really need the 8 gigabytes if you're just a residence, but uh for the businesses that we offer service to, they can get up to 8 gigs. Um, fiber is a scalable technology and it, you know, we can continue to add more bandwidth as the needs increase. Uh, and uh, that's that's certainly something that we have done and continue to do. We're primarily focused on residential service, but we do offer service to businesses uh, as well as we have an ATET division that provides services at a discount uh, to educational institutions. This was our pricing up until I believe

Friday of of last week. Uh, but our pricing is three for our 300meg service was 65 a month. Uh, $75 a month for 600 meg, $90 a month for one gig, and 150 a month for 2 gig. So, uh, that's all in. There's no contract, there's no taxes, there's no fees. Uh, that that what you see there is what comes out of your account. Uh, and there's again there's no installation fees. There's there's nothing like that of the sort or even service fees. If there if there's a service issue uh at the customer's home, we don't charge fees to go out there uh and fix it unless it's a business that's requiring a lot of various different highly complex uh fixes and whatnot. So, uh we feel that that pricing is very fair and actually that pricing just got better uh as of Friday. We relentlessly focused on our customers. All right, we have a uh our NPS score which is what basically how companies are rated in terms of customer service. uh we are rated at a 68. Uh so just to give you some perspective on that uh your traditional cable companies or your AT&Ts and your spectrum spectrum are usually rated at about two. Uh so we're substantially higher than those. Uh and that's because of the focus that we put on the customer not only in the acquisition process but also in the construction process as well as the installation process. uh and any any subsequent dealings that we have with them. As far as the process, what that looks like, uh we're past the planning and the engineering process. We're ready to get going here in the construction phase. I believe we've got some of our team that's going to come out here next week and meet with your staff to kind of get that process started. We do understand that it is a disruptive process, but we're going to do everything that we can to minimize that because uh every home that we go past is a potential customer for us. Uh and so our goal is to make sure that we are as least disruptive as possible and to make sure that you guys, whether it's the the

city commission, whether it's the city staff, uh that that the calls aren't coming into them, that they're coming in to us directly hopefully so that we don't uh you know, consume some of your resources here on on the city side of things. So from the notification perspective, what you'll see is our folks, our construction team will go out, they'll put door hangers on every door. Uh we'll also do some very targeted social media activity where we geoarget specific neighborhoods that we're going into. So the people in those areas will specifically see uh how many you know that we're coming in and there's a QR code they can click on takes and shows us our construction what our construction activity looks like. But you'll see all of that and then we'll come back later on and install it in the actual customer home. Um fiber process is is pretty self-explanatory. They they lay the conduit in, they they pull the fiber through it, they splice it, then they come back and they restore things. Probably the biggest point of concern that you guys might have would be the restoration process. That's probably where most folks have an issue. Uh for us, we our goal is to make it as good or better than it was before. There are going to be certain circumstances where that's not going to be possible like immediately. Uh so for instance, you know, if there's a lot of snow on the ground, obviously you got to wait for that to thaw out or whatever. uh in the summertime sometimes it's, you know, super hot and there's no precipitation uh in the forecast. So, we're not going to throw sod down if it's not going to take uh but we'll come back and make sure that we get that done. But our goal is for you guys to never get a call on any of that stuff. We do have an industryleading damage prevention process. I won't belver you with the details on that, but suffice it to say, this is a kind of a nationwide thing that we pioneered to make sure that we are reducing the number of damages to the underground utilities. Uh this is something that's been modeled and and other companies are looking at nationwide following our lead where we go out and we make sure that we're inventorying things. We're looking at the locate marks on site uh GPSing those marks, taking photographs of those,

mapping those out. Uh very complex process that we utilize. It's reduced our damages by 90%. As far as the home install, it's pretty simple. uh they go out, they do the temporary drop to get the service. Then they come back and at a later date and they uh after the locates are done, they bury that drop and then they come out and they and the installer connects it uh in the home and connects up all the devices. Really, what I wanted to to communicate to you guys is that we want to make sure that we collaborate with you, right? Whether that's updates like this where we come back in on a fairly regular basis, you know, uh a couple times a year and just say, "Hey, here's the status of this project. uh make sure that you you guys are are good with everything that's going on. Uh answer any questions that you might have or intervene if you've got some issue with a constituent that we need to intervene on. Uh we just want to make sure that we we're keeping you guys informed and giving you a chance to ask questions of us if you need to. Happy to give you guys my cell phone number. Dan and his team have it. Uh you're welcome to contact me at any point in time if you have any issue that you need to have addressed and I'll make sure that our team gets it addressed. So, that's pretty much pretty much it. We're a customer focused uh community focused organization. I think that you'll find that. I think they found that in Fargo. I think they found that in Morehead. Uh and I think they found that everywhere that we have gone uh before you guys. And we're looking to bring that same service and that same approach here to West Fargo. And I'd be happy to answer any questions.

Questions from gentlemen? Thank you, sir. Thank you. Appreciate it. So construction will begin when?

Uh it would begin uh they like to go as soon as possible. Um starting off um there's a process that we have. Uh they're going to have to permit certain sites. Uh we have said that they can start with three sites. Uh they're going to have to the basically the process is they apply for a permit for each site. uh our locating staff, uh Benji Schwarz, our rightaway manager, meets with them on site, talks about the location of where they're going to be wanting to install their utilities. Uh after the locates have been, uh say that there's a corridor that has way too many existing utilities in it any already. U Benji can be working with them to say, "You might want to move it over. You might want to get into an easement or this looks good." Once a layout has been agreed upon, figured out, um they would be paying a fee for the uh permit or through our normal permitting fees and they would be issued a permit uh up to three different sites to be working to start with. Um trust but verify. We want to make sure that uh what they're what they're doing is going out doing good work, restoring it, those type of things. Uh and then once they get those each site one site completed, we can start looking at issuing another permit for another site. Uh we do have uh that was approved last year. Uh we do have a contract with a consultant to do the the site inspection of this as we're going to have uh probably more than one company looking to do this work in town. Uh and it's just more than our our forces can handle. So uh the commission approved last year uh uh a consultant uh contract to do the construction inspection of this that we would dedicate towards this Gateway fiber project. Uh what I would say is that uh we have had a number of meetings with Gateway. uh every meeting we've had been very professional, very prepared, uh answered all of our questions, very responsive with regards to the agreements that are in the packet tonight. Um the rightway uh and construction agreements, they have been vetted by our city attorney. Uh they

have been modified and uh we we went through this, if you recall, with Ubiquiti about a year ago. I don't haven't heard from them. Um but that was basically the model that we used to set up this one uh this these contracts. They have the right to be here. Uh they have the right as a company that they are to put it in. Uh we just get to control when they put it in. And that's where we have this rightway in construction agreement. So that way everything is defined uh and to see how they're going. Now say they come out, they're doing a great job. They're it's going really easy. They're restoring things like that. maybe we open it up to five different sites uh to do it faster because uh there's a lot of fiber to put in the ground. So, uh the faster we get it in, the less disruption that overtime is going to be on our community. Uh so, that'll be worked on as we move by our rightway department in Benji. Um, but what I can say is is I've had good feedback from the other communities that he mentioned that they've been working in and I would uh recommend approving the rightway and construction agreements with gateway infrastructure.

Is fiber service subject to utility fees? So, correct me if I'm wrong, uh, Katie, but uh, right now no. Uh, that that it isn't because it is information based. if it's like a a telephone or something like that, there is then there is the those agreements. But what we do have in our rightway agreement is a 4% uh fee to be paid for the city, which does actually reflect the same amount that we have in our uh franchise agreements. Uh in our rightway u agreement that we have in the packet, it does stipulate that they would be paying us a 4% fee on whatever they install. So, thank you. Yep.

I was aware of that. I just wanted you to state it, Dan. Commissioners, any questions? Move approv. Commissioner Zundell moves to approve Gateway Fiber Project, approve the rightway and construction agreements with Gateway Infrastructure LLC. Is there a second? I'll second. Commissioner Jorgensson seconds. We have a motion and a second. Is there any discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor, please signify by saying I. I. Opposed. Motion carried. Thank you, sir. Welcome to West Fargo. Uh we moving on. Uh again, Mr. Hansen is going to give our city administrators report this evening. Mr. Hansen.

Thank you, Commissioner President Doris and commissioners. Uh I just have uh one thing uh for you and I dropped off in front of each of you before the meeting uh began. Uh we do have some upcoming neighborhood meetings that we're going to do for these projects that we've been talking about. Um they're listed as such. Uh the first one would be uh Thursday, April 16th from 6:00 to 8 at the West Fire Fargo Fire Station. That is going to be for improvement district number 3008, Meadow Ridge Development. That project is moving fairly quickly. Uh the the contractor uh has submitted a lot of their information. They want to get started and have a precon uh coming up pretty soon. So construction is going to start there fairly soon. So, the purpose of this meeting would be to uh it's post bid. So, we would be uh that'd be taking place uh introduce the contractor to the neighborhood, give the residents who show up, answer all their questions, give them contact information and an idea of what's going to be coming up and what to expect during construction. Uh similar to that, now that we awarded uh 1 Avenue reconstruction, there would be a same meeting on Monday, April 27th uh for the people uh in that area. And when I say it's just the improvement district, we're going to publish it to the public so anybody can show up, but generally speaking, it's more of the people that are affected by the project that are going to have more interest to be there. But that's Monday, April 27th from 6:00 to 8 at the West Fargo Fire Station. And again, same purpose for that meeting. Uh these are not required meetings. These are just meetings that we want to do to be able to get more information out to the public and the people adjacent to the projects. Lastly, uh we have improvement district number 2288, intersection improvements, 52nd Avenue and 9inth Street West roundabout. That is the down by Legacy Elementary. Um right now, we've created the district is all that's happened with that project a little while back. Um but uh again, we've got uh some HIPP funding on that. That is uh 90% of the construction

costs. Part of that is an environmental review and also it includes uh having a public hearing or I'm sorry a public meeting uh to get feedback from the public on that project. Uh again, construction for that project is expected to take place in 2028. Uh the date and time for that would be Thursday, April 30th from 6:00 to 8:00 p.m. at Legacy Elementary. And uh again the purpose of that is part of the project process with the H set funding to receive uh to get uh funding received for the project. We have these publicformational meetings. Uh that's where we're going to uh present the project again. Uh we did have one of these uh a while back if you recall. Uh we had proposed doing a roundabout in that same exact spot. Uh and we had the public meeting. there was a lot of uh people that were speaking up and uh as far as especially for the cost of the project and the need for it and the direction of the commission at that time was let's uh dissolve the project and in instructed staff to go and find more funding and so that's where we did apply for that eight funding and and got a 90% grant for the construction costs of the project not the soft cost just the construction costs so we were able to find some fantastic funding for the project and uh we're looking toward towards starting to move that along and starting with the public meetings. So hopefully you can uh attend any of those meetings that you'd like. If not, we'll definitely give any updates that you'd like to like to have on that. So, and uh with that, Dustin did not leave with me any other further things to share with the commission. So, I'd be open for any questions.

Questions for Mr. Hson? Uh Rachel, I have a question for you. Where will these this notification of these meetings be on your city website? uh they will be in the the calendar um also in the news flashash section and then I believe we'll be sending letters to the impacted um residents in these areas as well. Thank you. Y any commissioner have anything additional for this evening you'd like to bring forward? Commissioner Jorgensson, I'd like to thank every excuse me like to thank everybody that was in the street crew and did a fine job in the streets over the weekend with the amount of snow we had. Short amount of time. They look really good.

Absolutely agree. Thank you for bringing it up. Commissioners, anything else? Any department have anything you'd like to bring forward at this evening? With that, Commissioner Anderson? Move to adjourn. Commissioner Zundal. Second. We stand adjourned. Just

thanks.