00:00:11,530	Good evening Let us pray Your Heavenly Father, we gather tonight to give you thanks for the many gifts you’ve bestowed upon us. We thank you for our families, for our friends, and most especially we pray and thank you tonight for our communities.

00:00:35,730	Lord, did this commission, as this commission gathers tonight again, we ask for your guidance and your wisdom. We ask that all of tonight’s discussions, deliberations, and decisions would begin with your inspiration and be in accordance with your will and continue with your own failing help.

00:00:52,700	Lord, we make this prayer with faith and trust in your promises, and ask that all glory and praise be to you as we pray in the name of Your Son Jesus Christ. Amen. And please stand face the flag and join me in reciting the pledge.

00:01:15,630	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. Thank you it I’ll call the October 20, 2025 meeting of the Burleigh County Commission to order. First item is roll call of members. Comm Bakken. Comm Schwab. Mr. Woodcock. Comm Munsen. Here, Chair Bitner, here. um, approval of the agenda.

00:01:48,730	I think that about the only change I want to see there is we have an item number 15 that’s continued agenda item for ETA discussion, and it looks like we’re going to be discussing the ETA up under 7. I think we can eliminate 15 or move it, you know, just combine it, combine. Combine 15 and 7 and moved to approve.

00:02:09,500	Second motion, second, any further discussion? Paul. Comm Schwab. Yes. Comm Munsen. Yes. Comm Bakken, yes, Chair Bittner, yes, motion carries. Next, public comment, um, uh, it’s restricted to Burleigh County residents and landowners or may be a time limit.

00:02:32,970	Does anybody have anything they wish to address um, that’s not on the agenda because we’ll, we’ll give people a chance to comment during the agenda items anyway. Anybody wish to comment Public comments. One more time. Anybody wish to comment? I’m gonna close the public comment period. And Kent agenda. um, Commissioners, there’s um a number of, of things on there.

00:03:00,800	May want to pay attention to the Provident building remodel change order in case you have any questions with that. On 3 The I, I would like to pull B just to have a conversation. Sure. Do we, uh, there was no, uh, comment or vote on the meeting minutes and bills. I don’t know before. OK.

00:03:23,170	How about the meeting minutes and bills commissioners I don’t know who signed. Who, who reviewed the bills? Turn. I did. Oh. OK. We’re broke No, we’re not The bills are good I, uh, I looked at them. I didn’t see anything wrong. And the minutes are good. Um-hum. Is that a motion to approve? Yep. Second, motion of 2nd to approve, uh, any further discussion. Caro.

00:03:56,800	Comm Munsen, Comm Bakken, Comm Schwab, Charon Bitner, yes, motion carries. Kate, consent agenda, um, um. consider a motion for A and C. Move to approve. Second, OK, motion to approve A and C of the consentagegen any further discussion. Comm Bakken. Comm Schwab, Comm Munsen, yes, Chair Bittner, yes, motion carries.

00:04:24,000	Um, the Provident building remodeled changed order in your packet. Um, has to do with electrical upgrades based on plan change where we move the Commission chambers to the 2nd floor. Originally, we weren’t going to do essentially any remodeling on the 2nd floor. And this change order is directly relative to that particular change.

00:04:54,000	I appreciate that. This is just an odd question. What’s the percentage for tariffs? Because it’s listed in here as the increase in material costs with tariffs. I don’t. I don’t know, just it’s something that I’m dealing with on a daily basis. And I was curious in this change order.

00:05:14,900	Um I don’t know that anybody mentioned that, but we can, we can find out. Yeah, it’s, it’s listed in the description, so I would love an explanation on that. I will move to approve the change order, um, but I’d love to follow up on that point. Sure. Second, Motion the second. to approve the change order.

00:05:31,000	Any further discussion? the Comm Schwab. Yes, Comm Munsen, yes, Comm Bakken, yes, Chair Bittner, yes, motion carries. Next, uh, City of Bismarck. Discussion of Bismarck’s ETA proposal. Who’s got that? Welcome, Daniel. Good evening, Chair Bitner and, uh, Burleigh County Commissioners. Uh, let me hand out a map to you. I also have it on the screen here.

00:05:53,800	Thank you, sir OK, well, thank you for the offer of having a little bit of time on your agenda this evening. I’m here, I’m Daniel there I’m planning director of the City of Bismarck. I’m here with Comm Zenker on the City Commission is also Jason Tomon, City Administrator.

00:06:18,370	Uh, we’ve had a number of very good meetings with, with county staff. Uh, well, we thought it would be beneficial to also speak directly to you, um, as a Burleigh County Comm.

00:06:37,100	Uh, there, there is a map that the city commission has really already signed off on for the most part to change uh the ETA boundaries that have been in effect since 2014. Uh, this map, um, is before you. It is also online. I have a version of it here.

00:06:53,330	Uh, if we can share the screen uh, an interactive format, uh, we understand that individual property owners may want to dig in a little more deeply and it’s hard to see in a small map. So you can online, you can go and, uh, scroll around, zoom in, however you’d like, and and see uh where that proposal would, would affect each individual property.

00:07:10,700	Uh, the, the change would reduce the land area of the extraterritorial area by 47%, uh, but it would reduce the number of homes in ETA by 95%. Uh, now, really the reason for this from the city’s perspective is that the, the, the only purpose of the extraterritorial areas to facilitate future urban growth.

00:07:29,330	Uh, we have a comprehensive plan that was already adopted in 2022. They really lays out where we expect that growth to occur. Um, and there’s really a number of areas in the ETA that our own plan does not anticipate urbanizing, even in the next 50 years.

00:07:45,470	And so given that, and, and also given a lot of the concerns we hear from rural property owners, they would really prefer to be represented by their own county commissioners if they’re just getting a shed or or adding onto their home or, or doing something on their own properties. Uh, they would, they would like to come to the Burleigh County Commission, work through the Burleigh County Planning division, uh, building inspection, so forth.

00:08:02,900	rather than the city, uh, and so given those, those considerations, uh, we would agree to this change which would reduce, uh, dramatically the number of people within the ETA, uh, while also meeting the stated goals of our comprehensive plan, which would be to allow up to 50 years of growth potential, uh, within, within this area.

00:08:24,270	Uh, so we did meet with the citycom Commission last week and, um, and they’ve authorized us to move forward with this and, and so, uh, we propose this to you, uh, as an alternative to modify the joint powerers agreement that is between the Burleigh County Commission and the City of

00:08:40,270	Commission, and, uh, and change it to reduce the ETA, uh, to this, this new level, uh, so I’m also here just to answer any questions from you. I don’t really have a long talk to give, um, and Jason and Comm Zenker also are prepared to to speak on any questions you may have.

00:08:59,500	What if, uh, somebody is in the ETA and wants to leave it? Are you guys set up to because you know it’s going to be people that are going to come and say, well, we really would like to be out too.

00:09:21,370	Do you have any any recourse or any way that you can consider them? So, uh, Comm Schwab, uh, reconnect, Comm. So it, it’s not, when we’re looking at the ETA, we’re, we’re considering more so the lands than than the people. I mean, really with any kind of zoning, we have to have a rational basis for any of the decisions we make.

00:09:39,170	So, so if it’s a 40 acre piece of land unbuilt on in an agricultural district right in the growth corridor where we’re planning future city infrastructure. That’s an area that we would really support keeping inside of the ETA if it’s an area that’s already developed and has small lots, uh, that we really can’t physically

00:09:56,630	bring infrastructure to in a cost effective manner than that series we would propose removing from ETA. So, that’s the basis of our decision making more so than individual reacting to individual requests. Could I get a yes or no on that. I’m not. You didn’t answer the question.

00:10:13,230	So, the, the, the answer is. Is there a way for somebody, you know, uh, say they’re on the outskirts to come to the city and say, hey, you know, we’d like to be out uh, can that be included that, you know, So the answer would be, uh, it would depend on the lot.

00:10:29,230	I mean, the, the parcel. I mean, yes, we could consider. I’m taking this as a no. Uh, they’re. Um-hum. Hang on a second. I Daniel I know that there’s somebody in the, I know that there’s a couple of people in the room that have that exact question.

00:10:54,330	Um, Wayne, did you wanna, did you wanna add anything to that? Yes, thank you, Mr. Chair. My name is Wayne Martinen. I have a resident up on, uh, north of Bismarck, Northeast, and I own property along 110th Street down to 97th along the railroad track, and I like that piece of property removed from the ETA.

00:11:13,530	Is that possible to do? That’s the question, gentleman So, we’d have to really study that particular piece of land. I don’t, I don’t, I haven’t looked at it in detail right now. OK. Could you, could you get his number and do that.

00:11:37,600	So Daniel, kind of the process would be is if the city chooses to revise its future use map, then that potentially could be a an opportunity, correct? That’s the only way right now that somebody could look at getting out of the ETA is depending on what that long term planning map looks like. so OK, thank you. Yes, or John. Mhm.

00:12:02,630	Uh, Comm Bakke, correct. So, so, this map is, I didn’t mention this, but it’ll be going to the Bismarck Planning Commission on Wednesday, uh, for a review. Uh, it is part of our comprehensive plan and so by state law, any, any zoning has to be done according to a comprehensive plan.

00:12:19,270	So the first step would be to change that plan, uh, and that would, we started on this coming Wednesday, a public hearing will be held for for that. And, and so then any agreement change could be based on that. So that would be the process to make, to make those changes.

00:12:33,000	Uh, one other question then, uh, on the map that you presented, uh, the, uh, 138 North by 81st West, that line that bounces up and then goes, is that 4-eighth or approximately 4-eighth? Uh, on the south side? Yeah.

00:13:01,430	So, 48th is the line that uh, extends parallel to the city limits on the, on the south, very southern portion to the, to the West, that would be 48th correct? So I, I’m just kind of curious what the um the one little island that is uh, along the river on the south side Yeah, that yeah Sure, that, so that, that’s whispering bass.

00:13:25,970	So that, that, that area’s already been annexed. So the yellow, yellow areas have, have been annexed. OK, so that’s what, OK. Perfect. Thank you Mr. Chair Mr. Munsen. Daniel, on, uh, at the city commission meeting, there was a couple maps. One of them.

00:13:48,900	took everything out that was outside the 2 mile area Why is that still not being considered? As the Commission voted obviously for this map, but curious in your mind, what significance does that land have for your planning and zoning, and then my other question, uh, I had posed this to Comm Zenker. You’re 25 to 50 year plan. You run the numbers, you’re a statistician, you understand the growth and percentages and.

00:14:12,970	are you telling me that you’re gonna hit that area in 50 years? Sure. So, Comm Muns, and that, I mean that is a great question, and, and we can go in a lot of detail on the assumptions that go into that plan, but it’s, it’s based on everything

00:14:26,870	basically staying the same. So we’re growing, we grow out of 1000 people per year in the city of Bismarck. We, we grow by roughly that proportion um in the inland area. Our density hasn’t changed, uh, so we’re growing land area at the same proportion to our population.

00:14:41,330	So if that all stays the same, and that can change a lot in 50 years, but if it does, this is the amount of land we will fill up as a city. uh in in 50 years. So, um, so that’s the second part of your question.

00:14:55,370	The the first part of your question, the, the easy answer is this is just a city commission directed me to do, um, but, but they’re, there, there is a contemplation for if the Jot powerers agreement can’t be changed, and then there is a, an ability for the city to simply amend the map on their own.

00:15:14,900	Um, if they do so, anything beyond 2 miles would require a joint jurisdiction, um, processes, it would have to go through both the county and the city process, which we’ve done in the past, and it’s, it’s, it’s cumbersome for everyone involved. And so that was a hypothetical map if, if we were to not have an agreement. Sure, sure.

00:15:32,970	So Daniel, one other discussion, um, point to, there was a couple areas where people had some concerns about um Apple Creek Industrial Park was one, we had some ongoing discussions.

00:15:54,430	I don’t think this necessarily is part of the ETA discussion, but is something that we wanna get addressed and I was wondering if the city has a plan either to let those folks go ahead and get real water or now that the city’s to Morrison, possibly pick that up, Jason. Yes, uh, Mr.

00:16:14,730	Chair, Comm, Comm Bakken, to answer your question I had a conversation with our city engineer about the Apple Creek Industrial Park and, uh, yes, there are no city services there today. Most of the folks I believe are operating on well and uh septic.

00:16:34,600	Things have changed in the recent past, things being number one, the FEMA map for Burleigh County has changed substantially and some of the area that was previously undevelopable within the industrial park is now outside the floodway and in the flood plain. so there can be a different look at some of those properties that were previously idle, um, Mr.

00:16:52,630	Schell, our city engineer, shared with me that he has had conversations with some of the larger landowners in those areas. There are potential opportunities to look at that entire subdivision differently. coulddr water provide services potentially could the city potentially it might depend at the request of those utilizing the water. Uh, rural water typically does not have the capacity to support fire suppression, so then you’re dealing with lower water flows, lower, you won’t have hydrants.

00:17:17,100	If some of the uses that could be developed in that industrial park were to require higher volumes of water and higher water pressure, then we’d be looking at looping into the city system because we’ve got the forest main and the water to supply to supply that.

00:17:33,700	ultimately uh, what this would come down to is a simple conversation with the people that own the land today. Um, that conversation has not happened because some of these changes are so new, but the city would not be opposed to entering into those discussions about what would it take to bring water and sewer to the site.

00:17:47,530	So, that’ll be a discussion as soon as this gets cleared up and like I said, it subsequent conversation after the ETA but ETA adjacent. Correct. And if I may go so far as to say one of the things the city is quite good at its facilitating these conversations.

00:18:04,330	In other words, we may not have the answer, but we can invite those that are part of the discussion to come and, and figure it out. What is the best solution for all of you? Is it r water? Fine. Roll water in many cases is city water. They’d be tying into our system.

00:18:19,730	It would be for a again a smaller capacity use, but if someone is looking at a high, high water use, high volume, uh, need for water pressure, then we’d be talking about city water and if we’re talking about city water, then we’re also talking about a request for annexation and then all the other services that come with that.

00:18:36,170	So again, the city doesn’t force annexation on property owners, it becomes a request when those uses change or those uh desires are to develop the property differently.

00:18:58,000	one other question too, and the concerns, uh, county parcel, um because of what we need to manage our own project, um, that’s the Missouri Valley Com complex, uh, which we just had a, uh, study there which really there’s not as much available to land there as people think because of the water constraints, uh, with the, the floodway.

00:19:16,170	Um, that’s something I would I’m, I’m not opposed to this good start, but we need to be able to manage that propertyels for what we developed because there really isn’t an urban agricultural animals. code right now, so, uh, but that’s basically what we need. Sure. Understood that, and we talked about that as well. The current zoning for the Missouri Valley complex is Peep Public, so it’s a pretty broad. Right.

00:19:32,900	Set of categories or set of uses that are allowed by right, but we need to permit that ourselves and, and manage that development ourselves because it’s a hefty project and what we would request in exchange for that is dialogue, conversation, because if you’re tying into city services, if you’re pushing stormwater in other places, those could

00:19:50,500	become urban responsibilities. We have a very similar working relationship with the state capital. They do their own permitting and inspections, but at the same time they’re tying into water and sewer and storm water, and we need to know what’s going on because in the end, if the city’s the one providing the service.

00:20:06,370	we have to have an awareness of what’s available. And we do have some shared infrastructure there, so it’s a there’s a lot of benefit for that property to say within city limits, but the ability not dissimilar from the state capital for us to be able to map that out and go forward with the permitting and and the

00:20:23,630	events that are gonna wind up being out there with the infrastructure that’s out there, that’s something that I have a lot of concern about. Yep. And Mr. Chair and Commissioners, I think you know, notwithstanding the the under the determination of the map or those types of things, I think that’s a conversation that city staff

00:20:39,500	and your staff and your yourselves, be happy to have that and figure out some sort of a mutually beneficial agreement that works for the time and place that we’re in today. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I have one Mr. Jason might be the one to answer this question.

00:20:55,600	So you mentioned FEMA and the city has done a phenomenal job over the last 15 years, 10 years, 2. to, to work with FEMA and have a FEMA rating, which then affects the, uh, flood insurance for the residents that are in the floodplain. When this, and I say when, when this land reverts to county. How does it affect those insurance rates or those.

00:21:18,970	individual homeowners Mr. Chair, uh, Comm, Comm Munsen, I may have to defer to Mitch on that one because Mitch would become your floodplain administrator. Um, we have a community rating system which you were referencing, um, I believe each entity is responsible for their own enforcement and regulations of that FEMA code, so that would

00:21:42,500	become the county’s responsibility to maintain, I believe. looks like Mitch is coming up. But the insurance is affected by that rating, correct? That’s my understanding, yes. OK. OK To. And I would think that they would have did to the voices. rather than cities Which would increase their rates. Yeah.

00:22:02,170	Mister Chair, Comm Munsen, uh, we are in the process of applying for the CRS application. That status is on hold right now. We have not heard back from, uh, the FEMA consultants, people who came for the cab visit in August. There were some outstanding violations, and there we’d have to review that first under this application, um.

00:22:27,230	consideration of that approval. uh, from what I’ve heard from other people, um, that you, you don’t come in at a low score. You usually start at an 8 or a 9. and um I can’t tell you when we’re going to be able to get approval to be a CRS, but I would say that that CRS, uh, that.

00:22:47,630	um reduction in their floodplain insurance would not be applicable. We are not in the CRS program. I mean, we, we don’t know when that will change. That could change before the end of the year. Sure.

00:23:12,270	Well, and, and I think so, but Mitch, and I’ve had this discussion with Daniel too, um we’re not talking about this process taking place overnight. This is probably going to be over the course of the winter before things get hammered out and probably either late winter or early spring before we’re in a position to actually ratify anything, any changes, correct? That would be my, my, uh, recommendation.

00:23:29,800	There are so many things that we need to discuss. Uh, future land use maps, changing of our ordinances. a changing of the planning Commission so that it’s more of a joint commission. One of the things I haven’t heard anything about is this, uh, representation, regulation without any representation. That’s the whole problem of that these people in the EHAF talked about.

00:23:50,600	I haven’t heard anything from the city of what their suggestions are going to be for that. That will be on us now. and so it’s kind of well, there’s a component of that too that lies with the legislature that we need to address and we already, I know some of us are already working

00:24:08,730	in that direction as well, so. it’s just in my mind that these problems need to be corrected or. Right. Remediated or something needs to be, uh, because because you’re just transferring problems from C to county, right? OK, thanks, Mitch. Thank you. Mr. Chair, I would move the Burleigh County, uh, accept the proposed ETA map.

00:24:39,170	in our packet with the continued conversation with Missouri Valley Complex. Yeah, Missouri Valley Com complex and the, I, I would, at least on the record, the Apple Creek and Apple Creek Industrial Town, and the and the and Wayne Wayin Martins and property, yep, yep,.

00:24:58,070	So I think, um, if I heard right, this would be going to the city planning and Zoning Commission for for the review. Is that correct? And then you will have an opportunity to speak at that as well. Yes, there’ll be a public hearing this coming Wednesday on this item.

00:25:23,970	Mhm OK, thanks Second Here we have a motion in a second, um, with those specifics, any further discussion? All the rule. Comm Munsen. Yes. Comm Bakken? Yes. Comm Schwab Well, it’s better than nothing. That’s all I can say. Yes. Jaron Bittner. Yes motion carries. Thank you. And, uh, staff and both on the city side and the, the county side.

00:25:51,330	Thank you for all your work on this and uh as much work as you put in now, that’s, there’s gonna be a lot more coming forward and, and Comm Bitner with planning and zoning, I’m gonna guess you’re gonna have a, a big piece of that. So thank you very much for everybody who’s put their effort in for this. I certainly appreciate that.

00:26:06,230	Cause it has been a lift so far, and it’s gonna continue, so. OK, next item, uh, would be County Engineer Hall, but he’s out of town today, so I’m taking for granted that Dan’s going to cover the uh county engineer information. Federal HSIP grant and state special road funds. Good evening, Comm and Chair Bitner.

00:26:31,800	Uh, every year the Metropolit Metropolitan Planning Organization accepts applications on behalf of the NDDOT for various different grant applications within the MPO, um, this, this particular grant is the Highway Safety Improvement Program, the roundabouts on Highway 10 and North Washington Street have been funded in part with the HSIP money.

00:26:54,330	The county highway department would like to apply for construction funds under this HSIP grant for the construction of a roundabout or other intersection improvement at the intersection of 66th Street and Apple Creek Road. This project has been identified in multiple planning studies done by the Metropolitan Planning Organization and Burleigh County. In addition, the project has been included in the MPO’s long-range transportation plan.

00:27:14,000	The highway department is still working out details for the application, the cost estimate, but we’re currently estimating the project around 4.5 million, uh, of which 90% would be federally funded and 10% would be locally funded. The matching dollars would be approximately $450,000. There’s a proposed resolution in your packet, and I would take any questions.

00:27:34,900	OK, I have a question for you. Um somebody in the audience, uh had, had a question regarding um whether stop lights or anything else was under consideration. I thought I heard you say roundabout or other safety improvements.

00:27:56,170	Yeah, during the federal process we have to kind of investigate all different avenues of uh an intersection safety improvement at that particular location. So, um, all of those are currently on the table under that process. I see. Comm Buckan. So, wide, broad spectrum potential solution for this intersection, but the final decision is still gonna wind up coming back to us. Um, more or less, yes.

00:28:20,100	So we’re not locked into one solution or another right now just by applying for the grant, so. Yeah, we’ll apply for the grant and then there’s no guarantee that we’re gonna get the money either way, but, um, this is the first step in the process is, is getting essentially support to go and apply for that grant if we get funding

00:28:33,530	for that grant, then we would, uh, we would start doing the traffic operations reports and things like that to determine what the best avenue would be for that, that particular intersection and as we all know that that intersection has taken on a lot of traffic in the last few years, so.

00:28:50,530	any other questions that you want addressed, um, come on up oh gee. State your name for the record And I don’t know who come up with the idea that putting a roundabout there is brilliant.

00:29:11,970	I think whoever had that thought probably went to the Helen Keller School of Enlightenment but if you put that roundabout there, and I live a quarter mile from there. When there’s a train on 66th that nobody can move. Once that train’s gone, no one’s going to be able to get through that roundabout until they get through flushing, everybody from Lincoln all the way to the roundabout. just like happens up north by 19th.

00:29:34,870	I mean, people don’t like Roundabouts. They suck. So why would we spend $4.5 million. roughly because everything’s always more expensive than less So I’m sure we could dream out, you know, even more when a simple traffic light would be good enough. And if they’re worried about Lincoln traffic, well then give the Lincoln side more time than the Apple Crick side.

00:30:01,330	But for us to just sit on Apple Creek and never get into the roundabouts ***. I, I don’t disagree with you and, and my big problem with roundabouts is they take up too much space as well, cause like the one at 70 1st and Washington functions as they’re supposed to function, it’s massive when you look,

00:30:22,070	take a look at the land that’s used. So not a in fan a fan of them, um, that’s why I asked if this is still open for discussion for us to make that final decision.

00:30:37,900	Um, I’m in favor of applying for the grant, not necessarily in favor of a roundabout, so Well, and they just permitted a house right on that corner. Yeah. You know, uh, and, and that’s another problem with the city having ETA jurisdiction is obviously the county forgot to tell the city that they were going to put a roundabout there, and you’re probably gonna have to have a five-sided roundabout

00:30:54,530	because you’re gonna need to let the Guy get in his yard. Yeah. So, I, I literally right on. I have a lot of concerns about it as well, including some future development and, you know, what that does to Lincoln and the folks that live along Apple Creek Road. It’s, I’m not a fan of it.

00:31:07,800	I, I am in favor of going for the grant, but that’s probably not the solution we’ll wind up with. Does Burleigh County own any portable traffic lights like you see in construction sites. Oh, Dan. Do we? No. OK. You rent them. But you can rent them.

00:31:26,800	It’d be nice to rent one and just put it there and see what happens. Black out the four stop signs and see what happens. It’ll probably be an improvement over what you’re doing now. That’d be a good traffic study. Yeah, and that’d be a good way to, uh test it out. Test it out.

00:31:42,100	But I don’t think a roundabout’s gonna work good there. And there’s a lot of semi-traffic there, and every time you take a semi into a roundabout, somebody’s waiting to get run over so I think it’s a BS idea and just be chucked in the circular file Good. Thank you. Appreciate that.

00:32:04,370	Anybody else want to comment on that proposal? OK, Dan, you mentioned that there was a resolution Yeah. There’s a post move to approve the resolution. Second. In the packet for the study. Yeah, second for the, yep, application. OK. Just motion in a second. Um-hum. Good. Any further discussion? Paul rule. Comm Bakken. Yes, Comm Schwab? Yes. Comm Munsen. Yes. Chainner. Yes, motion carries.

00:32:28,970	OK. Second item on the agenda is a similar sort of uh project where the state DOT solicits for different various projects every year and this one in particular is the state’s special road funds project grant, uh, in the past we’ve applied money from for the, for projects from the NDVOT through their special Roads Fund program.

00:32:51,000	The Mill and Overlay of 93rd Street, northeast from Highway 10 to McDowell Dam was constructed in part with the special roads fund money. The county highway department would like to apply for construction funds under the special road funds grant for the Mill and overlay of Desert Road from State Highway 1804 to the Kimbell Bottoms bolt landing.

00:33:10,100	Uh, um, estimated cost for this project would be $800,000. This is an 80/20 split with a maximum of $500,000 through the state funding. The local match would be approximately $300,000. Uh, there’s a proposed resolution in your packet, and I will stand for any questions. Fishers any questions Moved to approve. Second.

00:33:32,430	Motion second to approve. Any further discussion? Call the room. Mr. Schwab. Yes. Comm Munsen. Yes. Comm Bakken. Yes. Chair Bitner. Yes, motion carries. Thank you. Thanks, Dany. Um, Coy Planning Director Flanagan. Bigegler final subdivision, Rolling Hills Road variance requests, twin buttes non-access Line. Complaint to owner and resolution. Well this Good evening, Commissioners. uh, Mr. Chair.

00:34:04,000	in your packet, uh, starting with uh item number 9 is a um the Bigigler final subdivision plat. This is located at 32032051 Northeast Fifth Avenue in Sterling.

00:34:32,270	uh, in, uh, last year, beginning of last year, the Beagler had requested to purchase excess right away, uh, from Loante Highway 10 from Burleigh County and that request was granted, uh, uh, on October 21st of last year. ILS survey began the platting that 4 lot subdivision containing the 19.47 platted acres. The projects size is a total of 22.76 acres with 3.29 acres dedicated to Riaway. Sterling Township approved the zoning review of all the parcels, uh, currently zoned Eg, and there will remain as egg.

00:35:00,600	um, and they also recommended approval of the Platte. A paving waiver was approved on August of this year. The stormwater Manage plan, uh, waiver was approved this year. The Planning Commission recommended approval of 7 to 0 vote.

00:35:21,900	So it’s um, based on the supporting documents and findings is recommended to approve that regular final plot, Comm Buckley. Um, Mitch, just because of the adjacency to the right, your, what was a right away and purchasing that property, is there any limitations on access points on that parcel or that size of parcel or those things it’ll still come forward later or.

00:35:41,170	They, uh, the access points are on the, um I’d have to find them on the plat, but that, that was discussed at the planning commission. No, and that would not uh uh, that would not prohibit any of ther to Highway 10 traffic. Correct. OK. Thank you. That I’d moved to approve Second motion second to approve any further discussion. Um.

00:36:03,070	I was just looking at one page here with this map. Oh. it’s, it’s on the next one. Never mind. Col. Comm Munsen. Yes. Comm Bakken? Yes. Comm Schwab, Yes, Sharon Bitner. Yes, motion carries. Next is the variance for A507 Rolling Hills Road.

00:36:29,870	In September, uh, Mark Rawh approached the Burley County Planning department and wishing to build an accessory building for, for the property owner Vern K Coots. The petitioner is asking relief of 35 ft of the 50-foot setback on the southeast side of the property, leaving a fifteen-foot setback for the proposed building. The property is located in a corner.

00:36:51,170	It’s a corner lot which requires a total of 90 ft setbacks from the front and rear. The October October meeting was recommended to approve the variance plan a 7 to 0 vote. There is a lot exhibit too on in the, in the packet that shows the location.

00:37:11,630	OK, that’s, that’s what I had a question about Mitch, um, in the upper right corner of the map, it shows a 40-foot non-acxis. and then a 40-foot non-access going down towards the south. Weest. southeast, is that only in that area on that lot, or does that line? you see the dashed line I’m talking about? Yep, it’s the corner.

00:37:35,100	They, it’s to, uh, coming to have a 40 ft setbacks from the corners. OK, so that’s the only non-access lines that’s, it’s just 40 ft, not Down the property line. Correct. OK.

00:38:01,530	Um what’s the justification for that, uh, setback change? Um, well, it’s, it’s common on, on, um, most jurisdictions will have relieve the rare setback on a corner lot. You can have your, you’ll have your 50 or 50 ft on 1 40 ft on one side and 40 ft on the other because of the frontage. You typically it’s, uh, the rare setbacks are relieved to the side setback at 15 ft.

00:38:19,800	and so it’s um that and the fact that he’s given up 90 ft on these lots, and it, it restricts the location of it and it’s also would push the building into a septic field. Mr. Chair, Mr.

00:38:41,730	Munsen, we reviewed a very similar project, uh, this spring, uh, same thing where they were on a corner lot, so they were being forced to have those two setbacks that were similar and we approved, uh, that same project with the 15 ft. So I would move to approved. Second motion 2 to approve any further discussion Kro. Comm Bakken. Yes. Comm Schwab. Yes. Comm Munsen. Yes. Chair Bittner. Yes, motion carries. Next up is a, uh, resolution 25-003 for twin bes block 3, uh, 21.

00:39:10,430	The owner Joe Kern had requested to have that non-access line that was platted in the Twin Butte subdivision as partially vacated to a, to place an approach on his property along 102nd Avenue.

00:39:30,170	The non-access lines are selectively drawn on a plot to limit access to high-speed, high traffic volume, roadways, and an intersections to lower traffic accidents. County staff has reviewed the non-XI Access Li I location and has made a recommendation to approve the resolution. We earlier this year, you may recall, we had the, uh, the ability to, um, adjust these lines administratively.

00:39:53,630	instead of Replat the, if the, the other option was to take the Platin and re go through the plating process just to remove 30 ft of non-access line, so it’s we, we now can do it by resolution. so. And she worked, worked with the county highway department on this. They recommended approval on it. Moved to approved. Second? Motion second to approve.

00:40:13,970	Any further discussion? Caro. Comm Schwab. Yes. Comm Munsen? Yes. Comm Bakken? Yes. Chair Bitner. Yes, motion carries. OK Uh, next up is an appeal from, uh, the, uh, the owners of Baldwin Greenhouse, a notice was sent concerning a complaint from a neighbor. to the owner of Mr. Jared Stole of Stowwell Holdings LLP 1725, 2001st Avenue in Northeast Baldwin.

00:40:41,730	The complaint was based on an, on an agricultural tour that was scheduled and conducted on the property. Miss Poldda has made the appeal. She is related to the owner In the packet, you’ll see a copy of the notice and order, order. uh, listing the, uh, violation.

00:41:05,700	Um, this was sent on the 9th of September or 8th of September. I was gone, uh, out of, out of state on the day of the, uh, I think it was the 18th of the year, they held there. um, it was a farm tour.

00:41:25,430	and I got back and the neighbor had come into the office and um this was after the fact, but we, at the time, there was advertisement for um a pumpkin patch, or not a pumpkin patch, but to uh pick pumpkins out there on this site, so we asked her to come in for a special use permit to allow that.

00:41:46,800	Our organs was approved at this commission on the 4th of August, um, it had the, had the 30 day wait period for advertisements. So at this, at that time, we had the ordinance in place. um in the packet, you’ll see 3, complaints, uh, registered to the police. There’s also a, uh, copy of the Facebook advertisement for this. for the, uh, uh, garden tour. This is the Facebook advertisement.

00:42:49,900	um we don’t know how many people were there, but, uh, the uh neighbor took some pictures of it. There’s probably about 25 people that were there in the photo, but he did state that there was 40 cars parked in front of the um uh greenhouse area.

00:43:13,000	This was in, uh, uh, with the soil districts, um, Burleigh County Soil District was a combination of their uh activity So these require, as you recall, special use permits, any of any of this agricultural recreation activities. and so she wants to appeal that. and I don’t think she’s in the audience, so. no action is needed.

00:43:39,170	I, I brought this because she requested the appeal. She sent the, uh, auditor a request of that appeal. So we’ll put it on the agenda. So, Um which is not in the audience. Did I? Mary Mary, right? No, I don’t see her. And she, I told her it’d be on the agenda.

00:44:07,230	That’s usual, yeah, it’s unusual to request an appeal and then not appear Well, I mean, it, it’s, she had an event it’s considered an agricultural recreation activity. and she did not have a special use permit. at the time, so it’s kinda I mean, there’s not much we can do after the fact.

00:44:29,230	We did ask her to come in and do it if she’s going to do any more, she needs to have a special use permit application and approved. so. She’s aware of that Yes, yes. And she, uh, told me that she don’t plan to have any, uh, um, Upix or anything like that. She’s, we’re working on a PUD of the property right now with her.

00:44:49,470	Hey, Julie, is there any, uh, any action we need to take here Generally when there’s an appeal, the person comes and pleads their case, and so there’s no information on the other side, so you can either schedule it for another time or make a decision based on the information you have.

00:45:12,370	OK, Comm, I guess you heard the options. What would you like to do I, I think that that situation up there has resulted in a little bit too much law enforcement activity. Absolutely. I’m not, I’m not real happy about that. Um, I’m a little pressed to, uh make a decision with one half of the conversation.

00:45:39,170	If somebody does not show up, but you know, at that point, do we just end this and let it continue. the legal route because they’re not here for the appeal, and were they fully notified, they knew that it was on the agenda and you had that conversation with them? Yes.

00:45:59,970	Uh, she wrote an email to the auditor to be placed on the, uh, on this tonight’s meeting. Uh, Mark, did you have any follow-up conversations with her, letting her know that it was specifically on this agenda? Oh yeah, check my emails, but I believe so. OK.

00:46:23,970	Then, I would say I would make a motion to deny the the appeal if they don’t want to show up. So, get you a motion a second to deny the appeal any further discussion. All the rule. Comm Schwab. Yes. Comm Munsen. Yes. Comm Bakken. Yes. Chair Bitner. Yes. I was curious Mitch, um it’s the resolution Item E is a resolution underneath E.

00:46:52,800	Yeah Mitch, what is the what is the resolution on the end there? I forgot that 10, sorry. Um that is on, that’s behind the, uh, the, uh, Oh, you, you would have to sign, or, um, just the auditor would have to sign it. It’s being presented to this board.

00:47:19,170	The auditor would need to sign it after this meeting. OK, I don’t, I don’t have anything in my packet. You didn’t get a copy of the resolution? Nope, not that I’m aware of. OK. I got them in my packet. It’s right after the memo. or it relates to twin bes. Yes. There’s a resolution right after twins twin buttes.

00:47:41,870	the I see. Oh, it’s out of order here, huh? Um it’s on page 027. Yeah OK, that’s but it’s in referenceplete Lebus, yeah, right? OK. How’s the legal description? OK. This would be recorded and attached to the lat. OK, we already took action on the. Yeah. Yep.

00:48:23,970	I think so, I guess it’s probably a moot point to sign it and go. OK. All right, thank you Thank you much. HR Director Binder, uh, buildings and grounds department, State’s Attorney stipend, recruitment policy, and annual leave policy revision. Comm. Welcome to him. Should I wait or go OK.

00:48:58,170	Chair Bittner, Commissioners, um, the first item I have is the building and grounds departments and on August 18th you gave me the approval to post both the, uh, facilities director position and the facility’s manager position, and we did get some good candidates for that. We did have the committee interview, um, we came up with a plan.

00:49:19,170	We do have a, uh, candidate for a finance director position. This candidate has 15 years, um, in a similar position with a different political subdivision. So what we are looking at, is to offer him the position, however, he is requesting a variance in annual leave because he has been with his political subdivision so long,

00:49:45,270	um he doesn’t want to have to start over. and that’s not something we’ve done and in our policy, it says that we don’t do it, um, however, we need to revise the policy, but I have not had the chance to do that, um, so I’m asking for an exception to do a variance for annual leave for

00:50:04,970	this facility’s director person. Go ahead. Comm Buckman. Um, so, will the policy change reflect what we’re going to make a variance for. It will align with that. It will align with the variants to those tiers. OK, so we’re, we’re just kind of trying to catch up on where we need to be. so to say.

00:50:29,000	I don’t think he’s going to wait for me to get a, a policy done in 2-3 months. So I’m asking for the exception um, that would go along how I’m gonna write the policy. So the policy will be in line with the exception that just a couple months later.

00:50:47,730	I, I would, I Yeah, I, I, I would move to approve that that exception. as long as policy’s gonna align with that. second motion of second. There is some further discussion. I had a discussion today with a, with the department head that, um, had that same request.

00:51:08,970	and was told that you couldn’t do it, and that’s causing some uh, it’s causing a problem What can we do about that Um, this department had that same request department had a had that same request, and I was told the same thing. So we just moved on because we were told we couldn’t do it.

00:51:32,470	So if we wanna go back, how far back do we wanna go? I mean that’s, I can come up with a recommendation or if we we’ll how about if we talk about that a little bit more. Yeah. OK.

00:51:53,600	I, I would think if, if the policy’s going to remedy the situation, then I think we’re in a position to exceptions going forward, if somebody wants to bring an exception forward, we should Consider it. Yeah. Yeah. Treat that the same way. I’m trying to be fair here. Yeah, as long as we know that. So I would say anybody that’s been denied that in the past, if they want to bring that forward we’ll have to listen to it if we’re gonna go that way with policy.

00:52:08,270	Yeah, I there’s a good reason that I’m bringing it up, so. How far back do we go? We’ll have to talk about that a little bit. Well, that’s a subject for another day, I think. Colro Future, uh, Munsen. Yes. Chriser Bakken. Yes. Comm Schwab? Yes. Chair Bitner. Yes, motion theories.

00:52:29,600	OK. And the second thing on the buildings and, and grounds department is we also came up with a very good, not quite a facility’s manager position, although he did interview for that, more like a facilities or buildings and ground supervisor, um, this person has HVAC, um, is skilled and has

00:52:51,000	supervisory experience, and we do not have one of our current technicians on staff that that has the desire to be in that supervisor role. So we have are proposing, uh, the facilities director and also the buildings and grounds supervisor position to supervise those techs.

00:53:13,970	Um, just, just for further information during the interview process and whatnot, we had discussions about this particular candidate, his skill levels and his, and his expertise are high enough that, um that he exceeds the qual we were going to hire a maintenance Guy anyway. you know, they’re, they’re, we were interviewing for maintenance technicians anyway.

00:53:36,070	and over time we’ve had a little bit of a challenge with some staff that, uh didn’t really want to move up to the manager or the supervisory kind of level, and that’s the uh entirely up to them.

00:53:51,900	That’s, that’s not a problem, but this person came in and interviewed and he seemed like a, a real, a real good fit for that supervisor daily, supervisor type of role. that’s still working in the department. and um we thought it would be a good addition to the Burleigh County staff. Move to approve. 2. Motion 2 to approve any further discussion. Paul ro Kercher Bakken. Yes. Comm Schwab? Yes. Comm Munsen. Yes. Chaitner. Yes, Motion carries.

00:54:18,530	OK. The second item I have is a follow-up to the state’s attorney, um, back back pay stipend, um, you had asked me the Comm asked me to go back and do some research on what in the past which stipends or what is the percentage of stipend that we have given

00:54:39,000	other employees that have fallen in that situation. So I went back and in the 5 years that I have been here, we have had 7, well 8 employees that we have given a stipend to because they were doing the job above uh, the job that they were doing that basically the department head’s job um

00:55:00,730	or taking on extra work and that came up to about 9.9% so I rounded to 10% and I put in 2024 and also I had to add because we were including 2024.

00:55:24,730	I had to add two names on, um, because they came in 2024 and the last name is actually one of our, our the the second to the last name is actually one of our senior attorneys, so they’ve taken on quite the load and, and it’s actually a returning employee. uh, state’s attorney and so I came up with a revised. computation basically and also to come up with a policy of 10%.

00:55:45,630	If we’re going to do a stipend, we’re gonna do a 10% stipend. based off of the grade So are there any questions with that? Mr. Chair, I would move torou as long as this is going to be our policy moving forward. So there’s no questions. This is how it’s hand. Motion a second to approve any further discussion.

00:56:12,800	Ful the rule. Krier Bakken. Yes, Comm Schwaben. Yes. Comm Munsen? Yes. Chair Bitner. Yes, motion carries. OK. And then I, subject 3 and 4 are together. Those are basically the two policies that we’re making exceptions to, um and I’m just going forward with some of the the things that we need to change and that these will be

00:56:37,630	the precedents that will not be exceptions. They’ll be included in the policy. going forward in 2026, the annually policy, uh, there was House Bill 1170 that went through and for state employees, they are offering a what do they call it? New hire Le, 40 hours of new hire leave to their new employees for the

00:56:59,900	first year, um, and that got approved, but we’re waiting for their policy to see how they’re going to administer it and then we may make recommendation to follow suit or do some variation to try and keep up. with the recruiting edge of our new employees.

00:57:19,000	So that is why the annual leave policy is there and also the recruitment employment and recruitment policy. So we, there’s nothing that’s needed at this time. I just wanted to make you aware that those are coming up.

00:57:40,370	And then the last thing I have is uh I think I’ve talked to some of you on this, uh, our law enforcement officers, so our deputies and our detention officers fall under a different rule under the Fair Labor Standards Act. It’s called uh Section 207 K and it’s the Garcia Ru because Garcia was versus the uh Texas Transportation.

00:58:07,100	and what that basically states is per pay period our law enforcement officers have to work 86 hours of regular time and then they can get overtime. um we were manually doing this in the old system, Infinite Visions, because they were, the department, the sheriff’s department and the detention center we’re doing paper green cards, um, and they were manually calculating this extra 6 hours of regular leave. They call it straight overtime.

00:58:30,970	um which is kind of deceptive to begin with because straight over Time is regular time, um, but when most people think straight over time, they think time and a half.

00:58:47,430	So the straight over time is just regular time, but they, it’s classified differently for those 6 hours because it has to be straight over time for those 6 hours. So it’s very confusing to our new employees.

00:59:07,370	It’s confusing to our programming in Pelocity for the universal timekeeping system, um, Sheriff Lieben and I have talked about this off and on for the 5 years I’ve been here, um, because to me it seems unfair for our deputies to have to work an extra 6 hours when everybody else. gets their any overtime after 40 hours.

00:59:26,700	Uh, I had Sheriff Len calculate what would be the cost, and he said the maximum cost for overtime would probably be an extra $20,000 in overtime and it’s within the budget, so it wouldn’t be a cost on top of what we already have, um the pros would be that it would, it’s easier to explain. It would be a recruiting perk. It would make it easier for our time card system, uh, more fair to our deputies.

00:59:46,870	and our detention officers, uh, one of the cons is that our supervisors are going to have to watch that to make sure that we don’t have employees that are abusing that over time, and they do watch it now, and they, they do know who those employees potentially are.

01:00:05,500	Um, so I am asking if we can put aside the Garcia Rule, the section 207 K rule and make our law enforcement law enforcement officers the same as all the other employees in Burleigh County, the hourly employees move to approve. Second, motion second to approve. It seems to make sense to me. Yeah. I don’t. um, any further discussion call the room Comm Schwab, Comm Munsen. Yes. Comm Bakken.

01:00:29,000	Yes. Chair Bitner. Yes. Motion carries. Thank you. Thank you. Um, Chair, um, I’d like to go back to item 9, D on that complaint to owner. And I guess I’m going to need some clarification from state’s attorney’s lawyer, um Oitor Spowskowski just brought up the email with, uh, that, uh, um,

01:00:54,630	request for a hearing on this, and with, uh, Mary Pole. um, and she did ask that that be put into the first agenda in November. So I’m not quite sure why it’s on this agenda, but um, given that she’d asked for this and probably had a conflict with being able to make this meeting.

01:01:16,530	I would like to go back and, and get that on the November agenda, so I, I’m not sure what. How about a motion to reconsider. Yeah, so, is Julie, would that be the pro just motion to reconsider that item? Um cause we all voted for it, so. Correct.

01:01:37,500	And it would be, and, um, and since somebody else asked for it to be on that isn’t here, then I would suggest that you put it on the date that they requested. OK, I would uh would make a motion to reconsider, um, that motion and put it on that requested date of the first meeting in November.

01:01:56,070	Second, a motion is second I agree with doing that. Um, it’s fair. I mean, that’s. Well, yeah, it was, apparently an administrative error, so we need to clear it up. Um, any additional discussion, call the roll. Comm Munsen. Yes. Comm Bakken. Yes. Comm Schwab? Yes. Chair Bittner? Yes, Motion curious. Thank you. County Finance Director, interim treasurer Jacobs.

01:02:22,230	got some treasurer’s office discussion. It’s kind of a follow up for you. some questions you had before and, and, um, he’s got some suggestions and whatnot here. Go ahead, welcome Lee.

01:02:45,230	Chair Bittner and Commissioners, uh, indeed it is a follow up to, uh, discussion from two weeks ago, um, the, the background here, as we all know, is that in July we reorganized the auditor treasurer’s office, uh, all financial duties were assigned to the treasurer, the auditor retained elections and uh the duties of a secretary to the board, and I was appointed interim treasurer. After a few months on the job, I’ve come to the conviction that the office needs to be reorganized.

01:03:07,600	and that the most obvious reorganization would be to do something similar to how many other counties organize their accounting departments. Um, the so to that end, I’ve included organizational charts from 8 counties in the packet. Uh, these counties have a population of under 100,000 people.

01:03:37,100	and you’ll, you may, you may see the accounting department come under different names in these organizational charts, but the most common is the finance department and so in most of these counties, the finance department reports up to a county administrator or to the board of county commissioners.

01:04:05,870	Uh, one exception is um maybe Texas has some kind of strange things going on, uh, they actually have an auditor that’s appointed by a judge, but that position requires an accounting degree with 2 years of experience. So I’ve also included 3 sort of templates of a suggested, you know, organizational structure for I don’t know what you wanna call it, the treasurer’s department, the, the, the finance department.

01:04:34,630	I’ll, uh, I’ll just refer to it as the accounting department in Burleigh County, um I’ve, I guess they’re labeled options 12, and 3. It’s the same basic idea except um in number 2, the office is sort of split between accounts payable and receivables, so the treasurer function is on one side in the accounting functions on the other.

01:04:59,870	I don’t really like that because it, I think it would create some issues with um sort of staff easily working together. The option that I prefer is option three, which, has a deputy we call the deputy treasurer in this, in this, uh, organizational chart who operates as sort of the first line accounting manager, um, so I, I think this is consistent with many

01:05:28,530	other counties where you have sort of a first line accounting manager and then if it’s small enough, it goes directly up to the, the finance director, um, in our case we’re gonna be a little bit bigger.

01:05:45,800	Do you have room for that additional level of management, uh, which we’re calling the treasure, and that may just be, they’re performing other duties, uh, like the investments and so forth, um, along with day to day, day to day activities. But the basic structure is that you, what, what we want to create here is a frontline manager who can handle the day to day requests from staff and manage the uh calendar.

01:06:06,470	Comm Boffin Comm. Uh, Lee, I was kind of leaning into option number 3 myself. Uh, the question I had was, what does that do for staffing? Um or you know, where does that leave us for, for what we need to bolster that that plan.

01:06:27,270	Well, we’re, we’re currently down one from where we where we had been, um, a few months ago, and so we, we also have, we have actually two opens positionians right now, but one of them were, were sunsetting. So we have a deputy position open and a treasurer position open.

01:06:49,730	We’re sunsetting the deputy and then we will, uh, just have the treasurer open next year. Part of the request that I have here is to, is to combine the offices of of finance and treasurer and if that’s accepted, then you would have a deputy finance direct or a treasurer, and then a finance director, uh, so there would be those sort of three levels of.

01:07:11,630	of management, I guess if that’s how you wanna. put it. So as far as how does it affect staffing? I think we do need to fill the treasurer position um, so that would, that would get us back to where we were a few months ago.

01:07:33,500	um but I think we can make it more efficient and more effective if we adopt a, uh, one of these organizational structures. And then my other question on that is from a checks and balances standpoint as far as, uh, interoperational oversight, is that kind of how that’s gonna function a little bit? Well, the, the checks and balances are done by internal

01:07:53,730	accounting controls, policies and procedures. Um, one example of that we’ve adopted is it an investment checklist and I actually went through every single one of them, um. 2 weeks ago and we have at least 2 signatures on every single investment we’ve made, meaning for, for the wire transfer.

01:08:19,500	meaning that there were 2 people who physically wet innk signed off on the wire transfer, and then I approved each. each, uh, transfer. So those are the types of um controls that you’d implement in order to multiple sets of eyes on everything and that we’re doing, you have people essentially doing um the, the, the, the incompatible job

01:08:38,730	duties are separated, and so, just as an example, you know, you, you’re not gonna find everybody we only have like 1 or 2 people who do accounts payable, right? So that sort of prevents somebody from being able to come in and make a a slip a fake vendor in there,

01:08:57,000	right? Because there’s just one person doing it, and then there’s a separate person doing all the bank reconciliations and there’s separate people still signing off on all the checks, so the fact that they’re segregated and there’s um people coming back and reviewing everything is what creates the um I guess it, it’s, it’s what prevents fraud and error.

01:09:22,270	Mr. Chair, Comm Muns. I, Lee, I appreciate it and, and as I reviewed this this weekend, I like that option 3 as well. Uh, it answers two questions for me. One, you’re not doing two jobs.

01:09:40,000	which you are now, and I appreciate all your extra efforts, you know, that the way this is looking, we are looking at hiring that treasurer, and I appreciate that. Um, but as, as you’ve answered, uh uh, Comm Bakan’s question, it also keeps that oversight, it keeps the, everything checks and balances, so I appreciate it. I would agree with option 3 as well. I would make a motion to proceed with option 3 Second.

01:09:59,170	OK, Motion motion and a second to go with option 3. Any further discussion? Pa wrong Comm Schwab, Yes, Comm Munsen. Yes, Comm Bakken. Yes. Chair Bitner. Yes, motion carries.

01:10:21,630	So, the, the other request is that we are able to list the job of treasurer for candidates internal to Burleigh County first. I don’t know if that’s possible. I don’t, I, I don’t know if there’s you know, any, any internal policies that we have to list it, uh, or that we do or do not list things internally, but my preference would be to try to seek out an internal candidate first before we go to the broader market.

01:10:42,500	Moved to approve Second OK. Motion in a second to approve. consideration of an internal. higher first. Is that an HR conversation or is that a board consideration, I would think it would be HR uh, and, yeah, I would feel better with HR being involved with that? Yes.

01:11:09,630	OK, so what are we actually telling them to do then? Work with HR to. Yeah. To be able to facilitate that we have that policy that we can list it internally, I guess would be the first question. OK, that’s under discussion here? P Pam. OK, Pam. She thought. Sorry, you thought you were safe. She thought she was done.

01:11:27,230	We just like hearing from you We don’t have anything in writing, um, but our past practice has been to open those director level positions internal external as an elected official, you have the right to call it however you want to do it, but I would, I would open an internal and external.

01:11:56,630	So that’s different than the motion we just made. Yeah, so I would rescind my motion and do the internal and external opening. In my 2nd and 2nd year new motion. OK The further discussion, called the rule. Comm Bakken. Yes. Comm Schwab. Yes. Comm Munsen, Chair Bitner. Yes, motion carries. Thank you, Chair, for that Commissioners.

01:12:32,370	OK. Next we got, uh, Comm Schwabab, Garrison diversions discussion in the Summit Carbon Solutions update, but auditor 2016. 0. Yeah. Oh, blue. There was a question on one date, I know we asked auditor Spoonskowski to check. Oh, OK. Go for it.

01:12:55,100	Yes, Chair and Comm, I reached out to the city, and they, uh, they checked their calendars and on Tuesday, September 8th, the, uh, this room here is available from 8:00 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. and then on the 9th, it’s available from 10:30 to 3. I’m not during normal meeting times. No. And the 10th was on your suggested list.

01:13:20,700	We put the 10th on the original list because it, that was the only date that this the normal time was available. Tuesday was normal time. Uh, Tuesday is 8:00 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. and then Wednesday from 10:30 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. If you want to have a meeting at an abnormal time to.

01:13:45,100	Adjust our schedule or to keep our closer to normal schedule. I’m amiable with any of the above. If you want to keep consistency, I guess. for time, 5:00 p.m. otherwise I mean, I, I guess I’m open. Yeah, I’m comfortable. Yeah. I, I think our citizens expect 5.

01:14:14,970	so they have it on a different day, early in the day. would be. Undue bur undue burden on the, on the residents if they want to be here at 5. So, I would move to keep the meeting on the 10th at our normal time. as presented on the last calendar. OK.

01:14:38,430	further discussion called the Mr. Schwab. Yes. Comm Munsen. Yes. Comm Bakken? Yes. Chair Bitner. Yes, Motion carries. OK, now, Comm Schwab Garrison diversion and summit carbon. Hey. pet projects Anyway, we tonight I’m gonna ask for the commission to ask Julie to write a letter of intent to leave the the conservancy district.

01:15:23,270	As you can see in the agenda packet we’re not getting much of a return on the money we’re giving them. And I feel that in the next 10 years, if they get $9,600,000. and we get 500,000 back. It’s a poor investment. That’s number one.

01:15:51,800	Number 2 that kind of money should be going into the economy, not to what I feel is a scam outfit right now. The federal government’s a banned them. uh they don’t do anything but shuffle papers, I think, and try to take credit. behind a smokescreen. Anyway, Mark, you want to speak on that? Sure. Mark and Tom, I appreciate their time working on that, and tell them if you want to have anything to add, you’re welcome.

01:16:13,970	Yes, uh, Chair and Comm, uh, Thomas and myself have been, are doing some research into this whole thing and, uh, basically condensed down to bullet points, what we found was that we’ve uh given them or levied approximately $9.6 million or $9.

01:16:39,170	9 million since its inception, since the county, the county actually requested to be added to the conservancy group in 1989, and then since then we’ve given them over $99.9 million the Comm Schwab also requested for a 10-year projection, and what we did is we took a very conservative, uh, percentage of growth that we that’s based on the last 1015 years and that would probably come out to about 9.6 million.

01:17:01,530	That’s the conservative number It’d probably end up higher than that, um. also some of the questions that we had going into this was how much money have I received because we are part of the conservancy group. and basically what it looks like is about $88825,588 since 2022. Sure.

01:17:29,270	um do you have any track record on asks? over that period of time versus, you know, cause there’s a difference between not asking for something and being denied for something. Um-hum. We didn’t look into how many things were asked for. We looked into how many things were approved. OK.

01:17:46,970	And most of the, most of those funds were approved for the city of Bismarck, uh, Parks and Recreation. They received most of these funds. and, uh, so we had to look into any group that was within Burleigh County’s borders that received funding.

01:18:09,370	Uh, so the, the biggest question though was the South Central Water District received a little over $56 million through Garrison diversion and at first I was wondering, well, maybe that’s because we were part of the district. So I did a little bit of further digging. One thing that we did find was the southwest water pipeline, uh, project has received over $105 million. uh through Garrison diversion. and they’re not part of the conservancy district.

01:18:26,430	None of the counties that the pipeline is going through as part of the conservancy district. So I called them and asked them what why they were getting those funds. the way it was explained to me is that the garrison diversion Conservancyro group is working as a pass-through. They have an agreement with the state that they work on those federal funds.

01:18:45,900	So all the, all the funding that the Southwest Water Project has received its federal funds that they received through Garrison because they were the ones running the, the grants and, uh, South Central Water District, which mainly consists of Burleigh County. is the same thing. Those are federal funds received from uh from the uh through the conservancy group facilitated by the state.

01:19:06,900	Yes. OK. And so our membership in the conservancy group is not, uh, O receiving those funds was not predicated upon our membership. And so that kind of that that took out the $56 million. That’s why we ended up with the 800,000. Wow. OK. So. Yeah.

01:19:27,330	Actually, all of this stuff can be done without them, and they’re shuffling papers, right? Well, all of the, based upon the information I’ve received, all of the funds that the South Central Water District had received. We could have received whether a part of the district or not.

01:19:48,100	It’s I suppose a person would have to go into a deeper after if we send a letter to them and tell them we’re terry taking money from the taxpayers. But when they’re running money through from one district to the other, I wonder what their administrative fees are. Well, like you said, it’s doesn’t seem to be a very good investment for the residents of Burleigh County.

01:20:10,500	Are you making a motion, Comm Doge? I am making a, yes, I am, by the way, and, you know, to really be honest with it, um so that people know if, if we quit collecting the taxes, the county itself doesn’t benefit. Right. They get just a tax break. It’s not a big one, but every, every little bit counts.

01:20:36,630	It isn’t, well, they’re not, we’re collecting it and then the the county will get it. It’s just gonna come off your tax statements, and it is on your tax statements. You can look at what we’re talking about.

01:21:00,100	So I moved there, we tell them we are ready to quit and that we send them a letter uh second for discussion. Yeah, motion in the second for discussion. Go ahead. Julie, do we have any legal entanglements, uh, you’ve foreseeing by dispensing that letter? Uh, what are some of your concerns? So, um, no, just that the, the statute does allow for that. It’s basically a petition that has to be filed.

01:21:28,970	It says that there has to be a resolution uh from the board of the county commissioners that the county auditor and the Chair of the board file a petition for and on behalf of the county requesting that the district excludes such county from the um conservancy district and then certain things have to be

01:21:47,100	fi led The petition has to state specific reasons why the county will not be benefited from the establishment and development of the garrison diversion unit.

01:22:03,170	So right, those specific reasons have to be included in there and so as long as we have everything that’s um pursuant to statute, they should accept that and then of course, the decision is the conservancy board, so. So they decide. course after they decide that they don’t want to let us out. So kind of like when somebody doesn’t like the decision that this board makes. There’s an appeal process, the district court.

01:22:21,270	So, we can probably count on going through the appeal process. Probably. OK, that’s pretty likely. Yeah. Um, I, I think one of the most important points that I’ve heard throughout this whole thing is that when, when this was created and started there was a different mission. Yes. And there has been a significant mission change compared to what was originally agreed to.

01:22:44,370	Well, this is Be mission creep. This is just mission. The original does not even exist anymore, right? I think they physically changed, you know, just changed and so I don’t think we’re benefiting, Mr. Chair.

01:23:08,330	few months if I can, um, the hardest part for me was when they were in front of us and presented uh this year, maybe there’s only 3 farmers. that are actually drawing water off of this diversion in Burleigh County. So this whole canal that has went through our county or parts of our county, 3 farmers are benefiting from it. in their irrigation systems, yeah, that’s it. Now, on the flip side, I got a grant application going into them pretty soon.

01:23:36,000	Yeah, well, you get out of paying the 1 million. Can, Can can you, and you can, you don’t have to worry about. Yeah, right? Can you better allocate those funds uh with a better investment. By going through the board. No, I probably, uh, I, I agree, um, but good.

01:23:56,070	Julie, what would the timeline of getting that drafted and, and back here for approval look like? I, I, I know you schedule’s ridiculous, so. It is, but I could probably have a draft by the next meeting. OK.

01:24:13,970	Um, I just need to know, I, obviously, uh, Mark is the auditor who’s got all the financial numbers and things, and then who else wants to work on getting that drafted drafts already. OK. Well, then I will work with. That had run through the eye. You and Mark on getting a, a draft for the commission, a second motion to make here after this is done. Yeah, yeah. Here, we have a motion of the second, any further discussion. All the rule.

01:24:32,600	Where’s your Munsen? Nope. Comm Bakken? Yes. Comm Schwab? Yes. Chair Bitner. Yes, motion carries. OK. My second motion is, I think we need to write them a letter and tell them we want that money back. and how do they want to do it in a lump sum.

01:25:01,500	or on a monthly or annual basis because they have accomplished nothing for us. I think the way to actually go through that would be maybe talk to the state auditor’s office and um as it pertains to us, an auditing of those funds. and they probably have something on record.

01:25:24,900	I, I, I would be a little I, I don’t think we’d get very far, but if you had the conversation with the state auditor’s office, there might be a path that becomes a little bit more clear. I wonder what. Cause right now, I, I, I, I, I just don’t see that happening I’m not in the business to make motions for the don’t know.

01:25:41,630	You don’t know it happen unless you try. Well, but I, I think the probably begin with the auditor’s office and then I would love to entertain. I would like to see a forensic audit on them. Well, that, uh. They have it coming.

01:25:57,100	I, I think before you would make a motion for that, I would think that maybe the discussion with the auditor’s office and see what they have in their files might be prudent. I, I, I don’t like being scattershot, and I, I, it, I think that would be a better way to go with that OK. And you know the auditor.

01:26:22,100	Our auditor I work with, with the state auditor’s office auditors do that. We can, we can work with come to my office, we’ll call them. All right. And that way you can. OK. Yeah. Hey, do you want to add something about some? Are they here Are you kidding me? I dare ask.

01:26:49,270	Yeah, the reason that’s on the agenda is if you read the wording in this packet, they are kind of abandoning North Dakota. as a dumping site dump ground, whatever you want to call it. And uh I had, I had made a statement here about, oh, maybe almost 2 years ago to the audience that it isn’t over yet and I still don’t think it’s over yet.

01:27:17,630	because there are lawsuits in North Dakota and stuff now, and you know when you go duck hunting, you have decoys. and that’s what this is. I could be.

01:27:45,870	I’m not saying it is but it sounds to me like their original agreement with the Iowa was that it would run through North Dakota and sequester would be in North Dakota. And the only way they can get things changed now. and stay in Iowa that they have to have Iowa change the agreement.

01:28:08,730	So it’s kind of a complicated thing but I don’t trust him and like I said, it’s it’s not over yet, and I want the people to know that to stay vigilant because uh another thing, this, this is really interesting and research on that. They are owned by, believe it or not a company called Summit Ag Agra. Ara Group and I often wondered why that 45C hasn’t been cut by the feds.

01:28:41,430	And I found out they’re big donors to Trump campaign and the Republicans. So I want that on, you know, full disclosure there. But uh when you’re a big donor and this is the outfit out of, uh, they’re out of Iowa. The owner is a personal friend of Donald Trump.

01:29:09,100	big donor and to a lot of the other Republicans. which could be our guys. So we want to keep that in mind. It isn’t over till it’s over. It’s a long way from home. That’s a long way with me. Sure. So question, Comm Bach. Um, so in that regard, there’s a couple of counties that are battling that down.

01:29:29,370	in Iowa. Yeah. Um, so I’m wondering if there might be a route with an amicus brief to support what they’re doing because that’s gonna benefit us. um Julie, do you have any thoughts on that Generally, that’s done on like a state level, our state is going to, if our state is going to intervene in another state’s

01:29:57,370	lawsuit. It’s usually on a state level that that’s done. But is there a way that, that we could support them in that regard because that’s gonna have benefit for us, so.

01:30:11,900	That I would have to do research on to see if a county can a specific county within a state can take a stance like that in another state. Like I said, generally, it’s on a state level when there’s an amicus brief done through the Attorney General’s office, but I’ll, I’ll look. If you could find out for us, thank you. Um-hum.

01:30:24,970	Cause I think there might be a way to support them because that’s gonna be helping us in the long run depending on how that county um litigation plays out. This, by the way, there’s one other detail with this Arogroup. We were led to believe that at least I understood that someone would just all of a sudden kind of popped up and was separate company. They already vision of this Arogroup.

01:30:50,530	They are LLC. Now, I don’t know how you can have an LLC with a division, but uh they completely flipped over their business. you know, they’re, they’re for walk away, but they’re um actually the biggest landowner in Iowa, just, uh, excuse me, the 10th biggest with 13,000 plus acres.

01:31:14,630	and they have a lot of reach there in, in, uh vaccines and this and that, but they claim they’re conservative, so there we are. It’ll be interesting to see what happens. It’s really interesting, yeah, if we’re able to. I like your idea. Yeah. So there’s get that Action required. That was informational purposes. I appreciate that. too.

01:31:39,170	See, I didn’t have to wait till the end to ask if they were. Pardon me. I didn’t have to wait till the end to ask if they were here. Yeah. Kimblebottom’s funding option under Comm Munsen. Uh, thank you, Chair. Uh, and no actions needed here.

01:31:57,370	I’m, I’m asking for your guys’ uh, thoughts, um, you know, we approved last meeting the, uh, chemo Bottom reclamation, uh, I had a funding mechanism in the budget that was removed for uh 26, so I’m reaching out to you to give me some ideas of how you think we can fund this 2.5 million roughly dollar project. uh, it, it’ll be about a 27, 28 project, so.

01:32:21,370	please give me your thoughts and uh so I can start working on that budget for 27. Garrison diversion. They’re, there’s a grant for the money. Yeah, they’re supposed to be doing that. Right there it is. Yeah, there, there is a, an option there for 50.

01:32:42,270	Um that’s my suggestion because when they get this letter, they’re probably going to try to do something to make themselves look relevant. And then it’s back to the old grind. Is there uh an opportunity to do a phased approach with what you’re looking at doing down there. It, it can. do pieces make sense rather than certainly something I could ask the engineers on that.

01:33:06,270	Or is it more, I, I’m big when it comes to conservation of scale. Does it make more sense to do it all at once because we’re going to have some cost savings there, or can we phase in different components of this, I guess that would be a good

01:33:16,500	question to ask to see where the, the cost benefit is more cores of engineer as well. Yeah. How long are they going to let us. Well, but this as long as we’re working on something. Yeah.

01:33:30,730	Uh, and working towards the finished product, then I’m guessing they’d be probably amicable to that, but um for me it’d come down to, does it make more sense to just get it done because there’s cost savings there, or can we phase it in and realize some cost savings that way by, by spreading out a little bit. So I guess we’ll reach that out. My questions. Yeah.

01:33:48,370	Yeah, I will appreciate that That’s it. OK Any other business for the good to Burleigh County. Sure. Comm Buckner. Um, I just want to say thank you to Comm Schwab you know now known as Comm Doge, for your work on the Garrison Diversion info and uh Oter Spowskowski for coming up with those numbers that, uh,

01:34:15,630	um Don’t your tongue. Greatly helpful. Yeah. Tom, thank you very much for, for your office’s work on that because I, I think when you can lay those numbers out and we can let the public know what lack of benefit for that investment that we’re getting that really clarifies the conversation.

01:34:38,630	So Burleigh County residents are getting, so, thank you very much and Comm. Thank you Munsen, thank you. OK. Anything else We are Adjourned