00:00:10,830	Today is Wednesday, July 23rd, 2025. I’d like to welcome all that are in the Tom Baker meeting room this evening and those online to this meeting in the Bismarck Planning and Zoning Commission and with that I’ll call the meeting to order and ask Sarah to call Roll. Comm Bittner Comm. E Comm Field.

00:00:34,330	Comm Johnson. Comm Larson, Comm Lukins. Here. Mr. Schelle, Comm Schmitz. Mr. Sebak, Mr. Wangan Comm Zent Chair Schwartz. Here. With that, we’ll move on to the first item of business in our agenda this evening, which is approval of our meeting minutes from our June 25th meeting.

00:01:06,530	Commissioners, what are your wishes? I’ll move to approve the minutes. We have a motion to approve from Comm Larson and a second from Comm Za. Any discussion? And I’m not seeing or hearing any. Sarah, please call roll. Mr. Wangan. Yes Comm Field. Yes. Comm Johnson, Comm Lukins. Yes. Mr. Larson, Yes, Comm Schell, yes. Comm Sebach, Comm Bittner. Yes.

00:01:36,300	Comm Schwartz. Yes, the motion is approved. With that, we move on to our consent agenda this evening and we do have a number of items in our consent agenda.

00:01:53,930	The first is item 2A, which is Lundy edition, and it’s a request for a preliminary plot staff recommendation is to call for a public hearing. Item 2B is Boulder Ridge commercial edition. And that is a request for a zoning map amendment and a preliminary plot, the recommendation from staff is to call for a public hearing on both. And then we have.

00:02:16,500	Item 2C, which is northern Pacific edition block block 10, lots 1 through 4, and it is a request for a future land use plan amendment and a zoning map amendment and staff’s recommendation for both is to call for a public hearing. We have 2D. William Blackstone edition. This is a request for a zoning map amendment.

00:02:39,800	Staff’s recommendation is to call for a public hearing. We have item 2E South Meadows Edition, 3rd re Platt, Block 1, lots 1 through 10, and that is a request for a future land use plan amendment and a zoning map amendment. Staff’s recommendation for both is to call for a public hearing.

00:03:04,530	And finally we have 2 F which is keeping of chickens within the city limits. This is a request for a zoning ordinance text amendment and staff’s recommendation for this is to call for a public hearing. With that, Commissioners, I would like to uh staff as requested that we pull item. 2 C For, uh Some additional information, so with that, with the remainder.

00:03:31,600	Of the consent agenda, are there any other items you’d like to pull, otherwise I’d entertain a motion to approve. Moved to, to approve all items on the consent agenda other than item C. Thank you, Comm I can. Second, we have a second from Comm Sebach.

00:03:59,000	With that, any discussion? I’m not seeing or hearing any, Sarah, would you please call roll? Comm Sivak, Comm Johnson, Comm Field. Yes, Comm Wongan? Yes. Comm Bittner. Yes Comm Larson. Comm Lukins. Yes. Mr. Schell, yes. Comm Zen, yes, Chair Schwartz. Yes, the motion is approved.

00:04:30,400	With that, we have, um, Item 2C, and I believe Isaac is going to provide us with some additional information. Yes, thank you, Chair Schwartz and Commissioners, uh, for this particular agenda item, the Community Development Department is requesting approval of a zoning map amendment from the existing RM 30 residential district to the DF Downtown Fringe zoning district, as well as the future land use plan amendment from the current urban neighborhood

00:04:53,330	designation to the downtown or DT designation for lots 1 through 4. Block 10 of Northern Pacific Edition and as you can see on the screens there, that is the eastern half of that block. So just as some additional background information for why uh staff are initiating this request.

00:05:11,570	Uh, this comes after a development inquiry was brought to the community development department’s attention on one of the parcels on that eastern half there, that would not be permitted in the existing RM 30 zoning. So after some conversations with that particular landowner and providing them with some options uh they preferred.

00:05:28,600	path forward was to request the zoning change to the DF Downtown Fringe district and to maintain consistency with how staff have handled previous zoning changes involving going towards a downtown district, uh, staff have initiated those in the past and as standard practice, we prefer to do either half a block or a whole block in this particular case,

00:05:49,900	uh, staff is requesting the eastern half of this block to again to maintain consistency with previous standards on how we’ve handled similar projects. A letter was sent out to the 8 relevant property owners who would be affected by this potential change and describing the proposed change as well as listing the primary differences

00:06:09,130	between the existing and proposed districts and setting up an informational meeting for those property owners to attend in addition to providing staff contact information to reach out via phone or email. A copy of that letter as well as uh the table which was given to the landowners describing the differences between the districts.

00:06:30,000	Um, uh, was included in the staff reports before you and In general, if we can move to the Uh, that’s the future land use portion of this, but if we go to this slide there.

00:06:46,130	So this is, uh, the same table that was included in your staff reports at the table that’s provided to the landowners just describing what those differences would look like in general, all the uses currently existing today would still be permitted in the DF uh Downtown fringe, so nothing would be considered non-conforming, and it would provide a little extra flexibility in terms of some more commercial or office uses and dimensional standards such as setbacks or height

00:07:04,900	regulations, and then the future land use plan amendment. portion is being requested to again maintain some consistency in the proposed zoning and the proposed future land use plan, so other than some ongoing conversations with the original property owner that helped spur this conversation and request staff have not received any inquiries for additional

00:07:26,000	information from the other property owners, nor have we received any strong indications of support or opposition from those property owners. So if the planning and zoning Commission calls for the public hearing. As a result of this request, the standard public engagement would move forward, including postcards to the broader neighborhood and Bismarck Tribune publications.

00:07:46,300	So as a cumulative result in the findings today, uh, staff do not find any adverse impact to public health, safety or general welfare, um, and do you recommend calling for the public hearing on the zoning map amendment and future land use plan amendments, and I’ll stand for questions if you have them at this time, Commissioners, Questions for

00:08:04,300	Isaac. I’m not seeing or hearing any Isaac. Thank you. With that, commissioners for item number 2C, uh, staff’s recommendation is to call for a public hearing. What are your wishes? Move to call for a public hearing. We have a motion from Comm Johnson. Second. A second from Comm Sivak. Any discussion? Sarah, please call roll. Comm Field.

00:08:39,600	Yes, Mr. Morgan? Yes. Mr. Johnson. Comm Larson, yes. Comm Sebach. Yes. Comm Bittner. Yes. Mr. Lukins. Yes. Mr. Michelle. Yes. Comm resent. Schwartz. Yes, the motions approved. With that, we’ll move on to our regular agenda this evening.

00:09:06,870	The first item in our regular agenda is 3A, which is Ek Ridge Fourth edition, and it’s a request for a soning map amendment and final plot and uh Jenny is gonna provide us with staff report. Thank you. Good evening, Mr. Chair. Schwartz, Comm, Section 18 Land LLC is requesting approval of a zoning map amendment from the Agricultural.

00:09:27,070	zoning District to the R10 residential zoning district and major subdivision final plot titled Elk Ridge Fourth Edition. This request is located northwest of Bismarck between North Washington Street and River Road east of Tyler Parkway and north of Frisco Way and consists of 23.65 acres with 46 lots and 5 blocks. The applicant has indicated that annexation of the proposed plot will occur at a later date.

00:09:46,500	Building permits for any structures within the plot would not be issued until annexation has been approved and an annexation ordinance is recorded. You tentatively approved the proposed plat and called for a public hearing on the zoning map amendment at your meeting on June 25th.

00:10:02,600	The property has been identified as urban neighborhood in the future land use plan, the Urban Nehood areas are a place of quiet enjoyment of home life, goals and objectives of this plan as they relate to the proposed zoning map amendment and Platt are referenced in your staff report, adjacent land uses include developing residential to the east and south and undeveloped agricultural zone property to

00:10:19,770	the north and west. Lot 1, block 1 of the proposed Platte includes a 30 ft wide axis water main and sanitary sewer easement on the north side of the. A lot. The axis easement would provide, um, the property owner to the West access should they, should they choose to develop in the future.

00:10:36,570	Lot one, block one is also fully encumbered by a storm water and drainage easement and will function as a stormwater pond for the development. The stormwater management plan states that the homeowners association for the Plot will be developed and would be responsible for regular maintenance of the stormwater pond.

00:10:53,700	Own and maintain the pond as well, regular maintenance consists of mowing, weed control, and other standard periodic maintenance, the city of Bismarck, however, would be responsible for sediment removal and any needed structural repairs for the stormwater facilities.

00:11:10,730	The public has been notified of this request to a notice was published in the Tribune on July 11th and 18th and 29 postcards were mailed to the owners of nearby properties on July 11th. To my knowledge, we have not received any inquiries regarding this request. The request was evaluated according to the standards contained.

00:11:28,900	within the comprehensive plan code of ordinances and state law, and there was a result of all the findings contained in the staff, staff staff find that the proposed major subdivision plot would not adversely impact the public health, safety and general welfare and is consistent with our comprehensive plan, code of ordinances, and state law.

00:11:50,270	Therefore, staff recommends approval of the zoning map amendment from the agricultural zoning District to the R10 residential zoning District and major subdivision final plot for Elk Ridge 4th edition. Do you have any questions? Commissioner’s questions for Jenny. I’m not seeing you here Jenny, thank you. With that, I’m going to open up the public hearing on this particular genda item is either the requester or representative.

00:12:10,530	I see landing, you’re stepping up there. Can I get you to put your name on the log. Thank you, Chair Schwartz. Lay and Naler of Schwarzehagen Engineering. Representing on this project, um, yeah, as Jenny mentioned, this is just one of the next, uh, phases of the Oak Ridge developments there are a couple other places in town as well in

00:12:24,730	the Oak Ridge area that are not annexed to the city, not requesting annexation at this point. That’s usually, of course, a little bit market driven, so it depends on what the what the future holds, uh, but this is just the next phase.

00:12:36,170	It’s very similar to what is going on in in previous phases, but I can certainly answer any questions if you have them. Commissioner’s questions for Landon. I’m not seeing or hearing anyone and thank you. Oh, Comm Schell.

00:12:56,570	Later, we don’t have in the, the staff reported condition that a turnaround easements are, are required, um, in fact that you won’t need to, uh, at the end of these dead end streets, the city just wanna permit the streets to be constructed to the edge of the plat limit, so just maybe a consideration to, uh, supply those if the intent is to pay for or desire to pay most of this area, so more just an FYI. Yeah. Thank you, Comm.

00:13:09,830	It is, um, it’s definitely under consideration and as we go forward, we’ll be ready for that. Thank you. Thank you, Comm Schell. Commissioners, any additional questions for land? Thank you. Thank you. With that, the podium is open for others that would care to address this agenda item. And I’m not seeing or hearing anybody with that.

00:13:29,570	I’m going to close the public hearing, uh, with that. Jenny, any additional? All right, thank you, Commissioners, this is a request for a zoning map amendment and a final plat. And staff recommendation is approval for both of those. What are your wishes? Motion to approve.

00:13:48,730	We have a motion to approve from Comm Wigan. Second, a second from Comm Zent. Any discussion? And I’m not hearing or seeing any. Sarah, would you please call roll? Comm Johnson. Comm Field. Comm Larsson, Comm Lukins. Yes. Comm Schell, Comm Seva, yes. Mr. Wangan, yes. Mr. Zent, yes, Comm Bittner. Yes. Schwartz. Yes, the motion is approved.

00:14:21,330	With that, we’ll move on to item 3B in our regular agenda, which is Boulder Ridge commercial Edition. This is a request for an annexation. And uh I believe Lauren is going to provide us with staff briefing this evening.

00:14:42,870	Uh, good evening, Chair Schwartz and Commissioners, uh, Wilman Development LLC and Wilma Properties LLC you’re requesting approval of an annexation of lots 1 through 3, block 1. And lot 1, block 2, Boulder Ridge commercial edition. The Project area contains 19.89 acres and is located in northwest Bismarck, in the northeast quadrant of the inner section of North Washington Street and Forty-third Avenue Northeast.

00:15:05,070	This annexation request is in conjunction with the zoning map amendment and a major subdivision plot to facilitate future commercial development in the area. Um In order to connect to municipal services for any proposed development, the property would need to be annexed.

00:15:28,070	The only reason that this annexation request is separated from the preliminary plot and the zoning map amendment, and that is also within your packet, um, is due to some uh timeline considerations for annexation. The property has been identified as community mixed use in the future land use plan.

00:15:52,070	current adjacent uses include offices, single and two family residential to the north, single and two-family residential to the east, a church, nursing home in a multi-family residential and retail uses to the south and a convenience store and undeveloped commercial land to the west across North Washington Street.

00:16:11,830	Annexations do not have a public hearing, uh, before the planning and zoning commission, uh, the public will be notified of this request before it’s heard with the city commission, however, um, as well, uh, Burley County and Hay Creek Township in accordance, uh, with certain provisions within North Dakota Century Code. To my knowledge, staff has not received any formal comments at this time regarding this request.

00:16:31,600	The request was evaluated according to the standards contained within the comprehensive plan code of Ordinances and state law. The proposed annexation incorporates land that has been designated as expansion priority 2, and is clearly contiguous to the existing corporate limits, uh, with 100% of the proposed annexation’s perimeter adjoining. Creation of new lots within the city of Bismarck is subject to development capital charges for municipal utilities.

00:16:59,870	This annexation request also triggers the health and costs for regional stormwater improvements, uh, related, uh, to the construction of North Washington Street as well. Uh, as a result of all findings contained in the staff report, uh, City of Bismarck staff and that the proposed annexation will not adversely impact the public health, safety and general welfare and is consistent with the

00:17:18,770	comprehensive plan code of Ordinances and state law based on the above findings, staff recommends approval of the annexation of lots 1 through 3, block 1 and lot 1, block 2, Boulder Ridge Commercial edition. Do you have any questions, Commissioners, questions for Lauren.

00:17:40,130	Comm Schell Lauren, can you maybe elaborate on the timing component because if this board approves the annexation of Older Ridge commercial edition when it doesn’t exist yet, because that’s just something that we called for a public hearing. Maybe you could just elaborate on that piece of it if you would.

00:17:55,500	So, uh, the annexation would next be forwarded if it were approved by this board, uh, as the final consideration would next move to the city commission on their consent agenda, if that were approved at the consent agenda, um, there’s an additional 2 week time frame between that.

00:18:17,270	Typically, um, uh, between that and when it would need to go to a public hearing, uh, this annexation request is. Based on that timeline would be proposed to be seen by the city commission at the end of September, um, that meeting if The preliminary plat slash final plot and the zoning map amendment that follows the general timeline of what those projects typically go for through both the planning and

00:18:39,770	zoning commission in the city commission. It would also be seen on that second meeting in September with the city commission. So they would align for the final public hearing, um, with the city commission, all three of those requests. OK, thank you, Lord. Thank you, Comm Schell. Commissioners, additional questions for Lauren. I’m not seeing or hearing you.

00:19:00,930	Thank you, Lauren. Commissioners, this is a final consideration for this annexation request and the staff recommendation is to approve what are your wishes. To approve We have a motion to approve from Comm Johnson. Second from Comm Sebach. Any discussion, commissioners. I’m not seeing or hearing any. Sarah, would you please call roll? Mr.

00:19:34,630	Wangan, yes, Comm Field, Yes, Comm Johnson. Yes, Comm Larson, Yes. Comm Bittner. Yes. Mr. Lukins. Yes, Comm Schell, yes. Comm Seva. Comm Zent, yes, Chair Schwartz. Yes, the motion is approved. With that, we’ll move on to item 3C in our regular agenda, which is Oakland subdivision block. one lot for and Jenny is uh going to provide us with staff.

00:20:04,600	Briefing this evening. Thank you, Chair Schwartz Comm Tanner and Andrea Broderick are requesting approval of a special use permit to increase the allowable area of accessory structures, so 3200 square feet on lot 4, block 1, Oakland Subdivision.

00:20:26,530	This request is located north of Bismarck, east of US Highway 83 between 71st Avenue Northeast and eighty-Fourth Avenue Northeast along the north side of Grey Fox Lane and consists of 1.68 acres. The property is zoned rural residential and is large enough. to have up to 3200 square feet of accessory buildings with approval of a special use permit.

00:20:41,430	The public has been notified of this request. A notice was published in the Tribune on July 11th and 18th and 56 postcards were mailed to the owners of nearby properties on July 11th. To my knowledge, we have not received any inquiries regarding this request.

00:20:59,300	The request was evaluated according to the standards contained within our comprehensive plan, Bismarck Code of Ordinances and state law, and as a result of all the findings contained in your staff reports, staff find that the proposed special use it would not adversely impact public health safety, general welfare, and is consistent with our comprehensive plan code of ordinances and state law.

00:21:17,900	Therefore, staff recommends approval of the special use permit to increase the allowable area of accessory structures to 3200 square feet for a lot 4, block 1, Oakland Edition, excuse me, Oakland subdivision. Do you have questions? Commissioner’s questions for Jenny. I’m not seeing you Jenny, thank you. With that, I’ll open up the public hearing. For this agenda item is either the requester or a representative here.

00:21:41,130	Please Step up and if you would put your name on the log and introduce yourself, that would be wonderful. Yeah, good afternoon, uh, Tanner Broderick, uh, property owner, and, uh, I appreciate, uh, uh, your consideration for the special use permit, um, just looking to use the, the Burleigh County,

00:21:59,900	uh, zoning laws that, that now the Bismarck City, from what I understand is uh is, is under jurisdiction to, to provide so. Thank you. Commissioner’s questions for Tanner before we let him step away. I’m not saying or hearing any Tanner. Thank you. Thank you.

00:22:21,300	With that, the podium is open for others that would care to address this agenda item. And I’m not seeing or hearing anybody, so with that, I’m going to close the public hearing, uh, Commissioners, this is a request for a special, and I should ask, uh, Jenny, any additional comments? No, thank you. Thanks.

00:22:39,930	This is a request for a special use permit, uh, staff’s recommendation is to approve what are your wishes. Motion. Motion to approve. We have a motion to approve from uh. Comm Wygan, Comm Bittner, would you like to be a 2nd? Sure, I’ll second that. All right. Thank you, Comm Bentner. We have a motion and a second.

00:22:59,900	Any additional discussion? And I’m not seeing or hearing any. Sarah, would you please call Roll? Comm Johnson. Comm Field, Comm Sebak. Mr. Wongan, yes, Comm Bittner. Yes. Comm Lukins. Yes. Comm Schell? Yes. Comm Larson, Comm Zent, yes, Cha Schwartz. Yes, the motion is approved.

00:23:28,600	We will move on to item 3D in our regular agenda, which is McKenzie and Coffin’s edition, Block 91 lots 1 through 16 and 24 through 29. This is a request for a special use permit, uh, and I believe Isaac is gonna provide us with staff briefing.

00:23:48,330	Yes, thank you again, Chair Schwartz and Commissioners for this regular agenda item man signs on. Half of McCabe Methodist Church is requesting approval of a special use permit for an electronic message center or sign or EMC for short on the church property there, which is lots 1 through 16 and 24 through 29, block 91, McKenzie and Coffins edition, as well as

00:24:07,000	the vacated Alley adjacent to those specific lots. This is located in central Bismarck and along the west side of North 6th Street, as you can see on the screens there between East Avenue F and East Boulevard Ave. Avenue.

00:24:25,670	The property is currently zoned RM 30 residential and a majority of the land around it contains a variety of uh residential uses ranging between single family to smaller apartment buildings, and then there is one office building to the west and of course the state capitol grounds to the north as well.

00:24:42,730	The area in the future land use plan is identified as urban neighborhood which are described as places for quiet enjoyment of home life, but do permit other things such as religious institutions like a church as well. The sign has been proposed to be located near the intersection of East Boulevard and North 6th Street with the sign faces Be oriented to the east and west to be primarily viewed from East Boulevard Avenue there, approximately the same location

00:25:04,200	where an existing sign is at the moment. The sign meets the relevant dimensional standards for EMCs and the applicant has provided a signed statement identifying the relevant operational requirements and sign features, uh, as well as as the property owners intend to meet those ongoing requirements.

00:25:24,570	The public was duly notified of this request via publications in the Bismarck Tribune on June. Uh, 13th and 20th and 10 postcards were mailed to, uh, nearby property owners on July, uh.

00:25:49,000	Wrote down the wrong dates here, but As a cumulative result of all the findings contained in the staff report, City of Bismarck, uh, staff find that the special use print would not adversely impact public health safety and general welfare and is generally consistent with the comprehensive plan and Bismarck Code of Ordnances and relevant state law.

00:26:11,930	Therefore, uh, staff does recommend approval of the special use permit for the EMC sign on lots 1 through 16 and 24 through 29 B block 91 Mckenzie and Coffins edition and the vacated alley adjacent to those lots. Does the Commission have any questions for me at this time, Comm, questions for Isaac. I’m not seeing any, Isaac. Thank you.

00:26:32,730	I, I will just uh correct myself earlier that the postcards were mailed on July 11th and that the publications were on July 11th and 18th, and it was 73 postcards just to correct my incorrect information earlier. Thank you. With that, I’ll open up the public hearing for this agenda item is either the requester or a representative here. And if you would put your name on the log and introduce yourself, that would be great.

00:26:59,030	Good evening, Shannon Schlinger from Man Signs here, uh, just looking for your approval on that sign, uh, Wonder if you guys had any questions. I do have a representative here from the church also. Commissioner’s questions for Shannon. Shannon, does the existing sign go away? Yes, it does. OK. It’s.

00:27:16,700	So, it’s will be, it’s gonna be constructed right behind where the old sign is at. OK. Thank you. Currently. So again, I’ll ask any uh questions for Shannon? I’m not seeing or hearing any. Thank you. Thank you.

00:27:33,270	With that, the, the podium is open for others that would care to address this agenda item, and I am not seeing or hearing anyone. So with that, I’m going to close the public hearing. Isaac, any additional comments? No, thank you, Chair. All right, thank you. With that, Comm, this is a request for a special use permit. Staff’s recommendation is to approve what are your wishes. Motion to approve. Motion to approve from Comm Zent second from Comm Johnson.

00:27:57,070	Any additional discussion? Chair, um, I do feel like maybe this is for Isaac, those conditions for being close to, uh, residential area. I feel like that’s useful for the public in general if someone’s watching. Um, to go through those. I see we have the signed letter. But, um Those requirements for the.

00:28:20,000	The electronic sign with a 150 ft of residential use as feel pretty important if someone lives within the area would want to know those things. Would you like to Comm Larson, would you like Isaac to clarify those in, you wouldn’t mind, so Schwartz, Comm, Larson and Commissioners, uh, there are limits to the the brightness of

00:28:42,330	what the sign can have for its maximum illumination at a level of 0.3 ft candles above ambient light levels, there are limits on how long a single image can be uh.

00:29:03,800	All right, a minimum time frame for how long the uh single image can be shown there before transitioning to another one, there are limits on the types of transitions between images there and uh between the hours of 9 p.m. and 7 a.m. They have a couple options, uh, so overnight they can either turn the sign off or it can be held on a single image there, um.

00:29:25,230	There is a prohibition on streaming a video or full motion video being used on the sign and for particular sign features if there were to be a malfunction of some kind, there needs to be a mechanism to display a static message instead, as well as a light detector to adjust the brightness of the sign based off of ambient levels as well,

00:29:45,100	and I will note as I realize I forgot to mention during my presentation that staff did receive a few inquiries from the public. regarding this sign asking for more information on this, but after providing that information, uh, we did not receive any public comments as far as I’m aware.

00:30:03,630	Thank you, Isaac. Comm Larson. Yep, perfect. Thank you. All right. With that, Comm, Comm Schell. Maybe a follow up Isaac the, the. Time frame between 9 p.m. and 7 a.m. is it the entire sign can’t be illuminated or just the electronic message component of the sign.

00:30:25,570	I think there’s a static piece above the sign that I just want to make sure we’re clear on that piece. Yes, uh, thank you, uh, Comm Schell, Chair Schwartz and Commissioners, these requirements would be specifically for the electronic message center portion of the sign. There is that static or portion above as well. Yeah, thank you. Thank you, Comm Schell.

00:30:46,470	Any additional discussion? And I’m not seeing or hearing any. So, we have a motion on the table to approve. Sir, would you please call roll? Comm Field. Yes, Comm Johnson, Comm Larson, Yes, Comm Lukins. Yes. Comm Bittner. Yes. Comm Schell, Yes, Comm Sebach, yes. Comm Wagen, Comm Zent Chair Schwartz. Yes, the motion is approved.

00:31:14,770	With that, that ends our regular agenda for this evening. We go to item 4, which is other business, and I believe, uh, Ben has some information for us this evening. Yeah, thank you, Mr.

00:31:33,270	Chair, members of the commission, uh, just really wanted to give you a preview on a procedural item for actually the, the city of Bismarck and all of its advisory bodies moving forward, um, it’s a policy that the city of Bismarck adopted related to public comment at their July 8th meeting of this year.

00:31:53,770	Really it’s in response to the last legislative or the, the most recent legislative session, which identifies that all governing bodies in the state have to allow for a public comment period at the beginning of each meeting before the first procedural item takes place. Now this is in particular, we have a lot of public Uh, input opportunities, those are typically done through at this meeting, typically done through a public hearing process that that will continue.

00:32:17,070	However, we do have often, as in, in the case today, uh, various items that are on the consent agenda, um, uh, that are not, uh, subject to a public hearing, uh, so this would be specific to items that are not, uh, Uh, offering a public hearing, but are on either the regular agenda for that current meeting or the immediate, uh, immediately

00:32:39,530	previous meeting that has taken place, so a member of the public could come up and speak to an item that’s not a public hearing on the current agenda or the immediately previous agenda, um, just some general ground rules that that have been adopted by the city of Bismarck, uh, typically each uh would be allowed 5 minutes.

00:33:00,370	That could be extended at the discretion of the chair, uh, and then a total public comment period, uh, an allotment of 30 minutes, which could also be extended at at the discretion of the chair.

00:33:18,470	Um, generally those are kind of the high points, uh, but, uh, starting in August, you’ll start to see basically this policy incorporated into all the agendas, so members of the public have an awareness of sort of the ground rules if they want to speak to non-public hearing items there. be, as I understand it, some laminated copies around this room, given the number of different public meetings that, that take place in this room.

00:33:35,570	So, uh, probably not a big change for organizations or commissions like City of Bismarck and Lake Burley County, which I think Burley County Commission, which I think already sort of offered this opportunity, um, just maybe a little bit more ground rules to it, but happy to take any questions if anybody has any.

00:33:53,730	Commissioner’s questions for Ben. Mr. Michelle Mm Then at the in the Agenda packet, we have a, uh, public hearing procedure and protocol document. Do you see an opportunity to revitalize that or change that or make some edits that kind of explain more of this process, how it would apply to a planning and zoning commission.

00:34:14,570	Yeah, thank you for that question. And in fact, Daniel and I were just speaking about that before this meeting. I, I think we’ll probably incorporate the, the policy, uh, just so the the public understands the, the ground rules of what, you know, they might be expected to follow, but we’ll, we’ll provide, we’ll have to provide some

00:34:30,530	clarification that. It’s for non-public hearing related items, so and so thank you for that comment. Commissioners, additional questions for Ben. Comm verbal comments or could they also represent written comments of that.

00:35:00,470	Um, it, it, the, the They, so the policy is written for verbal comments, uh, it allows it basically it requires a window of opportunity to hear from the public. So it’s, it’s intended for verbal comments. We, of course, allow we as a planning and zoning commission allow for written comments to be submitted up until 8 o’clock. a.m.

00:35:17,700	the morning of a a meeting for it to be considered, uh, for it to be distributed to you all by lunchtime, so. Commissioners, additional questions. Ben, I’d, I’d like a little clarification for me, and that is just that it can be any item on the agenda for the current meeting.

00:35:39,430	Or the previous meeting, and that would be the consent agenda as well as a regular agenda. That is, that is a non-public hearing item on the current agenda, and if it’s from the immediate previous meeting, it’s my understanding it could be idiot, so there may have been a, you know, a public hearing for it.

00:35:56,000	You may have made a You know, a decision or recommendation on it. It’s my understanding after that point. As long as it’s on the previous agenda, regardless if it’s a public hearing item or not, they can speak to it. OK, thank you. I appreciate the clarification on that. Any additional questions? Comm Larson, you get your brow furrow there.

00:36:19,600	I I guess the previous agenda just seems confusing to me because by that point we’ve Whatever. We’ve, we’ve, we’ve made a motion and a. Yeah, but. We’ve kind of had the similar comments, but uh, yeah, that that’s the way the statute’s written, so. That’s, that’s my furrow. OK. Well, I, I appreciate the clarification. It’s.

00:36:41,900	All right, if there are no further questions, Ben, thank you. Yep. With that, is there any other business for the good of the commission this evening? And I’m not seeing or hearing any, so with that, uh, our next scheduled meeting is going to be for August 27th. And I will Adjourn the meeting this evening. Thank you for