It's 5 15 on the September 9th.

We're in the Tom Baker room of the City County Building.

This will be the Board of City Commissioners meeting, but first we'll have invocation and Pledge of Allegiance.

Chaplain Wolfgram, please.

Commissioners, good evening.

Let us pray.

Heavenly Father, as we come upon the commemoration of yet another 9-11, we are grateful for your presence in our lives for your protection and for the safety that we enjoy, especially in our community here in Bismarck, really counting early county area.

We pray your care and blessing for our city, for these leaders as they gather, and for those who serve just uh our city as they protect and serve, and also are there with all of the situations that we face.

Again, on these uh late summer days, we are grateful for the warmth of your love and the beauty of uh North Dakota.

Grant us your peace as these people gather tonight that they would seek your good and gracious will and honor you with your decisions.

Uh grant us your peace now we pray through Christ our Lord.

Amen.

I pledge allegiance through the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands on nation.

Thank you, sir.

Thank you for your service.

All right, we'll to call a meeting in order, we'll call roll.

Commissioner Rish?

Here.

Commissioner Zenker?

Here.

Commissioner Connolly?

Here.

Commissioner Cleary.

Here.

Mayor Schmidt.

Here.

Uh this at this time is public comment, but before we get started on that, in case there's anyone here related to regular item C 3C, which was consider a request to hold a hearing of appeal for a zoning map amendment.

That was pulled by the applicant, so it is no longer on the agenda.

So with that noted, uh, this is public comment.

Anyone who wish to speak, uh please come forward, restrict the items to the last commission meeting agenda, or anything that's on this agenda that's consent, or is a non-public hearing item.

Um go ahead and sign in and state your name and which topic, please.

Good evening, Mr.

Mayor, Commissioners, members of city administration.

Uh thank you for giving me a brief opportunity to speak tonight.

I'm here to provide a brief update on Bismarck Municipal Court as we approach finalization of the 2026 budget.

So I'm referencing Judge, is this related to the budget?

I don't know.

I want to make sure all the commissioners are on the same page so I don't violate any open meeting rules.

But is it going to be?

I'm just clarifying, is it going to be related to the budget?

Because we're going to have a public hearing on that.

Might be a better time to discuss that then.

I'm not sure when when would you like me to speak on it?

When we will actually have the public hearing and during that public hearing piece.

Okay.

Um this evening.

It'll be this evening.

Just I think it might fit better with that.

Okay, thank you.

Yep.

Again, this is public comment.

Anyone wish to speak, please come forward.

A second call for public comment.

A third and final call for public comment.

Seeing nor hearing anyone, a public comment period is now closed.

Commissioners, what are your wishes with regard to the consent agenda?

I'll move we uh accept accent.

Consent agenda is presented.

Second.

Is there any discussion?

Hearing none, we'll call roll.

Commissioner Zenker?

Yes.

Commissioner Connolly?

Yes.

Commissioner Cleary.

Yes.

Commissioner Rich?

Yes.

Mayor Schmidt.

Yes.

Moving to regular item agenda 3A.

Continue the public hearing on ordinance 6635 and annexation of part one lot, part of lot one block two, Northern Sky edition, first replot.

Daniel, go ahead.

Good evening, Mayor and Commissioners.

So this item was on your agenda at the last meeting, but as a reminder, I'll go over some of the background for this request.

This is Wilmant Development LLC requesting approval of an annexation of the eastern portion of lot one, block two, Northern Sky second edition, first replat.

This would be edicts into the city of Bismarck.

It is in the northern part of our community, just on the west side of uh North Washington Street, north of Ashcoole Drive.

Uh if I can have the screen, there we go.

Uh you can see it there on the screen.

Uh the location in yellow of the annexation proposed.

Uh city staff do find that this proposed annexation would not adversely impact the public health safety and general welfare.

And we do recommend approval of the annexation as always.

The staff report contains all of the details behind that and analysis.

Uh the planning zoning commission considered this request during their June 25th, 2025 regular meeting and recommended approval at that meeting.

Uh you did open the hearing for this during your last meeting uh in August.

Uh but at the request of the applicant, you continued that hearing and made that made that vote.

So here we are today at the continued public hearing.

Uh I can answer any questions you may have, and I think a representative for applicant is here as well.

Okay.

Thank you, Daniel.

Again, this is a continuation.

So is there anyone on which to speak or or Landon?

I suspect you have some updates for us.

Thank you, Mayor and Commissioners Line and Nyman or Swinsenagin Engineering representing Willmint Development on this.

Um yeah, as Daniel mentioned with this, we did a continue this from the last meeting.

And uh, you know, just to mention again, regardless of tonight's annexation request.

There's of course a ticking clock on the annexation for this entire area that will be up in a few years.

Um tonight, though, however, we are asking for another continuance to September 23rd.

There's still some last-minute financing between the developer and the and the purchaser of the of the of the land.

Um so we are asking for another continuance for two weeks.

Commissioners any concern?

No.

Okay.

So I think we need an official motion to continue it.

I'll make a motion to continue the public hearing for ordinance 6635 till the next meeting scheduled in September.

Second.

Any discussion?

Hearing none will call roll.

Commissioner Connolly?

Yes.

Commissioner Cleary?

Yes.

Commissioner Rish?

Yes.

Commissioner Zenker?

Yes.

Mayor Schmidt.

Yes.

Next item is hold public hearing on ordinance 6638, the 2026 city budget.

Um Demetri, are you gonna give any presentation?

Uh good evening, Mayor.

Commissioners, I do not have a presentation tonight.

Um, I'll let you uh either comment or begin the public hearing.

Okay.

All right.

This is a public hearing.

Anyone who wish to speak on the uh 2026 city budget, please come forward.

And you've already signed in, so that was quick.

All right.

Um so I've been the city judge for just over the last year, and I just wanted to come and give give the commission an update on how things have been going, a year in review as you guys are making decisions on the budget.

Um, I'm not sure if you all know or don't know, but we have some unfunded legal mandates we're facing.

Um, specifically the biggest one, we've had several legal mandates that we're tr in transition with and and dealing with, but the biggest one is becoming a court of record.

So we're in transition to become a court of record.

This is a state mandated change that significantly impact our operations, and we need proper staffing and technology upgrades to comply with the state requirement.

Um number two is caseload increases.

I do have a handout to provide to you, and I should add as well, and I will add, I have a couple handouts to provide to you.

One um is regarding our in our case increases over the last five years.

Last year we had over 20 per 25 percent growth, and the year before we had over 40 percent growth.

And so we're we're seeing the bottlenecking of those operational challenges with the recent growth that we've faced.

Um we've done a little bit of research to see what other cities are dealing with as far as growth as well.

Um, and so I have a handout printout for you with what what other cities have had and did a five-year, how many new cases they've had in five years.

So just to give you a little brief overview of that research that I'm about to provide you.

Um, Fargo has two part-time judges.

West Fargo has one part-time judge.

Fargo in the last five years had sixty-two thousand eight hundred thirty-nine cases.

West Fargo had 20,490 cases.

Grand Forks, which is similar in population, a little less population than Bismarck.

They have one part-time judge.

They had 35,000 cases in five years, and Bismarck had 99,484,000 new cases.

And Bismarck had 99,484,000 new cases.

And so you can see that we are doing in Bismarck a caseload that is very significantly disproportionate to our population sizes of our counterpart cities.

So I wanted to judge can I ask a question related to those.

Is there any demographics as to what you know that's a big difference in cases?

What is the cause of that?

Do we have any idea?

Because of the ideas would be purely speculation.

I don't know.

I don't know if it's because we have a more robust police department.

I don't know if it's because the commission has passed more laws and has broadened laws.

So there's, you know, we do have a significant increase in prohibited camping citations.

We have significant increases in park violations in open container violations.

And I can give the commission the specific different charges that we see the increases in, but it's across the board.

It's from traffic tickets.

And those case numbers do not include parking at all.

So the case numbers that I provided to you do not include parking increases.

They do not include orders to show cause, which orders to show cause are hearings that we have for people failing to comply with conditions.

So these are just new cases.

We might see that case 10 times in our courtroom.

If they owe a victim money for restitution, or if they owe the court fines or not complying with a condition of probation, we might see one case 10 times, and these are only new case numbers.

So we don't have access to how many times we actually see people in the courtroom.

We have our staff has done a great job to try to manage.

We've added additional hearings to try to work with the amount of warrants.

We're right now averaging about issuing 450 warrants a month, so it's a strain on the police department.

We're working with them, then we added a an additional hearing every week to try so they don't get bottled neck with warrants as well.

So we're trying to even it out and work with all the other departments.

Please thank you.

But I do want to make sure that you have all of the information and that all of you hear it at the same time.

So with the caseload increases, there are caseholds are continuing to rise.

They've been very helpful in identifying in efficiency improvements, upgrades, and we're taking in all of their advice and information.

But it was concluded from IT that the improvements are low bearing fruit in their words.

So the improvements can't impact in a significant way the the very large concerns with the caseload and the unfunded mandate.

We have some things that may be coming from Odyssey, which is options to pay tickets online.

That was something I started working on last year.

I was told it would be ready and rolled out this year.

Now I'm being told it's gonna be ready and rolled out maybe next next year, the beginning of next year.

So we're hoping that we'll also provide a little bit of cushion so that our staff can enjoy some of the trainings and things from HR because at this time we just can't enjoy any trainings or really have any time to do anything because we are trying to keep afloat.

In July, we launched a courtroom collaboration with the with community and local service providers.

The focus is to support community members dealing with mental health and substance issues.

Providers are now appearing in court when we have court sessions to directly connect with individuals in need of services.

The early feedback we've been receiving is very very positive from both providers and people in the community.

This is an effort, it's more time on the front end, but we're hoping that this will decrease some of the recidivism and caseloads that we're seeing on the back end of these numbers.

Um and we've had additional, many additional added and new duties and responsibilities over this last year.

So we're adding duties to support other departments, um, adjusting our operations to meet the city needs.

Um there's too many really to list tonight, but um we're we're trying to make an impact where we can.

And despite all these crushing caseloads and unfunded mandates, um the strength of our court is really our staff.

Uh, their dedication and morale is truly unmatched.

They continue to deliver justice with professionalism under increasing pressure.

Um so as you finalize the budget, I just ask that you consider the operational needs and the legal mandates ahead.

Uh the upcoming changes are not optional.

They are, but they are an opportunity to modernize and better serve our community.

Thank you for your time and continued support.

Can I ask?

Go ahead.

Uh commissioners go ahead first.

Uh I don't care whoever.

I didn't see who raised their hand first.

Mr.

Mayor, your honor.

Am I looking at this right?

Um, we have um reduced your budget from 2025 by I don't know, $7,000 or 2026 for by $7,000 from 2025.

We're bringing in about 1.3 million, and we we're funding the court at about 85,000.

I I I think I'm looking at it right.

I'm not sure that way, I guess that would this is a document from fiscal.

So I do not have to do that.

But your 2026 budget is less than 2025 on this sheet.

And I'm not sure why why that is, or um I think it's projections, but I'm not sure you know why our budget would be less um Dimitri can probably help help us with that.

Okay, but but but you bring in about 1.3 million dollars, correct?

That's how I read it, yes.

Right, and then we spend about 805,000 in operations.

Okay, thank you.

Commissioner Connolly.

And in continuation with that part, I think your mic might be off.

Um Thanks, Commissioner, for noticing that.

But um, add a context, uh, Amanda.

Um in 2025, like the combined jail fees, we budgeted a million dollars.

It's significantly less this year.

Um can you share that information?

Um I can.

I was hoping not to because as a judge, we don't like to look at you know what what we're spending on jail, but we I inevitably we do look at that.

Um so there's been some maybe rumors that I'm not sending people to jail, which is not true.

Um, so just to get everybody on the same page with that, what what I'm what what I'm doing is looking to see if that person is on a hold for another county or another jurisdiction that's already paying the bill, and I'm not doing a concurrent sentence.

So I don't know if you know what concurrent sentence is, but if somebody's sitting in jail for 60 days and I can only give a max of 30 days, I'm not going to order a 30-day concurrent sentence and take the bill from some other jurisdiction and pay it for the city when they're already sitting 60 days.

So it's not that people are getting less time.

If that person deserves six 30 days and they're not on a 60-day jail sentence, then they're gonna go sit 30 days and Bismarck is gonna pay for it.

But if they're already serving another time for another jurisdiction or they're sitting on a $50,000 cash bond for another jurisdiction, then I take those things into consideration on who's paying the bill and making sure that people are still having consistent sentences.

So it's not that people are just being led out to the streets.

It's that people are having consistent sentences, but the court is looking at how to be most effective and efficient with our resources.

Uh, one of our strategies is to hopefully push resources to the front end and to save recidivism and resource and expenses on the back end, and that's one of the fruits of saving resources on the back end is with the jail bill.

And the part of that that uh I appreciate it is trying to uh reduce or save recidivism because reoccurring costs aren't good for the person trying to hopefully grow into a better life and uh all of the people that support that structure.

And I do want to add that part of this strategy does put a lot more pressure on the clerk staff because as we're working with these community service providers, we're looking at probation conditions.

Can we solve this problem or issue with probation conditions?

Does this person need a peer support, a community program, somebody that can report back to the court and let them know?

So a lot of our people that are coming through, we're not giving them jail time right off of the front end.

We're giving them a chance to comply with probation conditions and go to treatment, a seek housing within a timeline.

And if they don't do that, they're facing jail time.

But if they do do those things, then problem solved for everyone, and hopefully we cannot see them coming back through that revolving door.

Um the problem is the clerks have to monitor those conditions of probation, and they it's an extra step for them.

It's a lot more work for them, but I keep telling them hopefully we'll see it in the caseloads decreasing eventually.

Um, and so hopefully we'll see those that work, that extra work we're putting in now in the years to come in the community and and status.

So that and I was gonna tell you something else about kind of uploading, it does take more time in court.

So being court of record, we're gonna have to spend a significant more time in court because there's more procedural um things to kind of discuss and open up on the court of record.

We have to make sure we're recording properly and there's some legal out legalities to it.

Um so that's gonna take more time.

Also, when we're trying to figure out the root of the problem rather than just handing out a sentence and we're trying to figure out what's the issue, is this an addiction issue, is this a mental health issue, is this a reoccurring problem, and how do we address it?

It does take more time in the court process.

Not a sick, I mean, not to me not significantly, because you see the savings uh on the prisoner care bills, um, and I think it's worth it to have that extra time and extra pressure on my on the court staff to be able to see those savings and using our resources efficiently and effectively.

Um, and I think it's a better outcome for the people we serve in the community trying to get to the root of problems rather than just paying to house a problem for five days or ten days.

Okay.

That makes sense.

I don't does that make sense.

That explains.

One last thing with it.

Um through these discussions, uh, municipal courts, my portfolio, and through these discussions, some um topics that are bigger than municipal court that are actually statewide influence and things I'd never heard of before.

Um we're following up with meetings.

She mentioned one of the programs called uh is a software called Odyssey, and we're gonna continue working on that.

Um when it comes to budgets, there's a timeline and timing's rarely on your side when you're dealing with a lot of different topics, so there's going to be can some um continued conversations even leading into the future years.

But this is one way.

Um I do appreciate Amanda that you spoke because it is one way to inform all five people because we do live in a space of open meeting law.

So yeah, I appreciate that.

Thank you.

And I do, I mean, the commission, I just wanted to bring it to your attention as well, because the commission will have to probably make decisions in the coming years of what to do with the judge position.

It's a halftime position, but I'm working full-time.

So we're gonna have to figure out what what this is gonna look like, especially if there's continued caseload.

My solution right now was to add a add a position, uh a clerk position, because we're gonna need another clerk in the courtroom to do the recording duties, and right now we just don't have that option at this point.

I'm unsure of how we're going to comply with the state mandate.

And so the commission is gonna have to figure out and and come up with some ideas of how we will comply with that state mandate.

So uh Commissioner Rush and then Commissioner Zinker.

Mr.

Mayor, your honor.

Yeah, I I can't understand how a part-time judge can handle 99,000 cases, just doesn't seem possible.

That's not that's not in one year.

Five years.

Oh, or even 20,000 cases.

Yeah, five five years.

So right, that's correct.

That's five years.

You're right.

I think last year we had about 23,000, but that doesn't include parking.

But if we pass this just as it is tonight, are you gonna be able to operate in 2026 with this budget?

In my opinion, no.

Okay, can we add to the budget tonight?

I thought that's it.

It depends on what we do.

There's a lot of moving parts at the moment.

Okay, okay.

Go ahead.

Uh Commissioner Zinker, did you have a question?

Because I have a follow-up question for Johnson.

Thank you, Mayor.

So I do have I do have a question because in our packet um and at our previous um when we formally move this to the budget approval basically.

Umicipal court deputy clerk um ask with to the budget committee that's not funded.

Yes, we asked for a deputy clerk.

So the question would be what what was it from the portfolio holder and what was it in the budget committee as to why with if you're showing us these stats tonight, and I'm sure you might have had similar information at that time is why what was the decision not to fund it?

I can speak to that.

I mean, and certainly obviously there's other members of the budget committee that can speak to it too.

Uh timeline-wise, I think was our trouble.

Um we met originally with municipal court with Nicole.

Um we were presented with the court of records again, an unfunded mandate essentially from the state, but at that point in time, we didn't have a full understanding of what that meant.

We did get some of those answers via the state as to because I think originally we were thinking it all needed to be recorded and documented and able to be like sent out to whoever requests it, and then some of that was backtracked it and just needs to be recorded.

Um that was the at the initial meeting, it was presented, at least from my take on it.

It was presented as if we are going to have to do all of this recording and transcribing, etc.

Uh, we are gonna need an entire new staff member.

But then the way that it reflected back when we got some of those answers, it was like didn't seem like it was as heavy as a lift as we originally thought.

Then after I think our preliminary uh budget, I I might have my timeline wrong, Dimitri, but I think after we approved the preliminary budget meeting, we then met with the judge to discuss her concerns of this not being in there.

At that point, she explained further.

That was my first look at some of these dollars.

Um then with that meeting uh in August, I believe, we had the conversations of how can we help?

So she mentions IT because I from my perspective, and I don't want to speak for the whole budget committee.

We have a lot of FTE requests every year that we have to weigh the priorities of and the pros and cons of.

Some of them get asked for year after year after year before we're able to fill them.

Um I think that when we were looking at this, we we she is still new in her role and she's still figuring things out.

Every judge is gonna do things differently, staff has to adjust.

Um, and so I think that we at that meeting we discussed IT coming in, doing a full overview of how things work, how they can help, are there efficiencies that can help staff with because I think what you're doing is very helpful, but it does create almost more work for staff with the logistics of things.

So I think that what can you clarify.

I mean, like with the back end of spending more time in court, more documenting, you know, like the logistics of checking where the warrants are, that and not just giving out warrants and stuff, all that's good, but I think that like all of it takes adjustment for staff, right?

And I think that at least the impression that I got was that we were going to try to see what IT could help with, try to see they've implemented their own things, and but some of that stuff is they were implemented earlier this year.

A lot of those things to streamline things take time.

We wanted to see how time can help those things.

I guess uh when we met in August, we I think agreed to see what IT presents, and then we would meet after IT gives us their information.

We are meeting again, uh, but I think that it was more of the budget committee standpoint, I would say it was a little bit of not having maybe all of the information as to how important this is, and then also just having to prioritize things uh like the HR positions.

Uh those have been very long overdue uh with the same staff and just the growth, and so I think that it was more of a just trying to find the priorities, and then with that saying, not to say that your position isn't a priority, I think that we just had less information on that position because it is a new ask.

Some of these other FTEs that we're approving are things that we've talked about needing consecutively.

Uh I also um I mean I think that we all understand that adding an FTE is a long-term expense.

Uh it we're gonna add this FTE and it's never going to go away.

So, with that being said, I think the last conversation we had was how can we help internally, whether it's IT or legal or police, can we get things to move better for the courts so that our first adjustment isn't a new employee that we're trying to, and I know that you've been doing stuff on your own, but how can we also help from other departments?

That I think is where the conversation left off, but I do think some of this was timing.

I don't know if I agree with you.

I don't know if our opinions would have changed if we would have had all of this information at our first budget meeting with you.

Um I think that that is part of my struggle is that I think it fell at a certain spot in the priority list because some of that community that like we didn't have all of the answers as to what it was needed for with the state mandate, and it kind of came off at the first meeting that it was just needed because of the state mandate, not necessarily because of these numbers.

So that is probably my take on it.

I'm welcome to have Dimitri or Jason speak because I don't want to speak solely for the budget committee.

But that I if you're wondering why we didn't fund it, I feel like it was that that that was the main reason that it was we didn't have this level of understanding as to why it was needed.

It was a little bit more surface level um at the start, and then our timing-wise, by the time we did get these numbers, we had already had our first approval of the preliminary budget.

So it um so we're still trying to work.

And I understand with the timing because we feel blindsided by this the mandate as well, because it's a huge ta undertaking, and you know, we don't have a lot of resources to be able to do it.

So um so we didn't have years to prepare and plan for it.

You know, it just it was just mandated, and we kind of gave information as it became available.

Right.

Yeah, by no means were you not giving us the information.

I think that like we were told what we what you guys thought it was, and we were like, whoa, that's a lot.

And then we asked questions and the answers that we got from state level, it seemed like it was potentially less time consuming than we originally thought it was gonna be.

But now with your explanation plus the additional growth, it's like okay, is it achievable?

I don't know.

And that's part of why I'm here today, is just to make sure everybody knows about the growth.

I know I met with Mr.

Mayor during his podcast um and I talked about the growth and I talked about those numbers.

So I was kind of you know thinking that everybody was aware of the growth of municipal court, and that was my wrongful assumption.

So and that's partly why I'm here today is to make sure that you guys have all of those case numbers and information.

Yeah.

Commissioner Connolly.

Yeah, um, Commissioners and Commissioner Zenker.

So as far as the state or the unfunded mandate, turn your attorney on the Mayor Commissioners, Commissioner Zenker.

Seems to be a habit tonight.

Um as far as the uh unfunded mandate, I believe um Liga Cities and what they shared was it was fifteen hundred dollars roughly of software and not a lot of hours to make this transition.

Um and that's where some of the IT information I didn't know and we're walking into that space, but um in correlation to the timing that we have to have our budget in, it just it's a very uncomfortable space to go in.

So when Commissioner Risch asked you how you could um and you didn't see how from their perspective, I don't want to put words in your mouth uh that you don't see how that's conceivable.

At the same time, I appreciate the fact that you came up here and said you're not asking for anything, merely making sure that we're all aware of it because um it'll be interesting as we learn in this process goes forward.

Okay.

And and my only request would be is next year make sure you come to that preliminary budget meeting as the lead of that department because I think your voice in the room immediately would have probably had more weight.

Yes, to be honest.

And I apologize for missing missing that preliminary meeting, but when I'm supposed to be working 12 hours and I'm working 40 hours, you know, it's stuff I had a conflict, but I did ask for a follow-up meeting for about four weeks until before even that before your preliminary budget was approved.

So I did request a meeting, a follow-up meeting session.

I just want to clarify because that was in motion.

Okay.

Thank you.

We'll be seeing what we're considering.

We got a lot to consider yet tonight.

Okay.

Thank you, Jim.

Thank you.

This is public hearing on the budget ordinance for 2026.

Anyone who wish to speak, please come forward.

A second call for public comment on the budget.

A third and final call for public comment on the budget.

Seeing our hearing no one else, a public hearing portion is now closed.

I think um Demetria, I think it would be fair for one to get clarification on Commissioner Rush's question about 2025 budget versus 2026 budget for municipal court.

There is a lower dollar amount in totality.

So maybe you can address that.

Um Thank you, Mayor Schmidt.

Um Commissioner Rish.

Commissioner Rish, uh the difference is due to this con the salary savings that we've had with the change of of judges and staff that have been here.

I think one of the staff, um, I think Kathy was here for a very, very long time.

Yep.

Okay.

Commissioners, do you have questions of Dimitri or comments on the budget?

Commissioner Zenker.

I'd like to go back to this topic because I do have a concern that we're not going to fund that municipal court after hearing what the judge had to say.

I look at it twofold, right?

When when she was first elected, um and we had to have that conversation about reducing her pay and making sure it fell in line and the amount of hours that she's she's supposed to work.

Well, I can I can tell you that the cost for a municipal court clerk is gonna be less expensive than paying a judge, whichever judge it is, Bismarck might not, Morton County, it doesn't matter.

Is gonna be less expensive than paying a judge a full-time wage, right?

Or if we had to add if we had to add a second judge.

So I wonder if we shouldn't have just a deeper conversation about adding that that additional person to that to that staff, just to one take some of the workload off the current people that are there, any one of us in this room that owns a business understands what what good quality staff does and what it does for your for your business.

And two, I mean if we're if our caseloads are that much, um, and this person can take some of that off, I'd rather hire this person now than another judge in three, four, or five years or something.

I just throw it out there for discussion because it's now is the time to do that.

Um even with technology changes, sometimes technology only is only as good when it works, and that it doesn't always save time, but it just does make things more efficient.

Commissioner Cleary.

Um yeah, I mean I can definitely think it's worth uh discussing because I think that part of one of the reasons, like I said, that it was not one of the FTEs that we approved was some some of it had to do with how how we made how we got the information, and like Commissioner Connolly said, we we thought that this court of records was going to be this big lift and then League of Cities or the state kind of came back and was like these are the things you should need.

We don't know if that's accurate.

We they might be underselling that.

We might be, you know, they think that the not fun part of an unfunded mandate is that we have a lot to figure out with that uh and what how that workload flows.

Um I think that I struggle with where we make adjustments because I do feel like a lot of the other FTs that we approved and the other things that are on here are uh equally as high of a priority, I guess.

Uh so I mean I we can certainly have that discussion.

So this leads into my point of discussion, which I think there's people here who are yes, thank you.

Appreciate that.

So I've evaluated a lot and looked at what is in the preliminary budget from compensation adjustment adjustments and cost of living and what uh what I am seeing in the workforce that I'm dealing with in particular and what the state is doing.

And so whether or not anybody agrees with me or not, um we in the preliminary budgets of five percent, which I think was made up of two percent for cost of living and excuse me, three percent for cost of living and two percent for merit and other market rate adjustments.

Um the state is at 3 percent, and that's what they passed, and that's what they actually for two years in a row.

Um in my own business world, that's where we're seeing is about three percent, maybe some adjustments for promotions.

So if we would go down the road of saying four percent, leaving three percent for cost of living and one percent for some of those market adjustments and compression adjustments and uh promotions, that's about 340,000 to the general fund alone of potential budget change reduction, which if I equate that back to the 3 percent cap on property taxes, it's almost one percent of the property tax revenue change.

Not quite, like 9.95 percent.

Um, that would be one place where we would find some additional dollars for the budget to be able to fund a position for one, or two, just looking at what the budget is and being cognizant of what the fact is is what what the reality is in the world that we live in today.

So I throw that out there as further conversation around positions and compensation.

And by the way, our budget right now, we're gonna use some of reserves anyway to fund a couple of the capital purchases that were already planned for.

A fire truck, for example, and some reserve.

So we're gonna have to move dollars out of our reserve fund to balance the budget, regardless.

So I'm just looking at the administration.

We got a new engagement officer, I'm not sure what that is.

Um would easily, without that, we could easily fund the um the clerk.

And then another communications officer.

We've got the communications officer is actually only half a position because it was already half funded by the administration, the other half was coming out of public health, and that public health portion is going away.

I've got an issue with the um or suggestion about the pay raise, and I don't have any problem with the 3 percent and 2 percent merit.

I mean, I think we should need to treat our public employees fairly, decently, pay them well, be competitive.

But my concern about the pay increase is the percentage pay increase.

We keep doing a percentage pay increase year after year after year.

And what happens is the people at the highest end of the spectrum get the most additional pay.

And when they do that, year after year after year, the gap between the lowest paid city employees and the highest paid city employees continue to broaden.

Morton County gave a flat pay increase to everybody, everyone and everybody county employee got the same amount of increase.

And I understand the percentage deals with the um cost of inflation, this, that, and the other.

But um what happens is if you've got a a department head that is making three and four times as much as its lowest paid employee, his pay increase is three and four times as much as the lowest paid employee.

So I've got a a bit of compassion for the lowest paid city employees that we have.

I had one um city manager say to me, you know, I got people working for me, they make half the amount of money I make.

I don't know how they make a go of it.

So my suggestion is that we do the 3 percent as a flat 3 percent dollar amount for every employee, and Dimitri is a bright guy, he can figure out how to make that work, and then the 2 percent leave that as merit so the department heads can figure that out.

The end result will be that the people at the lowest end of the ladder, lowest paid employees will get a better bump than they would have, and the people at the top will get a bit less of a bump than what it would have, and it will help reduce this um spread between the highest and lowest paid employees.

So my recommendation is a flat three percent and a two percent merit.

A pool.

A pool that would then be divided by all the employees.

That's correct.

An average.

Yeah.

Correct.

Okay.

Pool.

We'll call it a pool.

Well, I mean, to get to your even number.

Yeah.

Commissioner Clary.

Um, I guess I just want to uh I mean continue to discuss some my concern with either of those options, I guess, not to say that they wouldn't both work to solve some of our issues, uh, is that when we talk salary increases, bonuses, et cetera, a lot like this has been an ongoing discussion.

I think 11 years ago we had a compression study done.

We made some adjustments.

I don't I'm not 100% sure about that because I was not here, but they weren't necessarily followed for much longevity.

Uh I think that Demetrium might be able to speak a little to that.

But we also did another compression study two years ago.

Um, and to Commissioner Rish's point, there is a huge gap between your highest paid and your lowest paid employee, but the where that we have the most compression issues is kind of that mid-range employee that has been working for the city for say eight years, but because we have had to increase the hiring rate, they are not sitting at media median or much higher than the rate that we bring a new person in at because of having to stay competitive when we're hiring.

And so I think that I don't know if the flat pool rate helps with that compression issue that we have.

If anything, I feel like it might make it more challenging.

Uh I also struggle with like if we do that this year and then we switch back to a percentage rate and we're alternating.

That kind of leaves a very interesting dynamic as the commission.

Obviously, we're not all five going to be always sitting at this table year after year.

The faces at this table change.

So what does that mean?

Versus, I think when we look at what the compression study showed us and why we're doing it the way that we're doing it, it's most effective if we stick to the plan that we created.

I think that the reason that we run into the compression issues in the first place is by taking step back from salary increases one year to fix an issue, and then we're not counteracting with the higher one next year.

My concern with some of that would also be that I would consider this budget year very high on like the maintenance side of things, other than the committed funds like the police and the fire that you talked about.

We don't have a high dollar amount for fleet replacements this year.

We don't have a high dollar amount for like big projects.

We have the Hay Craig Lift Station and other like planned projects, but nothing astronomical.

And there are going to be years in the near future where the fleet replacement plan has a higher dollar amount.

And on years like that, you're much more likely to see a pay decrease.

And I just I hate to take a step back on a year where it is manageable.

If then next year we're not going to be able to counteract it at all.

I think is where I struggle.

I understand that there is room to make an adjustment so that we could bring in this other position or find a better version of fighting compression, but I just I worry that like we we jumped through all the hoops to figure out how to make it work best, and then we're not going to listen to that study is is a struggle for me, I guess I would say.

What they would have got is a plain three percent pay increase.

And we're not going to bind next year's city commission or the year after.

Whatever they decide, they decide.

So to one of the comments, um, I don't think that whether it's four or five percent with the two percent or one percent being for merit and promotion actually affects compression.

It actually gives the dollars available to address the compression, which I am told is about a hundred grand of what we need to fix whatever compression we have right now, at least that's what I was told uh just this within the last week.

So I don't think I think there's enough room for that, because that's like $350,000 in the general fund only.

Um I'm just more respectful of the fact that A, if we put in salary increases, that is an ongoing cost that will be forever perpetual, and that will create more stress on our budget next year when we may have more capital needs replac replacement needs.

So I I'm trying to truly purely look at what's fiducially responsible and what the market is probably saying in employee compensation, and also knowing what our probably largest employer, or one of our largest employers in the metro area is doing.

And that's three percent.

So we'd actually be more than that at four.

So that that's and then I do think we need to look at what we provide for accommodation potentially to municipal court, whether it's a we we set for there, but we still evaluate can we handle it with technology or not, but at least it gives without having to come back with a budget amendment for another FTE.

Commissioner Secretary.

Right.

And then and uh Mayor, thank you for saying that because that's true.

I mean, we could put it in the budget, and then they still got to go through the process so the budget committee make sure it's uh valid person or that needs to be filled, and you can save it and and say, hey, and until we get what the true details are of the mandate coming down from the state, maybe you don't need it, but you're right.

Next year at this time or April of next year, we don't have to worry about a hey, all right.

We we do they come to us and say, hey, we do need this, you know, and then we gotta make an amendment or something.

I think it's always easier to plan for the worst, hope for the best type thing.

And I I think putting that that um FTE in the budget is that exact analogy.

Okay, so other thoughts.

We're beating this.

This is a this is a big I'm like honestly, this is the biggest piece of our budget is compensation.

Oh, absolutely.

And I and I'm with Commissioner Zinker.

I think we should put it in the budget, and I've got one one area where we can save a little bit of money to help fund it.

Um the fire department has a request in to replace their Ford expedition.

I went up and I drove the expedition.

It's got sixty-two thousand miles of two thousand and twelve excellent condition.

I think we should hang on to that for a little while longer.

I personally have a 2012 expedition with 232,000 miles on it that I would drive to the coast, so we could save ourselves 60 some thousand dollars just by pulling this expedition off out and using it for a little while longer.

That would go a long way in funding this clerk position.

May I say Commissioner Rish, I don't mean to contradict you or anything, but this is the the vehicle is a one-time cost.

Okay.

This would be an object next year, just next year for the 2026, it would help.

Understood.

Sorry.

My apologies.

Commissioner Zenker.

That is a proverbial kick in the can down the road, and I've fought that ever since I've been at this seat.

And it's and it's brutal.

You know, kick we can save it, you know, we don't need to do that this year.

We could do it, and then all of a sudden we have big expenses.

I can take you to multiple buildings that we own without in the city where we've kicked that preverbable can down the road and it costs us more later.

And we finally start to address those issues.

Right.

Exactly.

That's you.

Competing mics.

Yeah.

Commissioner Cleary.

I guess I just would like to speak to that point as well.

Um I'm not gonna like die on the hill of removing this expedition, uh whether we keep it or not, but I I guess I would make kind of a similar point to my point about the compensation.

Um the fleet plan was a very hard thought-through concept that I just I I would like to stick to the fleet plan as close as possible, just because uh you know, though it might be a very functional vehicle, it was put on this year for multiple reasons, whether it be that they're worried about continued maintenance on a car as it ages and what that maintenance costs versus a newer vehicle.

It also might be on this year because we don't have a heavy lift for bigger machines this year, so it's easier to fund it this year versus if we don't do it for three years, and then on that year and three years when we want or need it to be replaced, all of a sudden we have two snowplows that have to be replaced, and we're like, well, we can't do the expedition two.

Uh it just the plan exists for a reason it's already saving us money, so I just I'm hesitant to make adjustments to to Kurt's concept, but at the end of the day, it's not a huge adjustment, so I'm not like overly worried about it either, I guess.

So Dimitri, could you tell us what the full loaded fully loaded cost is of a clerk position?

Of the clerk position, maybe 88,426.

Yeah.

Okay.

But uh so it's on the record.

Okay.

Other thoughts.

Uh Mayor, just a quick quick uh point of clarification.

The state's uh increase, I believe was told was three and a half percent increase for next for twenty-six, just to clarify.

Um pretty sure it wasn't because I know what my wife got.

That's a burn.

Yeah.

So mayor commissioners, um, I talked to the compensation manager for the state, and they are moved their ranges 3.5 percent.

So the ranges are moving.

So the ranges moved 3.5 last year, and they're moving 3.5 in 26%.

Yes, the but the budget approval was three.

The ranges are set, the increases are zero to five percent with an average around three.

Yeah.

So that's just what they've been doing.

Uh and then that that doesn't matter, that's what the largest employers are doing, and that's what they're living by.

So I've got a question, Mr.

Mayor.

Where did the three and two come from to begin with?

I I there was no discussions when I was in my budget meetings.

Dimitri.

Um are you talking uh excuse me, Mayor Commission is Commissioner Rish.

Are you talking about the three percent co cost of living plus the two percent merit?

Correct.

I I I don't know how that was arrived at.

Uh great question.

Um so kind of to Commissioner Cleary's point.

I think she mentioned earlier.

So we've had some studies over the years.

So uh this is before my time in 2015 there was a study on on the market adjustment.

There, you know, uh at the city, and we they did that adjustment, but they didn't really follow the plan, which is supposed to do a cost of living adjustment every year.

In 2021, we did uh uh the the city commission approved an update to that study to sort of get everybody back up because we couldn't hire people at the lowest rate, which was too low because it wasn't meeting the market, kind of like Commissioner Zenker said, kicking the can down the road.

Well, we kind of had to pay for it, so we brought the bottom up.

But we but everybody that's within the ranges never got moved up as much.

And so you we had compra with what's called known as compression.

We have a range for every grade of employee, and within that grade, that employee is supposed to move at a certain rate.

And so then we did a compression study based because a lot of employees were basically saying, look, you what you call market, or we we wouldn't I'm not I'm too close to the bottom of where the employees are being hired.

So somebody who has been in the job for five years was getting very close to the same pay as somebody who's walking in the door.

And that's what happened.

So we had this sort of a mini compression study where the experts told us what Gallagher told us, look, you have to move through the range.

You have to give us the cost of living adjustment based on the market, and known as a market adjustment.

And then on top of that, you if you follow how fast do you want this an employee to get to midpoint?

And the and they said on average, an employee gets to midpoint about seven, five to seven years, which means that's where they're an expert in their field or they're good at their job about five to seven years.

We said we can't afford that.

We can't pay people to get to midpoint that fast.

And so our solution was, hey, we'll get to midpoint in ten to twelve years.

And so that what's caused us to say, okay, if we add two percent to the to the market adjustment, we will move people through the range as they should, and then people new people coming in will start at the bottom or close to the bottom, and then those there will be a little bit of a separation between experienced employees and new employees and so on and so forth.

So that's how we got to that.

And so we've been following that plan for the last two or three years.

And so we're just continuing that plan um just as we were recommended by our experts.

Any other comments?

I got other comments about the budget overall.

Um what we have to do is keep trying to find efficiencies, and I'm going to give a couple examples.

Um at the police department, we've got this new software program called Axon.

And Axon will help officers draft reports and save thousands of hours in staff time.

So that should be an opportunity for us, if not to reduce staff, but at least keep a lid on additional staff going forward because we have this AI technology that can help us with it.

And in the police department, I've been working with our new chief who's a great guy, doing a great job, and looking at getting a couple of electric vehicles.

Each year we spend uh about $26,000 just on fuel for a patrol car.

26,000 dollars.

And we North Dakota has some of the the lowest electricity rates in the country.

So the anticipation is some of the analysis I've saw, an electric patrol car can cut our operating costs by almost 50 percent.

So we're looking at doing that in the police department.

It'll be a we're not gonna go all in, but we're gonna try a couple of police cars, electric vehicles, to try and reduce costs, make reduce maintenance, reduce fuel costs, and things of that nature.

Plus the officers tend to really like them because they go very fast and they don't make any noise.

So that's that's a positive thing about it.

Um you advocating for speeding?

I no, well, only when they're chasing the bad guys, only when they're chasing the bad guys.

But you could turn the noise on or you can turn it off if you're sneaking up on a bad guy.

Um I was at the land I I was I I was at the landfill two weeks ago, and um I went out there shopping, they've got a store out at the landfill.

Um you can bring your paint and stains and uh chemicals and whatnot and leave them at the landfill if you're a business resident, and then you can take what you need.

So I I I shop at the landfill on a regular basis.

But Toby Sheldon gave me a tour of the landfill, and it's a pretty amazing place, and that's your portfolio.

But he was there and he gave me a tour of the landfill, and I pick up a bunch of paint and stuff.

And um, he said now with the new garbage trucks, they're already have been able to eliminate four positions.

That's an increase in efficiencies.

That's that's what we want to do.

Try and find ways in which we could uh increase efficiency so we continue to pay our employees decent wages, but find other ways in which to reduce costs.

Electric vehicles, uh garbage trucks that don't pick up the extras, different things like this to save money for the city.

Um the last thing I wanted to comment about is when I look through our budget in our funding all the time is all the money we spend on insurance.

Crazy amounts of money for building insurance, automobile insurance, things like that.

Uh we had a wrecked police car, and I was in there and I was looking at it and said, Oh, we're waiting for the insurance company to total out this vehicle so we can replace it and whatnot.

Uh our one of our fire stations had a water backup, and we're well, we're waiting on the insurance company to um um cover this cost if they'll cover this cost.

When in fact, as big a operation as we are, we should look at doing some self-insurance.

Some self-insurance.

So we we kind of are self-funded through the North Dakota Insurance Reserve Fund.

Okay.

We're part of a pool.

Sure.

That's what really what that is.

Okay, well, I see Bain insurance repeatedly through last week.

Um there are some things for we do have to buy commercial insurance for just a just a lot of insurance payments in our last financial statement I signed off on.

And my thoughts are some of that stuff, instead of paying those insurance premiums, we set up our own separate fund to cover damages when things occur.

Maybe it would be a patrol car, water backup at the fire station.

Things of that nature.

Well, we're attorney mees has got a responsibility.

Oh, she wants you she wants a well is our agent and is sort of the middle person between us and the insurance reserve fund.

We're required to use an agent.

Not really, but we don't have a choice.

I think that's state law.

We can't insure our own vehicles.

I mean, I we'd have liability insurance, of course, big liability insurance.

But as far as the cost of the physical vehicle, I don't see why we couldn't absorb those things.

We are under state law, we could be self-insured.

There are some things that we can't self-insure, like uh workers' comp, we have to use WSI.

But there are some things that we could uh self-insure.

We could study it.

I can tell you it's going to be a big number up front to put aside.

I'm not sure that our reserves would be very well positioned at this moment, but it certainly would be something we could study.

I I'm not disagreeing with self-insurance.

I just we're already part of a big self-insurance.

We could take some baby steps.

Commissioner Connolly.

Well, I work in the insurance business for 11 years.

And one thing about self-insured plans, they usually pay a company like Bain or Aetna or Blue Cross Blue Shield to administrate it because they have that integral knowledge.

It's still the city's plan, but they administrated it more effectively and more efficiently than a lot of times if we try to do it in-house.

Food for thought.

Anything else?

So I'm and this is a small item, but you you all might throw fire at me, but I'm gonna bring it up anyway.

Um again, I'm trying to be responsible and be wise to what I think uh we have with the property tax uh dollar limitation moving forward and and and for sure for this year, but um in the past the commission's commissioners' salaries have all been adjusted based upon whatever we passed as a budget number for the employees.

And uh it's not a big number in our budget at all, but every one percent effectively is a thousand dollars um out of our budget.

So if we were to cap or freeze for one year or two years or whatever, or or not, I'm just throwing it out there.

Um I think it shows us as leaders being responsible to our citizens of what that means.

I say freeze it for the entire time that I'm around.

So I I just am throwing it out there as uh I I don't know.

How do we stack up with other city commissions?

Are we in the I somebody when I was running for office, they said, Well, how much are you gonna get paid?

I said, I didn't know until I read the Tribune.

But um it's not a lot, but um we are we cut the I don't know that I think the other cities?

I mean I don't know.

I I know Jason knows the answer to that, but I don't really care personally because I didn't run for the compensation.

I didn't either.

Mayor and commissioners, if you're if you're curious to know where you sit, I I would have the actual uh information in an email that I could find it, but I just a broad stroke.

Uh Bismarck elected officials are significantly lower than other communities of this size in all pos in all positions.

Is it not working?

The lights on.

Apologies, uh Mayor and Commissioner, we had tech troubles over there.

Um I don't have the actual numbers in front of me.

I could pull them up.

Um we did a poll earlier this year with like-sized cities uh in North Dakota, and just based on the the larger cities, Fargo, Grand Forks, Minot, um Bismarck is the lowest of all of those for both the mayor position and uh the city commissioners' positions.

Fargo is a little unique in that they recognize a deputy mayor, and so there's kind of three tiers of salaries for those positions.

Um but where you're where the five of you are today, it is uh kind of at the low end of like-sized cities in North Dakota.

Go ahead, Commissioner Rush.

How do we compare to the county commission?

Uh Mayor and Commissioners, I don't have the exact numbers for the county commission, but it's my understanding that the county commission salaries are higher.

They're equal across all five positions, but I believe the county also provides uh health care benefit.

And if you are a county employee, if you're essentially elected two times, you are then eligible for their county pension plan as well.

So that's a whole different level.

So again, I only bring these things up as things to consider for what we're doing, and also just as elected officials to be respectful for what the mandate has been on controlling property taxes.

And our number is not a big number.

It hardly affects the budget, but I don't uh figure my hourly wage for having this position.

Not to have any close.

No, I didn't run for that purpose.

So Commissioners, what are your thoughts with regard to the budget and and the ordinance so we could ultimately get something over the county?

I don't want to do that.

I think I'll make a motions so we know what the heck we're doing.

And we've got about 40 things on the table here, Dimitri.

And they don't all have to be applied.

Can I add one more thing?

Can I add one more thing to your I emailed this to you?

I just want to do it.

The dedicated funds.

Or committed, I should say.

I'll just briefly describe what what you're looking at.

Essentially, it's a list of 20 million dollars worth of of reserve of reserves that we will dedicate or with your approval.

We should we we our our intent is to dedicate these for these purposes for the emerald dash borough prevention, police station land purchase, city building renovation in in the next few years and next year we we can start doing those little things and utilizing our reserves for these kind of projects.

We have we we have a our our ERP system is fairly old uh and it's we're gonna need to replace it.

That's gonna be a very heavy lift, not only with one time but ongoing things.

And obviously the fire station six uh fire trucks and station that we're dedicating our reserves to those purposes and with your approval, of course.

Commissioner Rush.

Well, first of all, I don't know what an ERP system is.

And so what is our total reserves now and what you know, 20 million dollars is a substantial amount of money.

Um so with this budget, we would be spending 20 million dollars out of the reserves and not putting anything into the reserves, is that correct?

Correct.

Correct.

Well, this would be actually committing the reserves that we have to future projects.

Um the purpose for that is is A, if we were gonna go back, we have a reserve policy that says we're supposed to be X percent, I think it's 40 percent of our general fund expenditures.

Um I believe we're over that at the moment.

In fact, I know we are.

Yep.

But this would be allowing us to allocate part of those aside so that when we come to paying for the next fire station and the next fire truck, we have the dollar set aside without impacting the 2026 budget, because we would never be able to handle these inside one budget.

Um but then beyond that, I don't know what our reserve balance is off top of my head.

I can't remember.

Um Mayor Commissioners, uh Commissioner Rich, our reserve balance is approximately sixty-three million dollars in the general fund, and that includes everything from restricted and unrestricted and everything.

This is just taking some of the unrestricted money and setting it aside for these projects.

So, you know, so people uh so public and and really just you all understand that this money is set aside.

It's not something that you know we're sort of keeping the oldest money for no apparent reason.

This is this is intended for these projects because they're gonna eventually come due and and need to be spent.

To answer your question on the ERP system, it's our uh I forget what the enterprise resource.

I forget what the piece stands for.

Basically, it's it's our accounting system and entity-wide.

It's where you punch in, it's we do payroll through it, we process payments, everybody uses it for for um for uh accounting reasons for uh budgets, for everything.

And it's a citywide, everybody has a login, everybody uses it.

It's it's just kind of old.

It's but to be fair, Mr.

Mayor, most of this money will be spent in 2026.

The fire station, the fire truck, uh building renovation, maybe not all of it in 26, the police station land, that'll all be.

There's a fair amount of it that will be the probably spent between the end of 26 and the first part of 27.

Sure.

Commissioner Cleary.

Just uh to add a little bit of an explanation for that.

Um Commissioner Rish, some of this stuff uh for example, the uh emerald Ashbore prevention was earmarked in 2025 because we were waiting for that to happen, right?

So like we don't know, you know, with the projection of city building renovation, like will all of it get used, but we are kind of reserving it essentially for that.

Um EAB is in North Dakota now, so I'm assuming that some of that will get used next year as we um work on saving our urban forest from it.

But um some of that we you can't plan exactly when you're gonna use it, but we can earmark it.

And they are specific to one-time costs.

You don't want to be spending your reserves on ongoing um costs.

So that's uh all everything listed there is gonna be like a one-time cost.

Uh Commissioner Rish.

But to be fair, we've got some other big one-time costs coming up, a potential new police station, a expansion of the airport that um and just to be sure everybody knows our airport, we don't actually assess a mill levy, they're self-funded.

Um the last time I think we spent money on the airport was in 2000 when we tore down the old one and built a new one.

But this new uh proposed expansion has got a big number on it.

And so there's some big expenses coming up.

Uh the runway with the runway that was just recently refurbished was or rebuilt was we had some sales tax dollars on it to that.

Okay.

Anything else?

I I think if I remember the the easy way is if we have an adjustment to the existing preliminary budget, would we make motion to either do several at once of those or one at a time.

Yeah.

All right, with that, Mayor, I'll make a motion that we for budgetary purposes add the deputy clerk um municipal court for our our dog was 88,426.

Second.

Do we have discussion on that?

Hearing on will again, I'll just man, this is really tough tonight.

They're kind of hot.

Well, you know, I always get yelled at when we don't talk loud enough, too.

Um I'll I'll put that out there that that it's just a budget, it's in there.

If we don't use it, fine.

If corrections come from municipal court and they don't need it, so be it.

But I just don't I don't want to shoehorn us later on and create other other problems for the future.

Okay.

Any further discussion on that particular amendment?

Here and then we'll call roll.

Commissioner Cleary.

Yes.

Commissioner Rish?

Yes.

Commissioner Zenker?

Yes.

Commissioner Connolly?

Yes.

Mayor Schmidt?

Yes.

Any other items?

Commissioner Rish.

I'll move that we uh remove the expedition from the fire department budget.

It's a I drove it myself.

I looked it over.

I'm a car buyer on the side.

Excellent vehicle.

We can get some more life out of it.

And I understand the fleet replacement plan, but you know, this doesn't have many miles on it.

Second.

Okay.

I'm just gonna say that I understand your reasoning.

Uh I'm a no vote because I'm I just truly want to stick to the fleet plan and follow it uh because I've seen so much of its value in in bigger chunks.

Uh, but I I understand your perspective.

I just am trying to to stick to to Kurt's role.

So I'm gonna call roll.

Commissioner Rish?

Yes.

Commissioner Thinker?

No.

Commissioner Connolly?

Yes.

Commissioner Cleary?

No.

Mayor Smith.

I'm gonna say no, and I agree because of the fleet plan.

Next, any other items?

Commissioner Rish.

I might as well make a motion that we do the pool on the three percent rather than a flat three percent pay increase and allow the two percent merit to stay as it is.

I'm gonna second for discussion.

Um I promised Demetri I wouldn't put him on the spot and make him talk about his own salary.

Um but um I guess I I understand what Commissioner Rish is presenting to us, but I'm just curious from a financial perspective.

If we do this and we do it for one year with the intention of like obviously discussing a percentage going back to a percentage next year, or or letting obviously every commission year by year decide that how would that affect the compression that we've been trying to fight?

Would there be a better balance in going with a 4.5 raise to make room for that position we added as and the leaving a couple extra dollars to just manually adjust compression?

I guess I'm just wondering if you have a perspective on that.

Uh thank you, Commissioner Cleary.

Um I will say so.

I'm just doing some quick math.

So anybody who's about 70, some 70, or you know, up low 70,000s per like if somebody gets paid, let's say 72,000 dollars, they'll get three percent with that with that uh method with a flat three percent.

So anybody above that will get a lower and lower, lower, lower lower.

And anybody below that will get will get higher.

So it'll sort of why the create a gap.

And so it'll catch everybody from the bottom up, but everybody at 73 will basically get compressed.

So everybody below 73 will will bump up against that 73.

And that's that's the fear that we have is that it's just gonna create more inequities in the pay plan that we currently have.

I if I may make a just my personal recommendation to the to the commission, obviously, you are all decision makers is that if we were to do something new, let's do it next year.

Let's not try something completely out of out of this world this year.

Um but that's obviously I'm just just a lowly finance director.

I don't think you have we have a first or second, any other discussion?

I just say what we have with the straight percentage is a widening.

That's what widens it now, because the highest people get the most and people in the bottom get a small amount.

That's what widens the pay different um differences between in the between our employees, a straight percentage.

I'm not sure what the median pay is, Commissioner Rish.

That's that's kind of my concern is I I I think it's somewhere around there and what that's gonna do to the to the to the pay ranges.

I I'm just not sure.

I'm not really a you know for or against the idea.

I just think it's I'm not sure what it's gonna do.

Well, sure.

Yeah.

So can I get a question?

Um so with that three percent, what's the impact to the ranges?

The ranges will not be moved.

It can't move it because you're not you're not adjusting the cost of living effectively.

You're just doing uh flat dollar amount per employee raise.

So we will not move our ranges, and so the state and other employers will move their ranges, so we will be three and a half percent behind.

I just want to clarify my own mind.

Thank you.

Well, it sounds like the people at 70,000 around there and below will do fine.

Is that did I understand you right, Dimitri?

That's correct, Commissioner Rish.

So I'm just not sure what the median is, though.

That's the bulk of our workforce.

Okay.

Any other discussion?

We'll call roll.

Commissioner Zenker?

No.

Commissioner Connolly?

Yes.

Commissioner Cleary?

No.

Commissioner Rish?

Yes.

Mayor Schmidt.

I'm a no, and it's because I'm more concerned about the compression because that's really where we're gonna be at, is the employees who have been here with us for seven or eight years are gonna be compressed and we're gonna lose them, which is really my uh is a serious issue.

Any that fails.

Uh any other Go ahead, Commissioner Connolly.

I make a motion to freeze um the pay for all commissioners and the mayor's spot for this budget.

Yeah.

Second.

Is there any discussion?

Well, I didn't run for it for the pay, but our pay is meager compared to the rest, and I'm not afraid.

I I spend sometimes 20 hours a week.

Um I'm gonna vote no just because out of principle.

I'm we're not doing much for the budget, and three percent on a very little amount is uh not gonna be much.

So from a political standpoint, oh rah-rah, he you know, I'm freezing my own salary, but from a practical standpoint, when the county commissioners are essentially paid at least twice what we're paid, and we're so much more productive.

Um I'm I'm gonna vote no.

Okay.

And I only made this one of the better budget meetings we've ever had.

And I only pointed it out again, I don't think it's a major budget.

Can I second that notion?

I don't think it's a major budget item.

I only want to point it out is like I want to be make sure we're responsible being respectful.

Um we can donate our salaries entirely.

We we can.

So I just wanted to point out there, like I I also accept the fact that I did not run for this position uh for the compensation.

I ran to do good for the city.

Uh yeah, I think I would agree.

I mean, obviously, I think if any of us were here for the compensation, there's probably other things we could be doing with our time.

Um I just my one concern was that we're freezing it just for 2026 because I just don't want to put any situation where the next you know 2027's budget committee and commission is held to what we vote tonight.

So uh I guess I'm I'm fine freezing it for a year, uh I'm fine not.

I just didn't want to do it for continued.

I'll make one further comment, and maybe this might be even what I would think is most appropriate.

Um, and then we can decide how we vote after that.

But I would be more inclined to say we've cap the commissioned salaries at cost of living, whatever we determine the cost of living is.

So that might that'd be a lesser amount than maybe what is ever approved for the rest of the employees.

But no, that's my last comment on that.

Uh any other comments?

So we have a motion, a second.

We'll call the roll.

Commissioner Connolly?

Yes.

Commissioner Cleary?

Yes.

Commissioner Vish?

No.

Commissioner Zenker?

Yes.

Mayor Schmidt.

Yes.

That's just for this year.

All right.

Anything else?

If there are if there are no other So we just got to figure out how we're gonna cover that 88 grand.

Well, I had a I had a solution.

Well, you have anything.

Pardon me.

I mean, I I put it out there as I think that you know, I I really think four percent is uh is an adequate raise for 2020 going into 2026, um with three percent of it being cost of living, so that moves the ranges and one percent for merit and compression and promotion type situations left up to the discretion of the um department directors and and uh uh city administration, but I'm one person, and that would that certainly would provide us some funding for that.

I will also say 88,000 is not gonna affect the bottom line of this budget significantly.

We're gonna be using some reserves regardless.

So I don't see that as a I don't think we need to fund that particularly or find a way to fund it.

Maybe that's the best way to say it.

Um Mayor Commissioner's Um I would say, you know, I think I don't think it'll it's a that significant of a cost at this point, but it's just because we saved a lot of money on that fleet plan.

I mean, can I just be honest?

I will take it back on what commissioner Commissioner Cleary said, you know, that fleet plan saved us a lot of money this year, and I can't I can't promise that it'll be the same next year.

Um this is an ongoing cost.

So but the way that the way that is put into the current budget, if six months into 2026 it's been determined through whatever other savings there are in technology, that position is not needed.

It doesn't then necessarily become a continuing position.

If that's a stipulation of in the commission.

And that's how it was passed.

So this position is to clarify, if you can clarify this from mayor commissioners, that this position will only be funded if it is proven that it's needed or by the budget committee or who's the budget committee.

By the budget committee.

Right?

Yeah.

Whatever our process is to fill vacant spots.

Okay.

Budget and employment.

They still have to follow the same scenario as whether public works or even when we have a position that leaves, we go through that same process should we fill it or not, especially certain positions anyway.

Absolutely.

Understood.

Um Mayor.

Yes.

I mean, I guess just Dimitri, an example was when we approved last year, we approved firefighters, but they were on hold as we were waiting for the station.

So I think it's okay for us to approve a position, and then we still have to it still has to get approved to start the hiring process at a certain point.

Because I think we're gonna still be continuing conversations with courts as far as how IT is helping, how legal and police are all streamlining stuff.

So I think like she's still gonna need approval to hire, and that doesn't have to happen to today.

So uh it can't happen today.

So um I think that that's fine.

Um I personally again just gonna reiterate what I already said, would prefer to leave the uh compensation uh the increase at the three and two uh just because of the compression study and the planning we've done and we've put into it.

I think adding this position in uh Dimitri and staff and uh budget committee will figure out how we are gonna absorb that.

I I hate again to lower the compensation increase or budget um salary increases on a year where we are doing a lot of routine maintenance and lifts that we were expecting to make.

Uh I think with 1176 in place, there are going to come years where big equipment expenses or big projects that come across the board faster or uh you know as more of a surprise than this year, that we are gonna have to make adjustments to salaries because of the three percent cap.

This year fortunately is not one of those years, and so I just I don't want to do a decrease for the sake of doing a decrease on a year where we're not being held to it by the three percent, where it's like our only option.

Um, because I think that there is potential that that will come up on years where we have a higher fleet purchase or um bigger projects, and I just would rather make sure we stay the course with our comp uh compression study um and continue forward with it.

And I think that from what Dimitri says, we can we can figure out how we add that position into the budget without adjusting uh the salary increases overall.

So I'm not gonna beat it in uh the conversation any further, but actually the larger our percentage of increase for compensation is today is gonna make our potential issue with capital needs and equipment replacements more difficult conversations because we'll have a locked-in higher compensation budget forever.

So that that's part of my concern.

That's part of my reason for let's be respectful and still make sure we're given adequate raises, but let's not lock ourselves in forever that extra one percent, which is effectively $340,000 a year on the general fund budget.

Just the general fund budget.

I'm still not clear where the three and two came from.

Was that is cost of living of two of the code?

Oh well, I understand that.

I understand that.

Because that's approximately what the cost of living is.

Who made the decision on the three and two for the budget?

The budget committee.

Okay.

That was their initial recommendation.

So but I'm I'm done talking about that.

So if there's nothing else, then I would entertain a motion to adopt the amended budget, including the utilization of the dedicated reserves to fund the shortfall, which is for I remember the pieces of equipment other than the fire truck fire engine off top of my head, but there was some some other pieces of equipment as well.

I would move to approve the 2026 budget ordinance 6638, including the 2026 fees and charges and the general fund committed balance amounts as presented and attached to the agenda item, including um the previous motion uh to add in the clerk of courts position as an additional FDE.

Do we not need to also say we're gonna use some of the general fund reserves to fund the deficit?

I believe I s is that included when I state that I'm that it includes the general fund committed balance amounts.

Is that that's what I'm speaking to, right?

No, that's a different number.

Because we're about 1.5 million dollars or 1.4 million dollars.

1.7 million.

Um Mayor Commissioner's uh Commissioner Cleary, the the the 20 million is the reserve there's a committed reserve, and then the what mayor is referring to is the fact that we're using our existing reserves for the for the fire truck.

We're actually appropriating the expenditure for the fire truck.

I I I put that we I think that's in the motion that I provided to Commissioner Clearies as kind of as presented as as we've had it on the website.

I just want to make sure I want to make sure we cover it because we can't have a deficit budget.

Yes.

If you want to state that, I'm perfectly fine with that.

Um I can give you the exact number if you prefer.

Sure.

It's one one seven one million seven hundred forty-seven thousand.

So to include that from reserves, correct?

Am I understanding that correctly?

To cover one time balance.

To cover a one-time balance.

Correct.

Second.

Any further discussion?

Hearing none we're going to call roll.

Commissioner Cleary.

Yes.

Commissioner Rish?

Yes.

Commissioner Zenker?

Yes.

Commissioner Connolly?

No.

Mayor Smith.

Yes.

Motion carries.

Thank you for the lively discussion.

And I think we had I mean we could it is important for us to have these conversations, I believe.

All right.

Moving to item D, consider request for resolution receiving bids, ordering preparation of the engineer's statement for street improvement district.

589.

Go ahead, Gabe.

If I could get the screen up for a second.

Maybe.

There we go.

Perfect.

Mayor and Commissioners, Street Improvement District 589 is new construction for improvements of roadways within West Region Medical Second Edition.

We opened bids up yesterday.

We had three bidders on the project, with the low bid being Knife River Corporation with a bid of $681,793 and 41 cents.

And one of the two developers has paid that, but the second of those two developers has not paid that prepayment amount yet.

We've contacted them a couple of times, and so our recommendation would be to award to Knife River of this project, but to hold site plan approval for that particular project until such time or for that parcel that is not paid its prepayment until such time that that prepayment is received.

Commissioner Rush.

I just um gave, Mr.

Mayor, Gabe.

The low bid is considerably above the engineers' estimate.

And it's because these people are really busy and they've got a lot of work and they're um or what do you what's your guess on that?

Sure, Mayor and Commissioners.

Commissioner Rish, this one in particular, this project had a component of it wanting because this this builder who wanted to get into their site uh required a portion of the project to be completed yet this year to have actually pavement in the ground yet this year, with the remainder being done next year.

So it's probably not the most efficient way to build that.

And I think in our engineers' estimate, we didn't uh appropriate allocate the the remobilizations that the contracting industry will have to uh use to construct this particular facility.

Move to approve is presented.

Second.

Further discussion.

Hearing none will call roll.

Commissioner Rish?

Yes.

Commissioner Zenker?

Yes.

Commissioner Connolly?

Yes.

Commissioner Cleary?

Yes.

Mayor Schmidt.

Yes.

All right.

We're moving to other business, and I know that I've got three items for other business that we'll have to attend to.

Um but is anybody else have anything?

Commissioner Rish.

I just and this is Commissioner Cleary's portfolio, but I want to remind our good citizens that next week is free landfill week, but don't bring any tires out.

And when you're out there, um stop by this city store and pick up some paint or uh chemicals of different things because it's free for city residents.

Yes.

And Alicia runs the store.

She does a great job.

Thanks, Commissioner Rish.

Okay.

Anybody else?

All right, I'm going to call on Jason.

Good evening, Mayor and Commissioners.

Um, I'm in front of you tonight with something that we didn't put on the agenda, but it is something that we do need to address.

Um community development director Ben Aerith has submitted his resignation.

His last day in this organization will be Friday.

Um that causes some dominoes that need to stand up and be tipped over again.

And one of the things that we need to do is we need to recognize an acting director for that department.

Um I would like to call out uh that um we have gone through the steps.

We'll go through the steps with HR to recognize Daniel Narin as the acting director for community development uh for the interim.

Uh Daniel is currently the planning manager and has been working with Ben over the last couple of weeks to pick up on some of the skills and the tasks that Ben is managing during his final days here.

Uh but I also would like to share with you as the administrator, we are using this opportunity to just take a pause and evaluate the best use of that department, its resources, the staff that we have in place.

Certainly he has led them well over his time here.

Bismarck is a better place because of Ben's input and his professionalism and his leadership.

And so I thank him for that.

But I would like you to know that in the not too distant future, I hope to stand in front of you with a uh either a plan to move forward to fill a position or perhaps a plan that might look a little different than what we are used to seeing today.

Um but I would like to use this time to uh reflect internally, talk with some other stakeholders in the organization and and some of you that hold the portfolio here as well.

So no promises on the date, but I'm certainly not looking to slow play this into 2027 or anything like that.

We recognize the the need for leadership in that department, and um we'll be um coming forward with a plan in the not too distant future on how best to move forward with that.

Any questions for Jason?

Okay, thank you.

Um next item is calendar reminder and update.

So I know it's not for a couple months yet, but November, we have our first commission meeting on the 13th, which is uh which is a Thursday and not a Tuesday, because Tuesday is Veterans Day, and so just to make sure we're all aware of that.

That's good.

I well, that's why that's why I'm trying to get out in front of this.

Someone's got to send me a meeting advice.

So when you show up here on the 11th, that'll be your reminder.

Okay.

So the other the other item is um in December this year, we have two meetings.

One of them is scheduled for December 23rd, which is going to be a travel day.

I might I already know I'm traveling that day, and I know I'm probably going to be in an airplane during one commission meeting would be.

So I would like to see us consider chang reducing December meetings down to just one, the which would be on the 17th, the third Tuesday for the entire month of December, and even consider us suggesting that on the calendar moving forward because December is a very busy month as it is with a bunch of holidays in there.

Um I think it would just it would be more accommodating to all staff included.

So if that's okay, then I would ask that the administration repost that uh and make that adjustment if we go ahead, Commissioner.

Do we need a motion on that?

We could probably do because we have to adjust the motion to excuse me, Mayor.

Just uh correction.

December 16th is Tuesday.

I wrote 17.

Okay.

We do need a motion though to do that.

You're right.

So I'll make a motion to have one December meeting on the correct date of the 16th.

Um in lieu of two.

Second.

Is there any discussion?

We'll call roll.

Commissioner Cleary?

Yes.

Commissioner Rish?

Yes.

Commissioner Zenker?

Yes.

Commissioner Connolly?

Yes.

Mayor Schmidt.

Yes.

Um, and then before I forget to get to item number three.

Um, remember next week Wednesday 17th, I think is the right day.

We have our joint.

We we all agreed, I think we all got polled on this.

Well, that's why I'm mentioning it now.

Is uh the 17th next Wednesday in this room at five o'clock will be the combined meeting of both the Burley County Commission and the Bismarck City Commission on the topic of ETA.

Whitney, can you just do a calendar invite for that one too?

Five fifteen?

Five o'clock.

Five o'clock.

Okay.

And then the last item is I'm gonna call in Greg Haug because there is a situation that aroused today for some grant funding at the airport.

Yeah.

Good evening, Mayor, Commissioners.

Um, I apologize for yeah, I mean, you know, I apologize, but then I guess we thank the FAA for their offer.

Um this afternoon at about I don't know, four o'clock, we got a grant offer for uh 8.6 and some change uh for our runway uh 321 and Taxiway D rehabilitation project.

Um, like I said, we just received it uh late this afternoon, but uh the FAA needs a response from us by Friday.

This is one of those typical things where the end of the fiscal year, they have some d extra discretionary funding.

Uh we have projects that we have put together and are waiting and ready on the shelf, and they have the opportunity to uh provide some additional funding to us.

Um, you know, we've been successful with this in the past uh on a number of different projects, and uh this is just like another example of that.

Uh but in the interest of your time, um tonight we really just need uh your approval to accept the grant offer and then authorize the mayor to sign the grant offer electronically, and then we will come back at another meeting uh um more formally and uh uh ask for acceptance of the uh the bids that we've got from the contractors and the project budget and all that kind of stuff.

We'll come back and take care of all that uh at a at a later meeting.

But uh yeah, there's this is that it's the east half of the uh Crossman runway and the parallel taxiway.

So this project uh does the east half.

We had to break this project up into uh two pieces.

Um it's research re it's not reconstructing, it's rehabilitating the pavement.

Uh it's also uh laying out the the new cans and conduit for uh changing out the lighting.

The lighting has reached its the end of its useful life.

We're also uh fixing the blast pads on both ends of the runway uh because it was noted by our certification inspector a number of years ago in the last several years that the it's a little bit wavy out on the ends.

Um uh the the ground needs to be nice and level and graded and all that kind of stuff.

So um so there's a few extra uh uh additional things that we have to do to continue to meet uh our certification with the FAA on the second half when we come back later, you know, hopefully we'll get another uh grant to uh be able to fund uh the other half uh, you know, hopefully next year.

Um and uh it'll be the same thing on the west side, but then there's some additional drainage work that's gonna be done uh in between the tack the main runway and the taxiway, and then another uh grading of a uh a little grading of an area um that was noted by uh certification inspector uh just in the last couple years.

Um and then they'll put in all of the new LED uh runway and taxiway lighting, you know, at that time.

So we'll they'll they'll install the cans and we'll just continue to run with our incandescent bulbs that are on there now because you can't have half and half.

So uh if we can get uh approval to accept this grant, then we'll come back with the bids and the project budget and all that.

So Commissioners?

Um Greg, will this uh you know we're trying to gather up as much funding as we can for the airport expansion?

Yeah, will this allow us to use some other money that we might have had to spend on this for the airport expans expansion?

Is it gonna take away from our funding for the terminal project?

Is that kind of your question?

No, no, my question is maybe this will free up some other money that we could use towards the terminal project.

No, some reserves.

You know, we budget this stuff and and we do these projects.

It's uh you know, on a on-demand basis, and when the grant funding is available, FAA told us that we have to do this runway recon well uh rehabilitation before we get to the terminal project.

This is one of those things where if you look at our uh pavement condition index study, um our numbers are going down, you know, each and every year on this runway, and we wanted to do this runway and taxiway before we did the main runway, and they told us no, you need to do the main one way first and then come back and do this other one.

And now we're just finally getting to it.

Commissioner Zenker, you're nodding because you remember you know, as airport commissioner back then that's but but did you have money budgeted for this out of our okay, so that money will some of that money we won't have to spend because we're getting this additional funding.

Or might have to do some the rest of it, I suppose.

I don't know.

Yeah, our our share, this is a 95% grant.

Um and there was a little extra money, I should say, too, that came our way that's paying for the design costs for the West half.

So that's also included in this 8.673500.

Um so we got a little little bonus uh funding to get a head start on the design, which we have right now at the independent fee estimators right now.

The the design is is complete and we're getting the fees estimated so that we can negotiate the final cost on that.

So just one more thing.

Yep, we need a motion.

Okay, I'll make a motion that we uh allow Greg to accept this and allow the mayor to sign electronically to agree to it.

Second, okay.

Any discussion?

Hearing none will call roll.

Commissioner Rish?

Yes, Commissioner Zenker?

Yes, Commissioner Connolly?

Yes, Commissioner Cleary?

Yes, Mayor Schmitz.

Yes.

Thank you.

One last call.

Anyone else have any other business?

If hearing none, we stand adjourned.

Thank you.

Thank you.