So Steve Sprague is really in a very uh customer service role for the city of Fargo.

He's an individual that uh every single day and every single week has really been uh a big part of providing a quality customer service experience for the residents of Fargo and the businesses of Fargo.

So he's somebody that we see out in the community.

He's somebody who serves our public very, very well, and we're very appreciative of that.

He's just had so many great years of helping out our citizens, helping out our businesses, answering their questions and being there for them.

My interactor Steve is great.

Um I look forward to coming to work.

Steve just he's always so positive.

He maybe he'll say different, but I think Steve's just a very positive person and just fun to be around, but also he has so much knowledge that it's just great to work with him.

He lets people do their thing.

He's not a micromanager.

He's you know, steps in, he's great to ask advice from yeah, he just kind of lets everybody do their job.

He's been always there for me to guide me and help me with uh anything work-related as well as outside of work.

He always was willing to do the extra mile he offered and and actually helped me re-roof my house with a group of hockey officials, and he took the lead in that project, and he just was always there and very, very supportive of his staff.

And I think that's just that's such a key quality of his is his ability just to relate to people and really get to know them and make you feel like uh you're a valuable part of his team, and that that goes forward with the work here at the city and also just in in my personal life.

I knew he was always there for me and helped me if I needed something and for support.

I think you know, Steve Leaving, he's held so many different roles.

Um, you know, even in my new role in administration, I've been working with him with the DCP and the bid.

And so I mean, you look at all the different roles he's held from he works with elections to the bid to all the utility payments and meter reading and then sewer repair and special assessments.

And so I mean, his legacy really is stretched on all departments that he touches.

And so he's gonna leave a big legacy, and he's just his demeanor of he's got such a like you said, that that approachable personality and his sense of humor, and it's always a good day to be able to have some time to visit with him.

Steve wears a lot of hats within the city.

A lot of people are saying that now.

I mean, he's working with almost every department.

It's hard to think about because he just knows so much that when he's gone, that I think people are definitely gonna notice that.

Oh, Steve's not here just to ask Steve.

When you ask him a question and he knows usually immediately the answer.

He knows the history of Fargo, he knows the history of the city.

So that will definitely be a loss for me and our department.

Yeah, I mean, I owe him a big thank you.

You know, he's uh uh the reason I'm here today, and without his guidance and his support and getting to know him, uh, you know, I wouldn't be in the position I was with my career, and I'm forever thankful for him.

Um and I I wish him the best of luck in his retirement.

I would love for Steve to just enjoy his retirement and to slow down.

He can slow down, take some days off.

He's not a person that just will relax all day, but maybe you should enjoy that retirement, enjoy the grand babies, enjoy the farm, and we will miss you.

And I appreciate everything that you've done for me.

Thank you, Steve, for your years of service to the city of Fargo.

We in administration greatly appreciate all the work you've done, as do the residents of the city of Fargo.

It's been a real honor.

Thank you, thank you, Steve.

Is there a motion to approve the order of agenda?

That's a move.

Is there a second?

Second.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Motion carried.

Is there a motion to approve the minutes of the October 13, 2025 meeting?

So move.

Sir second.

Second.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Motion carried.

Sir, a motion to approve the consent agenda items one through 36.

So move.

Sir Second.

Second.

Roll Call vote.

Call Peck.

Hi.

Strand.

Yes.

Epcorn?

Hi.

Turnberg.

Turnberg.

Aye.

Mahoney.

Aye.

Isn't it appropriate that he gets to come up the podium too, huh?

Public hearing.

Application for transfer of Z alcoholic beverage license at JT Corp.

Frank's Lounge to Frank's Bar to in business is Frank's Lounge should be located at 2640 52nd Avenue South.

Steve Sprague to explain.

Well, before we get to official business, I brought a prompt.

A prop, I guess you call it right.

When uh my wife retired two years ago, she gave me this jar full of marbles.

I've only got one marble left.

I've lost one marble every commission meeting.

Very good.

This uh transfer with the Z license, uh, Frank's lounge is a going concern transfer.

Um the original owners that opened Frank's lounge are looking to move in a different path, and they found some people that are interested in moving into the alcohol business.

This is a transferable license in that it is uh again a going concern.

Additionally, the license was originally issued before the um 2014 date uh when we no longer transfer licenses, but again, this is a going concern.

Um so uh we've gone through the background check.

There were some minor issues um with uh you know uh one of the applicants um but uh nothing that would lead to any uh you know major concerns or anything like that.

It does come with a recommendation of approval from both uh the liquor control board and from the police department.

So anyone present would wish to speak to this license transfer.

Is there anybody wanting to speak to about this transfer?

If not, I close the public hearing.

Do I have a motion?

I'll make the motion.

Is there a second?

Roll call vote, please.

Pepcorn, aye, strand, yes, turnberg, aye, mahoney.

Aye.

Public hearing 38.

Application for Class B annexation, alcoholic beverage license for Northdale Oil, doing business as Sisters Beer, Wine and Spirits to be located at 430 County Road 81 North.

Steve Sprague.

If you remember back this summer, we uh we created a new uh license and it was specific to areas of the city that are being annexed into the city.

Um and there were a lot of a lot of details, a lot of moving parts with this one.

Um we involved uh planning, we involved um engineering, um, and of course, auditors was involved, you know, in coming up with this uh annexation license.

Um, and it's a specific license that only um applies in certain situations.

We don't we really don't anticipate that we will see um other situations come up again, but in order if they do, we now have um we're prepared for that that circumstance.

Um this is uh it's a ninety thousand dollar initial issuance fee.

Uh it's set up the same as the Class B license.

It's an off-sale license.

Um the uh Northale Oil, the applicants here have their design will meet all of our rules with the city as far as the hundred feet from the liquor store to the uh to the convenience store.

Um we've gone through the background check.

There were no issues on on this application, and uh does come to you with a recommendation of approval from the city from the liquor control board.

Steve, I thought one time you guys want to look at the value of this and see if it's more valuable than in the 90.

We looked at that and felt like at this time if we are going to adjust uh license pricing, we would have to do everything at once.

Uh but we did set this at the same as as a class B license.

So anyone present wish to speak to this license.

Anyone present wishing to speak?

If not, I close the public hearing.

Do I have a motion?

I'll make the motion.

Can I make a quick comment, Mr.

Chair?

Just real quick.

What the concern was was this is annexed land, and so speculation was our concern, and so now they're required to keep it in that location for I believe it's 10 years, maybe longer than that.

But anyway, that would that would keep that because obviously we're have other areas of we're growing a growing city, so annexation and people buying that was that was our concern.

So uh is 10 years correct, Steve?

I think it is anyway.

It's a long period of time.

It might be 20.

Did do you remember Nancy?

Steve, did you lose your marbles?

Or it's that one.

Does that cost you your last marble statement?

I think so.

I don't recall the length of time that wasn't uh negotiation discussion point.

I don't recall where we landed.

Okay.

I need a second for the motion, however.

Second.

Second is done.

Now you want to say again.

Commissioner Pepcorn, did you have something else to say?

No.

Sorry.

Any discussion?

Roll call vote, please.

Pepcorn.

Aye.

Colpack.

Aye.

Strand.

No.

Turnberg.

Aye.

Mahoney.

Application class C alcoholic beverage license to be located at 1889, located at 602 Main Avenue.

Steve Sprague to explain.

The 1889.

So everybody knows that as Wimmer's store.

The 1889 opened a few years ago with a wine license.

They see a need to expand to have a class C, which is a beer license.

And that's what this application is for.

We've done the background check.

They also formed a new corporation and added another owner.

But anyway, the um so this is a a beer license.

They do not have to have food sales with this license.

And then that'll be complementary with the wine license that they currently exist.

There were no issues in the background check, and it does come with with a recommendation of approval from Liquor Control Board.

Is there anyone president wishes to speak to this class?

C alcoholic beverage license.

I'll make the motion.

Can I make another quick comment?

So I gave my testimonial at the last liquor control about Steve and I made him cry.

So I'll see if I can do it again.

The the thing that I I think of the most is your institutional knowledge will not be replaced.

That's the thing that's the saddest.

And to me, that's the challenge because you have the liquor license holders that don't want any new liquor licenses, and you want new businesses that and we want to have them come.

And Steve went out of his way to do that to ensure the the new people had an opportunity.

And I'm just telling you, and Angie is gonna do a great job, but uh the things that Steve did, no one will be able to do those.

And so I said this is gonna be an extremely damaging to our budget because we're gonna have to hire five people to replace Steve.

Because it's not only liquor, it's and you're the auditor, but the water meter.

The you can go down the list.

There's a whole long list.

And so uh, and I I just think of he's just such a a pleasant person and and what a valuable employee and the city of Fargo.

Uh we're so fortunate to have you work for us for this long, Steve.

And uh it's been an honor working with you, and uh so I will I will miss you tremendously.

Thank you.

Is there a second to Pipcorn's motion?

Oh second.

Any further discussions?

Roll call vote, please.

Pepcorn?

Aye, cold pack, aye.

Strand?

Yes, Turnberg, aye.

Mahoney.

Yes, thank you, Steve, for your service.

Appreciate it very much.

Item 40, a public hearing continued from 111025.

On proposed JO 45th Street Apartments edition and approval recommended by planning commission on 5625 continued to 101325 meeting.

So planned unit development master land use plan amendment.

It's a zoning chain from general commercial to PUD to general commercial with amended PUD.

It's a zoning change from general commercial with the PUD to a conditional overlay and removal of the POD, planned unit development master plan land use.

First reading the rezoning, second edition for those.

First reading rezoning ordinance and a plat of J and O 45th Street Apartments edition.

I think uh Don, you have your your work cut out for you to explain all this.

Well, that one's continued, sir.

That's continued to the next one.

Okay, so you don't have to tell us about anything.

Not tonight.

I'll just to continue.

Is there a second?

Second.

Uh roll call vote, please.

Colpack?

Aye.

Strand?

Yes.

Pepcorn?

Aye.

Turnberg?

Aye.

Mahoney.

Aye.

Public hearing.

Okay.

Is this one okay, Don?

Yes, sir.

Okay.

Plat of Northern Pacific, third edition.

Uh approval recommended by planning commission on 8525.

Don't Donald Crest to explain.

Yes, sir.

Uh, before we start, I also like to make one note about Steve Sprague.

He is very important to us as well in planning because his signature is on every one of the subdivision plots.

You approve attesting the mayor's signature.

So his uh we see him up in our office uh regularly.

Uh good evening, Commissioners.

Donald Cress of the Department of Planning and Development.

I'll be presenting the next three items.

Two of these items include ordinances prepared by the city attorney's office.

Item 41 is Northern Pacific edition, major subdivision, including a vacation of right-away.

This is located here's Broadway and uh NP Avenue.

Here's the ground transportation center.

Uh here's the former uh 701 are the 701 Main Avenue, the former park district building, now owned by a private company.

And uh the plan here is to combine some of these lots and vacate an alley.

There's an area of alley right here from the original plat.

Um this is the property.

This this parking lot here will be included in the subdivision.

This has actually never been platted.

It's still uh a township and range description.

So here we're facing uh northwest.

Here we're standing on the corner of Broadway and NP Avenue, uh facing down the street here, um, Bell Bank and Insurance, uh former White Drug Building here, and then this alley to be vacated.

Here we're standing on NP Avenue looking south.

Obviously, it has not been used as an alley for some time, uh, so vacate it.

And the uh plat will retain an easement for the existing utilities.

Here's uh looking at the other end here, um looking north.

This is uh right up against the building there.

Uh the zoning is DMU, downtown mixed use, no change is proposed.

Uh the plat combines lots that were originally platted in 1880, which have indeed combined since, and also vacates a portion of the alley.

Uh vacations are done pursuant to the North Dakota Century Code, chapter 4039, and findings from this section are included in your staff report.

Uh so again, these are all these lots from 1880, the unplatted land, and the alley to be vacated and uh indicating the an easement is retained here.

Uh the applicant Patrick Basey is with us this evening and may wish to address the commission.

Uh recommendation is stated in your staff report and shown on the screen.

That concludes staff's presentation.

Thank you, Commissioners.

Thank you, Donald.

Senator Vent President wishes to speak to this uh planning uh this plates.

Anyone wishing to speak?

If not, I'll close the public hearing.

Do I have a motion?

I'll make the motion.

Is there a second?

Second.

Any discussion?

Roll call vote, please.

Pepcorn.

Colpak, aye, strand.

Yes.

Mahoney.

Aye.

42.

Annexation of 72.96 acres, more or less located in a part of the southwest quarter, and it's part of the southwest quarter of section 11 Township 138 north and range 49 west of the fifth principal meridian.

Gas County, North Dakota, first reading annexation ordinance.

Donald Crest, please explain.

Yes, sir.

Thank you.

So this is an annexation.

This ties into the next item, which will be Selkirk Place 4th edition, but we do the annexation first, so we do them in the right order.

Uh this is 64th Avenue, I-29 here.

Uh this is uh Selkirk 1st, 2nd, and uh 3rd editions up here.

Uh County Drain 53.

Uh the uh zoning on this property is agricultural.

This is slightly updated from the map that's in your packet.

We had to correct one error related to that drain.

Uh the uh zoning is agricultural, and it will be changed when it becomes part of the subdivision.

So we'll look at that in the next one.

Here's the annexation plat.

The majority of the area of the annexation is owned by the applicant.

Uh these two small areas here are owned by the city of Fargo and Southeast Cass Water Resources District.

We include those in the in the subdivision in the annexation of the subdivision because we want to uh plat the drain as part of the city.

Uh the planning commission uh found the uh proposed annexation area consistent with the growth plan at their August 5th uh 2025 meeting.

The designation of the place type designation is urban neighborhood, which uh the zoning and the general uh plan of this development fit into the applicant John Eunice of Eagle Bridge Development is with us tonight.

May wish to address the commission.

Cass County and Stanley Township were notified of the proposed annexation and had no objections.

Uh the recommendation is stated in your staff report and shown on the screen.

That concludes staff's presentation.

Thank you, Commissioners.

Anyone present and wishes to speak on this annexation.

Anyone present wishing to speak?

If not, I close the public hearing and do I have a motion.

I'll make the motion.

Sir Second.

Second.

Moved and seconded.

Any discussion?

Roll call vote, please.

Pepcorn?

Turnberg.

Aye.

Colpack, aye.

Strand.

Yes.

Mahoney.

Aye.

Item 43, circumplace fourth edition.

Uh is another approval recommended by planning commission.

It's a zoning change.

And uh first reading of the rezoning ordinance and the plot of the circumplace, fourth edition.

Donald will explain.

Yes, sir.

Thank you.

So uh continuing from our last uh item here.

Uh, this is the area that was annexed.

Here is the uh the dark black outline is the full annexation area.

It's 120 or the full subdivision area, it's 124 acres.

Uh so location here again, 64th Avenue, I-29, Davies High School is over here.

County drain 53 runs down through here.

Uh here's some photos of the site.

I'm actually standing.

I'm actually standing on the uh lift station over here.

Uh Cell Kirk Third was under construction, so I couldn't actually get down there.

I didn't want to interrupt the construction trucks.

So again, it's uh undeveloped as you see, uh facing off to the southwest.

Down here is the future 76th Avenue, I-29 over here.

Again, looking across the drain, the houses you see under development here are in Selkirk Place 2nd.

Uh here's a little farther up the drain.

Here's the levee that will be continued along here with uh Selkirk Place Fourth, and then here we're on the northerly part here, uh 33rd Avenue.

The new fire station is right behind me on this picture.

Uh this will continue on down and eventually connect to 76th Avenue.

Uh so just looking across that undeveloped area there.

Uh here's the platform in the your packet, it's six pages.

We actually had the uh surveyor put it on one page so you can see the whole thing at once.

Um actually, could we see if we can use a little better picture here for a second?

Ah, there you go.

That's a little better.

Just doesn't work on the big slide very well.

So here you can see uh scroll through this.

The plat creates a hundred or three hundred and ten lots, including three hundred single family lots, as you see several blocks of those there.

Uh, there are two lots that are for multi-dwelling residential.

They will have a conditional overlay on it, similar to the uh conditional overlay that's in uh Selkirk Place Third.

I'll have two lots here for um SR5 uh town home development.

They'll have some lots over here.

This is that area that the city and the uh Southeast Cass owned.

So we'll have the drain and its protection lot, and then these two here will be combined for the Fargo Park District, both will be dedicated to the Fargo Park District for a park down here, and then these two uh lots over here up against the interstate will remain zoned agricultural.

Uh development is not determined yet for that for those lots at this time.

So the agricultural zone is just a holding zone here until uh further development is proposed on those lots.

So again, it's a it's a big piece of ground there, it's 124 acres.

And let me go back to my slideshow here.

Um the zoning.

Here we go.

There we go.

Uh the zoning here is uh agricultural, as we saw in our in our uh annexation, and then there's some general commercial.

This is left over from 2008 that was zone general commercial.

There was no commercial development, ever happened, but uh so it'll be uh rezoned here.

Um this is the same chart that's in your sub or in your uh staff report there.

We don't need to go through all these, but just to break that down for you.

Here's how that looks graphically.

Again, the yellow here is all the single family development, the orange is the multifamily development, uh, the whatever color this is is sort of greenish here is the uh town home development, and the green over here is PI public and institutional zoning, which is the appropriate zoning for uh lots owned by government entities.

So PI zoning, SR4, MR3 with a conditional overlay, SR5, and then the gray over here is agricultural.

Uh the applicant, uh John Eunice of Eagle Ridge Development is with us tonight.

May wish to address the commission.

Uh staff appreciates the cooperation of the Southeast Cast Water Resources District and the Fargo Park District in working on this plat.

Uh the planning commission's recommendation is stated in your staff report shown on the screen.

That concludes staff's presentation.

Thank you, Commissioners.

One president wishing to speak.

If not, I'll close the public hearing.

Do I have a motion?

I'll make the motion.

Second.

Any discussion?

Pep Corn?

Turnberg.

Aye.

Cole Pack.

Aye.

Strand?

Yes.

Mahoney.

Aye.

Thank you, Commissioners.

Item 44, recommendation to approve the relocation of the resource and recovery center to 2001 on First Avenue North.

Eric Johnson and Brenda Derek to explain.

Good evening, Mayor and Commissioners.

Uh, before we get started uh with the motions that we had been working on and discussing, I wanted to do just a quick um recap of the process that we have moved forward with so far.

So we have been discussing the potential relocation over the last year, looking for sites that would meet the space needs.

And so over the last six weeks, it has become more active.

I had to go back and look at how long we've been talking about this very repeatedly.

And so for the last six weeks, you know, we started with a presentation of what three sites were available, and that was back on September 15th.

We held a public meeting on the 23rd.

I came back to commission and talked about the response from the public meeting along with the survey results.

And then on the 13th, we did an executive session to discuss our negotiation strategies, and now we here we are today on the 27th.

And so what we've been working on throughout this period is collaborating with public health and facilities and working with the construction manager to understand the costs, considering construction options that are movable.

Working with local architect along with the Bloomberg Guidance on Design, working with the owner on potential lease terms.

And then the critical part of this project has been the approval from FM Area Foundation on the fiscal sponsorship of the project.

So this allows anyone to donate to the project to know that the funds are going to support this project, the relocation and build out.

That the 2001 First Avenue North did rank first, and then our 720 14th Street ranked second with the 610 University Drive work ranking third.

So as we get to the motions here and Eric discusses the lease, we know we're not done.

There's a lot of work to be done in the next 30 to 45 days if we're getting given permission to move forward.

We'll be moving forward with finalizing our funding options, doing outreach to private partners for build out and relocation, and then continuing to work on the design with Bloomberg on the local architect for and the management team to complete design of the new location.

And I will hand it off to Eric to talk about the lease.

Thank you, Brenda.

Eric Johnson, Assistant City Attorney, good evening again, Commissioners.

On in the agenda packet was a draft lease that had been prepared by Bollinger Enterprises, the owner of this particular property, 2001 First Avenue North, and we did just received that very briefly before the agenda deadline.

Thought we'd put it on, and my job here is to just highlight uh some revisions that uh we think are going to be acceptable to uh Bollinger changes to the agreement, uh some of which they've already given given uh verbal uh approval for.

Uh but we're seeking your approval of uh the base agreement with uh revisions that will be clarified and fine-tuned in the agreement, uh but which I will highlight here.

And if you approve this uh suggested motion, you're authorizing the mayor to go forward and uh actually execute that agreement.

We'll bring that agreement fully signed, uh assuming it is fully signed, uh back onto the agenda for receipt and filings that there's a public record of that document uh at uh a meeting, presumably at the meeting in two weeks.

Uh so with that, uh you already I already identified the location.

This is a large building, 54,500 square feet.

It contains uh just under 11,000 square feet of office space that's uh uh you know very useful for purposes of the nonprofits and the staff members that will be in this when it's uh fitted up uh as an engagement center.

There's some space outside, which is important, uh at least it's important uh during summer months or want warmer ones for gathering space.

Um the term of the uh agreement initially was proposed at three years, but uh I would believe it's now uh uh at a two-year level, which is frankly what we had asked for initially.

Uh, the two years is designed basically uh to allow uh the uh facility to be relocated from its current location uh and established uh footing uh on its own with uh you know information and statistics gathered uh for the use of the facility and the success or or lack of success, whatever proves to be the case in this facility at the first Avenue North location.

Um the idea is if also if the Bruhalla were to be successful in getting uh the bid uh for the uh uh convention center site, construction would take up that uh two-year period, and then uh this uh facility would need to be relocated at some point anyway, uh, as a result of that.

Uh the this building will need fit up.

Uh the arrangements would be that the landlord would undertake the task of fitting up, but it would be done.

The design of the fit up would be done at the city uh approval of that design.

Uh, and there are also donations expected to come in the door uh to uh pay for uh both rent and fit up uh and operations if there's enough uh donations.

All of that is approved as a charitable purpose through the FM area foundation that's been generous enough to uh be willing to serve as a fiscal agent for the city, and in your packet are uh both the fee agreement and the basic fiscal uh agency agreement, fiscal sponsorship agreement for uh the FM area foundation to serve as the conduit for those charitable found uh donations.

Um the agreement uh also has a provision in there, it's kind of a fallback or a fail-safe provision that if a third party were to come along and make an offer to Bullinger Enterprises to purchase the building during the term of the lease, uh Bullinger would at least give the city the opportunity to meet that offer and to buy the building instead of it going to a third party.

If the city didn't want to buy it, that's no problem.

We still have a lease for the two-year term.

No problem.

You just might have a new landlord for whatever the remaining period of that term is under those circumstances.

Uh the rent had started out at considerably uh higher rate than uh what is now being discussed.

Um the uh we had uh even talked about the need to rent perhaps less than the full amount of building, but the rate of rent understandably goes up when you're renting less than the full facility.

That makes sense if you're a landlord, and we can understand that as a prospective tenant.

But uh the rent that actually has been at least verbally agreed to by uh the Bullinger Enterprises was six dollars and fifty cents per square foot.

That ends up being uh just over three hundred and fifty thousand dollars per year in sort of base rent.

There's also uh sort of typically called CAM, common area maintenance expenses.

That includes taxes uh and uh and other management fees that are laid out in the agreement.

Um that that uh rent would be fixed for the full two-year term.

Um there will be uh surplus square footage uh in this building.

It isn't expected that the engagement center at all would be uh using the full 54,500 square feet.

Uh and so there'd be available space if there were a city need for that space uh because the of the donations coming in, it'll be important to identify clearly what space is used for the engagement center, the charitable purpose for these donations, and that the expenses go toward that portion.

So if other city departments were to step in and use some of this facility, that's fine.

We just would want to make sure we're properly allocating the rent that's payable because of the engagement center compared to uh rents that are payable for other city activities that don't meet that charitable purpose of the engagement center.

And then also there's the option here for uh the city to find uh another a third party to be a subtenant and subject to uh reasonable approval by the landlord, we could find somebody to to uh rent sublet that space uh from us, and that obviously would defray some of the cost of the rental uh of this uh facility.

Um the uh we will have some clarifying language uh drafted in the agreement.

For example, the if you read the agreement that's in the packet, uh uh there is language that uh kind of talks about the proper uses and so forth.

We we have uh we'll propose appropriate language.

It'll clarify that all of that is subject to what is clearly the use we're gonna have here for an engagement center.

It also will say uh quite clearly that we do intend to have this winter warming uh opportunity that may be overnight and uh people will maybe resting.

Normally their kind of standard lease doesn't allow for sleeping, but we will carve out that as a clarification and uh they'll be accepting of that.

We've already know that verbally.

Um so with that I open uh this up for uh any questions.

You have uh the uh suggested.

Any questions of Eric?

Yep.

Mr.

Strand, I do have to open up public hearing, but if you want to ask questions first, I just would like to advance the motion that's recommended.

Thank you.

Let me do the public hearing first, Commissioner Strand.

Certainly.

I have two speakers.

Olivia Fisher is first.

Hi, I'm Olivia, Fargo resident.

I'm speaking on this relocation yet again to encourage you all to not make a decision that will further displace and negatively impact the lives of our unsheltered neighbors.

This relocation is going to do just that.

I and other community members are incredibly disappointed by city admin's suggestion to go with this location because in case folks have forgotten, this spot is not anywhere near the preferred locations that deck staff themselves said would be the most effective to meet unsheltered people where they're at.

Most, if not all of the people that attended the town hall last month spoke against this location specifically for varying reasons.

And folks who utilize the deck services have spoken against it being moved at all, as have I.

Every step that has led us to this point has been in favor of business owners that claim unsheltered individuals are dangerous criminals.

I'm sure there might be yet again a few people who come up here to complain that business is being or will be affected by the presence of homeless people.

But we as a community and human beings should all agree that profits are not more important than people.

Not to mention, Chief Sabolski told the forum this month that crime downtown is down 9% from last year.

So these claim claims that crime is out of hand downtown are nothing more than an attack on unsheltered residents and blatant fear mark fear mongering.

So I ask you commissioners to have compassion and vote on behalf of the people who utilize the deck.

If you know deep down that this location is the least accessible option for residents, please don't vote for it.

This new location is about a 28-minute walk from the Salvation Army, one of the only places where people have regular access to a free hot meal Monday through Friday.

It's about a 31-minute walk from the library where people can access the internet to work on applying for housing.

And it's about a 35-minute walk from the harm reduction center where folks can access life-saving supplies.

The current deck is less than 10 minutes away from all of those resources.

The decision seems obvious to me.

Considering the dangerously low temperatures we're all about to be facing, displacing people to this extent can and likely will result in injury or death.

Most unsheltered individuals can't afford the new bus fare.

Do you intend to implement transport services for them?

Considering the warming center isn't open yet, and the deck hasn't been able to afford staffing on the weekends.

I don't understand why the funding from the FM Area Foundation isn't being used more effectively with the space you already have and the needs that are currently not being met.

Please do the right thing and do not vote to relocate to the 2001 First Avenue North location.

Thanks.

Denise Vanderbush.

Good evening.

Thank you, Commissioners, for listening to me this evening.

I'm Denise Vanderbush.

I am the president of Open Door 65.

I just have a couple of concerns.

I um do feel there is a need that we have a place for our homeless to go to.

I just am hoping that you're keeping in mind that we do need a way for our homeless to get to this new place that you are going to bring them to.

It is a long ways away from downtown Fargo.

Our homeless are not going to just simply disappear from downtown Fargo.

I bet I have lived in Fargo my entire life.

The homeless has always been in downtown Fargo.

They're not just going to suddenly remove themselves from downtown Fargo just because you remove their resources from downtown Fargo.

If you're going to move this place out of downtown Fargo, we need a way to get them from downtown Fargo to these resources.

So please keep in mind we need to have a way to get them to this place.

And is this a wonderful idea?

I agree.

We need to have a place for them to go, a bigger place for them to go.

There are many, many homeless people out there.

I hope at Open Door 65, we serve easily over 100 people in any given week, and we still have to turn people away because we don't simply don't have enough volunteers to serve the amount of people that show up at our doors.

We had to leave Fargo and we moved over to Moorhead.

We are now located in the Dorothy Day food pantry.

We're hoping to be able to serve more people over there than what we were able to serve over here in Fargo.

And we know the need has gotten so much more greater.

My phone rings and rings and rings.

People asking, when are you going to open again?

When can you be open?

We need your help.

I know there are so many people out there that need our help.

And I know that there's going to be so many people that need the help.

You're going to have a bigger location.

You're going to have a bigger need.

There are a lot of people that need your help, but they need to be able to get to you.

Since you're moving further away, please have a way for them to get to you so that they can help get the help that you're going to be offering them.

And please keep in mind they are people too.

Watch how we talk about them.

Keep in mind when you're talking about them.

Please use gentle terms when you're talking about them.

You're talking about our friends, our neighbors, and people that we care about.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Mr.

Strand, do you want to make a motion?

I I advance the recommended motion, Mayor.

Is there a second?

Mr.

Straff?

Certainly.

You know, it it's it's there's just no doubt about it.

This is a really tough issue.

Uh no matter which way you look, it's challenging to everybody on any end of the teeter-totter.

Um, bottom line, though, we are a community that makes decisions to do our best.

We have a uh amazing people on the on the bench and in the trenches that are on a daily basis, tirelessly supporting others who are in need and at risk.

We we have leadership that has tried to coalesce a vision forward that honestly recommend ref reflects the the delicate balance of the challenges we face.

On the one end, we have our downtown investments in our business community.

On the other hand, we have human beings that are falling through the cracks and not getting services and not getting the assistance they need, and where do they go?

You know, and and then we have the debate about well whose responsibility is this is this us or is it somebody else's?

Well, honestly, it's here, and it's in our community, and it's our it's our downtown and it's our people, they're ours.

You know, so I I there's there's potential problems with any decisions you make, and then you have to take some some some chances and leverage your best information and go forward.

In my head right now, the the coalition of team of people we have trying to lead us forward is is as good as we can get, and we have about a two-year window to try and make this work.

And so that and winter's coming.

So given that there's faults in anything and potential problems in anything, there's also hope in everything.

And I believe sincerely that this approach, if we all put our heads together, if we partner with each other, we try and make things work, we try and instill the best values that we can into the whole effort that we're advancing.

You know, if we if we if we give people a hand up rather than a finger pointing at them, you know, and and let's stand with our staff and our people that are on a daily basis, putting themselves out there without thanks often, and going home and having their own challenges in life because of what they've experienced that day.

You know, so I just really hope this works.

And and I and I hope that our our commission can unanimously support an effort to try get us ahead of ourselves with this issue that's not ours.

It's a national issue.

This has just landed in our on our main street.

This is from the White House to Congress all the way down nationally to us, that we have people that are absolutely at risk.

And there's no place for them to go.

There's no systems to support them.

There's no safety net for these human beings who, and our speaker said it nicely, these are our our family members, they're our brothers and our sisters, our neighbors and our friends, our cousins.

They're us.

So I just hope we can make this work and put our heads together and try and make this work rather than just say why it can't work.

Because we can all find that.

But I hope we can just give it our best effort to make this next two-year trial a success.

So Fargo can tell the others around the country, this is what we did, and this is why we did it, and this is what we've learned from it.

And we think it's a good good decision.

Mr.

Kolpak.

Yeah, so uh this really has been a conversation that's been more than two years underway, and it's clear that the engagement center was never meant to stay downtown.

Um, the building was never fit up for the types of programming that it provides, and it's not efficient, and it it needs to move.

And this location um, in the end, and when you look at all of the options we had on the table and anal staff, along with a number of organizations, um, have provided a lot of feedback.

To me, right now, this makes the most sense with a couple caveats.

Number one to Eric, to our assistant city attorney's point.

Um, there is an opt-out option if we do not secure the private funding.

Um, and in two years, and and I will say there is a real urgency for this model as as really a pilot, and and and it is a different approach.

It's truly meant to be uh an a resource and referral center, and it will be adding additional partners from the community in support of this complex work.

It also will be including private funding, which is critical to to making this happen.

And so those are important elements to me.

Um I I will I will end with you know, the city still is very much involved in the coalition to end homelessness.

We have representation that attends those meetings.

That will continue.

Um, you know, seeing the private and local organizational support for this, um, to try something else will be important, but there's true urgency to track and record the data as of the results of this center.

So for those reasons, I will support this for two years with an understanding.

We'll revisit it in two years and see what those results are and make a decision in that two-year part of time.

If we need to relocate it to a different location, we will have that option.

Mr.

Pipgar.

Uh Mr.

Chair, I'll just tell you a few facts.

Uh, first, on page 76, the lease agreement is being signed by the mayor of Fargo.

And so uh it's us on the hook.

For 350,000, that's the rent, and at least a million dollars for the fit up.

Here's the other fact.

So there's four finalists for the convention center.

One of them is Bruhalla, which is literally across the street.

And so if we approve the Bruhalla, uh they'd start construction next spring.

So literally, we would be spending a million dollars on a building that we're gonna move out of.

At the same time, we're building a convention center right across the street.

That's a special kind of stupid.

And and for us to put ourselves on the hook for this uh is inexcusable.

And I hear a lot of hypothetical.

Well, there are some people that are going to pay for it.

That's great, but on page 76, it's the city of Fargo signing this agreement.

And so the taxpayers of Fargo are on the hook.

I'll give you an example.

If I go in for and apply for a car loan and say, you know what, I might have some of my friends pay my car payment for me.

My bank is going to say, get back to me when you show me a legal binding agreement where your friends are going to pay for it.

Otherwise, get the hell out of here.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Mr.

Chair.

Sorry.

Mr.

Turn.

I just want to clarify my my comments that the opt-out option and having that period, if we do not secure funding is one of one of the most important criteria to me.

So there is, if we do not secure the private funding, um, we are not committed to this contract.

We will now vote.

This has uh been a very interesting uh project as we come along.

Brenda Duran, you did a lot of work on it.

John Powell and Jan and all the people who have contributed to this.

I want to thank the public that uh weighed in on this as well.

It's oftentimes hard to find a solution to many of the difficult problems we we face.

And again, this is something which we feel very strongly.

It's a different direction, a different area that we're gonna go into.

We're gonna try to provide services in a better fashion, resource, and referral center.

And we feel we want to try to get something that works that can be duplicated throughout the state.

The state has asked us, the governors asked me as well.

Is there something you can do that's different than what we're doing?

Because what we're doing right now isn't necessarily working.

So is there something else we can do that helps get people into treatment for mental health issues?

It gets them into treatment for addiction.

And this is our our attempt at this, and we'll see how it works out.

And Commissioner Inspirer Kolpack makes a good point.

Commissioner Strand, we'll look at the data and see what it shows.

If it shows that it's working, we'll continue it.

And if it doesn't show that we're working, then we ought to get out of the business.

So this is a good solution, I think.

So roll call vote, please.

Strand.

Yes.

Pull pack, aye.

Pepcorn?

No.

Turnberg?

No.

Mahoney?

Yes.

Item 45, application for property tax exemption on improvements made to buildings.

Do I have a motion?

So moved.

Sir, second.

Second.

Roll call vote, please.

Holpak?

Aye.

Strand?

Yes.

Pepcorn?

Aye.

Turnberg?

Aye.

Mahoney.

Aye.

You have my recommendations for the appointment to Housing Redevelopment Authority.

John, you're on that as these people good.

Yeah, absolutely.

And we reappointing the chair, which is terrific, Mr.

Lear.

So I I advance the motion recommended.

Is there a second?

Second.

Roll call vote, please.

Strand?

Yes.

Colpak?

Hi.

Pepcorn?

Hi.

Turnberg?

Hi.

Mahoney?

Hi.

The liaison commissioner assignment updates.

Commissioner Strand.

No report, Mayor.

Commissioner Kolpak.

I have two updates from the water treatment plant.

Some good news from both sides.

So the North Dakota Water and Pollution Control Conference was held on October 15th.

And Bismarck, Fargo, and Grand Forks placed in the top three.

By the way, Fargo has been in the top three for the last four years with in winning be in a couple of those years, but this year, Grand Forks ultimately took winning place.

Once again, I heard from my friend from Bismarck, Mr.

Kirschman, who works in their water treatment plant, and he was just as proud of Grand Forks as he was for Bismarck last year.

For four years in a row, Fargo tap water has been the oh, here it is, top three sample in the blind water taste test.

And when North Dakota's best tasting water award in 2022 and 2023.

And our by the way, our tap water was runner up in a national water taste competition in 2024.

That doesn't just happen without the dedication and strategic visioning that happens at the water treatment plant.

So congratulations to all of them.

And then one other thing, don't you want to tell people they need to convert?

They are having difficulty getting people signing up to convert to the new wireless uh tap.

Water meter sign-ups.

Yep.

If you've been notified, if you're in the target area, um, please set up that appointment.

I know we're a couple months out now for those appointments, but it's been going very well, actually.

So thank you for that reminder.

And then I'm excited to say, and I shared this also, that the City of Fargo's new water tower has been named Tank of the Year in 2025.

It'll actually now be part of a national calendar.

Um and competing against more than 300 nominations from across North America.

Our new no our new tower earned top honors for its vibrant design, innovation, and craftsmanship.

And the new tower replaces three aging towers, so engineering wise, it makes a significant difference on the water flow and adds a number of efficiencies.

The tank holds two point five million gallons and is the largest in North Dakota.

So here, thank you to all the engineers, designers, artists, painters, builders, city staff, and community members who brought this tank to life.

Congratulations.

Thank you.

So congratulations for contributing to the city of Fargo and our revenue stream.

Appreciate it.

No update.

This is not the first time I've been on the line yet not connected to your audio to speak, just so y'all are aware.

Um, three weeks ago marked two years of genocide in Palestine.

A ceasefire officially went into effect on the 10th.

I'm speaking about this tonight because you are in fact relevant to this conversation, as some members of the commission refused to pass or participate in the vote for a ceasefire resolution last year.

Now that a ceasefire has passed, no thanks to you, Israel is only releasing 2,000 Palestinian hostages, which is under 19% of the Palestinians held in Israeli prisons.

A lot of the bodies of martyred detainees being handed over from the IOF were tortured so badly that they are unidentifiable.

They are also still occupying land in Gaza, and the violence has not stopped.

At least 93 Palestinians have been martyred, and over 320 have been injured since October 10th, according to the Gazan Ministry of Health.

On the 12th, beloved journalist Saleh Hajafrawi was murdered by Israeli-backed gangs.

Sale documented the genocide from day one and he lived to see a ceasefire, only to be shot seven times two days later.

He was only 28 years old.

He is now among at least 251 journalists who have been killed by Israel.

The grief and cruelty is unbearable.

The violence will only continue so long as the U.S.

continues to provide funds and weaponry for Israel's apartheid.

I implore you and everyone listening to pressure our state representatives to cease all funding for Israel due to its many violations of international law.

Over 67,000 people have been killed in this weekend.

220 were added to that total by the Gaza Ministry of Health as they uncover bodies from the rubble.

Israel has yet to let fuel or heavy machinery in, so these bodies are being retrieved by the sheer willpower of Palestinians.

Over 6,700 families have been erased entirely with no surviving members.

Your inaction will haunt you and your children and theirs for the rest of your lives.

Glory to the martyrs.

May they rest in power.

And long live the resistance and long live Palestine.

Thank you.

That's all we have for public comment tonight.

We're adjourned.

Thank you.