00:00:10,370	this commission together tonight, uh, welcome to the first hearing, first meeting of 2026. I’d also like to work in our new Comm James Small. or Jim, I guess he would be known as Jim Jim.

00:00:33,430	And so we’re here to begin with the um uh roll call for, uh, election of office, but we could start with a roll call. Uh, Comm Patrick. Mr. Connelly, Comm Jarrett, Comm Bittner. Comm Patrick Comm Munsen is not here Comm Streifel, Mr. Small. Um, did I get everybody? No. Oh, Comm Connelly. I, sorry, Comm Risch, here OK, and Connelly is here. And sorry, OK, Comm Connelly. No. I’m here twice.

00:01:18,370	Uh, sorry, um, im Commissionerer Patrick, I mean, Agnew Agnew, yes, here. Yeah, I know. Good enough Yeah, yeah. She’s, she’ll be gone till the 20th Maybe, maybe longer. Uh, so we’re gonna have the election of officers. I’d like to see a nomination for, uh, chair. Uh, so we could, uh, entertain an abortion for Chair for 2026. Mr. Patrick. Who seconded? Con.

00:01:56,700	I Ag, Comm Agnew. I second. A. Mitch Yes. I think I would just prefer to remove my name from the chair’s position and maybe remain where I’m at. Oh, OK. OK That’s fine. That’s easy Do we have a, uh, so Agnew was, uh, Comm Jarrett. who seconded that Straiffel.

00:02:39,370	um entertaining another motion another name, no? OK, so we’ll do a roll call. Uh Comm, uh Small, are you in favor of this would be in favor of Chair Patrick to continue for 2026. OK. Agnew. Agnew Edu Agnew, uh, I knew what he meant. So I could be, let’s, let’s go all in favor.

00:03:08,270	I think it would be easier. So. All right. All right, I. All opposed? OK. Congratulations, Mr. Chair. OK. So, I’ll hand it over to, uh, Comm Patrick, chair. Agnew Agnew Jiminy. Either way, just don’t call me late for lunch. Yeah, all right, uh, I would like to, uh, I’d like to open nominations for vice chair.

00:03:34,330	I like to nominate uh Comm Patrick. OK. Uh Mr. McP Patrick, do you accept OK? All right. Any further nominations? OK, hearing none. Can I entertain a motion for unanimous ballot. Go moved. Second All right, all in favor of unanimous ballot. All right.

00:04:01,100	All Any opposition? All right. Can. Yes, sir. I just want to. Uh, yes. I just want to explain the reason that I with you because I am going to have a shoulder surgery coming up, and that’s gonna, Mess you up. Yeah Yeah. So. Well, good luck. Yeah. That’s only a month Well, we hope, right Yeah, it’s actually two months.

00:04:19,530	OK. We will move into the, uh, approval of the December 10th meeting, 2025 minutes. They are in our packet. I’ll move there. their approval All set. OK. It has been moved and seconded for approval of the December 10th, uh, 2025 minutes. All in favor. Say aye. Hi. Any opposition? Hearing none. Minutes are approved.

00:04:45,900	OK. We have come to the, uh, portion of the agenda where we will entertain public comment. So if anyone would have public comment, uh, please come to the lectern and uh let us know. And uh please let us know who you are. I think most people know me. My name’s Robert Field.

00:05:09,370	And I was reading through you know, some of the proposed changes to zoning How many people sitting here know where a woman hides her Areola. Do I see hands OK, one hides Areola. That’s in your in your ordinance It talks about sodomy, it talks about masturbation.

00:05:49,000	Now, not to point out the obvious, because I see some of you guys look kind of shocked. That means you didn’t read it. That means you should never pass it. I mean, you look at it, I sit on the city planning and zoning. Now the city has a lot of rules I disagree with there.

00:06:08,370	But it, it seems like we’ve even gone further down, uh, insane path. I mean, I got 30 pages in. and I realized I had to quit reading it or I’d have to call 911 because my head was going so far up my butt, I couldn’t breathe. So whoever made that obviously didn’t realize you’re a rural county.

00:06:30,070	And with that being said, I don’t think anybody on county zoning or the county commission should live in the city limits. because of the fact that the people in the county are the ones eating it. I see that I went from 10 chickens though to 30,000. Can anybody explain that one I can have 30,000 chickens now with a stroke of approval.

00:06:51,370	That’s total insanity So I think whoever proposed this should have to read all 95 pages publicly on camera for the public. because there’s no sanity to it You don’t have a strip joint in Burleigh County.

00:07:17,530	But if you were going to say we want to act sane and allow a strip joint what would be reasonable A couple miles from a school, a couple miles from a daycare, not next door to a church or a mosque. OK it could be out in the middle of nowhere but this zoning makes no sense not for rural county. If you guys wanna make Burleigh County, Bismarck.

00:07:38,370	Fire everybody on the county zoning and just hand it over to Bismarck. because that’s what this does And I guaranteed no one’s read this whole thing. You read enough of it. But you missed the, uh, OK, well, where the woman hides that it’s a dark spot around her nipple.

00:08:00,230	but I knew I’d catch everybody on that one cause it shocked me when I seen it in there. So, we will, uh, just a, just a 11 thought here is that, you know, we’re gonna, we will be having a hearing on, on that in the hearing portion.

00:08:12,000	So I, I mean if you want to speak on it there too, you sure can. Uh, what do you think you can publicly have somebody read the whole thing on camera? I don’t believe we’re going to do that, but, uh, yes, if, uh, if someone uh would like to, uh, has any issue with it, they can bring it up in the hearing, absolutely.

00:08:27,470	But that would seem reasonable because not everybody has access to it. You aren’t printing the whole thing in the Tribune. So how, you know there’s people that don’t have Internet I mean I do, obviously. So how do you inform the public? Can they call you and order a printed copy? Mr. Chair, for, uh, yes, Mitch.

00:08:54,100	The the agenda is public published on our website if you have internet. Yeah, and they, we also have copies at our office for anybody to come pick it up. OK. Well, I suggest a lot of people should get it and read it.

00:09:11,270	but I think there’s a more common, a lot more common sense approach to zoning than matching the city. Thank you Is there anyone else who would like to, uh, have any input on the public comment section? Anyone else OK, we will move into the consent agenda for the uh Coomer ranch subdivision.

00:09:49,730	and uh is there any uh I guess we should, uh, let’s, let’s go, go into this and we’ll uh we’ll take a look at it. And if you could give us the details of it, Mitch. Comm, this is a, um, recommend approval for a uh preliminary plat for the Coerce subdivision. It is an uh 5 acre outlaw of a 40-acre 40 acre parcel on Pleasant View Road.

00:10:12,800	The um legal description is lot C block 00. C and E E estate subdivision. This is an Apple Creek Township. They do recommend approval. Um don’t have a very good, uh um attachment on 6.1.2, you can barely see it. The 5 acres is, is a little northeast corner of that 40 acres. It’s uh this is for a recommendation for a public hearing.

00:11:01,230	So to entertain a motion for approval. OK? Any questions for, uh, for Mitch at all? OK. Uh, any discussion or, uh, action we would like to take on this? Motion to schedule a public hearing Thank you, doc. OK. There’s been a motion for a public hearing from Comm Bittner, seconded by Comm Connelly.

00:11:28,470	Uh, any discussion on the motion Hearing none, uh, all in favor? Any opposition? Hearing none The, uh, Coomer Ranch subdivision will move to public.

00:11:59,970	Thank you, Mitch OK, we will move into the public hearing portion of the agenda on 7/1, we have the Amendment 21 for floodplain District, and that is a, uh, uh, one pager on page 10 of our, of our agenda. Right, Mr. Excuse me 2 pages, yes. Yeah, this was presented at last, um, the, uh, December meeting. No changes were proposed, so it’s kept the same, no differences.

00:12:21,870	So it’s basically a, a preamble at the beginning of our floodplain ordinances that have been uh handed down from Department of Water Resources. So All right. Any questions for Mitch before we open the public hearing? OK, seeing none. Thank you, Mitch. We will open the public hearing to talk about the Amendment 21 floodplain District.

00:12:47,270	If anyone would like to speak in this public hearing, please approach the lectern and let us know who you are, where you’re from, and sign in. Anyone like to speak in this hearing? And last call to speak at the public hearing regarding Amendment 21 floodplain District. See none, we will close the public hearing and move into action and action and decision on this amendment. Yeah.

00:13:19,470	Comm Small Well, I realize I’m kind of late to the party, but I, I, I guess I’m not sure what I’m looking at here. what changes or what’s different or or I don’t know anything about this, so I Yeah, and I educate I guess I, uh, Mitch, if you could and I, I, it’s basically

00:13:45,100	stating that the legislator of legislature of North Dakota and the century code tittle 40 has delegated responsibilities to jurisdictions of local governments to adopt regulations designed to promote public health, safety, and a general warfare of its citizenry. It’s basically a, a preamble, like I said to our Article 21 flood plan ordinances.

00:14:08,100	It’s a big very beginning and so it’s, uh, we didn’t have that in the front of it, apparently there are legal staff, uh, created this and sent this out to all the jurisdictions in North Dakota. So this doesn’t really change anything. No. Our Article 21 stays exactly the same. That’s right.

00:14:29,730	It just adds the, adds the underlined, uh, verbiage. The rest of this book No, no, just, just these two pages. Yeah, yeah. It’s on the, on this page. Correct. Yeah. OK. Thank you. Thank you for clarifying. All right. Any discussion or action on the uh on this uh. Amendment 21 flood floodplain District.

00:15:09,470	Yes to Yes to the Coy Commission Yes to? Correct. OK, so moved. Yes. All right. Comm Streifel has, uh, has a, a motion on the table for the motion on the floor, excuse me, to uh send the Amendment 21 floodplain District, uh, with the, a do approve uh recommendation to the county Commission.

00:15:30,870	Is there a second? OK, seconded by Comm Rich. Any discussion on the motion Uh yeah, Comm Patrick Mitch, I have a question, or just a comment The comment is on page 17 It’s just a typo, uh, which I caught when I read through this thing at home.

00:15:49,530	Oh, this is just on, this is just on the floodplain district. Just, just this one. I’m sorry. Yeah. Any discussion on the motion? OK, we will go into a roll call vote, Mitch, if, uh, you could walk us through roll call vote on on approval of Amendment 21 Floodplain District for a due approval or a due pass

00:16:11,070	recommendation to the county Commission. OK, Mr. Patrick Yes. Comm Connelly? Yes. Comm Jett? Yes. Comm Bittner? Yes. Comm, um, I say Jarrett Hardy? Yes, you just did. Uh, Comm Munsen. you’re not here Mr. Rich? Yes. Comm Streifel. Yes. Comm Small? Yes. Comm Agnew. Yes. OK. Right.

00:16:43,470	Uh, Amendment 21 flood plain discharge, uh, goes to the county commission where they do pass recommendation. We’ll move into our second hearing of the night and this is, uh, amendments, uh, amendments to Article 357, 10, and 13.

00:17:02,730	and Mitch you could kind of step a surge, uh, give us a little bit of information of, uh, uh, why we’re considering this, and we will then open the hearing. OK I, uh, don’t like creating ordinances for no reasons at all. Honestly, to, to, uh, to limit the amount of ordinances we have. But we’ve been tasked through um a change in our jurisdictional areas, uh, basically the transfer areas of the city of Bismarck, the ETA.

00:17:41,630	Everything in the hatch, the, I don’t know if you can see the red hatched areas. Um, that was former ETA area of the city of Bismarck is now in our jurisdiction. There’s 310 subdivisions that were developed. uh, and they were all developed to the city of Bismarck standards. not a rural standards.

00:18:07,730	and so we are at the position of having to adopt ordinance that match what they’re they’ve been approved. Otherwise, every, every house, every subdivision, every person’s private residence is gonna be out of conformance with Burleigh County, uh ordinances. So we are tasked with adopting urban standards and that’s what these are all about.

00:18:38,270	We copied most of, most of the red yellow are, are out of. the city of Bismarck’s ordinances with some changes that that I’ve made to match more of the Burleigh County standards.

00:19:05,370	So beginning with the first draft Ordinance 2603 is definitions, all the highlighted areas are new, are going to be added to the Article 3 So the um anything that is in is not highlighted is in, in our already in our ordinances. and the purpose of definitions are so that you do not make a mistake And also, if there is a violation or there’s something is out of conformance you have something that can be defined.

00:19:28,900	Now, the gentleman that had spoken earlier about some of the anatomical definitions. Well, that is the reason for that is because you have to enforce our regulations for some of these if somebody’s conducting that type of business. we have an enforcement, we have the defined offense or whatever that they’re doing wrong. We have it defined.

00:19:53,430	and that’s the purpose of that So the past that every, if you have any questions on any of these pages anything that’s highlighted, I can certainly go through each one of them. They are not in our current ordinances, but not in our current definitions. They do assist in expanding these definitions in case something comes up within this urban area.

00:20:14,870	Um, Mitchitch just a, just a quick question. Our, our, our ordinances, are they, they’re not retroactive though. So anything that is in place, I don’t, I don’t believe, uh, anything that is in place now wouldn’t necessarily have to be in compliance. It would anything be anything going forward, Crate rate or to correct me if I’m wrong here.

00:20:36,630	Well, it’s, it’s already been approved. You’re talking about the areas in the ETA, right? Yeah, they’ve already been approved, basically, they’re, they’re nonconforming unless we adopt these. And then we have a problem.

00:20:57,600	What if somebody wants to work in that subdivision, put an addition on their house, and we have just uh a rural uh our our subdivision with different setbacks with differing uh lot coverages with different size, heights, all that, right, right, I guess the root of my question is, is say if, uh, if, if none of this changed and none of the highlighted was adopted.

00:21:14,900	You couldn’t go back to anything that was in place and say, well, you’re not conforming now, you need to change this or that. It, it’s not retroactive, correct? No, absolutely not. OK, that’s, that’s what I wanted to be C clear on. Unless it, unless it’s a violation. which there are violations that we’re going to inherit because of this. Sure, yeah, Comm Bitner, yeah, I should.

00:21:32,800	go into a little bit of detail about why we’re doing this and how we got here. Um the point with, with looking at city ordinances that applies to things that were under the city ordinances to begin with is we want to make sure that there’s no harm to citizens that like, say, built a house under

00:21:54,100	this set of ordinances versus the county ordinances. So we’re going to try to find some sort of balance between them. And that’s what our job is, and I don’t think we’re going to accomplish it completely tonight. Um, because there’s some things that are, are going to play into this.

00:22:15,100	Um For example, if changing the county zoning ordinances and adding this to it. then without some of the other action, and I would suggest the action is to limit it to the existing map but a whole bunch of stuff that has never impacted Coy jurisdiction would suddenly get impact.

00:22:37,370	So we got to make very sure that we’re not um stepping on, on the other ordinances while we’re trying to help here. So, um, you know, the, the definitions and whatnot um, I think, um, Comm Patrick pointed out something and we’ll have to get into the, into the details, but the point is to try to make sure that the

00:23:00,870	citizens that have a house that was under the city jurisdiction stays like it was you know, because we want to be fair and and whatnot, because there is some differences But I think having them match, as long as we’re not applying that outside because I think there’s a whole bunch of township residents and whatnot that would

00:23:22,230	kind of scream bloody murder, and I don’t think we want that, OK? It’s a little bit of background. Yeah. No, I appreciate that. Thank you. Uh, any other questions for Mitch? Yeah, Comm Rich.

00:23:40,330	Yeah, Mitch, uh, during the ETA discussions, the Bismarck, you know, explained that we’re revamping our ordinances to make them more in line with county ordinances, so they’re similar because we have some more restrictive ones. So how’s that going to play out if we take the city existing city ordinance, and we’re gonna have to go back and, uh, redo this again after the city um. their new ordinances would not affect these transfer areas. Oh, right, they wouldn’t be, you’re crack.

00:24:01,230	But as long as you’re on that subject, and, and I’d like to give you a little heads up on that, Comm. Um I talked, I had a conversation with Mitch earlier today regarding there was one section that I think was pointed out with the city information during our meetings that unlike an acre and a half lot.

00:24:22,000	the size restriction for an accessory building, I thought was different between the county and the city. and in that case, the county’s 4%. So, you know, if, if you’re just adopting the 4% that the county has, the city actually had a higher square foot number.

00:24:50,330	in the, in the city ordinances than the counties at that one little point. you know, that acorn, I think it was like an acre and a half. Yeah. And so, um, I would, I would urge caution with going backwards because one of the things we’ve noticed, and of course I’ve been on the city planning and zoning Commission since January of 2008.

00:25:10,730	that people aren’t um opposed to the ordinances, but a lot of people have come in and requested a special use permit for an oversized accessory structure. And so I think we both, as, as commissions need to look at upping that um that that size because flat out people have more toys.

00:25:33,630	You’ve got more camper, more boat, more ATVs, uh, snow removal equipment and all that that um, I, I think we should be looking at up in that size because we, we have never denied a special use permit for an over oversized accessory building. And I think somebody coming in and having to make, I don’t know, what is this $750 permit request.

00:25:56,530	It’s just I mean, because we recognize the need for larger buildings because it’s absolutely in our best interest for people to preserve their campers, their boats, their everything, because it preserves investment and preserves property value and the whole thing. And plus it makes yards look so much nicer than they’re nice and clean, so.

00:26:16,330	Mr. Chair, can I follow up on it on page 42, we’ve got it yellowed and red, so I think it’s new, but it’s not the same as the city, and it refers to that 4% you’re, you’re talking about com Comm Bitner. I think the city inside city limits, we allow like 35%. building coverage on a city lot.

00:26:37,100	Does that sound right, Mitch? 35%. No, that may be the total coverage of the lot. Right. Yeah, these, these, that figure on page 35 is, is, or 342, page 42. 4, OK, 40, that’s for the accessory building lot cover. Sure, sure. It’s 4%, OK.

00:26:56,100	But I, I, I, I mean, I’m with Comm Bittner here. If somebody wants to build a bigger building, an accessory building happens to be 6%. What do we care? Right? Yeah. I mean, I don’t know why we want to grab these art arbitrary small percentages stick them in here. I, I agree with you, Comm.

00:27:16,630	Um, that, that was a point in me bringing it up is that um, a 4% you know, I’d have to do some math, but 4% on an acre and a half really isn’t a very big building. You know, and I’m asking myself what difference does it make? What size that person’s building is.

00:27:36,700	It doesn’t bother me. I mean, generally speaking, like, like just take my yard, for example. Just completely, I mean, it’s, it’s surrounded. I’m so far enough off the road that anything that’s not surrounded by trees, which is pretty much all of it. You can’t see the building anyway.

00:27:56,100	I mean, if, if I could afford to build a you know, whatever size building, what who gets hurt you know I think that there are restrictions that are part of covenants in some subdivisions that can apply and can answer that for those specific communities that are, you know, the subdivisions that have those type of covenants.

00:28:18,000	And other than that, I mean, if you’re out here and you’ve got a uh uh you know, whatever acreage I mean you know, I mean you should be set back from the property line a little bit, so fire trucks can get around there and all that. I think that’s appropriate.

00:28:39,270	However you know, All right. Any other questions for Mitch or yeah, Comm Rich. Chair, I got another question. It, it just kind of jumped out of me on page Hm, I don’t know, doesn’t have a page number on it. It’s got, has to do with the bicycle racks. and almost a full definitions? Huh? Under definitions? Yeah.

00:28:56,500	It no, reductions and exemptions, bicycle racks, mix-use parking. Draft number one, it doesn’t have a page number on it. It’s more towards the back. Let’s see, what’s. But anyway, we have more than a page of specifications on bicycle racks, and I’m going, that’s. What’s with that? Yeah. Again. It’s, it just seems excessive.

00:29:19,100	Is that what the city is? for bicycle rags? Mr. Chair, yes. Yeah, yeah, go ahead. Yeah. Yeah, because I think you said any, most anything or most of the stuff that’s yellow is from the city ordinance, right? We are now in urban area.

00:29:38,530	This is not for the city of Baldwin This uh this entire the all these changes of the purpose of these areas in the ETA. There’s uh 9 districts in there.

00:29:55,170	that we don’t have Yeah, I, I’m not, excuse me, can I follow up I’m, I’m not blaming you, Mitch, but I’m just looking at this and as a city Comm, we need to address this bicycle rack issue. uh do not require to lift user to lift a bicycle. Do not bend wheels or damage other bicycle parts. Do not contain a protruding elements or sharp edges.

00:30:17,000	Uh it just goes on and on and on about this bicycle rack, and I don’t, you know, it just seems ridiculous Yeah, I think I, I’ve lived here, I’m sorry. Oh, go ahead. Yeah. I’ve lived here most of my life, you know, I’ve never seen a bike rack out in the country. either, you know Yeah, so, um do it.

00:30:35,270	Yeah, if anybody, so anybody’s got any questions for Mitch, uh, before we, before we actually open the hearing, yeah, ooster Sreifel, yep. Um, Mitch, can you clarify what we’re looking at? Anything that’s highlighted is poss the possibility of its city and it’s possibly gonna be added to the urban area of our ordinances, is that what the yellow is and then

00:30:57,800	there’s some yellow with a line through it, what’s with that and then what’s with the red and highlighted. What’s the difference in in those things. OK. The strikethroughs, oh the yellow, that I highlighted that yellow strike through on the first section accessory bills.

00:31:21,630	That was the original of the uh our original Burleigh County ordinances. The first section, but I moved them to different articles, in different sections in the same article. For instance, H through uh H um all the way up to Jay was moved to Section 2.2. C. Section J down to 8 uh J2 was moved from to Section 2 item 2E.

00:31:45,630	So So the, so the, yeah, I, we, so the this is pretty serious. The red, uh, the red text. That’s, that’s a comment from me. Oh, OK. what’s new. Got you. Say that again.

00:32:06,100	The red, if it’s red, uh, uh, that’s a comment for, uh, it’d be open for discussion, uh, for instance, on page 41, you see it next on, on, uh, the drip, 40. I have 41 it says moved, moved to home occupancy occupation. I get that part, but then flip the page to 42. and at the bottom to see that’s not a comment, that’s a that’s something else. Yeah. But it’s, yeah, it’s the red, redex highlighted yellow.

00:32:32,100	That, that, that highlights the for um the 4% of the accessory buildings. That is, that is in this new section. OK. And then the one about customary, uh, customary, uh, domestic pets. That one is on the next page. That one is. That is to be determined. That’s. Uh, that, that’s, those.

00:32:50,900	That’s something that I, I want those open for, for discussion. Oh, OK. OK. Those are ones that are. Yeah. But we really. That you potentially want to look at some changes on. Yeah, I made some open discussion to be determined is what I put on that. OK. Thank you.

00:33:06,800	Any other questions? Yeah, Comm Connelly. Well, and part of this is, is that the, OK, the 95% of the residential dwellings that are going back to the county, but then there was a motion at the city commission when all 10 of us were there that um, the cities’s also going to

00:33:26,600	make the 5% remaining, they want those ordinances to be the same, so they’re treated equally as we continue to evolve this discussion down the road. and I’ve been in discussion with some state um representatives so we can answer the question of regulation with representation. I’ve talked to Comm Bittner about that, so.

00:33:49,000	this is an ever evolving thing that we’re trying to be the first community to answer that question that a lot of the citizens in both the county and the city have been asking for for a long time. Would that be fair? Um-hum. First Cha? Absolutely, absolutely. OK.

00:34:11,000	Uh, I think we’re, we’re good on questions for you, Mitch. Uh, thanks for clarifying some of these things just so we know how to, how to, uh, how to think about them, how to address them. Right. And, uh, if we have nothing else, we will now, um, oh, yeah, Comm, uh, Comm Small, yes.

00:34:25,900	So, in here, how do you, how, how do we make changes to these or? Yeah, so, we’ll, we will, uh, we’ll end up opening the hearing. Uh, we’ll hear from the public and then once we actually close the hearing, then we’ll actually move into discussion and action and any changes, proposals, anything

00:34:43,630	like that that we, uh, uh, wanna do, so we’ll have to, we’ll have to do that after the hearing. Well, are we going to need a hearing after we’re done with it, though? Um-hum. There will be, have to be that also. Yeah, there’ll have to be another. Yeah.

00:34:53,530	Cause I’m hearing right now, that, I mean, this. Yeah. This will, this will be the initial hearing. Yeah, absolutely. OK. OK. Well, we will, uh, open the public hearing and, uh, so if anyone would like to speak uh, regarding any of these, uh, changes to, I get flipped back here.

00:35:14,370	Changes or amendments, excuse me, to Article 357, 10, and 13 as specified in the packet. Oh, excuse me, N19 as specified in the packet, uh, please approach lectern, tell us who you are, where you’re from, and, uh, sign in.

00:35:44,430	Hello, I’m Robert Field again, and I would sign in, but as most of the county meetings I go to, there’s nothing to sign in on, and I don’t want to scratch the counter. Bring it on paper next time. Well, it’s the same every time. I mean, I’ve gotten the Comm several times on that one.

00:36:07,500	And I’m usually like the 5th person to speak, and they all just don’t tell them there’s no paper up here. Yeah, we’re just looking for your signature, you know. So. For later. Yeah. You know, I read through a lot of that. Yeah. And, and I can appreciate that some of it’s highlighted. but I challenge any one of you to show me an alleyway out in the county.

00:36:27,000	It’s in your ordinance This whole thing should be chucked in the circular file This isn’t protecting the public from anything It’s showing inordinate ignorance. because most of this does not apply to anybody that lives 5 miles out of town. And that’s back to my comment earlier. There needs to be a separation between the city and the county.

00:36:53,730	The reason we move out of town isn’t because it’s cheaper. You go out of town and buy 16 acres. but yet we fought the ETA issue to get out of the city.

00:37:18,270	Now we turn around and buffoons want us to adopt all the same rules as a city Well then put us back in the city I mean how is that any different? But I challenge anybody to read that whole packet. and take notes and then come back here and say intellectually this is a brilliant transcript of what we should do to the public I. I wish George Carlin was still alive. He would read this and say, obviously birth control has failed.

00:37:46,000	because whoever wrote that doesn’t believe in freedom at all. Only weak men restrict other men You’ll never have a biker walk up to you and tell you what to do. He believes in your freedom It’s the weaklings in society. that want to control every aspect of your life.

00:38:12,730	and you can let that sink in as you read that. And that is the truth So hopefully you give enough time that the public gets to see this because I guarantee they don’t know these ordinances even exist.

00:38:39,900	Otherwise, this place would be overflowing to the to the street and I encourage everybody that walked, you know, the 6 people that watched this video. to call and get a printed copy of it. We might hit 10, but it usually isn’t very high. reruns of mod get a better calling than these uh county meetings. All right, are there any questions for Robert? Yeah, be or Mr. Streifel, excuse me, Mr.

00:39:07,330	Field, what would you suggest at this point? that we do I would say you need to have a citizen’s group sit and look at the entirety of it Forget the fact that some of it’s red and some of it’s yellow. I mean, I didn’t read the entire thing because I was thoroughly frustrated believing we even have this.

00:39:28,530	But there’s probably a spot in there where if you you know, are driving your car and you see a horse, you have to hide behind a bush and not honk your Horn. I mean. in Boston that’s still a regulation That’s probably why you don’t see horses in Boston anymore. so I mean.

00:39:47,700	most of that makes no sense for Burleigh County as a county. As the city, yes, but that’s where we’re getting polluted. We’re taking city guys and putting them on county boards. Well they shouldn’t be making decisions for people that live past city limits.

00:40:14,900	and to say that the people that just got out of the ETA under this agreement. will still follow city rules that’s, that’s asinine, that’s ridiculous. You should grandfather everybody up to the day of the agreement if they want to build something new, then they have to follow the county rules. but to think you need to empower more rules Makes no sense whatsoever.

00:40:40,530	but bureaucrats like to justify their job So if we make more regulations we have to hire more of them, where I’m of the opposite opinion. I think we should make them show us their hands, and every single one that doesn’t have at least one callus should be fired. We would have so much office space we could lease out most of the government buildings.

00:41:00,370	but that’s my opinion of what we should do with it. have the public look at it and come back and say these are all just garbage because this is for the whole county. This isn’t for the little, you know, strip around Bismarck.

00:41:27,000	I mean, this goes clear to steelle up to Wilton I mean it’s a big area and you’re restricting how many cattle you can feed in there. What the hell’s that about I thought we were an egg community but that’s in there. That’s how I got 30,000 chickens now. I mean, not that I do, but holy balls. So yeah, I think it the the whole thing should be redone. because somebody copy and pasted.

00:41:55,330	something that didn’t even apply to this county. I mean, to put this in perspective we have engine brake signs out on 66th, and this is back to incompetence. they’re in the acceleration lane not the deceleration lane.

00:42:19,500	Anybody that’s ever seen a semi come up to a stop sign when you’re coming up to the stop sign, you turn on the engine brake. When you leave the stop sign, you don’t run the engine brake. Where do we have the signs? The wrong side of the road. So you hear him run the Jake very constantly there. Well, there’s no sign saying they can’t.

00:42:36,700	It’s saying they can’t do it while they’re accelerating I mean, seriously we have things like that we can’t function or get right and we’re worried about adding more regulations. Let’s get better at what we’re doing now. just leave people alone Anybody here ever watched the documentary on the Killdozer? You should watch it.

00:43:11,700	That started as a planning and zoning enforcement They told him he had to do sewer and water and it was going to cost them a ton of money. Then they started finding him per day. and then he bought the biggest kabatsu bulldozer he could.

00:43:27,800	And then he drove it into Grant Gambi, Colorado and pushed down every house and every business of everybody on the council and the zoning. Smash the town flat That’s the truth. Everybody should watch that. When you have regulations and you push people, and you push it’s like when you’re little kids which I’m older than some of you Well, I know.

00:43:53,370	but when I was a kid, the big thing was you’d shove the other kid down and start tapping on his chest. Well, I tell you what, they didn’t get more than 5 taps and I was swinging. Well, that’s the thing that zoning seems to be doing more and more in the country is just coming up and just can’t leave people alone.

00:44:12,000	you know, like your oversized buildings in the ETA. Why don’t, you know, how many of those have we heard in the last year? A lot. And we know its an extra 700 bucks, but nobody steps in and fixes it.

00:44:31,970	That’s a violation to the citizen but we’re all complacent, well, except for me, everybody that knows me knows I’m gonna show up and say something. Any questions? Any more questions for Robert? Yeah, Comm Rich, yes, Mr. Chair Robert, you weren’t beaten up on the city guys being on the county zoning Commission, but you’re a county Guy sitting on the city’s zoning commission.

00:44:47,800	How does that once, once that red line disappears, I won’t be. Oh, OK, OK. I was put on there because you guys are pushing us around in the ETA. So, as a city Guy, I’m not a big fan of, of a lot of rules. I don’t like a lot of rules. I like liberty.

00:45:02,730	I like people to be able to do what they want as long as they’re not affecting their neighbor. That, that’s my philosophy on it. So let’s, let me just set the record straight on this. But I want to ask you about this one.

00:45:17,730	For the purpose of calculating the number of horses allowed under this section section of miniature horse shall be deemed the equivalent of 0.66 of a horse. Is that OK with you? Well, I, I really think it’s still a horse. I mean, I can’t imagine riding a horse that’s only 2/3.

00:45:33,170	I don’t even know how you put a saddle on something that have three legs or does it just have 1.5 or you heard of the beforelowhead. Yeah. Yeah, I, I mean, things like that are truly ridiculous. I forgetting into the weeds. You know, but. um, I still think we can do way better.

00:45:55,100	and I still think you have to think about the people that live 50 miles out you know, the, the difference in ordinance, if I wanted to build a big building in Bismarck or the ETA, they want a crossst pudding, they want 16 on center, they want a concrete floor. If I’m gonna park my tractor in there. I don’t need a concrete floor.

00:46:11,100	If I’m gonna let a cow run around in there. I don’t need a concrete floor. So just the difference in the two ordinances right there is going to add 100,000 in the build of your building. so are we gonna adopt that ordinance too, so every farmer can’t build a poul barn anymore.

00:46:30,330	I mean, where do you stop That’s true. Comm Bitner. some really good points, but um, one of, one of the things that I want to point out is, is that I think I mentioned earlier that we don’t want I don’t want this going any further than what was already

00:46:51,630	existing, and that has to do with the map that, that we were showing earlier. And my goal um, in my position is that this is not going to apply to anything that it didn’t apply to before. Now, I don’t know how we get there, and that’s my point in bringing it up.

00:47:08,170	is the, the citizens in the ETA. were already under this. This is not a new thing, and that’s my concern and why, why I’m making a big deal out of it is so that we can um make those kind of corrections that are needed and, and do away with the fluff and the stuff.

00:47:27,470	but I don’t want to see it go. enlarging it to, to, you know, we have, we have a lot of areas in Burleigh County that are have nothing to do with the ETA.

00:47:47,270	And I can’t imagine putting a whole bunch of regulations like the thing with cows and chickens and whatnot on somebody out and you know, yeah, and I don’t, I don’t think that’s our goal. So we’re, I think we’re all, uh, I think this com this Commission understands exactly what you’re saying, and I want to thank you for coming in and Well, but I, I think a lot of the, the past history is a

00:48:08,170	problem too, though. It ain’t just what’s highlighted. Right. I mean, there’s no reason to describe sodomy and and areolas and everything else and our building. zoning Yeah. I mean, what, what’s the purpose in that? Good point. You know, so you start reading through there, you go.

00:48:26,600	and this is public, I mean, a little kid could go online and read this. You really need to explain sodomy and masturbation and which is in there I’ve never heard of planning and zoning being concerned with masturbation. That is really stepping out of the venue.

00:48:47,530	I mean, if we’re gonna go that far, I’m going to say what I’ve said before. We should not allow one more church to be built. because the only thing that churches draw are sinners.

00:49:08,270	So that makes perfect sense that if we’re going to be worried about everything else we can’t do churches now If not, tell me what who goes to a church if they aren’t sinners. So we can be as ridiculous as we want to be. or we can be realistic.

00:49:26,370	I mean, in my opinion, if my neighbor on the left and my neighbor on the right, I have the highway in the front a river in the back If the two neighbors next to me don’t care what I build. I should have to build it to code. I should have to get a permit and that’s it You don’t need to worry about my 0.66 of a horse.

00:49:47,870	How’s that got to do with zoning? I mean, it’s just, it’s like we’ve tried to put everything in the zoning Any additional questions for Robert? Uh, yeah, Comm Sreifel. Mr. Field, in defense of the commission here, we did not come up with this. This just got sat in front of us. Um, and we’ve had it for about 9 days, so.

00:50:13,530	um, I agree that we do have a lot of properties in Burleigh County that are out of conformity right now that our grandfathered in. um, and we don’t do anything to go out there and search down problems and find out what we should fix and what we should leave alone, so.

00:50:30,470	I wish that we could back this truck up and have some sort of group that could have got together and went through this and compared compared things and made notes and figured out what what should have been put in front of a public hearing before it was. But we’re here now, so. Yeah, Comm Bitner there is nothing stopping us from doing that. Right, that’s possible.

00:50:46,530	Nothing whatsoever. Um, I, I really got to hand it to the members of this board and, and, and Bob, and the, you know, the conversations are, are very important, and I think from working with this board as long as I have it as well as the City Planning Commission. We’re making good progress along those lines.

00:51:03,070	And I think the notion of trying to combine or, or make the city and the county more closely, you know, the size differences and all of those things all makes sense.

00:51:23,000	I do think, like I said earlier, it’s too much for us to hammer out here in one, in one meeting at one night, you know, because I’ve had it for the same amount of time. I actually had it earlier than you guys did because it was sent to me by staff, but I haven’t had a chance to read the whole thing either, and I’m a speed reader.

00:51:39,870	so I’m not prepared to I mean, obviously this is a public hearing and I want to hear what anybody else has to say on it, um, but I’m not prepared to move forward with anything at this point. Thank you. Oh yeah, Comm Connelly. This has been a good discussion all the way through, because of what we mentioned before.

00:52:04,530	A lot of citizens have asked they want regulation with representation. This, when we originally brought up the conversations when the initial meeting for the Educational piece, cause a lot of people, even on the commissions, didn’t totally understand what the ETA. conversation was and even I didn’t know when they brought up the history of it.

00:52:25,870	I knew about the authority being established in 1975. I knew about the governance being presented in 1977. 1977’s, you know, when I think of that year, that’s two things. That’s the first time Star Wars came out and I was 6.

00:52:48,270	That’s a lot of history, a lot of ordinances and things that built up in governments usually they add more, they don’t generally decrease. So this is an opportunity to where we can go back and revamp a lot of things, and we’ve made some progress in that. The home occupation, even in the city, where the lightest 1 in 5 states now, and that was a 97 to 9 month process and it wasn’t very comfortable.

00:53:08,630	So by having the uncomfortable civil discourse Hopefully we’re starting to get it right, where maybe other communities, they can struggle and I’m OK with being the lead sled dog in that regard. So we’ll be you look at what you just said, you know, just standing here looking at the.

00:53:30,430	assembly Do we have anybody from um Sterling that sits on the board? No. Good Moffatt They’re not in our jurisdiction But if you look at the other cities that are in Burleigh County. we always connect the City of Bismarck and Burleigh County. We don’t include the rural towns. So.

00:53:56,630	you know, you think about it, that isn’t equal representation to the people that are out. We just know Bismarck’s the biggest town. and that’s what we connect to. but the county is way bigger than just Bismarck. Yeah, Comm Strael, if you watched the last few, uh, uh, planning and zoning meetings, I have been begging people from outside the ETA to come and apply.

00:54:20,630	to sit on this commission and I think part of the problem is is we haven’t had a whole lot of those people apply. to sit on this commission So we will, we are very un re p re s ent ed for lack of better words.

00:54:37,100	um for people who live outside the ETA for a while, there was just 2 of us, 2 out of 9 So I do agree with that, but part of the problem is we don’t have the applications. Or you could go over all the centers hang out and talk to them on Sunday, maybe we can get one.

00:54:54,170	Any other questions for Robert? OK, seeing none, I appreciate the feedback. Thank you. Have a good night. Anyone else like to speak on this, uh, in this public hearing regarding amendments to Article 357, 1013, and which one did I missing 1417, 7, 19. Anyone else like to speak in this public hearing.

00:55:28,430	All right, before we close the public hearing, uh, just seeing how few people that we’ve had turn out, uh, how large are our book is in front of us of all these changes. Uh, I would like to entertain a motion to continue this hearing to our next meeting. So. OK.

00:55:48,170	Alright, is there any discussion on the motion, I guess, is there anyone that would like to uh, have any, any things that we would like to have, uh, in addition to this at our uh at our next meeting if we’re going to continue this or is this, is this enough for us,

00:56:07,000	Comm Connelly, yeah Comm Comm Connelly, yeah. Good, Fisher. Well, I was actually going to ask Comm Bitner, is this something that’s you discuss at a county commission to what a committee might look like in order to develop it out.

00:56:27,730	Can it be something that you reach out to the outskirts a little differently versus here at the planning and zoning. What’s the most appropriate way? Well, uh, actually, I had a conversation with Mitch about that earlier. Um, to, to get this information out to the townships, for example.

00:56:52,270	because as you know and as everybody should know, Burleigh County does not have zoning jurisdiction in those individual little towns or in most of the townships in Burleigh County. Most of the townships in Burleigh County have retained their own zoning ordinances, so nothing that we do would apply to them anyway, and I don’t want to see us expanding like I’ve said, um, zoning ordinances into the

00:57:14,630	unorganized townships, I don’t know whether 9 of them or something. We, we have jurisdiction in 1616. Yeah. OK, so a lot of the total number you know, we have jurisdiction in 16, but I don’t think anybody from those townships is interested in us doing, um, talking about chickens and

00:57:34,430	I, I think that would be a gross overreach on our part, and I think we’d have a lot of trouble because of it Um, but we have, I have asked Mitch to get this information out to the townships that are within that ETA area.

00:57:56,330	because my goal and, and Bob is correct that as it is right now, this would apply to all of those townships, and I simply don’t want that, and I can tell you I won’t support that at the Burleigh County Commission.

00:58:14,470	either because that’s not our intent Our intent here was, first off, the, the citizens in the EAA were already under this, you know, so that’s not this is not new. This is not putting anything new on those citizens in that small area that we’ve talked about, and that’s why I mentioned the map earlier because that map that is part of the agreement between the city and the county for the jurisdictional area is only what I think we should be

00:58:33,600	talking about. Any notion that this is going to apply to anybody else that wasn’t already under this. I, I think it would be a gross mistake And so the, the idea of of, um, I, I think it would be a great idea if the staff could work it out to first off, get

00:58:53,100	this out to all of the unorganized townships, and, and that’s hard because they don’t have a township board. You see, we’re we’re sitting here and with, with except for the members of the commission that are here because they’re city commissioners The rest of us are here because we are representing, we were either elected or appointed.

00:59:18,000	to be here and as such, we are the representatives of those people. and I think I, I have a lot of confidence in this board based on the work we’ve done over the years and and I would love to have more input but I don’t think we’re gonna hear much different than what, what we’ve just already heard.

00:59:35,730	I think that’s a pretty good a pretty good example of what the attitude would be out in Burleigh County, North Dakota. So, Comm Detner, can you help us as to where, where did this come from? This came directly. This came directly out of city ordinances.

00:59:51,630	This is copy and piece with the exception of, of his red print where he says, you know, look at this or some things you might want to check. This is exi that’s why I brought this these certain. This, these certain. This this is the city. This, Staff. Yeah, Mr. Chair, yeah.

01:00:08,630	That’s, that’s what this book is This is City of Bismarck Zoning Ordinances. is there a way to back it up before this so that we don’t have. that we don’t have to incorporate a lot of this Absolutely, that’s entirely up to us. You’re yellow or of the highlights basically. Can we back it up and start over without. Absolutely, we can.

01:00:28,270	We can do any, we can do anything we want. Yeah. Comm Connelly, yeah. And let me interject on it a little bit. I think, uh, Comm Rich Risch, you were alluding to it a bit, is is that we’re currently re-going through all of our Title 14. It’s been an 18 month.

01:00:48,730	Could be as long as a two-year process. So a lot of these things might not be in the new, and we’re in flux. So we’re the existing is what we have to follow.

01:01:08,530	It’s kind of like when we talked about existing ordinances as far as solar, or those type of things, you had to go on the current tell the new is adopted. So the fact that, I mean, some of the letters that go along with zoning like um QUD those designations might be changing at the city level, depending on what that new look looks like. It, it, so.

01:01:31,600	it’s kind of catching us funny a little bit, but this is an opportunity. I mean, they’re very large documents both at the county side and the city side, so it might be an opportunity to where we take a microscope to it and really try to find out what’s fair for our citizens. Right. On both sides of the border. That’s true.

01:01:46,070	Yeah, yeah, there’s a reason I didn’t bring the county zoning ordinance because I’ve just carrying this whole, you know, this whole thing. Um I, I think because it’s all new to all of us though.

01:02:04,070	and, and because this already applied, it’d probably be best if we spent the next, you know, between now and the next meeting, actually digging into that ourselves, and I know that’s gonna take time. um, but I think, you know, give ourselves that time. And I don’t know that we’d be even prepared to do anything except talk more about it at the next meeting.

01:02:22,270	I just, I don’t see a, I don’t, because of the fact the city’s making changes as well, and I think staff, they would behoove both of us, the city and the county, to direct that our staffs work together. You know, I think that’s on us.

01:02:45,100	Um, because at the end of the day, it really does apply because a, a large part of, of the existing ETA didn’t get turned over to the county. And we need to, we need to make sure that we’re having those cross conversations that address everybody Mr. Patrick. Well, I’m just wondering if maybe we shouldn’t, um, put together a, um a working group that would include some members of this board and some probably private citizens and begin to work on this.

01:03:07,600	And I agree with the Comm Bittner. I, I don’t think we’re going to have anything ready by next meeting, but at least we can begin to work on it and revise, uh, or add whatever we need to add, so it does apply properly to the, the uh

01:03:23,530	ETA area that we’re talking about. OK. So, how would we go about forming that, do you think? I mean, you know, because nobody. is, is, is, is Bob laid out, um, people don’t know we’re even talking about this. You know, we’re not, we’re not exactly on everybody’s mind.

01:03:38,800	How, how did we go, how did we grab all the people and I think, uh, Comm Sreiffel, you were in on this pretty heavily with the Agritourism piece, um, how were those people recruited? It was a volunteer. basis. OK.

01:03:58,900	That, uh, staff asked for recommendations and, and volunteers, I guess I, I would recommend that, I would recommend that we I don’t know how it, how we go about it, but I would kick this back. I think it’s premature. I think we have to see what the city’s going to be doing.

01:04:11,270	I think that we need to start, I know, I know there’s been a lot of work that’s gone into this, and we do appreciate it, but I’d like to see this scratched, I’d like to start over. I’d like to have a group.

01:04:26,070	from the city and the county that can get together with our constituents and, and put our heads together and come up with something that makes sense because I, this is never going to get through. Mr. Chair. So, yeah, um, Mitch who had hang on a second though. It’s already through. I mean, this is not this is already in place. For city. Yes. Right. In the ETA. ETA. Yeah. OK. This is, this is not new.

01:04:46,500	Don’t, don’t, you know, this is and it wasn’t us. I mean, this is over time, this is what the people in the ETA were living under and we’re sitting here having this big conversation about why it’s such a problem, and maybe now you get a little clearer idea of why it’s such a big problem to the citizens.

01:05:02,500	Right, but I don’t see I mean, we don’t it. I don’t see putting any more people under any of that. So I just don’t like the idea of even considering this for anyone outside of Saty limits. No, we, we’re, we’re not.

01:05:19,370	I think I’ve been very clear that I’ll never support putting that on additional like the unorganized townships where that we do have the jurisdiction um, because that just wouldn’t be fair, you know, they didn’t buy their places and suddenly they wake up and now we’re under city ordinances that were adopted by the county. That’s not the point here.

01:05:38,630	The point here was to try to make sure that people understood we’re not doing a wholesale change on stuff without going through these comb nor normal processes and, and whatnot. How do we go forward in a thoughtful and intentional way.

01:06:04,330	In regards to that, I think that before we do anything with volunteer groups and, and whatnot, we have staff both city and county, and we have a Coy planning commission and a city planning commission. And that’s our job. That’s not a, that’s not that we need to have um a whole, a whole team of, of volunteers. Bobs come in and tell us what to think. We live here.

01:06:23,730	We, you know, we’re sitting here and we’re we’re saying, well, I’m, I can’t support that. Well, that’s because we’re doing our job representing the citizens that put us here. So I think between now and the next meeting, it should be up to the Comm and certainly anybody you talk to for assistance or share this with people.

01:06:47,170	I think, and that’s what I did, you know, I, that’s why Bob’s here because I shared it with him and he goes, Woah, and he’s on the city planning Commission and he didn’t even know this, so you know, before we, before we have a room full of people that’s that’s as, as wound up as Bob is, let’s let’s do what our job is.

01:07:05,730	and that’s to go through this, I think. So we should have had a public meeting and discussed this before we opened it up the public hearings so that we could have got the people here. Well, should, would have, could have. We’re, we’re on a timeline here. What we got, what we got going on.

01:07:21,170	First off, this is already in existence, like I said, these properties are we talking about? Does anybody have? A lot. Uh. Well, we got 3 and 320 subdivisions. 320 subdivisions, 30 subdivisions that are. Yeah.

01:07:42,530	So, that, and I don’t know if the number was accurate, but when the ETA discussion came up, somebody said that there was around 12,000 in the ETA. Um-hum. So, 95% of 12,000. is what your ballpark can be cause only 5%’s remaining of the established developed residences. So that’ll get you close.

01:08:04,370	But, but that’s I guess I could be beating on a horse here or beating on a dead horse, but that’s why people were so wound up about this ETA because now you’re sitting here and you’re learning it for the first time, but this is what the way it’s been. I do understand that. OK. I just don’t understand so moving it outside the people who are outside of that area. We’re not.

01:08:17,170	No. No. I, I will never support that, and I, I can’t believe that that would pass the county commission. Mr. Chair, how do we proceed? Do we just discuss it again at the next meeting and have staff at the city and county, maybe do some revisions.

01:08:36,370	Uh, what do you suggest Chan, I would actually suggest a special meeting of this board. Allow, allow some time and you can, you can pick, you know, a couple weeks or something and have this group get together again and, and have an open public meeting again, and we could advertise it as a as a meeting about this and get

01:08:52,500	it out to the public, you know, where he, he didn’t have much time to send this to townships today. Uh, we, we were looking, he was looking for addresses and whatnot and and so I think the more we can get the word out to the folks, and then

01:09:07,870	have another meeting of this board, then we can talk about do we wanna do a our job. You’re, you’re actually appointed and elected to be here doing that. Yeah, Comm, or, uh, yeah, Mitch, go ahead. Mr. Chair.

01:09:29,270	Uh, the, what is at play here is on March 1st, this jurisdiction will be handed over to us. Right. That’s why it was. We don’t not, we do not have any urban standard ordinances for these areas.

01:09:52,730	So the idea is they are under Bur Bismarck’s jurisdiction now, we could adopt their complete ordinance for the same area, so it doesn’t change a bit, and that would give us time to create a change only to the ETA areas. This basically will be a separate district than the rest of Burley County. It actually, it would change though too because the, the things that the ETA folks are living under are the are the highlighted pieces, not the non-highlighted pieces, so that would change for them.

01:10:13,070	They would, they would also, they would have additional That’s actual, actual additional, uh, restrictions? No, no. These, these were these were, these were not be additional. These were, these were changes to the original of their ordinances to fit Burleigh County style. as far as urban standards.

01:10:37,600	There would not be additional brand new uh set of ordinances for the ETA. OK, then, then I misunderstood, but the, the non, I think he’s got it right about. The non, the non highlighted stuff. Yeah. Is already in the county, and we’re adding the highlighted stuff that the ETA people are already under.

01:10:55,270	So technically the ETA people now are, uh, they’re gonna have to be under combined, they actually get more rules. That’s, I think that’s a fair state, yeah. know. Because that, that’s literally what. It would be limited. It’s limited because we’re, we do not have this er urban Stan Ordinances.

01:11:13,330	Oh, I’m sorry, but if they’re becoming under Burleigh County, he’s, he’s correct because you’ve come under Burleigh County zoning when you weren’t under Burley County zoning, then, then the whole Marianne applies. yeah, uh, Comm Small, uh, you had something. Why do we need to reinvent the wheel? Don’t we have all these ordinances in the Burleigh County already? No. The the, the unrated. See that’s highlighted. The unhighlighted pieces are in Burleonei already.

01:11:37,870	The highlighted pieces are The city right now. Well, these people are basically in the county now, right? Yep, right, so. That’s correct. Yeah. Us what we got. Yeah Maybe, maybe there’s, we should be changing something or adding something instead of all this garbage. Um-hum. Well, like the one, if I might. Yeah, no.

01:11:57,170	Um, the 11 of the things that was pointed out was that 4% on an acre and a half lot because a a lot of the people that we’re talking about have 1.5 lots in those 350 subdivisions where if you suddenly put county zoning on that. and, and don’t look at the city thing, they’re going to go backwards in square footage.

01:12:20,630	and I don’t want that. I, I want us to move a little forward on that, so people can keep their stuff indoors and, and, and all that so. Yeah, I think.

01:12:34,530	So, just leaving it, you know, just, just plopping the county stuff on them in, in that one case and I don’t know how many more there would be. That’s not a good thing No, but I mean, we could, we. Yeah. We could garbage 90% of this and change some of the things that we want to change. Right. Like, like the coverage percent. Like the coverage.

01:12:48,330	That’s a valid. Yeah, that’s a valid, I mean, it’s like this, like this dog thing here, right? I mean. who’s gonna police whether or not you got 4 dogs. Yeah.

01:13:06,000	I’m not a dog person, but what are you going to do is send the Burleigh County sheriff out there because the neighbor called in because the dog defecated on, on their 5? Oh, she’s got 5 dogs over there. Good boy. Well, what about dog kennels? We actually have a lot of dog kennels out there. They have 50, 50 dogs. Yeah. Yeah, go ahead.

01:13:26,870	Well, just throwing it out there as the conversation evolves, and that is, is that part of the discussion ran around state plumbing code as far as right on the border of the city, so March 1st is gonna come up on us quick. I, I see you nodding.

01:13:46,530	It’s like, where’s he going with us, but, um, and it’s a little nuanced because we’re also having this dual conversation, and a lot of it’s going to come up in 2027 legislative session. But, um, subdivisions or homes right on the border. and that that if they petition in, I don’t know what that looks like or if they decide to come in, um, there is a difference between city services versus rural services.

01:14:09,630	There’s also the water districts and there’s little nuances there that go along with it, but somehow, um, take that into consideration to where not huge changes from what they’re currently existing under until we get some of those nuances, but everybody else is considered in a different lens and properties

01:14:29,870	that any new properties, one to have to abide by it. Just something that can be considered just so, um, we’re not stepping into a thing where state law ends up being a problem.

01:14:52,500	I think we should try to Schedule a special meeting and invite as much as possible citizens from some of these unorganized townships and and whatnot, and I don’t know how we go about doing that. Well, I, I, I think if you, if we bring in the unorganized townships, I mean, just to kind of devil’s advocate it here. I’m not sure what we’re going to hear.

01:15:06,170	I think what we’re going to hear is, well, I don’t want any of the highlighted stuff. Just leave, just leave the non-highlighted stuff. Just, I just want, I just want that. Uh, uh, I’m just kinda thinking about like, well, what are we going to hear? I don’t, I don’t think anybody in unorganized township wants any additional regulations, yeah, so if we’re,

01:15:22,230	if we’re limiting anything that we’re doing here, to the map Right, then it, then it changes. You’re right, that, yeah, yeah. I’m, I’m you know, since this stuff already exists. changing it for the benefit of the citizens that are on that map or whatever seems to be a good goal.

01:15:40,270	And if, if we are going to have a separate district, then it’s almost like uh. we, we almost have, we almost say, well, take all the highlighted stuff and take all the non-hylated stuff and now in, in the what used to be the ETA, you have the same rules uh. Mr Comm Mr. Chair.

01:15:59,000	If we don’t pass it at all, the people that are cur that were in the ETA and no longer in the ETA. uh, if the county rules are less restrictive, what, what effect will it have on? It shouldn’t have any effect on It’ll make them happy. Mr.

01:16:14,530	Chair. Yeah. All right. So if we don’t pass it at all, it’ll make them happy and that, what, what, what kind of violations are we talking about? That, go ahead if, the, yeah. Because they’re, they’re, they met the original ordinances standards when the city of Bismarck developed these properties, allowed to develop these properties.

01:16:33,270	We have nothing that could be applied to them. No. Anything going, going forward is what you’re saying. Going forward, correct. Yeah. I think the question is, what’s the harm Yeah.

01:16:52,970	And, and I think what you’re, what you’re getting at is that these people are in the county now and until you’re in the city, you shouldn’t they’re in the county and they, they already were subjected to more stringent rules. OK, so they built and did their things under the more stringent rules.

01:17:11,800	If we don’t pass this they’re under more lenient rules and I, I, I, I just don’t understand why we need to pass it at all. That was my way. Uh Yeah, yeah, go ahead, Mitch, Mitch, you got, Something? Yeah. You have to have The only reason in having the conversation, if I might, is simply because the citizens are already under this and where do we go from here? That’s correct. And now if it’s a consensus of this commission.

01:17:30,270	um, to do that, that’s great, really, that, that would flip my switch. And Mitch, you, you had something? Yeah, uh, Mr. Chair, it would be my recommendation to, to adopt to keep these same ordinances in place, that the city had or the ETAers on a on a temporary basis until we can

01:17:51,230	have time to go through each one. Have a few uh uh focus group go through each one and see what can be changed and reduced or restricted removed. We don’t have time to create a focus group. and have something in place by March 1st.

01:18:10,530	It’s, these are, they’re uh tremendous changes that are going for, for Burleigh County on this, on this actual zoning. When you, when you say why, why don’t we just have, remove all their, all their original ordinances put Burleigh Counties in. There’s novel there’s not the same development standards that they have.

01:18:27,330	How, I mean, how could you follow the same development standards as an R10 subdivisions which are very tiny lots, and then we don’t have anything like that. And it’s, it’s how do you issue a building permit for something that’s designed for Burley County and you’re in a smaller sub smaller design subdivision.

01:18:48,100	Yeah, so anything under, is it, I forget what, what is R2, is it 11 acre? The minimal, yeah, R2 is, yeah, you could get down to 20,000, but it has to be a PUD. We have the minimum size lot is 65,000 square foot. OK, currently. And that’s, uh, currently in Burleigh County. Yeah. OK. So if somebody comes to get a building permit, and you’re working with a 20,000 square foot lot.

01:19:06,900	How do you issue that? How do you, how do you come up with right now in the county 20,000, 20,000 square foot lot would be PUD it wouldn’t be R2. Yes, exactly right. We have nothing in place, but it would be my record PUD at the 20,000. in that in that range. Yes, yes.

01:19:22,900	It would be my recommendation to consider uh keeping the same ordinances in place while this group we create, we could have this group have special meetings for that or we can have a focus group on each one of these articles. and, and work through them.

01:19:41,270	because that’s one of the reasons why many of those people wanted out of the ETA because they’re over restrictive. But we have to have something in place in the interim. We have nothing there. I mean, we’ll have nothing. It could be applicable.

01:19:55,730	Yeah, so Comm Bitner, when you were talking about the, the map, just going back to that map, that would mean that we would have to, in our zoning, we would have to create just this separate district, call it whatever you want, um, you know, former ETA and we would say then it, it, because if we did that, I would say, then I would agree with you, Mitch.

01:20:12,630	Let’s, you know, we could say, all right, for now. just take all the highlighted stuff, and in that new district that we just created, here’s your stuff. Nothing changed. Outside of that district in the county. on highlighted stuff, here you go. Nothing has changed.

01:20:30,170	We can look at, I mean, I, I really think I agree with the, the accessory building and coverage and all that stuff. Yeah, I agree that’s that that we can treat that separate to this, but, uh, that to me gets us, would get us covered, and all we would have to do is create a new district that conforms with that map and say, here’s your rules, and they haven’t changed.

01:20:46,370	That covers us now in the future, if we say, yeah, we want to back that down and now in that district, so kind of with with Comm Rich was saying, oh, now we’re, we want to change the rules going forward and we wanna have you have this, you know, have the county rules that are in place.

01:21:00,100	We could do that in the future, but it sounds to me like the kind of the easiest way would be. create a new district and say here’s the same rules for now.

01:21:17,900	is, is, I mean, am I oversimplifying this or not? Well, they keep the, keep the zoning districts the same, just, uh, be kind of an overlay basically of those same districts that are in the city of Bismarck. We wouldn’t change them. but we would have it over the, there were we can apply these ordinance to those. Right, but not, but not but not but not shoving the county stuff.

01:21:34,870	Absolutely not. That was outside of the district on to those people because then like I say, then now, now they just uh just doubled the rules or reverse or going out to a county reverse or going out to a county or putting reverse or going out to a county the reverse or going out to a

01:21:51,270	county reverse or going out to a county or putting the the city stuff outside. OK. That’s OK. I, I understand that, that answers my question. I appreciate it. Yeah, Comm Connelly since times of the year, since, um, say, Comm Bittner, cause you and I have been in this conversation a lot longer.

01:22:07,370	um, and I don’t know if, uh, we’d probably have to ask, um the city commission to make a five-minute decision call a special meeting or whatnot, but if you and I Mitch, and say, um, one of the staff from the city went through and what’s the ridiculous that doesn’t really apply anymore because some of

01:22:34,100	these things are so old, and we can get rid of those right off the top and leave the stuff that’s up for negotiation, so we can create that greater timeline.

01:22:50,330	We’ll be OK with it And be doing a, a district or a kind of a separate district, right? Uh, well, uh, keeping this. And, and tearing this down. Yeah. Say it’s going to take longer than the March 1st, we can create the timeline at that point once we weed out the stuff that we don’t want to talk about anyway. Uh, you know, I think construction wise and everything else, we have time.

01:23:09,270	because nobody’s um putting a new subdivision right now. you know, so I think, you know, at least till spring, but um, I would, I would certainly be OK with, um, with us getting together with staff and having some of those conversations. I don’t mind. Oh yeah, commercial trifle. My concern is the ETA people who wanted out.

01:23:28,530	and so I don’t want to see them thinking, oh, that we’re putting them right back into where they just came out of, so we need to keep that in mind and I think we need to have somebody from that area also to participate so that we don’t stick them right back under what they wanted out of.

01:23:46,100	and end up with the same thing for them. Well, the the representation changes me. You’re right, yes, yeah. I’ve been dealing with that ETA issue for roughly 20 years. Long time. Yeah But yeah, Comm Small, yeah.

01:24:05,900	Well, so, if I understand this right, everything in the red hatches went back to the county and what worries me is, is that everything in the red line here when the city decides to annex out a little bit further and then get bumped out onto somebody that because of the 4 mile all of a sudden they’re under a bunch of rules.

01:24:29,330	and all of this because the, the city is still has control of everything in the ETA that is not the red hatch mark. True. At the same time. It’s a negotiated boundary. It’s not the 4 mile. So, so how does that get negotiated? Who negotiates it? City and the county.

01:24:57,170	Yeah negotiate the Commission or well, it, it’s, Comm, you know, it wasn’t negotiated. That’s correct. The state gives the city, um, up to 4 miles. Um, and we had we, we actually gave back 45% of the, our current ETA after many discussions, joint county city Commission meeting.

01:25:22,800	Um, 95% of the re residents, I think in the ETA went back to the county, 45% of the land went back to the county, but we have it in the state is established it by statute that the cities, depending on their size, have what we call an exit territorial authority because they’re liable to expand and they want to expand it in a

01:25:42,600	way that would fit with the city. So that I, Comm Bittner, you can add something to that, but um, I don’t know, I don’t have anything good to add. Yeah, and I, I, just to, just as a, as a question to kind of go on to your question here. Uh, the annexation. out.

01:25:59,600	uh, the city to annex out that now, do landowners or uh developments, things like that, they have to ask for annexation, correct? The city just can’t go grab. I don’t think I think. almost always that’s the case. They ask to be annexed in. But I don’t know that that’s an absolute. OK. OK. Comm Connelly, yeah.

01:26:22,000	That’s one of the things that came up during the discussions. Initially, when I got started into these conversations 2015, around that time. State plumbing code came up as if somebody’s septic system went down, I think it was two different measurements were thrown out.

01:26:43,500	200 m or 300 m if they’re a septic system failed, then they had no choice because the state plumbing code, it was, uh, forced annexation based on that. During the discussions, that was actually one of the nice things that came up is from the city, they said, we don’t do 4annexations.

01:27:05,900	and it would be up for to those people if they wanted to replace their drain field and their septic system, depending on what they needed, or they could be annexed in at that time, even with those parameters in place. I never knew it was a choice before, but since it’s on record, we got it on tape. We’ll go with that. That furthered the conversation to the next step.

01:27:25,530	Now, there was a term used when um a long time and then the Martin house south of the Burleig Tree was the key one. Their septic system failed. They ended up annexed in. It would have been 2, 25,000 to replace the septic system.

01:27:47,470	They ended up, uh, hooking up to City Services. Oh, it’ll, you’ll just have to pay the, for the um specialized hookup. It was a look back on all special assessments at the time It was a $56,900 special assessment.

01:28:09,870	And then there’s some little nuances that change that thing, but that’s kind of where I got involved in it and representing citizens from a citizen standpoint and talking with them. Now, so there was this whole thing with the lookback taxes in and there was a lot of heartburn over it. The got into politics a little bit and got really uncomfortable for a lot of people for a long time.

01:28:30,730	When we did the water utility rate changes in 2018. I wasn’t on the commission at the time, but I was at all the meetings. I as an advocate. They couldn’t change state law as it pertains to already developed properties, but any new development, they can make an ordinance in relation to that.

01:28:51,470	So they moved away from the abeyance charges, and they moved to what they call a utility capital charge So when those properties come into the city, if it’s a residential property It was, uh, um the numbers might have changed a little bit because I think they’ve had some recent negotiations on it, but at the time it was $4700 for

01:29:12,370	residential. It’s 24,000 for um uh business commercial and so those look back fees or abeyance are down to 6 districts, and it’s only in relation to water resource district areas. Everybody else is under utility capital charges now.

01:29:41,100	So now most developments that are coming on board, uh, like, say, um, one of the developers says we want to annex this area in. They’re paying those utility capital fees, and we’re seeing more annexations at that rate, and that’s why the I, I believe it’s 47% versus the 53% on the raw land, the ETA versus not the ETA but the already developed residences. That’s why it’s the 95.

01:30:11,270	The 5% comes in with some of the areas like say around the airport. Everybody I, I think common knowledge is, is the accident that happened where the UPS plane went down in Tennessee.

01:30:34,630	Some of those people that are remaining in the ETA is some of that area that surrounds the airport, how do you constructively anticipate some of those uncomfortable situations that we don’t want to go through. So they retain that part of it. That’s where we’re gonna work at the state level to, uh, make sure that we can answer the regulation with representation. you’re new, it’s a history that some of us know already, but most, uh, annexations at this point.

01:30:57,000	They’re saying no forced annexations, it’s based on requests, and that’s what we’re going forward with until an exception comes up because those state laws are still in effect, and it could make uh, be applied to this All right. That makes sense. All right. So, we have, uh, so we have a motion, a second on the table to uh continue this hearing.

01:31:15,730	um to the next meeting, and I’d say uh let’s, uh, we’ll move into a vote to continue this, and then, and then we can move on to other, other things as necessary. So, um all in favor of continuing this hearing to the next meeting, I’ll say I. I.

01:31:35,330	Any opposition? Hearing none. The, uh, the hearing for the amendments on Article 35, 7, 1013, and 19, uh, will be continued until the next meeting of this uh commission. Any other business? I think that’s all we had, right? Yeah. Yeah. Is there a second? OK.

01:32:09,000	It has been moved and seconded to Adjourn, and all in favor say aye. Any opposition?