00:00:10,300	spk_0:
This is the It's a joint meeting of the board of City commissioners and the county commission. um, this is what would normally be our regular monthly joint committees meeting, um. And before we get started, I will ask Whitney to call Roll to call the meeting to order. She has offered to take role for both commissions. Whitney.

00:00:35,367	spk_1:
Mayor Schmidt, here, Commissioner Cleary, Commissioner Zener here Commissioner Risch, Commissioner Connelly here Chair Bittner, Commissioner Bakin, Commissioner Munson. He Commissioner Schwab, You Commissioner Woodcox here.

00:00:55,767	spk_0:
All right, so we have an agenda that was published, the agenda, um. It's gonna start out with the a presentation on the extraterritorial area or the ETA, which is why we're here today. Um, after that presentation, we'll take public comment so we. Pledge allegiance

00:01:16,867	spk_0:
We have not historically done it. We have not been doing that. I mean, I, we can do it, but we should have done it before we called the roll, called it to order.

00:01:28,867	spk_0:
So we're we're gonna receive a presentation then after that we'll have public comment and then discussion uh to whatever the topics and what directions we'll take from here. So I thank everyone for being in attendance. I do want to let everybody know that the meeting is being uh run live right now in Dakota Media Access, but at 5:30. It will cut off on live. It will still be taped, but it'll switch over to the Mad and City commission because it's their regularly scheduled meeting and we need to give them their respected due. So with that, um. Ben and Gabe, I think you're got some of the material anyway, so I'll let you go ahead, Ben, and as we discussed, uh, Commissioner Bach and this is gonna be informational first, correct?

00:02:13,667	spk_2:
Right. This, uh, that was kind of a thought process on this because, uh. From, uh, some previous meetings, there seemed to be a little bit misinformation. Uh, this has been a ongoing uh issue between the city and the county for quite a while, and, uh, it really puts, uh, residents of the county that live in the ETA and A little bit of flux. So we'd like to figure out how to have a path forward for the growth of the city of Bismarck and what's equitable for county residents as well. So, um, Ben, thank you.

00:02:50,300	spk_3:
Great, are you ready for me? Great, uh, greetings, Mayor, uh, chair, and members of the commission. Uh, I will have probably about, uh, 20 slides. Uh, we're all, uh, Gable Gab speak on some of this as well, but generally we'll go over a history and the purpose of the ETA. Um, we'll talk about the existing elements, the kind of the key elements of the existing agreement between Bismarck and Burley County. Uh, what North Dakota Century Code, uh, statute says about the ETA versus versus agreements, uh, ETA agreements, uh, talk a little bit about, uh, uh, our negotiated boundary and some characteristics with and without that boundary. Um, there, there's been discussions in the past and so we'll, we'll touch on this as well, who has jurisdictional authority over what in the ETA. Gabe will speak a little bit about stormwater issues that there's been questions about, um. There has been a desire for us to to compare, uh, similar, uh, zoning regulations between city and county so we'll go through about 4 or 5 different zoning designations that are comparable to each other in the city and county as well as, uh, differences between. Uh, a handful of differences between, uh, building code provisions and then finally I'll end with just some population projections, uh, for the city and, uh, for the area over the next, uh, 20 years. Any questions before I get started? OK, seeing none. So just in general, uh, talk about what actually is an ETA. I'll, I'll be using this term ETA a lot. You see it in your agenda packets, uh, it's, we call it the extraterritorial area. I'll be just referring to it as ETA from here on out cause it's extra-territorial area. Uh, we'll extend this meeting a little bit longer if I continue to say that full phrase, uh, but generally it's a growth management tool, uh, that North Dakota Century code allows, uh, the intent is, uh, really to, uh, kind of have cities control their own destiny as if they believe they're going to continue to grow or expand outward. It allows them that ability to control that land outside their boundaries to continue to expand those boundaries if there's a desire to do so. Uh, if you're looking at what an ETA and, and I should say this to you, feel free to, to interrupt me with questions on slides at any point. If you have questions, we don't have to wait till the end. You can ask them in the moment if you've got them, but, uh, uh, either they're based on population of, of the city in North Dakota, so there's 3 different tiers of city population groups, uh, that, uh, dictate how. Uh, large and extra territorial area can be Bismarck is in one of those largest tiers. Uh, so Bismarck, if we were following North Dakota Century code would have up to a 4 mile extra territorial area from the corporate limits. However, we are, we have a negotiated agreement between Burley County and several others that I'll discuss in a little bit. So, uh, but, but generally, uh, uh, size of the community can can dictate the the size of the ETA. Um, for other communities in the state, um. It does provide jurisdictional authority for subdivision zoning, building inspection, flood plain management, and other authorities that are tied to zoning and subdivision regulations. Uh, we did not review every community in the state, but we did review every community over 5000 population in the state. It appears all of them are using their extra territorial, uh, jurisdiction authority.

00:06:35,767	spk_3:
So for uh Bismarck, we're talking about the agreement or or the extraterritorial area and agreement between Burley County, but we actually have 4 other agreements with other jurisdictions uh within the region. Uh oh, hold on.

00:07:08,800	spk_3:
Somebody know how to get that uh. Yes, no question off the off the screen. Has that ever happened before?

00:07:20,900	spk_3:
Oh, I'm sorry. Yeah, we're seeing a, oh, OK. Well, I'll keep going if nobody else can see it. Um, So, uh, we, we happen to have 4 other agreements. Uh, and I'll pull up the laser pointer here. So this map I'll go into a little bit more detail later in the presentation. But if you're looking on the screen, sort of the yellow line that you can see, um, and it and it kind of goes under this red line here and goes back around, that's the existing, uh, agreement that's the existing agreement line, uh, with, uh, Burley County, um, I'll go over some of these other lines a little bit later in the presentation, but in addition to to that agreement defining this boundary, we also have agreements with the city of Lincoln roughly in this area. Who has their own extra territorial area as well, uh, Apple Creek Township, which is this township here, uh, not in Township, which is this township up here as well as Missouri Township which which is this township here which essentially is limiting. What could be up to the 4 mile ETA, it, it, it pulls it back by agreement, uh, to something less than that 4 mile extra territorial area. Uh, there's a pretty extensive, uh, history, uh, from a state perspective and local, uh, perspective on the use of the extraterritorial area. I'll thank, uh, Daniel Nin, who's our planning manager who's who, uh, pulled up a lot of this, this history, and I'll, I'll go over some of these milestones, uh, of, of the, the ETA in the state, uh, and, uh, locally. So 1929 was where it first showed up in North Dakota state law. At that time it granted cities uh up to a 6 mile extra territorial area from the, the corporate limits. Uh, 1935, uh, Bismarck Planning and Zoning commission was created and, and through the minutes it appears that to some extent the planning and zoning commission uh was exercising their extra territorial areas. There were a number of subdivisions platted. Outside of the annex boundary but within that 6 mile limit. Uh, 1955 is when the state legislature gave counties the ability to engage in planning and zoning activities and uh could create their own planning commissions. Uh, in 1975, that's kind of where the, I guess we would call more the modern ex-territorial zoning authority was created. Um, municipalities at that time were required to adopt, uh, extra-territorial zoning, uh, by ordinance, um, if, if they wanted to, uh, retain that jus extraterritorial jurisdiction in those areas. 1976 Bismarck adopts its first, uh, ETA actually its first ETA zoning ordinance, um, 1978, the North Dakota Supreme Court ruled that, uh, Bismarck could exercise its extraterritorial area within Apple Creek Township, which had prior zoning authority. So at that time Bismarck's ETA did go into Apple Creek Township, who also had the ability to zone. And uh it it uh ended up in Supreme Court that Bismarck had had the authority to, to uh exercise its extraterritorial area jurisdiction in that area. Excuse me. 1981, uh, the state legislature changed the way it measures the extraterritorial area from a radial or rounded distances from the, from the, uh, corporate limits to quarter quarter sections. So that's why you see more squared off, um, extra territorial boundaries is because it's being measured by quarter quarter sections. So generally if, let's just say it's 4 miles from the boundary. And it's a curve from that 4 miles from the boundary. If it's more than 50% of the area that quarter quarter section, it's included within that, uh, jurisdictions ETA. If it touches that quarter quarter section but is less than 50%, uh, it is not included. And so that's how we, how we, how it is measured uh uh uh uh for distances from the corporate limits. 1982. Uh, that's when Bismarck had its last overhaul of its zoning and subdivision regulations, so 1982, uh, 2005, we're going, we're doing that whole process over again, uh, more than 40 years later, uh, going through another overhaul, but 1982 was the immediately previous last overhaul of the zoning and subdivision regulations, uh, and in 1982, uh, it, it did include reference and, and, uh, inclusion of the extraterritorial zoning authority. Uh, in 1997, this is when the state legislator created legislature created what's called a joint jurisdictional authority for the outer half of extra territorial areas. So let's just take a community the size of Bismarck which would by state statute allow a 4 mile ETA from the corporate limits that inner 2 miles would be the the sole authority of. Let's say Bismarck, that outer 2 miles would be uh jointly approved for zoning and subdivision authority by city and in this case, Burley County. So that's, that's when that joint jurisdictional authority, uh, first appeared. 2002 Bismarck Growth Management Plan, uh, this, this must have been one of our first growth management plans, but it adopted recommendations to expand. Bismarck's extraterritorial area uh to a 4 mile ETA. So in the past, Bismarck, prior to 2002, Bismarck did not take full effect of that 4 mile ETA, that growth management plan suggested that it should. In 2003, Bismarck did then adopt a 4 mile extraterritorial area expanding the ETA from 85 square miles up to 146 square miles. Uh, 2010, uh, this kind of goes through a history of our existing agreements that I that I touched on earlier, but that's when we signed an agreement with Apple Creek Township basically to, uh, remove a portion of, of what Bismarck could have in its extraterritorial area, uh, limited back within the Apple Creek Township, same with, uh, 2011, uh, not in Township. Um, where we are completely out of, uh, not in Township at this 0.2013 Bismarck enters into an agreement with Burley County City and City of Lincoln, uh, to establish, uh, the boundary essentially mostly what you see today, um, so Bismarck's extraterritorial area at that point went from 147 square miles, uh, now back to, uh, 101 square miles. 2021, uh, Bismarck Burley County ETA agreement was amended. Many of you were part of this amendment or may remember this amendment, but it basically pushed, uh, Bismarck, Bismarck's ETA boundary back kind of in the, the Hackre area to account for, I believe it's the summit, uh, development or summit subdivision. Basically that that subdivision was gonna be split by Bismarck and Burley County. This agreement basically pulled that, uh, that ETA line back. So the, the summit development was wholly within B Burley County at that point. Uh, 2023 and I'll go through some of this in a little bit more detail as well, but, uh, Bismarck, uh, later on in the presentation, but Bismarck and Apple Creek amended their, uh, agreement. Uh, there was in the initial agreement there was some reference to flood plain administration that was, uh, supposed to be taking place by Bismarck but really hadn't been done as as Apple Creek Township had actually taken over that responsibility. And then eventually I think you all now Burley County now has uh an agreement contracted with Apple Creek to do their floodplain administration so we amended the agreement to recognize that. Kind of back in that 2010, 2011 time frame, we also established an agreement with Missouri Township. Uh, to stay virtually completely out of Missouri township. Uh, however, neither party, neither the city of Bismarck nor Missouri Township, uh, we had the agreement, but neither party had a signed agreement. So finally in 2004, we actually got a signed agreement, uh, even though we had been recognizing the agreement, uh, no one could find it, but now, now we do have the signed agreement, so. OK, a little bit of the differences between what and North Dakota Century code essentially allows two options for an extraterritorial area. Again, I'll probably be referring to the largest tier. I will be referring to the largest tier of ETA in Bismarck because that's, that's what's relevant to us. But North Dakota Century code would allow for a community the size of Bismarck, uh, up to a 4 mile extra territorial area from, uh, the corporate limits. Mentioned this earlier, but those inner 2 miles would, would be the sole, uh, jurisdiction, or authority of the city of Bismarck, those outer 2 miles for zoning and subdivision approval would be jointly had to go have to go through joint approvals from both the city and and county in that outer 2 mile area. Uh, and there is a process to extend that extra territorial boundary. Every time the the city, uh, annexes or adds land to it expands out those corporate limits, there is, there is sort of a process in place to then add uh those those uh uh equivalent miles of the extraterritorial area out to match that 4 miles. We do not have, uh, this 4 mile limit. We have uh uh basically a negotiated agreement between 5 different parties, including Burley County. So in this case it's whatever boundary, um, we all decide is, is appropriate. Uh, I, I would say at no point does the extraterritorial area go out to the full 4 miles. I would say maybe it varies. On average between 2.5 to 3.5 miles out, uh, the, the difference is that within that entire negotiated area, Bismarck has sole jurisdictional authority within that whole area and there is no joint jurisdictional, uh, agreement. Ah, they're the sort of the. The diff the other difference that exists, uh, between what state statute would allow there there is really no process to expand that boundary unless you all agree that you want it expanded or contracted uh there is really no process unless you all call for that opportunity to change, to change that boundary, um.

00:18:44,166	spk_3:
Some of the highlights of what's in currently in Burley County's, uh, Bismarck Burley County's agreement again, originally adopted in 2013 and amended in At the end of 2021, uh, signed by all parties, I think early 2022, uh, the boundary, uh, in 2013 was reduced from the four mile, uh, extra territorial area based on the negotiations that took place at that time. Uh, the, uh, the, uh, permitting authority for zoning subdivision, building permits, stormwater management, and floodplain administration conduct is conducted by, uh, the city of Bismarck within the extraterritorial area outlined in the agreement. Uh, subdivision latts, uh, uh, that are in the ETA area are are forwarded still to Burley County Commission for acceptance of right of way. Uh, this is also, uh, listed in the agreement, but both parties will retain a fully certified building official. Uh, the agreement automatically renews every 2 years unless the Bismarck City Commission and Burley County Commission request a change, and, uh, there, there's, there's more to the agreement, but I've kind of hit the highlights here, but, uh, the, the last item I'll talk about the the agreement may be canceled within a 6 month notice by either party or may be amended at any time upon written agreement by both parties.

00:20:10,400	spk_3:
Some of the characteristics I referenced this map a little earlier, but I'll go into a little bit more detail of, of some of the population and area characteristics. So that yellow line again represents the current, uh, ETA. Boundary between city and county. Uh, within that current agreement there's a population of about 12,500 people. Land area, uh, just within the the that that area is about 64.03 miles, uh, without the agreement, it would, it would push outwards, probably add, you know, a little over 1200 people to about 13,700 people. Uh, and grow to about 101 square miles. We are not in this, in this scenario here we are not including Notton Township, Apple Creek Township, or Missouri Township as really we're just discussing Bismarck and Burley here, but if those townships were included, that area would expand even more. The population would expand even more. But for, for purposes of this discussion. We're just uh discussing the what the impacts of the agreement with Burley County.

00:21:24,166	spk_3:
A Little bit of the timeline of recent discussions on this, so this, this group or actually the, the Bismarck, uh, Burley, uh, Joint Committee, uh, brought this topic up in 2023. Um, we appeared uh or various of us appeared, I think seven times in 2023 and 2024 to discuss this. I'll hit some of the high points here. But, uh, essentially we provided an introductory presentation on the ETA much like we're doing now to the group. There was a a request at that time for more information on who has jurisdiction over what things in in the ETA. I do have a slide on that. I will go over that in a little bit, um, but, uh, the next meeting staff provided that that information. At that point there was a request to uh meet with all parties uh uh who were have an agreement with Bismarck extraterritorial agreement including Burley County, uh, City of Lincoln, Apple Creek Township, Notton Township, and Missouri Township. Those groups met or staff representatives from those groups from those uh jurisdictions met uh at the end of October in 2023, uh, the group did establish, uh, some, some items in looking at the boundary and the agreements. The group did feel it was appropriate to meet on regular intervals every two years, so that was in 2023 we're in 2025, so it is appropriate that this discussion is occurring because this is kind of that two year time frame to to look at the boundary again. Uh, we did notice in, uh, kind of inconsistencies in the existing agreement with Apple Creek Township in terms of who was actually conducting flood plain administration, so recommendations were made to change that. Also recommendations were made to modifynton, uh, township, uh, recommendation they had some older language in the Bismarcknton, uh, agreement that referred to both the 2 mile and 4 mile limits which were no longer, uh, relevant. Uh, both those actually, both those were both these changes have been made and signed off on by, by the parties. The third thing that I didn't include in here was, uh, finding the signed agreement or, or getting a signed agreement with Missouri Township, which, which was also done.

00:23:48,300	spk_3:
Uh, the information, uh, was then presented to the Bismarck Burley Council, um, uh, at the beginning of December. Uh, there was a question at that point to determine if building inspections activities and authority could be conducted in Burley County ETA by the county, uh, and city still retain zoning and subdivision authority. Uh, we did conduct some research on that at the time. Apparently there, well, not apparently, we did discover that there were 2. Uh, attorney General's opinions that the, the, the building inspections activities need to be linked to the, the zoning and subdivision authority. So decoupling those at least based on that attorney General's opinion was, was, was not an option. Uh, staff noted, uh, after conferring with all the parties at the, uh, from the October 30th meeting that we, I guess we were comfortable with the boundary the way it was. There was not a need to expand or contract based on some of those conversations. There was a request to hear more information about the community rating system, uh, and so I believe staff provided at the March 5th meeting, uh, a presentation on the community rating system. I think Burley County is in the process of, of investigating or perhaps pursuing that CRS uh approval, um, which I think was probably driven from this meeting. Um, and then on, uh, June 4th of 2024 I think there were questions about issues of, of stormwater, uh, challenges that existed in the extraterritorial area, I believe, uh, Gabe Shell, city engineer, provided a presentation on, on, uh, some of those, uh, subdivisions that were questioned, uh, that had stormwater challenges at that time.

00:25:44,300	spk_3:
Here's, uh, some of the jurisdictional authority, uh, and who's responsible for what in the extra territorial area that was provided at a previous meeting as well, but, uh, for planning and zoning activities, uh, that's, uh, the community development department of the city of Bismarck our planning manager is is sort of the, the, the, the key person for, for those activities, uh, zoning and building zoning and building code enforcement also community development department. Our building official Brady Blaskowski is, is the, the sort of the key point person, uh, related to those items. Building permitting and inspections again community development, uh, building the building official flood plain management, uh, community development, uh, building official, uh, uh, in addition to, uh, the building official's duties as the building official, uh, Brady also wears another hat as the flood plain administrator for the city of Bismarck and the extra territorial area. Uh, stormwater management and planning, uh, done jointly between, uh, uh, Bismarck, uh, Engineering and Burley County, uh, Engineering. The stormwater management enforcement, I think, has been identified as Bismarck Public Works within the stormwater uh program. And uh the the formal name for the accumulation of certain items or some people just refer to it as the junk ordinance um is the responsibility of the Bismarck Burley Public Health environmental health officer and often, uh, the building official gets gets brought into these cases as well and sometimes, uh, municipal court, uh, depending on if they are corrected or not.

00:27:27,166	spk_3:
Oh, this, this item for this slide, I'll let Ge speak to this slide.

00:27:35,266	spk_4:
Hello Gabe Shell, City engineer, just have a quick slide here to talk about some of the stormwater management timelines. Uh, the first item that we have of note is 1996 and 1997 is when, uh, the city planning and zoning created our Title 14.1, uh, that, uh, created stormwater regulations for both the city as well as the ETA. So we'll note that anything predating that 1996 time frame, uh, definitely didn't have any, uh. The same scrutiny that it has now or even that it had in 1996, uh, both in the ETA as well as uh within city limits as we move on into the year 2000. And that was our first stormwater design standards, uh, were implemented, so I kind of created the rule book by which developments would play by, uh, that would then, um, fall in line with the 1996 1997 ordinance. We let that sit for 11 years or so and then in 2011, uh, we amended 14.1 to then include county engineering concurrence on all reviews and approvals in the ETA. I can't speak to, uh, well that wasn't included originally necessarily, but that was noted as as an area of improvement from 2011. And then our most recent update to both the the design standards and the the title 14.1 was in 2017 and that was an even broader group that include engineering staff, uh, Burley County staff, uh, Burley County Water Resource, and Burley County Commission representatives, um, so I guess I just wanted to provide that. Timeline on on stormwater in the ETA.

00:28:58,700	spk_3:
Thank you, Gabe. Uh, now for the next few slides, we'll, we'll go through. A series of comparisons, uh, between Bismarck, Burley County first with zoning then with, uh, building inspections and include, um, permit fees for for both entities as well for both, uh, uh, planning activities as well as building permit fees. Uh, so in this case we've, we've tried for zoning, uh, we've tried to compare as close as apples to apples as we can between uh a similar, uh, residential zoning disc or a similar zoning district in Burley County compared to Bismarck in this case we're looking at the rural residential, uh, zoning designation. And in the middle here is, is really the the category that we're talking about. I don't, I, I've, I've tried not to list where we are similar. Basically, I'm trying to list where we are, are different. Um, and in this case uses by right, so those are uses that you don't need any additional or special authority to have. So a rural residential, uh, uh, uh, a common use by right would be a single family home. So I'm not listing single family residential in in these areas just because they're both allowed in both cases. I'm just listing the differences. So in Bismarck. One difference is that we have listed public recreation is allowed, uh, not identified in Burley County, but in Burley County religious golf course and truck farming activities are allowed, not identified in Bismarck as a use by right for special uses, that's where Bismarck identifies religious and childcare uses as special uses in this area. Uh, no special uses identified in Burley County. Uh, chickens, up to 10 allowed. Within uh Bismarck's zoning code not addressed currently in Burley County's code accessory structures, so those would be like garages, shops, those types of things, uh, up to 3200 square feet with a special use permit. In Burley County, uh, it's, it's essentially 4% of the lot area and no special use permit. I should note this is a really good one to talk about too. We see a lot of these at our Bismarck planning and zoning commission, uh, come through as special uses. Uh, I mentioned earlier we are in the process of updating our, our zoning and subdivision regulations for the city of Bismarck. Basically we're areas that we're talking about here where Burley County is more permissive than Bismarck and this is probably one of those key areas um we're proposing or at least we'll propose that our ordinance match Burley County's so in the future when the zoning and subdivision regulations are adopted in Bismarck. Um, there won't be this 3200 square foot limit. It'll sort of match what Burley County's is with the 4% of lot area and will no longer be, hopefully no longer be a special use permit. Uh, for home occupations, uh, Bismarck recently went through a, uh, you know, a process to, to update its home-based occupations which would allow up to 3 external employees and up to 50% of the primary home. And 100% of the excess rebuilding and with sales allowed unless traffic becomes problematic, uh, for Burley County there is some differences, no external employees allowed, no more than 25% of home and no on-premise sales. For the agricultural district, uh, again, uh, both, both uses by right were very similar, so didn't really even note any by right uses. Um, special uses, Bismarck has private writing called out. Uh, not necessarily called out in Burley County, but what's not called out in Bismarck is, uh, or sorry, rodeos, race tracks, wind turbines, meat packing, animal feeding operations all allowed by special use permit, but not in Bismarck. Dimensional standards, there are some differences here. Uh, Bismarck, uh, would have a 660 ft minimum lot width with the front yard set back from a collector at 125 ft. Compared to Burley County, which would have a lot width of 640 ft with a front set back from a collector at 65 ft again, these areas where Burley County is more permissive with our update, we would propose to align with with where Burley County is at on those. Accessory structures, uh, 1% of the lot area up to 5000 square feet with a special use permit, you could go up to 8000 square feet if the lot was 35 acres or more and 15,000 square feet of 70 acres or more. Burley County is 4% of the lot area. We tend to like that the staff, we think that's a simple, effective way to do it. Again, we would propose to align with Burley County here. Home occupations, uh, again, I went through this previously, but there are some differences with, with the home occupations allowed that are similar in, in the egg district as they are the residential. Uh, for flood plain, uh, for the flood plain district, uh, Bismarck regulates to the 100 year flood plain. Burley County regulates to the 100 and the 500 year floodplain. Um, both have additional development standards next to the Missouri River. Bismarcks is 10 100 ft setback from the ordinary high water mark.

00:34:35,266	spk_3:
Or and 75 ft or I, I think this should be or 75 ft from the ordinary high water mark from uh Army Corps of Engineers stabilized bank. Burley Counties doesn't account for the 75 ft for stabilized bank and including variances we, we don't list any variances, uh, allowable Burley County lists, uh, a condition of approval for a variance of a new construction of a sub or substantial improvement. Uh, on a lot less than 1.5 acres in size and contiguous to this and surrounded by lots with existing structures constructed below the base flood elevation to be constructed below the base flood elevation, so that's a variance that's allowed that is not identified in Bismarck's ordinance. For the agricultural recreation, um. The, I think Burley County just very recently, even as of last night, uh, might have adopted the egg recreation, uh, or, or zoning, uh, designation in, in your commission meeting last night. But for Bismarck, ah, minor. Egg recreation uses are allowed, um, which would be up to 75 individuals at any one time. Um, And must be related to the agricultural use. No special use permit would be required in in Bismarck for these, uh, as long as they were kept under 75, uh, individuals at any one time for the major, it's, it's, uh, if there's 75 up to 250 people must be related to the agricultural production of the site, um, it would be allowed, uh, uh, for 30, uh, calendar days, uh, of the year. Uh, that would require a special use permit for those major, uh, types of events as we've defined them. Burley County, uh, defines them a little bit differently, and I think both, and Michigan, correct me if I'm wrong, but I think both the. Sort of what what would be maybe more of a minor and a more of a major require special use permits, um, for the 10 acre or more type uses you could do you pick orchards, hay rides, tractor rides, farm animal petting, testing events, and other others related to the principal agricultural use and there are 50 people or less per day allowed for up to 50 days per year and must meet certain standards. Uh, for the 40 acres or more, uh, these would be more like types of uses would be more like domestic wineries, domestic distilleries, brewer taprooms, any event related to principal agricultural use with more than 50 people per day. Um, or any event occurring more than 75 days per year. So, uh, I'm just gonna confirm, Mitch, do both of those require a special use permit?

00:37:31,467	spk_5:
The bottom one, the 40 acres of war, the we have simplified it to be.

00:37:39,367	spk_3:
So the 10 acre and the 40 acre?

00:37:41,266	spk_5:
OK. All right, so.

00:37:47,266	spk_3:
Special use permits are required for both the 10 acre event or 10 acre events associated with 10 acre sites and 40 acre sites. So special use permits are associated with both. So here's a comparison of planning and zoning fees generally Bismarcks tend to be higher than than Burley Counties, uh, for Bismarck, generally how we establish our fees is based on, uh, the amount of staff time that's put into them. So we look at, um, the average, uh, what would be the average hourly rate of a planner. Versus the average amount of compared to the average amount of time it typically takes to process these different things. Uh, usually they're still not, uh, 100%. Uh, generally they range, uh, between covering the cost of 70 I would say 75% to 90% of the cost of what it costs staff to review and and process these things, uh, but you can see, you know, here, uh, for major subdivisions we, we break it down in Bismarck by acres and Burley County it's broken down by lots, but less than 3 acres is $950 for 1 or 2 acres is. Or 1 to 2 lots is $200. I'll just jump to the 10 acre, greater than 10 acres, $1350 in Bismarck 21. Lots or more $900.

00:39:09,867	spk_3:
For minor plots, uh, let's see, we break it down kind of more by acreage and the size of the, the development, uh, ranging from $170,700 to $1900. Uh, Burley County looks like their minor plat is at $200. Uh, and then for zoning map changes or zoning map amendments ranging from $1250 to $1450 looks like they're around $500 in Burley County for special use permits, uh, $700 and. Bismarck, $300 in in Burley County.

00:39:50,066	spk_3:
Going into residential building code and uh building and residential code items now really there's probably literally 4 or 5 what we would, we would identify as more significant differences between the codes. I think Burley County tends to adopt what the state of North Dakota adopts as the building code, uh, I think almost verbatim. We, we've had, uh, like I said, maybe 4 or 5 amendments to that locally, and I'll, I'll go through what those are. So for relating to frost protected frost protection or frost protected foundations in this, uh, Bismarck recently made a change. To allow an exception to allow frost protected foundations for various S or storage uh type uses and new utility occupancies so utility occupancy might be. An accessory type structure like a garage, you know, a fence, something like that. Um, uh, so we allow exceptions for the storage facilities and the utility, uh, um, occupancies. Burley County, um, uh, allows for the utility and not the, not the storage. Um, Uh, related to decks and whether they need frost protected foundation, Burley County does provide an exemption from frost protection, uh, for, uh, uh, with no exclusion for, for deck types, I think in Bismarck. We, uh, we provide the exception if it's non-covered, but if it is covered, we require that to be frost protected and also, uh, for light frame construction accessory buildings greater than 200 square feet, uh, should be on a monolithic slab on grade with, uh, turned down footings.

00:41:51,000	spk_3:
And I think these are the last two changes, so I, I guess there was 4, but in Bismarck, um, when we talk about, uh, the height from the floor in this case we're talking about the ill height for, um, uh, uh, egress windows in the basement to get out of your basement in case there is a fire. So in Bismarck, uh, we've adopted that seal height can't be any higher than 44 inches. Uh, and state code, which is what Burley County's is as well as that seal height can be higher. It can be up to 48 inches. Why that matters, it's we believe it's easier for a firefighter to get out if it's 44 inches versus 48 inches if there's a fire going on with all their gear. Um, and then the last, uh, item here, uh, we'll call out for that, uh, I guess of of substance. There's various administrative details that are different, but. You know, when it comes to regulation, it really doesn't make much of a hill of beans, uh, from, from that perspective, but, uh, the, the, the height of exterior load bearing walls would be allowed in Bismarck up to 12 ft, uh, in Burley County would be allowed up to 10 ft.

00:43:07,000	spk_3:
Uh, for building permit, I gotta provide a little bit of explanation here, so these two tables reflect the, uh, charts to identify what the value of structures is, um, and once that value is established, then there's multiplier tables in each Bismarck and Burley have these tables that if let's say you get a value of $200,000 for a structure. You, you, you then look at the multiplier table and there's ranges, so between $100,000 and $300,000. X number of dollars permit fee is charged. So, um, I've got to do a little bit of an explanation here because it's, it's not very straightforward how, how the permit fees are calculated you need to do a little bit of math to, to get there, but in terms of establishing the value of the structure, there are some slight differences and some Bismarck's higher and some Burley County's higher. Um, when it comes down to it, if you're just looking at the cost of just a single family home, a 2000 square foot single family home, when you run it through the multiplier tables, it'd be about $1400 for a permit fee in Bismarck and about $1750 in in Burley County, so you know, relatively close I think from both parties there.

00:44:27,467	spk_3:
And then the last slide I'll talk about is just what the, the future holds, uh, what our crystal ball is telling us for the region. So, uh, our 2045, we're at Bismarck right now is at a population a little over 76,000 based on the latest estimates, uh, by 2045 we're projecting actually just under 100,000, uh, population, uh, for the, the city of Bismarck. What that means from a land area need that could range anywhere from 1212 additional square miles up to 16.5 additional square miles depending on. Uh, growth patterns and how that growth occurs either more dense or less dense. Uh, this map actually I think is our latest. Um, growth what we call our growth phasing plan, so it, it identifies essentially to think about it, the area is easiest for Bismarck to serve with services, primarily water and sewer services, so, uh, the orange, uh, sort of pockets showing up on the map are probably the areas that that are not necessarily incorporated into the city but would be easy to serve it once they become incorporated the, the, the darker. Orange or burnt orange colors on the map you see those are kind of the next easiest areas to serve and so if one assumes that every undeveloped piece of property in Bismarck is developed. And all of these colored orange areas are developed that would probably be in it and it that growth occurs contiguous to the city as this map is showing that would be about 20 years of of growth uh for the for the city of Bismarck. So with that, um, are there any questions? That's, that's the end of the presentation, part of the, uh, information that we have.

00:46:22,767	spk_0:
Who has who has questions at this point?

00:46:30,166	spk_0:
Commissioner Zinker

00:46:33,066	spk_6:
Mayor commissioners, uh, Chairner and county commissioners, so I got a question for, uh, Mitch and Marcus. I mean that presentation was 100% provided by. City City of Bismarck employees, do they have anything to add to that presentation or anything they disagree with or, um, you know, kind of what's their side of the story, so to speak.

00:46:58,467	spk_5:
Commissioners, uh, Mr. Chair, Commissioner Zener, we have nothing to add right now. This is open for discussion. What he talked about on the presentation was basically a brief description of our jurisdiction in the city of Bismarck. So there's nothing that we can add. This is. By law, this ETA area is the city of Bismarck. So Consideration of this, you know, we have to wait till our decisions are made or some kind, some kind of change of agreements and then we can add. Uh, comments or considerations at that time.

00:47:33,667	spk_0:
So, so Mitch, just I guess to be for comparison purposes, did Ben and his team capture what you feel are the significant differences between zoning and permitting type items. County versus city, I mean, that's one of the considerations here we, I think are trying to deal with.

00:47:54,600	spk_5:
Uh, besides the difference in our zonings, uh, no, it's pretty accurate, OK.

00:48:00,200	spk_0:
Thank you. Anybody else

00:48:04,200	spk_7:
So

00:48:06,266	spk_0:
Good Commissioner Schwab.

00:48:08,567	spk_8:
Does the ETA.

00:48:12,100	spk_8:
Have to be 4 miles or can it be

00:48:14,667	spk_0:
smaller? So I think Ben, you can address this.

00:48:19,066	spk_3:
Yeah, thank you, Mayor, chair, and commissioner, Commissioner Schwab, yes, it can be smaller. In fact, ours is, is smaller. It's, it's smaller than that 4 mile ETA by agreement.

00:48:28,367	spk_8:
OK, I'll come in on that a little later then,

00:48:31,600	spk_0:
OK. Mr. Bakken, did you have

00:48:34,166	spk_2:
it? So one of the reasons I think this was beneficial for those that live in the ETA and for city residents to understand that is, is we all know that Bismarck is growing. Uh, in the meantime, what we're trying to do is kind of check an equity box a little bit, um, you know, there's issues that come up that, uh, residents in the ETA are. Dealing with, I don't wanna necessarily say cumbersome, but um. Possibly some excessive regulation in some cases when they're trying to do what they see fit with their property. Um. Fully noting that that's a future growth area for the city of Bismarck, um, and I think this is a great start to maybe spur some better conversations as that agreement's coming up again this year for review as Ben mentioned. Um, that if there's some areas that we can address some of the issues that residents in the ETA have concerning how they're managed, um, and the jurisdiction that they're under, while they're a county resident, I think this is a good place to start with that conversation.

00:49:49,667	spk_0:
So with that that kind of leads us to the next topic um or at least on the agenda so this time we would like to have public comment and I guess you know I I think my hope would be is let's hear some good constructive things that we can. Work on that would make things as Commissioner Bakin mentioned maybe less burdensome or cumbersome or cumbersome whatever the term might be so uh as you come forward I believe there's a sign in sheet at the podium um please sign in, state your name, and then tell us what you wanna tell us please.

00:50:29,300	spk_0:
Anyone

00:50:49,667	spk_9:
Uh, my name is Jim Cook. Uh, so what is the? He said it can be shorter than 4. What is the actual? From the city limit out where you have jurisdiction. And counted of 2 or 4.

00:51:06,767	spk_0:
So it, it varies because I think the way the city has grown with annexation from when the original line was set. And trying to look at where the city might grow, so there is not a set. Distance from the city corporate limits.

00:51:26,500	spk_9:
Sure. I live, see and why I'm wondering, I, I live on. Uh, Country Creek Fifth Estate, 6700 Cody Country Drive. I called the city. And not that I'm gonna get chickens. I was thinking of it till I had common sense kick in and And And and so they said I could not have chickens, but yet I'm way out in Country Creek, so I called twice just to make sure and they checked my address, says no, you're not allowed chickens there, but yet on 42nd and 53rd guy has chickens sitting right there. Now that's much closer to the city and there's multiple other places that do, so I think we really need to get. I've watched commissioning meetings, county, city, Burley for years. I hardly miss a meeting and watch them all. What I don't understand is, if they're gonna allow people to do it, In spots where they're not supposed to, but yet tell me the person that actually goes by the rules and regulations that I can't. When are we gonna get to the point where we're gonna weed out the people that have blatant and it's just not with chickens, it's crap yards, things like that. I know there's rules and regulations, but why isn't anything done to the people. That don't go by the. All the rules and rigs and then the honest people have to go by it because they're raised honest. You know what I'm saying? It gets to the point where, why even have any regulations if they're not gonna be. Enforced, you know what I'm saying? And so,

00:53:21,900	spk_2:
and that was one of the things too is the, the enforcement side of that and that's one of the. I don't wanna call it a loophole, but I guess that's a, a hole in the regulations, and we're trying to figure out how to navigate some of that as well, so.

00:53:37,467	spk_10:
I'll I'll add on to that a little bit. Um, realistically, um, it appears that the city doesn't have authority outside the city limits.

00:53:49,567	spk_10:
that's a big part of our concern. Um, I know as recently as, uh, I don't know, maybe a week ago, I contacted the city about a, about a property that, um, needed some, uh, Clean up, sure. And it's still the same way as when I called, so um Burley County has a state's attorney and the sheriff's department and whatnot, and Burley County is not in a position where, where um we're enforcing city ordinances and the city doesn't have the ability. To prosecute outside of the city if that makes sense,

00:54:31,700	spk_9:
nothing really makes sense with with it all because it, it's just not right for the law abiding people, but whatever. So, so then with the chicken then, why is it that I was told, just getting back to that, that I can't, but yet there's multiple places closer, way closer to the city. And they can. So did they just not call? Do they call? Don't they call? they

00:54:58,467	spk_0:
care? I think we can potentially have someone answer that for us. I, I can't answer that because I

00:55:07,166	spk_0:
don't know I have to we're here, yeah. So I don't know, it probably depends on where it was specifically, but Banner Brady can because I thought we have some areas of rural residential that chickens are permitted.

00:55:21,000	spk_0:
In ordinance

00:55:23,867	spk_0:
In the ETA.

00:55:25,767	spk_5:
He happens to be located in our jurisdiction.

00:55:29,200	spk_0:
OK,

00:55:30,166	spk_5:
so probably he's talking about chickens that are closer than that would be in the

00:55:34,367	spk_0:
ETA which would we allow.

00:55:38,166	spk_9:
Yeah, but why then what I told I can't

00:55:41,667	spk_11:
because you just said, huh,

00:55:45,300	spk_5:
no, we, we don't, yeah, let me say the we don't have any ordinances on chickens. We allow the, uh, the horses. Uh, we haven't got any special use permits for chickens yet if that's what people want, we can certainly consider that.

00:56:04,667	spk_9:
I mean, so yeah, I'm just saying when they said I can't. And I said, Well, other people haven't posts and she said, Well, where you live, you cannot have chickens, so maybe I should have called the county, but then if they're gonna say I can, and you say I

00:56:18,467	spk_6:
can't, but, but he didn't. He just said you can't.

00:56:21,767	spk_5:
Yeah, we, we not, no, I, yeah, let's stop. Oh yeah, no, we do not have an allowance in our ordinance currently right now for chickens that may be a certainly a consideration in the future. So it's

00:56:41,467	spk_6:
because we, we who, um, Ben or Brady, anytime you want to jump in here. They're hiding behind the pillar, but, but, but we, we allow it within the ETA under our jurisdiction.

00:56:56,867	spk_6:
So that's hey totally confusing, right? Get it? That's a great thing about this conversation is we'll figure some of those out, yep, so you're upset because you live in the county and you're told you can have chickens and which probably would be a little bit more practical that you could because you live in the county but yet in the ETA close to the city they can. And this guy wants to put him in the city limits, but this guy doesn't.

00:57:24,567	spk_6:
Let's just stir the pot some more. He's warming

00:57:28,467	spk_0:
up to the idea,

00:57:29,567	spk_6:
not a chance.

00:57:32,567	spk_10:
For what it, uh, I think for what it's worth, a lot of people, uh, have chickens and, you know, yeah, there's the, yeah, well, there's

00:57:45,100	spk_10:
a lot of. I mean in the county they

00:57:46,800	spk_2:
have bigger lots

00:57:47,967	spk_0:
yeah it's like.

00:57:50,567	spk_12:
Go ahead, sir.

00:57:52,667	spk_12:
My name is Tyson Austin. Um, I live in the ETA. I've got almost 5 acres, 4.6 acres. Um, kind of sounds like you guys have addressed this already, but. It frustrates me that with the land that I have, I can only have 3200 square foot of outbuildings when I have the dirt that I've got, um, horses, we've got chickens, um, I've got a huge garden. I'd like to put up a greenhouse, but because I have a pole barn and a horse barn, I'm basically out of square footage. There's other things, landscaping related on a landscaping company. I would like to have an outdoor kitchen and a pavilion and all kinds of stuff at my house that I can't have because it's considered an accessory building. Um, if I went by Burley County's measurements, I could have almost 8000 square feet of accessory buildings, um, right now at 3200 square feet. That's kind of a slap in the face. It, it's. I understand that there's gotta be rules and and. Things have to make sense, you know, um, but I'm also in an area where according to your own map you're not planning annexation in the 40 year plan, so my rural residential area is gonna be rural residential for a long time, um. We've got a huge garden. I plan on having a farmer's market. That's kind of my, uh, going to farmers' market, not having one, but, um, that's kind of my retirement plan. It's something my grandpa did, and I wanna kind of continue that legacy. I've got an orchard at my house, um, and I've got plans for things that I would like to do. And I'm really stifled by I, I can't even have a greenhouse, you know, I, I've got 2.5 acres on our north pasture that I'm not using right now that I thought I'd put a greenhouse in and I can't because it's considered a permanent structure, um, now granite it's made out of poly and. Uh, I don't really see how that's permanent, but that's what it's considered, and I'm not allowed to use it. I also can't build my pavilion because I don't have the square footage to do it. Um, you know, I, I have a ton of stuff that I use at my house more. I use a skid steer for snow removal. We've got a ton of toys, um, and all of that stuff I would like inside a building, and my, my only real option is to add on to my garage. And that's just not feasible with where I'm at. I mean, we're kind of pushed up against the north side of our property and that's where our garage is, and, and I can't go off the south side because I've got septic system over there. So I'm, I'm kind of stuck between a rock and a hard place, and it's because I'm being told that you can't do this, even though someone who's got, you know, an acre of land can build the same kind of structures that I'm allowed to have. And that's just a very frustrating thing.

01:00:50,567	spk_13:
Yeah, um, go ahead, uh, Ben, can you just clarify when you talked about the zoning comparisons, agricultural and rural residential, the changes that we're that you guys are talking about making now to align with the county with that. Fix or help with his issue

01:01:09,367	spk_3:
that would address Tyson's basically what we're proposing to do is align with the county is for access

01:01:17,100	spk_13:
of

01:01:20,400	spk_3:
including without need for a special permit which exists now.

01:01:25,166	spk_13:
What yeah, where are we at with those changes? Like you you said you're currently doing them.

01:01:29,400	spk_3:
So the, the time frame was originally looking at adoption by the end of this year, um, going through the adoption phase. I, I, I'll look to Daniel, are we still on track for that time frame? OK, so by the end of the year,

01:01:46,100	spk_13:
so at least we're making progress, right, Tyson? Thank you.

01:01:50,266	spk_12:
Anybody have any questions for me?

01:01:52,567	spk_0:
No, and we thank you for your concerns. Those are, those were well heard before, so I appreciate it.

01:02:33,467	spk_14:
Uh, my name is Dennis Wetzel. I live at 6111 Apple Creek Drive, and unfortunately, I'm in the ETA and also in a special flood hazard area. And I've spoken to the Burley County Commission and City commission over the last couple of years and uh You know, I started with trying to add on to my detached garage and I've been through many ordinance changes and through two flood map changes and uh. You know that was my original intent and I understand, you know, trying to, you know, uniform the ordinances and the rules, but I think there's always gonna be differences between the county and the city. I mean, we move out to the county so we can have larger accessory buildings and they're never gonna be the same. And I'm not sure why we are in the ETA are treated differently than the other county residents. I mean, I understand the growth, but I live in Faulkner Edition. There's gonna be no, uh, growth for the city down in the south part. I mean talk to the developers at Parado Valley, how much money they're spending on sewer and water connection and in Faulkner's addition, there's probably like 4 lots that are left, and I think 2 or 3 of them are in the, uh, floodway, so I mean they're not going to be built on. So I mean, I think you could easily remove Faulkner edition from the ETA and you're not gonna jeopardize any future growth.

01:04:11,000	spk_14:
Uh

01:04:14,266	spk_14:
You know, and we're in Lincoln Township, I think. So where are we at in this, uh, you know, like the agreements that you have, is Lincoln Township part of the city is it? Do do they have their own, uh, officers?

01:04:31,967	spk_10:
No, I can answer that. I believe that Lincoln Township is an unorganized township under the um under the jurisdiction of Burley County.

01:04:41,000	spk_14:
So and really, so that Lincoln Township. Didn't have any input into the ETA boundary.

01:04:49,100	spk_10:
No, that, that's where the county is.

01:04:51,066	spk_14:
Coy did that. So how do we go about trying to get an area out of the ETA?

01:04:57,767	spk_10:
Well, that's why we're here today

01:04:58,900	spk_0:
right? I mean, that's, I think the city will admit that there are probably some areas that need adjustment. We just got to figure out what those are and and also protect. I mean one thing we have to make sure we do is we have to protect the airports or air traffic so we don't have issues there, but I mean I think those are all things that are reasonable that you're talking

01:05:16,867	spk_14:
about and again I think in the growth plan I don't believe. You know, we're not in in the growth plan at all. I don't know what that burnt orange area was, but You know, So that's really all I had. Any, any questions? Thank

01:05:34,467	spk_0:
you.

01:05:43,166	spk_15:
Good evening, um. I guess I'm up here mainly to talk. I'm out in the ETA just uh North Misty Waters.

01:05:50,100	spk_2:
Travis name for the record.

01:05:51,700	spk_15:
Uh, my name is Travis Jensen, 5610 Olive Tree. Um, drive, like I said, just north of Misty Waters south of Ponderosa, right up on that edge of the ETA. My issue for one is regulation. I can tell you guys the regulation part that a lot of us are up in arms was showed by the 3 to 2 vote by the city. The city was first of all asked to coordinate this meeting and 3 out of 5 said no, we don't want to hear from you guys. Our county commissioners know more about this area because they talk to the people. They are accessible. They are in the community with us. I can tell you during the 2011 flood. I've seen Brian Bittner more than I've seen some of my neighbors. You know, he was down there checking on us, he was down there seeing what was going on. He was an intricate part of that effort. You guys in the city didn't want to hear from us, and the vote proves that. 3 of you basically gave us the burden. And said we don't care what you have to say. You're gonna follow our rules. You're gonna hold on, hold on,

01:07:05,567	spk_0:
hold on here at the table. I'm

01:07:06,367	spk_15:
not attacking anybody. It's on the record that the vote was 3 to 5, uh, Mayor. Like I said, I can reach out to my county commissioners if I have a problem, if I have a concern, and I can tell you whether they agree with me or not. I feel heard every time, and a couple of them at this table can tell you we've had arguments at the end of the day I will still reach out to them every time because I feel heard. The city folks, I can't say that, you know, I think the Misty Waters thing we talked about accountability. I'm gonna touch on that briefly here. I don't wanna take up too much time. The accountability is a problem. You guys only create accountability when it suits you. Otherwise, the other areas of the ETA are misfits, and we've seen that recently up in the Misty Waters area, which is ETA. You guys change the rules. Because it was convenient. They broke the rules and you guys changed them. The precedent was set that in the ETA. Go ahead and build what you want to build. And after years of arguments change over on the commission. Well you know what you know, whatever you wanna call it, we're gonna change the rules to make it so you're good. Um, You guys only give notice to the ETA when it's convenient, and that's the frustrating part. I live in the ETA. I moved up to the country because I didn't want to be part of Bismarck. Um, quite frankly, if I had known what the ETA was back then, I would not have purchased my lot. Um, I was young, wasn't involved in politics, um. I wouldn't have purchased it. If I would have known what I know today, I would not have purchased my lot. I would have been a county resident. Um, you guys want us to pour cement for shops. You want us to pour cement for for sheds. If, if we're just gonna put a boat or, I mean, something that doesn't need to be on concrete, what is the point of having us pour concrete? If a person wants to put up a pole barn. What's the part of a pole barn Pole barns, I think a lot of you guys can attest that they don't look too bad these days. You can do some pretty nice things with pole barns to where they are aesthetic, um, rather than just a quonset. Um, that's one of my problems is we're restricted by people that we can't vote for. And I wanna add on to that Mayor, that we are restricted by people that don't want to hear from us. And I'm gonna be very loud about that because that's one of the biggest problems is that you guys don't want to hear from us and your 3 to 2 vote, prove that. And I'll be honest with you, the whole chicken thing from a county aspect. Why don't we just allow it? I'm in the ETA, I got chickens and ducks, you know, so I'm, I'm to the point in the ETA where I'm tired of asking for permission. I'm just gonna start doing, and I'm gonna hope you guys give me the same precedents that you gave Misty Waters. Thank you for your time.

01:10:03,300	spk_0:
Mr. Rich, I

01:10:04,200	spk_11:
just want to set the record straight. I was one of the 3 votes. I didn't give the thumb or the bird to anyone. There wasn't a clear, uh, description of what this meeting was going to be. We already meet with the city and county. We've got joint meetings going on. We already got, uh, uh, an ETA agreement signed. That's why I voted no, no big deal. I love the guys in the ETA.

01:10:28,667	spk_15:
I didn't ask for clarification either. I believe that Commissioner Connelly headed that up pretty good. I was at that meeting in person. Um, I was pretty clear on what was being asked. I know I apologize. Maybe you didn't understand what was being asked, um, but that's why I see at this table. I think everybody sitting at this table would encourage questions and clarification as leaders in this community. That is your obligation before voting. To understand what you are voting on. So maybe a little bit more discussion rather than the 3 to 2 vote that we continue to see. Would would benefit the city, but like I said, where do I stand as an ETA resident? I can tell you half these guys I've talked to you at some point within their political career. And I've been heard whether I agree with them or disagree with them. I've had conversations each time I have felt hurt. I can say there's a few of you in the city that uh I've had discussions with, but quite frankly, you guys only want to hear from us or. You know, deal with us when when issues like this arise, and I feel like a lot of us feel like orphan Annies and uh. That's, that's not a good feeling that you guys have because us ETA folks, we are part of the Bismarck community whether you want to realize it or not, we work in Bismarck, we send our kids to Bismarck, we patronize businesses in Bismarck. But yet you guys want to regulate over us with an iron fist and not give us any say. All you would have to do is vote yes that night and we would have got this rolling because I didn't hear any. Any problems from this from a county commission? Is it an extra night of their time? Yes, and I appreciate that, guys. Like I said, these folks here, they're, they're in the community, they stand shoulder to shoulder with us and they're always willing to take a phone call and I appreciate it.

01:12:37,400	spk_16:
Hello, I think everybody knows who I am, but my name is Robert Field. And I happen to live about half a mile from Brian Bittner. Uh, no complaints about him.

01:12:51,567	spk_16:
The, the big problems I have with the way the ETA is handled is basically everybody wants to control what we do out there, and there's nothing more tyrannical than saying we can't vote for the people regulating us. So election time comes we can't run somebody for mayor. We can't run anybody for city council, but yet you guys can control how many chickens supposedly can live in my 700,000 square foot lot. I mean, just stop and think about that with a reasonable mind. So that means if you only own a 10 bedroom home in town, you can't have a parakeet. Because it's way too big for your lot. I mean, there's gotta be some reasonable explanation for how a lot of 700,000 square feet, which for mathematically declining people, that's 16 acres. I can't have one steer.

01:13:49,867	spk_16:
But I can have horses. And I believe I can have fish. And 10 chickens. I mean, How do you even? Measure that without thinking this is a comedy.

01:14:06,767	spk_16:
I'm way out on Apple Creek, not far from 80th, between 66th and 80th. Well, that obviously isn't policed by Bismarck Police. Even though I have them in my yard at 2 in the morning. It isn't policed by Lincoln. And I had the Lincoln cops pull a guy over at the end of my driveway. How much law enforcement do we need out there? There's a handful of us. I mean it's like you guys decide how to regulate it and then you don't pay attention to it at all. You just walk away, but I, I, it really bothers me and I talked to an attorney on Monday and he said if we want to fight it, we can get the right to vote.

01:14:52,367	spk_16:
Because it's a federal case, you can't restrict our right to vote when we're being regulated. I just haven't decided if I want to waste that much money yet.

01:15:03,500	spk_16:
And I don't believe there's anything wrong with building a pole barn like he said in the ETA. If the city does ever get out there, anything we built on a 700,000 square foot lot, the first thing they're gonna do is bulldoze the whole place and make it into lots. So what's it matter if there's a big pole barn sitting there? He'll be at the landfill in about 6 hours. They aren't gonna keep that building and reuse it. Now if they're gonna build a development.

01:15:36,000	spk_16:
But I, I just don't think, you know, and you look at the, we only pay business or uh Burley County tax and the ETA and schools and specials, whatever.

01:15:47,800	spk_16:
Even though we're regulated by the city in town, I own a home. And I pay Burley County tax. What's Burley County doing for me as a homeowner in Bismarck? What services do I get from the county? The city and the county don't get along, so I can tell you what I get from the county, 0. And also one of you guys can tell me what the county did for Bob Field this year.

01:16:16,400	spk_16:
In town. And the ETA they plow my road and everything else. So yes, I get B Burley County Services in the ETA. But my house in town, I don't see how I get anything from Burley County.

01:16:37,166	spk_16:
So have you got an answer for that?

01:16:41,100	spk_8:
Do I have an answer for that?

01:16:43,000	spk_16:
I mean, it's taxation without representation. Oh, you're just closest.

01:16:50,867	spk_16:
You're probably more used to it.

01:16:52,266	spk_8:
You have services from the county. What

01:16:57,867	spk_8:
you have like.

01:17:00,200	spk_8:
What's that?

01:17:03,100	spk_8:
There's, there's services, whether you like it or not for everybody that does live in, in the city. Uh, anytime somebody in the city goes out into the county.

01:17:18,767	spk_8:
They have roads to get there that the county takes care of. That's a service to them. Hunters get a service. Do you hunt? no, too bad.

01:17:28,100	spk_16:
I'm saving my animal for better reasons,

01:17:30,300	spk_8:
but you know, hunters, boaters wherever they want to go.

01:17:35,266	spk_8:
They're getting services from the county, they're getting recreational services, boat docks, good roads to get out to the Hunting grounds where they wanna go or Thanksgiving with grandma, so you can't say that you get nothing. OK, so I, unless you don't want to drive around in town or out there, I mean,

01:17:58,667	spk_16:
but you got gas tax and state funding and everything else. I'm saying, I mean, I, I understand Burley County does things for me in the ETA. I can't deny that. They're out there all the time working on the road now that the city's wrecking Apple Creek Road, you'll be out there fixing that again. But I don't see that it's an equal parallel that we should pay as much Burley County tax as we do in the city. And the city tax on top of it and anything else they can dream up and then whatever extra sales tax they nail you with.

01:18:33,767	spk_8:
Think you can run government without taxes so.

01:18:37,166	spk_16:
Well, I could do without as many parks that the homeless live in. I can do without as many

01:18:41,867	spk_8:
aquatic centers be coming up at the next meeting. This is ETA, and I, and I will, and I, and I will, I will tell you one thing. Some of this stuff I agree with you on. Uh, but I don't agree. That all of a sudden we nuke everything without a plan in place. So civilization around here can continue. Everybody complains, and a lot of times when you talk to me, you say, well, Minnesota does it this way. I don't care how the hell Minnesota does anything, would you, I don't want to live in Minnesota, they got their problems. We have our way of doing it and and it's kind of the old west in some ways. Bismarck is one of the last hometown big cities. And trying to preserve it within this county. You know, we try to help and, you know, between the highway department, say, and public works, they work together fine.

01:19:41,700	spk_8:
But If they go it alone, up go your taxes. So,

01:19:48,200	spk_0:
so let's, you gotta look. I'd like to bring us back to the, the agenda if we can. Um, we're on the ETA and, and Robert, I appreciate your comments that you've made and, and some of them are very valid. You're, you know,

01:20:00,467	spk_16:
as, as far as conversations in the past, yeah, as far as the chickens go, I don't think that once your, once your houses aren't 10 ft apart anymore. There should be room to let a chicken run around, you know, it's either that or I want the city and the county to come out and remove those illegal 50 wild turkeys that live on my property. They're all trespassing. This is a public notice. I expect you out there tomorrow morning, Schwab. I'll point out the herd and you grab them so

01:20:29,367	spk_2:
I can get a tag in this zone, right? You're right.

01:20:32,467	spk_16:
I don't care if you have a tag or not. I'm not a game warden.

01:20:36,100	spk_0:
Commissioner, go ahead.

01:20:36,900	spk_8:
I would say that if I, and I do live in town, I have cattle out of town. If my neighbor's got chickens and the *** thing comes over my yard, I'm gonna have chicken because it's mine then. That's the way I look at it, so you could take care of the turkeys.

01:20:55,066	spk_16:
They're not mine. There Thank you for your time.

01:21:00,500	spk_2:
Thank you, sir. Thanks, Robert. Uh, anybody else?

01:21:06,867	spk_2:
This is public comment. Anybody else like to speak? Uh, cause we are about addressing issues between the ETA residents and the county and the city and uh I think we've had a good conversation as far as, uh, a starting point, you know, some of the things the city are doing, uh, as far as addressing ancillary structures. I mean, there's still some places to have conversations as far as, you know, some of the required engineering that. Things may or may not need, uh, as opposed to the county, um, but, you know, the concrete's a great conversation, um, you know. I, I think the city a lot of times needs to look at what the use is in that rural area, um, until that is part of the city. So

01:21:53,166	spk_15:
I got one quick request, Steve, um, can we possibly look at the time? 4 o'clock is really difficult for a lot of working class folks to make, um, if we want some good input, and I know this was more of an educational, you know, kind of a hopefully a starting point. Um, but in the future if we want actual public comment and we want people that are able to make it here and you guys actually want to hear concerns, most of us blue collar work until 5 o'clock, um, so it'd be great to see these after that give us some time to. You know, get home, you know, and make it here within a reasonable time frame, so.

01:22:32,700	spk_2:
Thanks, Travis.

01:22:41,867	spk_17:
Good evening. Um, I'm Karen Martinison. My husband and I live northeast of town and we have a farm land that is now in the ETA. Um, and I share the concern that we have no representation with the city. It was interesting to me that there can be joint jurisdiction. And that isn't happening to my understanding, is it right? Just the city has the jurisdiction

01:23:10,066	spk_0:
under the under the negotiated ETA. That's how if it weren't negotiated, then there would be. 2 miles roughly of joint jurisdiction,

01:23:21,767	spk_17:
so, uh, I mean if you can't change in any other way, I'd sure like to see at least joint jurisdiction in those, uh, external miles, um, where we would have some representation from the county. And that's my comment any questions.

01:23:38,667	spk_0:
Thank you.

01:23:55,300	spk_0:
Yes, I'm sorry,

01:23:56,967	spk_6:
why she's finishing writing that up. So, um, it's about joint jurisdiction from a planning zoning perspective because I think we have that now, correct? And, or, or what other, what other expand in that joint jurisdiction, I guess. Just so what you, what you want because we, I, I think we already, we already have planning zoning has, yeah, has joint jurisdiction. I don't think we could have unless state law changes joint jurisdiction from city to county on our boards. So I think maybe that's a, yeah, if we have it on PNZ is if we're cool with that, but maybe there's a clarification we should, we should get from both our legal teams.

01:24:58,400	spk_18:
Good evening. I'm Gerald Kunz. I live out at Leisure World Estates. And I fall under the extraterritorial.

01:25:09,166	spk_18:
I guess I, I just don't understand. I know it was touched on earlier. But that you guys realize we can't vote for you, we can't run for the offices because of the extra territorial. I just wanted to make sure you guys understood that. Thank you.

01:25:41,900	spk_7:
Mayor, chair, and commissioners. The reason why I'm standing up here under public comment is I asked for something to be added to this agenda, and I was told no. And that frustrates me because it's part of this discussion for a long time. And I appreciate the fact that Ben shared that this history is a lot longer than even what I looked up. On some levels, this has been discussed since 1929. And the reason why I was told that part of it was not going to be discussed was um that the topic would be um if the ETA did not exist. Um, the practice of greenfield assessments and abeyance. Um, Would be still implemented without the ETA. Well, if it's been part of the discussion since 1929, and it's been part of the practice for 48 years. Why are we saying that, well, if it didn't exist, it wouldn't be part of this discussion. So when I look to our agenda and under Senate Bill 2180 and allowing the space for public comment, and it has to be related to agenda items, public comment relating to the ETA. So under the idea of, I shouldn't be up here talking about this, but it's a practice that we employ right now. There was a house south of the Burley tree that their septic system went out, and whether it was plumbing or other reasoning, I get different stories. The annexation into the community under the assessments, they got a greenfield assessment for just under $57,000. This is not

01:27:32,300	spk_7:
part of the reason for having these discussions is there's and bringing it to the table so we can have a raw and genuine discussion about some of the impacts of things that happen to people on the fringes. And I had a very good discussion with one of the department heads, but part of that discussion is, is outside of 4 miles, I don't find anybody wanting to be annexed into the community.

01:27:58,700	spk_7:
But on the fringes or within the 2 miles. On a house by house or property by property basis for it um. Any properties that have existed for a while. These dollars, these greenfield assessments can add up very quickly. And

01:28:19,767	spk_7:
So I tried. To uh

01:28:26,600	spk_7:
Ask questions and I just picked three areas and I said I asked for generic examples so people could understand that what those impacts might entail, knowing that each of these would be highly individual and we do have several services that have different levels of assessment, so no one property is going to be the same. And um. We have memorandums of understanding where if people want a single family home or building an outbuilding, like some of the people mentioned, um.

01:29:05,166	spk_7:
It's occurred in our, uh, staff reports to where if you want this on your property, then you have to agree to this if the city ever expands that far. And I just think that in the future, um, as we have another one of these discussions, that pick some examples so people understand some of the dollars and cents that might apply to them individually and leaving it out as if it might not happen when we're currently employing some of these practices, new development that was taken care of with the water utility rate changes in 18. But all existing developments that could be significantly, significantly different, and. I was part of looking for these answers, uh, in 2017, with two mayors ago, and it's a question that's always hung true. I've had several discussions. I know citizens want to know what those impacts are. So I'm very. I mean, I wrote 5 pages worth of stuff and I could have been a lot more direct and a lot more. Um, bold with it, but. I would say take another swing, let's add that to our discussion and um be real with our citizens. They like many said, they can't vote for us at the city, but they deserve representation regardless of what seat we are. Thank you.

01:30:45,266	spk_0:
Did you ask the Commissioner Schwab

01:30:48,367	spk_8:
account's gonna be over

01:30:49,100	spk_2:
here. Yeah, turn your mic on.

01:30:53,066	spk_0:
I haven't, we haven't closed it yet.

01:30:55,000	spk_8:
OK, I'll wait till afterwards.

01:30:56,867	spk_0:
OK. Is there anybody else who wishes to speak?

01:31:04,500	spk_0:
The 2nd call for public comment.

01:31:12,166	spk_0:
Third and final call for public comment.

01:31:18,066	spk_0:
See no one else, public comment period is now closed. So now we're to the next steps or other or other discussion.

01:31:26,300	spk_8:
OK, you know, I kind of listen to that beginning presentation. And

01:31:35,467	spk_8:
The city controls. Land outside. The city boundary I remember when I was on the city commission they'd have maps you can only have and they're out there 4 mile boundary. And the green was for parts and recreation, and this is for development, the red was for commercial. Number one, you can't tell people what to do with their land. Uh, all regulations are actually imposed on the people because they can't vote. And that's a big issue with me. Uh, 12,500 people in the ETA can't vote for who's going to impose regulations on them, so there is a solution. Now this may seem off the wall, but I think it should be considered.

01:32:28,000	spk_8:
We need the departments that are necessary between the county and The city For flood water and and the major things, uh, traffic and etc.

01:32:42,100	spk_8:
We need them to be working together. And uh That'll take care of half the problem right there. The other part of the problem is we have inspectors. We're going to have to decide who's going to inspect what because Everything is different. So my recommendation, and like I said, it's gonna be out the wall. I think that we should look at getting the, getting the uh departments to work together individually that are really Taking care of infrastructure.

01:33:20,500	spk_8:
Once we do that, we should reduce. The ETA to 1 ft out of the city boundaries and let the people live the way they want.

01:33:32,266	spk_8:
And you think about that, that's, it doesn't, you know. It makes sense because basically I understand that the city. And they have a right to, you know, well, we're going to be annexing and the county has. Like the highway department, well, how's this traffic flow gonna be? That could be worked on. Why do we even have an ETA? Is it required? And if it. If it's required, one foot's enough for me. That's my comment.

01:34:07,967	spk_0:
So I'm gonna, I'm gonna ask a question because you bring a question up that allows this question to be reasonable. So, Mitch. Um, could you come up, please?

01:34:21,367	spk_0:
So, so Mitch, if you were to take on the ETA. Area, how many additional staff people would you need?

01:34:30,600	spk_5:
That's a good question. There are 8 additional zoning. Districts in the city of Bismarck compared to ours, we'd have to change our complete zoning pla um planning model.

01:34:48,100	spk_5:
But it's a good question,

01:34:49,700	spk_0:
so, so that, I mean my concern would be. We can negotiate a boundary, but there's a, there's there's another impact to that boundary. I'm just making that clear to everyone that there would be staffing needed at Burley County to handle that additional area because there's because there's 12,000 or 13,000 residents in the ETA who have needs. For that and just to keep that in perspective as we talk about this as we move forward. That's all

01:35:17,000	spk_8:
you're worried about people, well, the staff to handle that.

01:35:25,900	spk_8:
Well, if we're giving out the permits, We'll be able to in, in the 1st 2 miles, we'll, we'll be able to hire help for uh. Zoning I mean it's like I said, it's off the wall, but think about it, think about it.

01:35:42,800	spk_0:
I think we're gonna negotiate something smaller in the ETA regardless. I think there's some definite areas I've looked

01:35:48,600	spk_8:
at the map. I'd like to see it gone anyway,

01:35:50,567	spk_0:
but, but, but, but there's, there's a cost to the county if this happens, and it's not insignificant.

01:35:57,200	spk_8:
There's a cost to the city

01:35:58,400	spk_10:
too. Yeah, I, I think there would be a corresponding cost savings to the city.

01:36:05,567	spk_0:
You know, we still have our boundaries to manage, so I mean there might be some, but I don't know it would be corresponding.

01:36:11,367	spk_10:
I I think it would be. I'm part of the

01:36:17,200	spk_10:
The ETA thing is a is a real personal thing to me. I bought my house 38 years ago on 80th Street, and I knew, unlike anybody else, I knew where the line was, and it was the edge of my property. Was The city's jurisdiction. So I bought land outside of your jurisdiction, and then suddenly I find myself under the city's jurisdiction and nothing I could do about it. I go, hmm, that's a problem. So then I wanted to either add on to my garage or do something, you know, a little project. Then I said, uh, well, I guess I got to talk to the city. So I go and talk to the city. I said, well, no, you can't, you can't add on to your garage or anything until you do a, a subdivision plat. Well, well, I'm not a subdivision, I just own this land out here. And uh that at the time, I think it was estimated somewhere around $12,000 to do this subdivision plaque. Because I had on my garage before I can even move a shovel full of dirt. And that's why I got involved and started working with the legislature, and I got appointed as the governor's designee on the advisory Committee on Intergovernmental relations, and we worked to change the zoning laws so that we could at least negotiate that 2 to 4. Um, and then there was a, a change, um, at the city level that that staff kind of jokingly referred to it as the Bittner Amendment, so that properties like mine that existed prior to the city's basically grandfathered us in, so I didn't have to have a, a subdivision plat to um add on to my garage, you know, it seems, it seems pretty academic, right? Um, and so over time. Um, I just constantly hear, uh, we get phone calls as commissioners all the time from citizens with issues in the ETA. And like I mentioned earlier, um, you know, the, the big problem really has been enforcement. Now, besides enforcement, There's also um this information that you've received from the county in front of you that talked about stormwater and related problems within the ETA. We know from the timeline, um. That was presented kind of where we're at, um, but between the Burley County Water Resource District and the Burley County Highway Department, this particular set of problems has cost us $559,590,000.

01:39:00,367	spk_10:
See, we can't afford your help. You know, we, we appreciate your desire to be out there. Regulating that area, but honestly, we can't afford it. We pay more now for their planning and zoning because me and uh and the commissioners at the time, we created our own county planning and zoning. And it's because we terminated you, your staff was terminated because of these sort of things. So it's hard for me um to want to have a lot of cooperation with the city. For example, there's a conversation that came up about a $50,000 thing for public health, um, out of this opioid settlement fund. It doesn't get much traction with me. Because we're on the hook for, we're responsible for the repairs out here. A lot of, a lot of repairs and. You guys get to make the.

01:40:00,500	spk_10:
The you guys allow this to happen without any kind of skin in the game. So I guess my question is, you want to pay us back in a lump sum or you want to make payments?

01:40:12,867	spk_0:
So I think, I think before we go down that path, we need to move forward we need to fix going forward that's the goal here looking back is really not gonna get us anywhere and as, as, as let me, let me finish please, um, I think I could pull Mr. Shell up here and Marcus Hall up here and there's a whole bunch of that $5.5 million that was way pre-storm water management and.

01:40:40,567	spk_10:
That's the same, it's the same point,

01:40:42,367	spk_0:
but how, how is that the city's fault? Well,

01:40:45,567	spk_10:
you approved all these

01:40:46,467	spk_0:
subdivisions. I did not approve them.

01:40:48,567	spk_10:
This was before your time, but this is why we're here because all of this, regardless of the stormwater thing, and we worked hard, we, we've. We've directed our staffs to work together better to avoid this,

01:41:02,867	spk_0:
and I believe they are, they are doing they are working quite well together, but

01:41:07,667	spk_10:
look at the value.

01:41:09,000	spk_0:
So again, my point is put the timeline to when stormwater management actually started to occur and that that is gonna eliminate a significant number of these items because that's that was on. Honestly, I don't know who it's on. It's not,

01:41:24,367	spk_10:
it's on the city planning and zoning.

01:41:26,867	spk_0:
It wasn't city planning and zoning. We had uh we have stormwater ordinances then?

01:41:31,900	spk_10:
That's not an excuse.

01:41:33,667	spk_0:
Well, Brian, that, that, that is we're, we need to move forward. We need to move forward.

01:41:40,467	spk_2:
You know that that's part of the issues we've had. Go ahead.

01:41:43,667	spk_8:
You can't move forward without looking at the past because you're, we're not here to approve Einstein's theory, so

01:41:52,400	spk_0:
insanity as you and others have mentioned. Understand that 78% of the taxes Burley County collects comes from City of Bismarck residents, so we probably have already contributed to that in a large way.

01:42:08,667	spk_8:
So how much, how much of that tax goes to the county and how much is the city?

01:42:14,400	spk_0:
78% of your property tax collections, Burley County property tax collections, which Mr. Fields was just talking about it. Go to the county So if the county collects $34 million in property, well I'll keep the math easier if the county collects $40 million.30 million dollars plus is coming from city of Bismarck residents, so we're already contributing to anything the county does.

01:42:40,600	spk_10:
These are mistakes,

01:42:42,300	spk_0:
but we're still contributing to that so you can if you want to go down the road and if we were to say that was an actual number.

01:42:48,700	spk_8:
I want to go down. I want to go down that road, we can do a little audit and get them

01:42:54,567	spk_0:
numbers, but again, 78% of the dollars have come from the city of Bismarck property owners, so we have paid for. Close to 80% of that regardless as city property owners.

01:43:08,467	spk_2:
Well, the point Brian brings up is those are mistakes and they're legitimate mistakes, but what they wind up doing is costing the taxpayers' money. Coming back to the ETA, a lot of the concerns that the ETA people are seeing are there being. Cost more money uh from some of the decisions and that's why we're here is to try to navigate a path forward so we can mitigate cost to the taxpayers in the ETA that that's what this discussion is about, so.

01:43:41,467	spk_0:
And

01:43:42,400	spk_2:
there's a lot of there there's a lot of issues whether it's roads, water conveyance, um, different things that lie in the ETA and, and that's they're all open for discussion, but, uh, you know, this was more the informational piece and this is, I, I think a good starting place, but there's a lot of things that we still have to look at addressing. So

01:44:04,700	spk_0:
what would be appropriate, I'm sorry, Commissioner Woodcox,

01:44:07,867	spk_19:
um. This is a thought, um, would there be such a thing as creating a planning and zoning department that handles just the ETA paid for by a joint combination of city and and county funds and let them handle that just that area. Is that a thought? Is that something we could pursue? Uh, I know that then, then that, that one for planning and zoning would, would eliminate a lot of the, hopefully eliminate a lot of the permit costs $20 here and it costs $200 here and that type of thing. We could move towards a combined regulation of the entire uh the ETA. Is that such a thing?

01:44:51,400	spk_2:
I don't know I think it's a I think it's a step to give them more representation which is I,

01:44:56,266	spk_19:
I hate to see us grow in, in, uh, government numbers or employees because I'm against that too, but there comes a time when maybe this, this might be. Uh, an option.

01:45:11,867	spk_0:
throw it on the dartboard and see what or throw it up on the board and see what it what it brings.

01:45:18,800	spk_20:
Mr. Mayor and

01:45:19,567	spk_0:
chair, yes.

01:45:22,567	spk_20:
Uh, this is Wayne Munson. Um, I, to, to kind of go back to, uh, uh, Commissioner Woodcock's, uh, comment, and I've thought about that as well, but, uh, I'm not interested in growing larger governments to. Charge the taxpayers more. Uh, I do like the idea of of what Commissioner Bakin is talking about. This is the informational piece that we got tonight. Now we need to move forward, uh, even as, uh, one of the residents mentioned, we, we need to make, make a different time for the next meeting. Uh, I feel bad we only had 5 residents coming and. Bring their concerns to us and we have 12,000 people living in the ETA. We need to have another opportunity to hear more of the concerns from the residents. So that we can move forward in creating additional guidelines for the two groups to work together so that we can have some good common ground. Thank you.

01:46:31,667	spk_0:
Commissioner Risch,

01:46:32,767	spk_11:
thank you, um. You know, I heard some things from Commissioner Bittner, Mr. Jensen about unreasonable rules as far as adding on to a garage. He wants to build a pole barn without concrete. I think those are legitimate issues that should be addressed. We shouldn't be over over bearing on the people in the ETA. We should be more lenient and let them do things they wanna do. I'm all in on that, but one of the underlying things that I keep hearing is taxation without representation. Funny thing, I have property in Mandan and Morton County. I pay more taxes for the schools of Manden than I do in Bismarck. My home is in Bismarck. I pay more taxes for the park district in Manan than I do in on my home in Bismarck. I just got a special assessment in Manan for $156,000

01:47:21,567	spk_11:
and guess what, guess what? I don't get to vote over there, nor should I be able to vote over there. You can only vote in one place. And the people in the ETA, I love you all, but you do not pay those mark city taxes, and a lot of a lot of people move outside of the city limits so, so they don't have to pay city taxes. They don't have to pay, uh, park district taxes and things of that nature, but the people in the ETA, people in Burley County actually get some big advantages that the people of Bismarck pay for. Like I said, I pay $622 a year in park district fees. Apart from taxes. When I go to Riverwood Golf Course, I pay $40 to play an 18 hole round of golf. If somebody from the ETA of Burley County goes to play golf at Riverwood Golf Course, guess what? They pay $40 as well. But I pay twice because I pay the $622 and I pay my full green fee. So there's an advantage there. You get to go to all our parks, which is great. We want to do that. Um, I go to the wave to pool, take my grandchildren there. It's $5. People from the ETA don't pay any park district taxes, but they get to get in for $5 as well. Our public library is open to everyone in Burley County. They don't have to pay anything for a library card. And um I've heard the librarian say it's about costing each citizen of Bismarck about $35 a year for this library. So there's a lot of benefits that people in the ETA get that they don't have to pay for. And that I think that's an injustice on the citizens of Bismarck.

01:48:53,667	spk_10:
Except.

01:48:56,400	spk_10:
Except we were just reviewing our preliminary budget last night and um there was a substantial amount in our budget that does go towards city parks, um, library, and those sort of things. So we actually are. Yeah,

01:49:16,667	spk_0:
you're right. The county county contributes to several of those. There's no question,

01:49:21,567	spk_10:
so let's be clear, it's not uh. Uh, it's not just the city residents that are subsidizing the county.

01:49:30,800	spk_8:
Well, I want to be very clear on this. And that's why I said we should just have this one little strip around the city and then the county and the and the city should work together. This will never be resolved ever in our lifetime until these people out here get to vote for who's telling them what to do and who's taxing them. It's not gonna work. You you have better luck. Trying to teach Iraq how to swim.

01:50:07,367	spk_8:
OK Because it's not gonna work and, and we could sit here and say, well, you get these benefits the number one benefit is the right to vote and they're not and they don't have it.

01:50:18,300	spk_11:
Should I be able to vote mania? I live in Bismarck. I have property mandate. What

01:50:29,467	spk_8:
exactly why don't don't, don't twist my words. The right to vote is a constitutional right. It's a right every person deserves. And If they can't vote for who's telling them what to do, that is wrong. It's morally wrong, unacceptable, and you'll never get this straightened out until they get the right to vote. So I am done commenting.

01:50:51,967	spk_0:
Let's try to find some steps forward because we're not just throwing barbs back and forth. It's not gonna help us.

01:50:59,000	spk_10:
What are you worried about? What, what, what does the city worry about? I mean, why Um, You know, this, uh, the extraterritorial area. I think was justified at one time. Because back in the 20s and 30s and whatnot, there was no county planning and zoning either. So over time, The city and the county have almost mirror-like ordinances. There's essentially, you saw the presentation, there's basically no difference. And Burley County is totally on board with the notion of trying to protect the airport. We obviously we fly out of the same thing, you know, um, city owns the land around it. Now I don't know what that means in your mind to protect the airport because we would have the same interests. So what I'm asking is, what are you afraid of? This thing has outlived its usefulness. We're way beyond. Um, the 20s and 30s because we have county planning and zoning, we established that and so, you know, we're prepared to work together. I've been on the city planning and zoning commission for like 17 years. Nobody has been on that board that's currently on it longer than I have. And the place is not a train wreck or anything. I, I haven't proposed anything outlandish. We've been cooperative and I think the city would have a lot better cooperation from the county. If you eliminate the CTA, we'll work together. We'll we'll guarantee none of us here. want to see the city of Bismarck have problems. But conversely, I showed you a list of the problems we face. So, I guess the question is what are you afraid of?

01:53:02,767	spk_0:
Well I believe if we go back to the reason why ETA was established, and again, the area I'm not gonna say that the area that's currently defined as the right geographic square mile area, but the ETA was established to provide and provide the cities, cities, not just city of Bismarck, it's cities. A, a way to manage the growth. Now, does it need to be restricted potentially. That's why it isn't, isn't what's under century code right now. That that's really why it isn't that way and we're trying to negotiate potentially something better so I'm not Brian, I, I'm not saying that we're afraid of anything. I just think we need to get to what is a reasonable geographic definition 1 ft around the city like we're gonna be annexing county property every other day, and that's not an easy process to go through when you've got a plane and zoning that's under our jurisdiction. That becomes a,

01:53:58,567	spk_10:
there's no problem. There's no problem with that. You annex the property, it becomes in the city limits, and you got it. These,

01:54:07,367	spk_0:
look at,

01:54:07,567	spk_10:
look at here. All of these subdivisions around the outside here. How does that protect your growth area? That doesn't, you know, there's, there's, you guys over the years have approved subdivisions everywhere in your own way. And now you're, you're trying to say you're protecting your growth. You've been hurting your growth. You know, we're, we want to work together. We want to work together with the city.

01:54:34,000	spk_2:
One of the things that needs to be part of the discussion is for the growth of Bismarck, what happens when the city has to annex a 2.5 acre lot. I mean Great example was the the gal down south that she had one house on a parcel that was hers and she wound up getting assessed x 6. Um, that's where I think a lot of the conversations at this table need to also go is for the future growth of Bismarck, how do you manage that? Because you're not gonna be able to go to somebody who's got a 5 acre lot and go, hey, we're the city, you're not part of the city, and you're getting assessed times 12 for, I mean, so those are some of the discussions that we need to have at this table as well because you're going to tax somebody out of their property. At some point if that happens, and those are some of the things we need to look at addressing because nobody doesn't want the city to grow. The city has to grow,

01:55:33,867	spk_0:
not disagree with that,

01:55:35,700	spk_2:
so those are some of the other discussions that we need to have

01:55:38,567	spk_0:
way to get to this without being 1 ft around the city. I'm just, there's something, there's a. There's gonna be a negotiated and there's gonna be compromise and not everybody's gonna be, everybody's gonna be unhappy at some point and everybody's gonna be happy to some point. That's, that's what negotiation is. So I would like to know what our next steps forward would be so that we can begin to move in a process forward. Do we want to schedule another meeting of the entirety of us? Do we want to have a subset of that to try to work with some ideas to bring back. Because putting 10 people around the table sometimes it's hard to get those get those deals done.

01:56:17,600	spk_2:
So I, I,

01:56:18,467	spk_8:
I, uh. I would advise you that like I said,

01:56:25,100	spk_8:
If I was gonna try to figure this thing out, the first thing you need to work on is these people's right to vote. It is not gonna work, and that's the most important issue here.

01:56:38,667	spk_19:
Mr. Chairman, has anybody, do we know or our planning departments are here? Do anybody know of other cities that they all have the same problem because you get that can't vote for. Who represents you in the city? Are there other cities that have solved that problem?

01:56:54,266	spk_13:
I was gonna ask the same thing, Ben. You say in your presentation that every city in North Dakota over 5000 people has an ETA. Are there any of those cities? I mean, I don't expect you to know. Are there any cities off hand where those people, the residents in the ETA vote for their city representation? Is that

01:57:13,200	spk_3:
a Mayor chair and members of the commission, I've not, not, uh, I'm not aware that that's uh allowable. I've not heard anybody else doing that. OK.

01:57:23,200	spk_19:
Mr. Chairman, at, at one point, the, the uh Counties and the cities had districts where you ran for the Northwest District 22 and I ran for the one in the northeast and then you would have it, you had that problem solved because people in the ETA would have a district to vote for their representatives in that problem and but that's a real long process that takes a lot of a lot of difficult decisions and that's a tough, tough way to go, but it is a solution to providing uh representation for your district.

01:57:56,000	spk_13:
Yeah, and since you're up, um, I guess while I'm I should

01:57:59,900	spk_3:
sit down right yeah that's your loss

01:58:02,700	spk_19:
you hang in there, uh,

01:58:05,667	spk_13:
while these gentlemen were all speaking, I was just looking at your presentation and this map that's in front of me, and I guess if we're gonna be meeting again and having the conversation because it does sound like there's some appetite of like eliminating or shrinking the section of the ETA while we continue to have the conversation of what the representation looks like. Um, on the last slide of your, uh, for your projected population, I guess I would just like to, if we can steer the conversation whether it's next time or what to what minimizing the ETA looks like to the actual plan for growth. I know there was like one gentleman up here, um, I believe it was um. Daniel, but, um, was talking about, uh, living in the Faulkner edition and that there's probably no intention that that would ever end up in Bismarck. So then why is it in the ETA? I guess I would like to have some of those questions answered like would it be reasonable for it to be smaller if in the next 20 years we're only touching.

01:59:04,667	spk_3:
From staff's perspective, this question was actually asked uh um uh in 2023 when we were going through this with the Bismarck joint Bismarck Burley um council, and yeah, staff staff from Bismarck are open to if there are established rural subdivisions that we are not anticipating urbanizing into we're open to having that discussion to modifying the boundary to removing some of those but. The caveat is, you know, I think we'd want. Uh, representatives from the airport, uh, here to, to, for, uh, for, for the airport's protection as well, uh, because they, they've found benefit in those properties, some of those properties being within the ETA because they know it's within the city's control and FAA actually appreciates that as well, um, so yeah, but long story short, yes, we would be open to

01:59:57,800	spk_13:
to happen but I think, I think just from like ETA. Residential perspective, I can imagine that the farther out you are away from the city limits and the farther you are to that like boundary of the ETA, it probably gets even more frustrating to have to abide by the rules that maybe don't make sense for your acreage or whatever so I guess if we're not going to be growing into certain areas I'd like to at least look at what it looks like to eliminate parts of the ETA I think is a starting point at least.

02:00:26,867	spk_3:
Yeah, if I understand your question, maybe looking at areas that we aren't anticipating providing urban services to any time in the foreseeable

02:00:34,767	spk_13:
future anticipating growth within that 2045 would be where I'd like to start.

02:00:41,667	spk_0:
Mr. Connolly.

02:00:43,767	spk_7:
Um, a lot of the taxation without representation, that's part of the reason why I bring up the greenfield assessments and things, and, um, I think a lot of that gets taken care of if we grandfather new properties in by um. Eliminating the look back on the green field. Because I did have a discussion with department head uh heads, and part of it is, well, they're benefiting from the services at the same time, like Commissioner Bittner said. He's lived out there a long time, and now the community is encroaching on him. More traffic's encroaching on him. Probably perfectly fine with 3 or 5 people using the gravel road, but now, if you're adding hundreds of cars, gravel's not practical anymore. Should those people that were perfectly fine with gravel roads. Be assessed for more traffic that came to them, they didn't encroach on the city, so to speak. And that would take care of some of that taxation without representation conversation. You

02:01:54,467	spk_2:
know, some of it too. It's like there's areas that don't need curb and gutter and uh development that was put out there that is the water conveyance is perfectly fine, and what does that look like, you know, at, at some point that that goes into the city and then, um, they wind up getting assessed with curb and gutter and the water and sewer, well. Do you need the curb and gutter, you have the water conveyance. You've got some of the other pieces that are just perfectly fine for that development, um, you know. County garbage trucks, private garbage trucks drive on those roads just fine and uh don't have issues. So I mean there's a lot of moving parts on people becoming residents of Bismarck without getting them overly taxed and overly burdened with assessments, and that's part of the discussion as well. So again, So, um, Commissioner Cleary, I think is a great point. Uh, if we can bring some of that back, um, address the map and what that looks like, um, really have a conversation about shrinking down the ETA and getting it, uh, where the city's comfortable with what we're doing and we're comfortable with what the city's doing. I mean, Ben ran through the list, it's almost identical. There's some things that people need to be able to do on on their property if if they're putting up a pole barn. I certainly don't need engineering for a pole barn. I don't need concrete in a pole barn if I'm just parking my boat and my tractor in it. Um, those are some of the discussions we need to have, and I think that's probably discussions for the next meeting.

02:03:33,700	spk_0:
So do we wanna have try to schedule one for all of us, or do we wanna have a working group first?

02:03:39,467	spk_2:
Why don't we do the working group? I think part of that discussion is at the joint meeting at our next one. we can do a follow up there. Um, I would like to do either an opportunity on the city commission or the county commission, uh, if we can't get together as a group to at least maybe set aside on as part of an agenda. Uh, an agenda item for public comment for people that live in the ETA to to be able to speak to both commissions.

02:04:09,867	spk_2:
Um, so I, I think that would be good for a good opportunity for compromise for people that don't that do work past 5 o'clock or near 5 o'clock.

02:04:23,367	spk_2:
yeah, and then yeah, as an agenda item, and then we can bring that back for our joint meeting and uh further this discussion there.

02:04:30,600	spk_0:
Is there any other discussion at this point in time?

02:04:36,667	spk_0:
No, we are adjourned.

02:04:39,266	spk_2:
Thank you.