00:00:15,470	All right. It is 130 on the 21st of April. We’re in the Tom Baker room of the City County building in Bismarck, North Dakota. This is the Metropolitan Planning Organization Policy Board meeting. Before we start, though, we’ll have a pledge of allegiance. I pledge.

00:00:38,530	Allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. We can call the meeting to order by calling a roll. Please. Mayor Berglund. Yes. Here. Commissioner Zach Meyer. Mayor. Freilich. Here. Commissioner bacon. Here. And chair Schmitz here. Next item is public comment.

00:01:10,400	Restricted items on the current agenda of the prior agenda. Excluding any public hearings. Anyone wish to speak? Seeing no one in the audience. I don’t hear anyone online. I’m going to close the public comment. Period. We’ll move to item for review of minutes and possible approval policy. Board members, what are your wishes? Move to approve. Second.

00:01:35,500	Any discussion? Hearing none. Roll call. Roll. Mayor Berglund. Yes, mayor. Freilich. Yes. Commissioner. Bacon. Yes. And chair. Schmitz. Yes. Uh, moving the regular agenda. Item number five, fiscal 2027. Recreational trails program application. Stephen. Thank you. Chair.

00:02:07,600	Uh, the North Dakota Parks and Recreation District recently solicited for fiscal year 27 recreational trails program projects. They opened their solicitation on April 1st and accepted applications through April 13th. So applications for these projects that are within the MPO area require an MPO letter of support, but this can be provided after the application window because it is such a brief window that the Park District has for this program.

00:02:30,570	Uh, we are not asked to prioritize applications at the MPO level, but simply to review them, assuming that Policy board approves the applications, we provide letters of support to the applicants for submittal to the Park district.

00:02:51,530	This, uh, we received notice of one application in time for consideration on this month’s agenda from Bismarck Parks and Recreation District. So this application is a submittal of a project that they applied for last year. And I’ll give you a brief overview of that.

00:03:16,100	So the proposed project is a submittal from last year for a rehab of shared use trail connections within the southern portion of Cottonwood Park. The project includes 5901 linear feet of ten foot wide shared use trail that is currently aged and cracking, including 176 linear feet of trail that needs to be removed and replaced.

00:03:41,170	The proposed project is located within one of Bismarck’s most popular parks, seeing thousands of visitors annually, and on the application they note that this includes winter as well, because they do clear the trails in this area all year round. Uh, the project cost that they provided was $312,500, and they are requesting the maximum that this program will provide of 250,000. Um, and then at their meeting yesterday, TAC recommended support of this project as presented.

00:04:07,270	Are there any questions from the board? Any questions? I do, so I. Oh yes I’m are you going to talk about the fact that there’s another project on there. Yes. That was a mistake that I carried over by accident. The City of Lincoln project was actually funded, uh, all red and is. Yeah.

00:04:28,000	Sorry, I just forgot to hit the delete key when I moved it over. Okay, with that correction, you’ve. Second. Any further discussion? Hearing none. We’ll call roll. Mayor Berglund. Yes, mayor. Freilich. Yes. Commissioner. Bacon. Yes. And Chair Schmitz. Yes. Item six Bismarck. Functional class change request. Steven. Thank you. Chair.

00:05:07,000	Um, so the, uh, functionally classified roadways are eligible for federal funding. Functional class also helps describe a roadways general function within the network and helps direct federal, state, and local resources to those roadways.

00:05:30,100	Historically, we have processed these changes, uh, every ten years after the new urbanized area boundary is approved through MnDOT and the decennial census. However, we do believe that it will be more effective and less burdensome for us and our jurisdictions to address these types of changes as they come up in the future, rather than all at once every ten years. So that’s what we are encouraging our jurisdictions to do.

00:05:47,170	The city of Bismarck. Last year, they completed an extension of East Century Avenue to connect into 52nd Street. Um. However, I will note here the city is carrying forward a request that they be functionally classified.

00:06:12,130	But at the meeting TAC meeting yesterday, uh, and through communication with both the City of Bismarck staff and Burleigh County, there are some concerns that Burleigh County specifically has with this request. Uh, so it was moved at TAC yesterday that we carry this item over to May, uh, to allow for a time for the MPO and for city and county staff to resolve any concerns or issues with this before there’s no deadline for functional

00:06:32,400	class changes, and they’re all approved at the Dot level. So, um, yeah, that’s what they recommended. Uh, if there are any questions I can answer at this time. I don’t have any. I guess I’m glad the two departments are talking to each other, and I think it should be continued.

00:06:52,770	I don’t know if we need a motion for that. Okay. Do we need a motion? Yes. Yes, we would be looking for a motion to continue the item.. Motion to continue to extend. Second. Any further discussion? Hearing none. We’ll call roll on that. Mayor Berglund. Yes. Mayor. Freilich. Yes. Commissioner. Bacon. Yes. And Chair Schmitz.

00:07:16,170	Yes. Moving to item seven, the 2026 Transit Development Plan. Uh, Paulette. Okay. Thank you very much. Chair. Um, last week, on Monday, April 13th, we interviewed three firms for the update of the transit development plan for 2026. And we’ve interviewed Bolton and Minc, Houston Engineering and SRF.

00:07:47,670	Uh, the selection committee consisted of representatives from Man transit and the cities of Bismarck, Lincoln and Mandan. And I served as a moderator for the interviews, and I’d like to state that all the consultants did an excellent job. I was very impressed. They put together good proposals for the project, but it was a difficult decision.

00:08:06,100	But at the end, the selection committee has promoted Bolton and Minc as the preferred consultant for this project. The MPO is requesting approval of Bolton and Minc as a selected consultant for this project and permission to pursue contract negotiations with them.

00:08:28,270	The MPO will execute the contract after legal and MnDOT review, and I have provided a copy of the letter for informational purposes that I handed out before the meeting, and it certifies that the MPO will be complying and have complied with MnDOT qualification based selection requirements for the consultant selection process, and a copy will be signed by the policy chair after the meeting and yesterday, TAC did recommend approval of the selected consultant of Bolton and Minc.

00:08:50,700	Um, any comments or questions? Questions? Anyone and I would move to approve the consultant. Consultant? Yes. Thank you. We were first in a second. Is there any discussion? Hearing none. We’ll call roll. Mayor Berglund yes. Mayor. Froehlich. Yes. Commissioner. Bacon. Yes. And Chair Schmitz. Yes. Next item eight. The 2026 Passenger Rail study. Kim.

00:09:22,070	Thank you very much. Chair Schmitz. Members of the board, I’ll direct your attention to the handouts in front of you. And for our viewers online. Tracy has graciously, graciously agreed to share her screen, and she’ll be sharing exhibit D in the packet that begins on page 31.

00:09:41,900	This is the passenger rail Station Siting Study RFP. The objective objective of this project is to identify and evaluate passenger train station corridors and potential site locations for a new passenger rail service, station or stations and platforms to serve the MPO area. Alternatives that are provided through this study should answer two primary questions.

00:10:05,400	First of all, is the ideal solution for us to have a single station to serve all passengers in the MPO planning area, or to have multiple stations. And secondly, how do the preferred potential rail station or platform locations rank based on a matrix that’s developed using the evaluative criteria established through this study? With those two questions in mind, I’ll go

00:10:28,000	through the pertinent details of the the study and how it’s laid out in the RFP. This is to be an approximate 12 month study to begin approximately in July of 2026 and ending in July of 2027. Uh, it does have a not to exceed budget of $225,000.

00:10:53,600	All five MPO jurisdictions are paying partners and participating partners, as indicated in the 2026 2027 UPW. P so the study area will include the BNSF rail corridor in the MPO planning area that extends from the westernmost boundary of the MPO in Morton County all the way to the MPO easternmost boundary in Burleigh County. If approved, I’m sorry.

00:11:19,630	The RFP was developed and it was provided to all jurisdictional representatives for their review. All comments were received prior to this meeting, and they have been addressed. And I’ll address that a little bit further now, if approved today, uh, we are hoping to have this RFP posted on the North Dakota Dot website by Friday, April 24th.

00:11:42,170	And that would provide us with proposal deadline of May 15th, 2026. Uh, the interviews then could occur between June 8th and 11th, and consultant approvals would hopefully occur on June 15th and 16th at the TAC and Policy Board meetings, respectively.

00:12:07,070	Um, if all goes well and the process is finalized and approved, a formal notice to proceed could be issued to the consultant as early as June 30th, or potentially those first couple of weeks in July to get that study kicked off. And then, of course, we are anticipating a conclusion of the study by about July 31st, 2027.

00:12:26,500	Uh, are there any questions on that timeline that’s been put forth before I go into comments on the RFP? I think so, okay. Uh, as I as I stated, there were some comments that were received as the jurisdictions and oversight reviewed the RFP, and primarily they were pretty insubstantial, maybe a typographical nature or

00:12:48,430	textual nature, but there were five comments that I feel bear noting. And the first of those Tracy will be sharing on screen, and I’ll be pointing out in your handouts. The first occurs on page two of the RFP, page 32 of the packet. The Burley County logo was updated.

00:13:08,000	The copy that was included in the packet. For some reason, the Burley County name didn’t come through in the logo, so that’s been updated to be their their new logo with their name, uh, on page six of your handout, page 36 of the packet, uh, the SF 330 form language in the proposal requirements

00:13:30,870	section was updated to provide clarification, and this was worked out between MPO staff and North Dakota Dot to meet their satisfaction. Since the SF 330 form. Um is a North Dakota Dot requirement. Um. Moving on to page eight.

00:13:59,270	In your handout, page 38 in the packet, the local existing condition section was modified to include restructuring of where the description of the rail line and the historic depot in Mandan occurs. This was taken from the BNSF bridge paragraph and then inserted into the man down paragraph. Because it fit a little better, it flowed better. Um, and I think that overall it makes a little bit more sense.

00:14:21,670	However, no language was added or deleted from either paragraph. It was just moved around, uh, and then on page ten we have the study area map. That’s page 40 in the packet for those following along in the packet, the study area map was replaced with an updated version.

00:14:45,130	The original version, uh, indicated the eta um boundaries for the city of Bismarck. So we had those removed. We labeled the the map. We named it a little bit differently, calling it BNSF. BNSF railway within the MPO area, which makes a little bit more sense than um, MPO railways.

00:15:09,130	And, um, we updated the City of Bismarck logo to reflect that it’s a Bismarck Mandan MPO, um, study area map. Um, and those were all to address comments that had come through. So I believe that that has been updated to everybody’s standards.

00:15:31,200	And then finally, on page 13 of your handout, uh, page 43, for those following along in the packet, the contract and project schedule was revised to include a potential presentation to North Dakota Dot in May 2027, should they request it.

00:15:52,470	They do always have the option to request a presentation to dot management for any study that we conduct, but it’s, um, it’s easy to miss that in the planning of the project schedule. If it’s not in the RFP. So it was just kind of a natural addition to put that in. Uh. Continuing on with some general information on page 12, uh, in on your handout or page 42, in the packet, the RFP provides a list of suggested steering committee members.

00:16:15,570	And you’ll see that this list is very robust, and it includes representatives from the Federal Railroad Administration, Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad, and Amtrak, as well as local technical staff leaders and even potentially elected officials from within the MPO area.

00:16:40,970	Now, public engagement will factor very heavily into this study, and we’ll have two rounds of public engagement, each consisting of outreach in both Burley and Morton County, uh. Additionally, this study will coincide with outreach by big Sky Passenger Rail Authority as part of their corridor ID project. And no doubt there will be some synergies to be had, and we’re going to want to really capitalize on those when we have the opportunity to do so.

00:17:04,000	And additionally, the potential membership of the steering committee, with it being so robust, um, we understand that it will be imperative to keep our local leaders and elected officials informed and up to date with study activities and with other rail related developments in the MPO region.

00:17:23,730	So, you know, we want to do that both from a study led effort and also from an MPO staff led effort as well. Are there any questions or comments on the changes that I’ve outlined in the RFP or the public engagement, or any other component of the RFP that I may have neglected to address for you today?

00:17:46,630	Any questions? No. If not, TAC did recommend approval of the RFP with the changes as presented, and we. Would be presented second. Any discussion hearing none. We’ll call roll. Mayor Berglund. Yes. Mayor. Fraley. Yes. Commissioner Botkin. Yes. And Chair Schmitz. Yes. Next is item nine, basic letter of acts. Support. Uh, okay.

00:18:18,170	Well, thank you again, chair Schmitz. Uh, as you may recall, last month, I did bring some information forward to this board regarding the bridges and safety infrastructure for Community Success Act or the Basics Act. This is legislation that has been introduced into the U.S. House of Representatives.

00:18:41,130	Um, to try to form the basis for the next surface transportation reauthorization bill, because our current bill does expire on September 30th of this year. Um, at that time, we brought forward some some basic information on this, this particular legislation. Uh, some of the high points that really interested the the MPO directors across the state.

00:19:05,600	And we were looking for a consensus in pursuing a joint letter of support amongst the state MPOs. This board, as you recall, did provide that consensus on behalf of the Bismarck Mandan MPO. And I was asked to bring a letter back at the April meeting. Here we are. I’m sorry, I have no letter yet. We are working on it.

00:19:25,070	We have had meetings as executive directors from the four MPOs. Our MPOs are all a little bit different in composition, especially with our Fargo Metro, Fargo-Moorhead Metro Cog being a TMA because their population exceeds 200,000. So sometimes we’re looking at things through a little different lens than another MPO in the state.

00:19:52,400	And so what we’re trying to do right now through our discussions is come to a consensus of the the, um, high and overarching provisions within the Basics Act that we would like to call out to, um, kind of emphasize our support for.

00:20:15,600	However, this would be more of an outcome based, um, letter of support, rather than citing very specific provisions within the bill. I think that we all feel more comfortable in that approach. Uh, given the fact that we have no control over what this bill will ultimately look like, should it come to passage. Um, so it is our intent.

00:20:39,600	One of the other executive directors and I have agreed to jointly work on this together on behalf of all four MPOs, and we’ll we’ll get consensus amongst the directors and then hopefully have something to bring to you at our May meetings. Um, TAC did unanimously recommend a continuance of this item until May, and I would be asking the same of this board. Move to extend.

00:21:07,370	A second. Any discussion? Hearing none. We’ll call roll. Mayor Berglund. Yes. Mayor. Freilich. Yes. Commissioner. Bacon. Yes. And Chair Schmitz. Yes. Item ten is the 2026 Fringe Area Road Master Plan update. Steven. Thank you. Chair. I will just provide a brief update on the fringe area roads plan update today.

00:21:39,570	Um, we continue to kind of head into the home stretch for this study. We are, uh, nearly complete with our coordination with, uh, attack, uh, for modeling, uh, Darius, roadways and scenarios, uh, to support the study.

00:22:06,800	We are, um, continuing to refine and work through the, uh, regionally significant corridor network, which are just, uh, some major roadways that we will deem to be significant for future development in the Bismarck Mandan MPO area. Uh, we are also planning our final round of, uh, public meetings. That is intended to be early May, although dates and times have yet to be finalized for that. But this would be another opportunity for the public to participate in an exercise.

00:22:30,070	And, uh, look at results of public involvement so far through the study and, uh, see some preliminary, uh, maps and draft products for the study as well.

00:22:51,830	So we, uh, are anticipating that the updates will continue to get a little bit more robust as we head into the final few months of the study and prepare to start showing, uh, drafts, uh, of the final plan. Any questions? I don’t have any. Thank you. Next item 11 fiscal 2026 safe Streets and roads for all. Kim. Thank you, chair Schmitz. Uh, very briefly, this is about the SS for a or safe streets and roads for all.

00:23:18,730	Notice of funding opportunity that was announced on March 26th. Uh, there is a 60 day application window for this particular grant opportunity. And so any applications need to be made by May 26th.

00:23:44,870	We’re very excited about this particular grant opportunity, because the study that we had completed in December of 25, which was the safety policy study, was geared specifically towards making applications for implementation projects from the SS for a um. Eligible applicants include MPOs, counties, cities, villages, towns and tribes. The state dots are not eligible to apply for these funds.

00:24:06,930	So, um, it is a little better playing field for our local jurisdictions to, um, maybe get some of those discretionary funds. Uh, we know that there is nearly $1 billion available through this particular funding opportunity. In fact, for implementation grants, there is over $687 million. And they anticipate awarding 40 to 70 awards through this particular, um, uh, solicitation.

00:24:36,130	Now for the implementation projects, which is what our safety policy was all geared towards. Um, we developed the high end jury network. You, as a board adopted the leadership, um, goal and commitment for our Vision Zero. Uh, for the MPO area, uh, we identified safety countermeasures.

00:24:57,670	All of that was laid out so that our jurisdictions would be able to take advantage of this final, um, effort in the SS for a, um, funding. And we’re hoping that they will do so, um, because, you know, with the implementation, implementation awards, they will fund projects that are up to $25 million in cost.

00:25:19,930	So they’re getting into some pretty high dollar items there. Now, I haven’t heard from any of the any of the jurisdictions, um, whether they have intent to apply for this funding or not, and they don’t need to contact the MPO. It doesn’t run through us for approval. This is, you know, something that they can do solely on their own.

00:25:36,170	So I’ve been disseminating information to the technical and engineering staff of all the jurisdictions, and I’ll keep doing so as the information is made available to me.

00:25:53,600	But I just wanted to provide you with an update and let you know that, um, we are going to have one more month left as far as an opportunity to take advantage of this funding. Any questions on that? Right now? Alone? Any questions. Go ahead. Kim, to next item 12 passenger rail.. Okay. Um, so this is the wcaG or the, um, excuse me, the website. Uh, content accessibility guidance.

00:26:22,970	Am I there isn’t there a passion or railroad table discussion update? Oh, Sorry, I am sorry. Um, yes, you’re right. My my total mistake there I was jumping ahead. So the passenger rail, um, roundtable discussion there. There are communities along and adjacent to the Burlington Northern Santa Fe rail corridor.

00:26:49,070	Um, that may be impacted by the potential restoration of passenger rail to North Dakota. We’ve discussed that at this table before, and we’ve also talked about kind of gathering a consortium of, uh, leaders from each of those communities to discuss what we see as our, our needs, uh, what we look at as potential impacts and challenges to our communities. Should passenger rail return.

00:27:14,770	Uh, and so I’ve reached out to, uh, mayors, to commissioners, to city administrators of communities along that rail corridor from Valley City, Jamestown, of course, everybody in our Bismarck, Mandan, MPO area, uh, and then of course, Dickinson Beach and Medora included.

00:27:44,000	I’m trying to coordinate a best block of time that we might gain a good attendance and have a brief introduction to one another and to maybe see what a wish list is, um, from each of the communities and how we can move forward. Uh, as maybe a coalition, even in advancing our efforts to restore passenger rail to our state.

00:28:10,800	So the the doodle poll was just extended, um, to try and find a possible meeting date. Um, of course, it’s it’s a little tough because I’m dealing with a lot of very, very busy schedules. Um, and elected all of you at the table, elected officials, you all know, um, what your schedules look like, and everybody else is similar.

00:28:30,000	So, uh, hopefully we will be able to meet. I’ve got meeting dates out to the 20th of May. Um, if we can’t get that done, you know, before the end of May, I think we might abandon that effort and try to go into June.

00:28:48,670	But my intent really was hopefully we could have, um, met prior to May 12th, uh, because on May 12th, the EDC, the Bismarck, Mandan EDC has a local issues committee that meets. And I would like to come before them and ask them for support of our passenger rail restoration efforts.

00:29:13,730	And it would have been good to have that, um, roundtable discussion behind me, um, to present to them. But if that’s not meant to be, we’ll we’ll have that discussion another time and carry on with whatever that brings. So that’s my update today. Uh, I’ll just keep bringing updates as I know of them. Are there any questions or concerns? Okay. Thank you. Number 13.

00:29:35,570	No thank you. All right. So now we are on the website content and accessibility guidelines on April 24th of 2020 four, the Federal Register published the Department of Justice’s final rule, updating the regulations for title two of the Americans with Disabilities Act.

00:30:01,800	Now, this final rule has very specific requirements about how to ensure that web content and mobile apps are accessible to people with disabilities and, uh, the DOJ’s final rule mandates that state and local governmental websites and mobile apps have to conform to their guidelines of 2.1 level AA. So there’s actually three levels. There’s a double A and triple A that’s kind of intermediate.

00:30:30,100	And compliance deadlines were originally set at April 24th, 2026 for public entities having 50,000 or more persons in their population count, or April 26th, 2027 for smaller entities. So now the Bismarck Mandan MPO, of course, our population is collective for all of our jurisdictions, and so we fall into that above 50,000.

00:30:55,200	That means that on April 24th, um, Friday, we would have been having to meet compliance deadlines. Um, this maybe doesn’t sound like such a big thing at first blush. We thought our website is accessible and that’s what we need to make sure of, but it goes a little bit further.

00:31:16,530	It goes all into the documentation and even the documents that have been on that website for, for even many years. Um, and so to go back and make sure that all of your documentation is accessible or appropriately archived, if that is an option. Um, became very arduous just very recently for many entities. And the Bismarck Mandan MPO included.

00:31:42,300	Now, the good news is that an interim final rule to these regulations was made official and actually became effective yesterday. The DOJ’s interim final rule is revising the regulations to extend those deadlines by a year each. So now the MPO deadline is going to become April 26th of 2027.

00:32:08,900	And for cities under 50,000 in population, that deadline is going to be April 26th of 2028. So, um, some of us are breathing a sigh of relief, uh, while we welcome this deadline extension, I will tell you that the MPO has already taken steps to achieve, um, wcaG compliance, uh, by using accessibility checks with all of our new documents that we’re creating, particularly those

00:32:31,430	that will be posted to the website, we’re making real sure of that. Um, our RFP is now include accessibility requirement verification for all of our final deliverables from consultants. So now we have a little paragraph in there saying that they need to verify for us that all of our final deliverables, our reports, etc.

00:32:51,700	are, um, compliant with these guidelines. And then also and finally the city of Bismarck as the MPOs host agency, has procured an accessibility application for the conversion of documents that already exist on our website. That may be inaccessible. It converts them to like an HTML format that becomes accessible. So, um, we’re very grateful for that.

00:33:17,230	And in the meantime, the MPO will continue to strive to, you know, attain accessibility in all of its documents and website content. Prior to that, 2027 compliance deadline.

00:33:43,330	Um, in the meantime, if any users of the MPO website encounter any inaccessible documents or if they encounter anything like broken links, um, due to issues, um, involved with us performing updates, we ask that they please contact the MPO directly and let us know of those cases so that we might correct them immediately. Any questions on wcaG? Okay. I just know it was a welcome order yesterday by a lot of people. Yes, I thank you. And is there any other business? Not we are adjourned. I do.

00:34:10,200	Have other business. I forgot my handout, but I did want to report that, uh, we did receive our estimates for our 2027 consolidated planning grant. Good point. I think I think I adjourned us and we need to reconvene. So I. Guess I’m sorry. Thank you. Commissioner. Um, let’s just call roll to reconvene. Mayor Berglund here. Mayor Froehlich.

00:34:40,970	Here. Commissioner Bacon and Chair Schmitz. Here. Okay, apologies. And thank you very much. Chair Schmitz and board members for accommodating me. I just wanted to report that North Dakota Dot did provide us with our 2027 consolidated planning grant estimates on April 14th.

00:35:07,200	Um, as we have an agreement that they provide these estimates to us by April 15th of every year. So we were very pleasantly surprised. Again, I have some good news to report.

00:35:29,770	We received a little over $36,000 more for our 2027 CPG estimate than what we were expecting, and this was due to the receipt of some 2024 FTA 5304 funding that we weren’t anticipating at all. So we will be working that additional $36,000 into our 2027 budget, which is very welcome and we’ll be adjusting our study. Um, our study schedules accordingly.

00:35:54,730	And I’ve already notified our jurisdictional representatives, our technical staff, that they’ll they can look forward to an updated study list, um, to review and approve prior to our main meeting. Before we start developing that 2728 up in earnest questions. Okay. Is there any other business? No. Thank you.