00:00:01,879 S1: Right? 00:00:04,799 S2: Well, I wasn't expecting this, but. Well. 00:00:09,800 S2: All right, well, we'll go ahead and call the meeting to order for the Bismarck event center. Authority board. Um, I believe we have to take a roll call. Yes. Okay. If we could do that, please. 00:00:22,679 S3: Member. Gardner. Grossman. Here. Castellucci. Here to. 00:00:29,960 S2: Present. Wachter here. 00:00:32,600 S3: Wilson. Here. 00:00:36,600 S2: All right. Moving on to item number two of the agenda. Public comment. Is there anybody wishing to, um, to comment on any item on the agenda? 00:00:50,840 S2: Going once, going twice? Three times. Nothing heard. We will close the public comment period for our meeting. Moving on to agenda item number three. Consider the approval of the minutes. Has everybody had an opportunity to review the minutes so moved. 00:01:12,670 S4: There was a typo in number five. 00:01:16,310 S5: Okay. 00:01:17,549 S2: You have a typo on number five. 00:01:19,549 S4: It says negation instead of negotiation. Okay. 00:01:24,069 S2: Uh, Joel, your approval with that correction. 00:01:27,870 S5: Yes. 00:01:28,469 S2: Okay, so we have a motion by Joel Castellucci. Do we have a second? 00:01:33,189 S4: Second. 00:01:34,750 S2: Is there any further discussion? Hearing none. Call the roll. 00:01:40,030 S3: Grossman. Yes. Costa. Lucky. Yes to Monica. 00:01:45,950 S5: Yes. 00:01:46,790 S3: Wilson. Yes. Gardiner. 00:01:49,510 S4: Yes. 00:01:50,590 S3: And. Walker. 00:01:51,629 S2: Yes. All right. Moving on to number four. Enter into executive session. Um, we're going to need a motion by, uh, one of our members to enter into executive session. 00:02:05,950 S4: So moved. 00:02:08,189 S2: Okay. Do we have a second? 00:02:11,469 S5: Second. 00:02:13,030 S2: All right. Any further discussion before we vote on this? Hearing none. Call the roll. 00:02:19,509 S3: Costa. Lecce. 00:02:20,469 S5: Yes. 00:02:21,150 S3: Demonic. 00:02:21,990 S4: Yes. 00:02:22,629 S3: Wilson. Yes. Gardner. 00:02:24,590 S4: Yes. 00:02:25,310 S3: Grossman. Yes. Schmitz. 00:02:28,990 S4: Yes. 00:02:29,990 S3: And. Wachter. 00:02:31,310 S2: Yes. Mayor Schmitz, you're here. Would you like. You're on on board. Would you like to take over? 00:02:38,150 S6: You can go on it. It's easier with you. Probably. You've already started. I'm sorry I got sidetracked. 00:02:44,189 S7: No problem. But just real quick. I don't know if we're supposed to be able to, but unless I don't know if. Sherry, if you were mayor. If you can see. I can't see the room. 00:02:51,189 S8: I will not see it either. 00:02:52,949 S7: Yeah. I don't know if the camera is supposed to be off, but I just FYI there. 00:02:56,629 S2: Okay. Um, we're going to call our regular meeting back to order. 11:24 a.m. please call the roll. 00:03:05,860 S3: Wilson. Here. Gardner. 00:03:08,379 S4: Here. 00:03:09,139 S8: Grossman here. 00:03:11,419 S3: Castellucci. 00:03:12,300 S5: Here. Here. 00:03:14,699 S3: Wachter here. And Schmitz. 00:03:17,340 S6: Here. 00:03:19,099 S2: All right. Moving on to agenda item number five. Mission statement. Development discussion. 00:03:26,219 S4: Um. 00:03:27,139 S2: I had visited with Jason about, um, feeling like it would be a good way to start off with our new event Center authority board by having a mission statement for, uh, for the event center. So, um, I have developed a draft of something that I would like everybody to consider, and I'm going to pass that around, and we'll have to email that to to the two of you. 00:04:10,610 S2: What I'll do in the meantime is I'll just kind of read the draft that I have here. 00:04:16,649 S2: Uh, so this is a proposed mission statement for us to, to have a discussion about. And we, you know, to make corrections and additions. The Bismarck Event Center delivers high quality events that drive economic growth, strengthen community engagement, and maximize the return on public investment through professional management, strategic partnerships, and operational excellence. We provide a premier venue that serves residents, attracts visitors and ensures long term financial sustainability. 00:05:01,920 S4: I don't know all that you can do. So that way. 00:05:09,759 S6: Chad, would you mind just reading that again? Sure. 00:05:13,680 S2: The Bismarck Event Center delivers high quality events that drive economic growth, strengthen community engagement, and maximize the return on public investment through professional management, strategic partnerships, and operational excellence. We provide a premier venue that serves residents, attracts visitors and ensures long term financial sustainability. 00:05:50,199 S6: Without reading it or seeing it but just listening to it stated it seems to capture. I think what we're trying to accomplish. 00:05:59,639 S2: Uh, mayor, we can't hear. Hear you very well. 00:06:03,319 S6: Oh, no. My mic is down. What's going on? 00:06:10,199 S2: All right. 00:06:11,240 S6: Can you hear me now? 00:06:12,839 S2: I mean, I can hear you, but not very good. 00:06:16,519 S8: I wonder if that's on your end, because I can hear him perfectly. 00:06:19,879 S2: Okay. 00:06:24,920 S6: So. 00:06:25,879 S2: Oh, there we go. Now we can hear you. 00:06:27,439 S6: Okay. Based on what you read, I think it captures in my mind what we're trying to accomplish. 00:06:38,879 S2: Okay. Are we thinking that we would like to take an extra meeting to kind of just think about this and think about if there's any additional language we want to include or any corrections we want to make before adopting this? 00:06:55,350 S4: I mean, technically it's venues, not venue. Okay. Do we all agree that if we say Bismarck Event Center we also mean the bell? Or do we need to be explicit about that? 00:07:09,870 S9: In my mind. 00:07:10,629 S4: We provide we provide a premier venue isn't really. 00:07:15,910 S9: Venues. When I think of the Bismarck Event Center, I guess I've conditioned myself to understand that means three things. It's the arena, it's the exhibit hall and the bell Mayhew's auditorium. But I don't know that everybody we still have people that call it the Civic Center. So I think. 00:07:34,310 S4: To your point, I agree with you. 00:07:35,589 S9: I'm just to your point, Mike. I think it is worth recognizing all three facilities, because that's part of our charge here, is to make sure that each of these venues has an active presence in our community. So I would definitely support that recognizing plural, maybe just for context, for those of you at the table, we have a strategic plan for the organization. We have a mission, a vision, and we list our values within that strategic plan. Our mission statement is very succinct. Uh, we've actually just gone through the process of updating it. The current mission statement for our organization is together we deliver exceptional public service. That's it now. Our vision statement is a little more illustrative as as Chad has drafted here and our our vision statement, it's a little longer. It says Bismarck is a preferred destination for people who enjoy living, learning, working and playing in a city with an enduring community pride. We embrace our rich heritage, economic opportunity, and lifelong learning to cultivate a healthy and sustainable environment, fostering opportunity for all. It's a vision statement. It's a it's a big goal. It's a vision. It's probably not something we will ever really be able to put our hands on as an achievable moment, but it's what we're striving for every single day. But then when you go back to what is our mission, it's providing, I've already forgotten it because we just changed it. I spent years memorizing it. So our mission statement today is together we deliver exceptional public service. It's a very brief, very succinct, very specific. So I, I support what Chad has drafted here. But just thinking in the context of a mission statement versus a vision statement, I'm wondering if this is more of a visionary and a mission statement might be a little more brief, or it might be components of this, but I think this is a great start. Um, I don't know that it's the best use of everybody's time to try and wordsmith this at the table. We all have our own different ideas and and thoughts, but, uh, I think it's a it's a great place to start the conversation, for sure. 00:09:49,100 S2: I'm assuming that this is a discussion we're going to want to have with all VG once they're involved. 00:09:54,889 S9: I think they could help us achieve our vision and certainly hone the mission as well. 00:10:00,169 S4: Right. 00:10:01,169 S9: Um, I'd be open to spending a little time independently away from this particular meeting and just thinking about it. And I'm guessing other organizations, maybe. Joel, you your organization may have a mission statement. There may be other things that we could all bring as, uh, just context or background to the table. Um, would it be helpful if we have edits to maybe compile those and send them to Whitney, and then we could condense all of those for the next meeting and, and maybe see if we can hone closer to something. 00:10:38,169 S2: Yeah, I think that's a good idea. We'll let's all take some time and take a look at this, and then, uh, we can all email our feedback to Whitney, and then we can have another document to look at. 00:10:47,450 S6: And I think it's good. It gives us a second reading basically to it. 00:10:53,159 S5: Okay. 00:10:53,679 S2: Okay. All right. Any other discussion on the mission statement development? Okay. Hearing none. Moving on to item number six. Term assignment discussion. 00:11:08,679 S2: Our last meeting we had we were talking about, um, staggering our terms. 00:11:13,960 S4: Mhm. Mhm. 00:11:18,320 S6: So we because with all of our other boards we have staggered terms. So we don't have a complete roll off all in one year. 00:11:27,720 S6: Therefore I think it's a good idea that we stagger them. I think Jason we talked about one two and three year for the initial. Is that correct. 00:11:36,000 S9: Yes. We had. 00:11:37,840 S6: And then they'd ultimately all be three year terms after we get through this initial and everybody can reapply. That's not the point. It's more that we don't want to have a situation where ultimately we had five members decide they weren't going to want to re-up. And then we have five brand new members. Now, 1 or 2 of those positions are basically going to exist no matter what for the organizations. I guess it's two technically, and then a third is specific to a set, a set of users. Correct. So like Mike is serving in that role. My thoughts are we just kind of draw straws and hopefully whoever gets the one year term is willing to re-up. 00:12:28,509 S9: Mr. mayor, this is Jason. We Whitney and I did kind of telegraph this out. And your comments are on point to have a one year and then multiple two years and multiple three years. And then what that does is it will evolve into every year somebody would be coming up for their term. And so then we wouldn't have gaps in in years where we have new members and reoccurring members. And that's very similar to how many of our other authority boards or advisory boards work, is that there's typically every year in November we call for applications because terms expire in December of that year. And so it's just a cadence that our office and other departments are very comfortable working with. And I think having one person for one year, two people for two years, two people for three years, and then the mayor's term is prescribed to his elected term. So technically his term is through June of 26. And then my term is more or less appointed. As long as I'm here, this would be a part of my job responsibility. So my successor would then be immediately seated at this table if I were to move on. So I guess in short, one for one year or two for two years and two for three years is really what we were looking for. Is that right? Yeah. That would be five. So if we. I don't think we have straws. So. 00:13:56,940 S5: Are we. Can they just randomize it and then just let us know. 00:13:59,940 S9: We can certainly. 00:14:00,700 S5: Just we want to just. 00:14:01,779 S9: Assign. 00:14:02,259 S5: It. Unless someone has strong feelings about wanting a one year or three year term. 00:14:06,139 S4: I'll take the one year. 00:14:09,220 S5: Yeah. 00:14:09,860 S2: I think yeah, it doesn't really matter to me. I think that's probably the best way to do it, is just to randomly come up with it. 00:14:16,779 S4: And that's fine too. 00:14:17,899 S9: And then the the finality of all of that, for all the appointed and advisory boards, everybody will sign an oath of oath of office indicating you will uphold the Constitution and the ordinances of the city and all of that within that oath. Your expiration date is noted. And so we keep track of that in city administration. And we would notify anybody when their term is coming near and encourage you to consider reapplying or encouraging someone else to take your seat. 00:14:44,019 S5: So yeah. And honestly, Mike, if you feel strongly one on one year I have no issues. If Mike serves a one year and then you randomly draw the rest. If that's what you would prefer. Yeah. 00:14:54,370 S4: My intention would be to reapply. I mean, I'm not going to leave in one year, so I'm just trying to facilitate it. 00:15:01,649 S5: Yep. Pull names out of the hat. Whatever you need to do. Okay. 00:15:05,009 S2: Okay. Do we have any further discussion on term assignments? 00:15:11,570 S2: All right. Hearing none, we're moving on to policy discussion. Who would like to present that? 00:15:21,129 S9: I guess I can just offer an overview. This was kind of on the heels of the discussion that was held at the last regular meeting, at the request for, um, free use or discounted use of the facilities. And so I think that's really where this group probably needs to figure out what type of organizations we would be willing to entertain versus not. Or maybe the policy is that it just. There are no donations because it's just easier. I think that's really up to this group to start that discussion. And I don't know that we'll come to finality today. Again, there may be some feedback or input from the third party management group that we've brought in to help us with this. They may have some thoughts as well, but I think just given I know what everyone's intentions were at the last meeting and reflecting on that, I think we now know that we need to establish something for continuity. At least we have something to stand back and say, this is what we've all agreed to. And then there's consistency across when the question will come forward. 00:16:25,889 S2: Right. And Mike, I'm not sure if you're, um, if you saw what happened at that last meeting, we ended up rescinding that. And, um, because I think you made some really good points and, um. 00:16:37,889 S4: I did see that. Thank you. Yeah. 00:16:40,490 S2: So I think it is definitely worth having a discussion about that. And, um. 00:16:45,129 S4: The real problem is we have lots of nonprofits that use the facilities, and I don't think we want to be in the position of grading non-profits and saying, oh, this causes better than this, cause it's obviously a great cause. I don't want to be the one that says, well, you're a good cause and you're not. 00:17:02,200 S2: Right. My thought is, is that, um, we may be kicked this down the road and wait for involvement and, uh, and have a discussion and get some recommendations from them on how they handle those and other venues and inconsiderate at that time. 00:17:23,519 S2: Everybody good. 00:17:24,079 S8: With that. I agree, I think it'd be valuable to have OB involved in the discussion. 00:17:28,359 S10: Yeah, I agree with that, Chad. I've thought about this a lot in how we prioritize the different pieces of the event center, the bell and the exhibit hall for level one or A events, B events, See events. And when we have a space that maybe doesn't have the lights on, how do we accommodate that? But there has to be a set, a, some sort of set of rules that govern that and application process. Um, otherwise I think we will open a can of worms. 00:18:01,950 S2: So yeah, totally agree. And I think one thing worth considering when we're having these discussions is, is the policy that we have for the event center and the bell the same or, um, are there different guidelines? So I think it's it'll be good to have this discussion once she gets involved. And, and we can definitely get something put together that's going to be fair and equitable to everybody and not cause problems for staff. We don't want to do that. 00:18:28,470 S9: So I think having some type of. 00:18:31,509 S8: I think a important thing for us to consider going forward on that is, is the time frame of it. If we are doing something like that, I don't think we'd want to commit into future years because that might prevent us from bringing a longer, a multi-day event in there that might be more profitable. So I think as we go forward, we just need to think about how far out we would consider on those and use it more as a way to fill in some dark days. 00:18:56,420 S2: Totally agree Jason. 00:18:58,420 S9: I think it would be good for us to develop some type of a scoring rubric that we can use to evaluate any request, whether it be a local nonprofit or even a traveling nonprofit. And some of it agreed timing the venue. I when I think of the facilities, I think the Bahamas is a is a different animal than the arena. And if there's a way to encourage some of the local groups that have historically used the Bahamas successfully, and one of the things I've heard over the years is sometimes rent is a barrier, and I would love to see that facility as active as possible. But not just a loss leader either. So a balance of all of that. But I would agree with with the others If if there's some suggestions from OPG on how they've successfully handled this in other places, that might be good for us to be able to think about that and craft a system that works well for Bismarck, something that we can stand behind and recognize as a fair and equitable process for everybody, including the symphony. 00:20:03,779 S4: It is not just the rent. You also have to have like six employees there and you got to pay them. 00:20:08,660 S9: And yeah, there are there are definitely some hard costs to operate. 00:20:12,059 S4: And they're not like super high. I don't think I don't think they're out of, you know, range or anything. 00:20:16,819 S2: But okay. Do we have any further discussion on this issue? 00:20:26,099 S2: Okay. Hearing none I'm moving to item number eight. Survey discussion. 00:20:30,859 S9: So authority board members, I put this on as a talking point. We had kind of briefly discussed it at the last meeting. I just wanted to share this with you to kind of get your ideas flowing again. Uh, this is something that would be used for essentially any group that is renting any portion of the facilities as feedback. Uh, it's feedback on the staff. It's feedback on the facilities. It's feedback on the experience. Um, this was an example that was provided through JLL that they have developed for other facilities and other locations. Um, by no means is this the end all be all. But I just again wanted to share this. This example is 58 questions. And I guess if I had any concerns with this, it's it's the volume of information that we're asking someone to share. If someone were to put thoughtful responses into all 58 of these questions, it's a significant amount of time. And while that information is extremely valuable for us, I don't know how inclined somebody may be to articulate all of their thoughts all the way through. So again, not looking for any finality to this today. But just thinking. Reading material for each of you at home. If there's components of this that you think are worthy of, including in a post-event survey, I think that's great. If there's if this spawns other ideas or other questions in your head that maybe we would want to include in. Otherwise, I think it's all just part of the discussion, part of how we continue to build our foundation and grow as a board. But I think this will be one tool that will be tremendously helpful going forward, not just in the immediate future, but in the long range future. Knowing that we're going to be partnered with Oakview Group for quite some time, having the the length of time, the longevity to look at these surveys over the years, I think will be tremendously interesting as well. So I think we all know we've got some shortcomings, but we all know we've got some really great staff that make a lot of really wonderful things happen. I think these surveys can help peel back some of that information from people. 00:22:41,359 S2: That sounds good. Any discussion on this matter? 00:22:47,039 S8: Well, Jason, I agree on the length of it. As someone who works with the meeting event planners and my employees, they'll never complete this. But there are some really good questions, so I think it might be worthy of maybe what the event center is asking, and maybe that there should separate them from what the CDB is asking. So they're not getting overwhelmed with them. But it's some great questions though just a little long. 00:23:11,839 S6: And I I would agree I think it's too long. But I also think because this is really going to be around how OBD might be performing, we need to again, probably defer this a little bit until we have them on board of the two. So we'll make sure we're covering the topics that are appropriate to the facility itself or facilities, all facilities that they're managing. 00:23:40,430 S2: Yeah. I would I would definitely agree. If there's a way that we can shorten this up and, um, you know, work with of G to come up with, um, with really good questions, maybe take a look at what they're doing in their other venues. The one thing I think is really important is, is that these surveys come directly, directly to the city and not to them. 00:24:01,190 S9: Yeah, typically it's my understanding typically these would be facilitated by a third party. 00:24:05,630 S2: Okay. 00:24:06,309 S9: So I mean that would be a service that we would pay for. But at the same time I think we can develop our own and through internal staff or whatever the case might be, we could find a way to make that happen too. 00:24:18,069 S2: Okay. 00:24:19,190 S10: I agree. I also think that some of these questions could easily link to our KPIs, and they could give us the measurable, um, result from that KPI. And if we're using some sort of technology where there could be a talk to text feature that could allow that person to answer or fill in more of the answers. Um, it seems to be a good win. 00:24:48,859 S2: Okay. If there's no further discussion, we'll move on to other business. Does anybody have any other business? 00:25:01,980 S2: Okay. Hearing none. Can I get a motion to adjourn? 00:25:06,099 S9: So moved. 00:25:07,380 S2: Okay. And is there a second? 00:25:09,220 S10: I'll second. 00:25:11,579 S2: Okay. Any discussion? Call the roll. 00:25:17,059 S3: Wilson. Here. Gardner. 00:25:20,299 S4: Yes. 00:25:21,059 S3: Grossman. 00:25:22,819 S8: Yes. 00:25:23,740 S3: Castellucci. 00:25:24,660 S5: Yes. 00:25:25,980 S9: Yes. 00:25:26,900 S3: Walker. 00:25:27,740 S2: Yes. 00:25:28,500 S3: Smith. 00:25:29,819 S6: Yes. 00:25:30,700 S2: Okay. Meeting adjourned. Thank you. Everybody. 00:25:35,970 S9: Take a look. 00:25:37,650 S2: Okay, I'm going to move. I'm going to recall the meeting to order of the Bismarck event center. Authority board. Whitney, can you please call the roll? 00:25:50,369 S3: Gardner. 00:25:51,529 S4: Yes. 00:25:52,569 S3: Costa. 00:25:53,450 S5: Yes. 00:25:54,849 S4: Here. 00:25:55,490 S3: Wachter. 00:25:56,410 S2: Here. 00:25:57,210 S3: Wilson. Here. 00:25:59,170 S2: Um. The chair recognizes our city attorney. 00:26:01,890 S11: Hi. Yes. Good morning. Or. Yes. Morning. So, um. So, title 44 is, uh, contains the open records rules. And when you went into executive session, you made your decision. When you come out of the executive session, you need to make a vote on the record for either following or not following what you all decided within the executive session. 00:26:25,930 S2: Okay. Um, could we get a motion, um, to clear this item up? 00:26:33,890 S5: Uh, I would make a motion to direct staff to move forward with the negotiation strategy agreed upon during the executive session. 00:26:40,690 S2: Okay. Do you have a second? 00:26:42,210 S10: I would second. 00:26:43,730 S2: Do we have any further discussion? Hearing none. Please call the roll. 00:26:49,569 S3: Grossman. Costa. Lucky. 00:26:52,730 S5: Yes. 00:26:53,410 S3: Demonic. 00:26:54,089 S9: Yes. 00:26:54,769 S3: Walker. 00:26:55,490 S2: Yes. 00:26:56,130 S3: Wilson. Yes. Gardner. 00:26:58,210 S4: Yes. 00:27:00,009 S2: All right. Is there any other business? 00:27:04,690 S2: Hearing. None. Can I get a motion to adjourn? 00:27:08,210 S4: So moved. 00:27:09,490 S2: And a second. All right. Any further discussion? Hearing none. Please call the roll. 00:27:17,130 S3: Castellucci. 00:27:17,970 S5: Yes. 00:27:19,250 S4: Yes. 00:27:20,009 S3: Walker. Wachter. 00:27:21,490 S2: Yes. 00:27:22,329 S3: Wilson. Yes. Gardner. 00:27:24,289 S4: Yes. 00:27:25,369 S2: Okay. Meeting adjourned. Thank you. Everybody.