[{"_1":2,"_100":-5,"_101":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76,88],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6518619,"mediaKeyId","5386804-a462237b8146bdbf978ef710e5552def","parentId",5386804,"title","School board approves 90%/20‑year PILOT for Agristo plant after 6‑3 vote","audioSeconds",2853,"startMs",2156000,"endMs",5009000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=5386804-a462237b8146bdbf978ef710e5552def&start=2156&end=5009","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5386804-a462237b8146bdbf978ef710e5552def/thumbnail_2156000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6518619/North-Dakota/School-board-approves-9020year-PILOT-for-Agristo-plant-after-63-vote","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6518619-c8027841f544698658e1efb9cf7fb712/orig.mp4?Expires=1771065980&Signature=RViPgbSD4VQU7v58OJxf9oIzpRNG46kexN0yTe51Aqi6iyWEV35wQ30aDKHr3lwPDgpDTg55zBA17Mv4vcIipT2NNXLJ4TyfDcfbUYaQPJ3o-KHjLIDilA7p53mP~x8WZsSv4egN5XquTAh-DQeErWtgamIJieFRehP2zx6MxZgTFctxfx6d035kfOHHxZr4peQMMSCDu93mc2N9Eu4rovt9x7~aBNg-b5Yy-dIPC57Hx6fS~XuiaJZO4b9sR6tDCADhrcADo6HurdbevcDHoT8yJxKXc74Wi73hIRvsuFYO6cjPxD8wx3XzFA~kYCpbQTB~L2JWtq2DkDzTIGyC2Q__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Grand Forks Public Schools","date","2025-07-15T13:35:05Z","article","The Grand Forks School Board on Monday, July 14 approved a city request for a payment‑in‑lieu‑of‑taxes (PILOT) that would exempt 90 percent of the property tax on the Agristo phase‑1 plant for 20 years, by a 6–3 roll‑call vote.

The PILOT was presented by city staff, including City Administrator Todd Phelan and Business Manager Brandon Bambach, who summarized the city’s analysis of projected tax revenues, job creation and estimated student enrollment impacts. The board voted after a public presentation and discussion; the motion to approve the 90%/20‑year PILOT passed 6 yes, 3 no.

Why it matters: Agristo is a large frozen‑potato processor that city officials and regional agricultural leaders said would be a major industrial investment for Grand Forks and the region. Supporters argued the combined incentives (state forgivable loan plus the local PILOT) were needed to close a competitiveness gap with a Wisconsin site and to secure roughly 450–500 million dollars in capital investment, hundreds of construction jobs and hundreds of ongoing jobs.

City presentation and projections: Phelan told the board the phase‑1 build is estimated at roughly $450–$500 million with a current assessed real estate valuation figure used for modeling of about $186 million (he said $11 million of that is land value and remains taxable). The city’s materials estimated roughly 660 direct and indirect jobs related to the project and 4,000 construction‑job years across the build period. Bambach and city materials estimated that 15–25% of new employee households could include school‑age children, producing an enrollment increase the district modeled at 59–99 students; the district’s per‑pupil state aid figure cited in the packet was $11,349 per student.

Financial case: The city said the state had approved a $30 million forgivable loan to help close a competitiveness gap with Wisconsin and that the 90% PILOT is designed to make the project financially feasible for Agristo while still generating some near‑term local tax revenues. City estimates the school district would receive modest tax receipts in the early years as the project becomes taxable during construction and then substantially higher annual receipts after the PILOT step‑down ends.

Board discussion and concerns: Several board members tested assumptions about whether the student yields would materialize (private schools, homeschooling, and uncertain household composition were cited), and whether projected tax and enrollment gains fully offset additional school costs. Dr. Cheryl Hodak and other members emphasized stewardship of taxpayer dollars and questioned some external vacancy and market data the city relied on for other projects, but ultimately the motion to approve the Agristo PILOT carried.

Vote record (roll call as recorded): Josh Anderson — yes; Amber Flynn — yes; Jay Cleven — yes; (record lists “Podak” — no); Bill Palmisino — yes; Dr. Lund — yes; Jeff Manley — no; Joel Larson — no; Dave Berger (president) — yes. Tally: 6 yes, 3 no.

What happens next: City staff said the project still requires final land purchase and permitting steps, additional development agreements and city council approvals; the PILOT structure will be reflected in a development agreement negotiated between the developer, the city and taxing entities.

Evidence spans from the meeting transcript are below; the city presentation and the roll call vote are recorded in the board packet and the July 14 meeting transcript.

","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","GFPS School Board Meeting (July 14, 2025)","oneSentenceSummary","The Grand Forks School Board on July 14 approved a city request for a payment‑in‑lieu‑of‑taxes (PILOT) that would exempt 90% of property taxes for Agristo’s phase‑1 facility for 20 years by a 6–3 vote.","taxTitle","GRAND FORKS 1, School Districts, North Dakota","taxId",49620,"location","North Dakota","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6518610,"Votes at a glance: July 14 Grand Forks School Board meeting",2424,1013000,3437000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5386804-a462237b8146bdbf978ef710e5552def&start=1013&end=3437","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5386804-a462237b8146bdbf978ef710e5552def/thumbnail_1013000.jpg","/articles/6518610/North-Dakota/Votes-at-a-glance-July-14-Grand-Forks-School-Board-meeting","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6518610-036d5dfb314e22e83a3cb62bb935ed86/orig.mp4?Expires=1771065980&Signature=JVQDFzOku7lGiBdQ9-aMuk5ghqlLrHXwH97S0cr-BDupj3bhI2Uu8hoE0mDkZzXDNzC976eVZOnVUMA63J4awmf4K1glgrL3o4pl8KIlrp-eEl-wXgcqY~M31h2qW3i5ZzXGGO7vaXTZFN8So2Bzqvco~inWYjTZ~4EPpACZTFtbDyM2JitzBTNWQ6hZzRKKd1bKw8ifWJz3N-gTPDFunAfKPZCPrGaxvpYPvevSuAFfWVm348WaWJphgFHOa2gC7kKPYx4zY38lYC8lFR3NJ8A-lj6~xpz9797TpbQSY0QeqEjAzFP2Yf~lmYoacQkjdnyJ8Rq28ZMsIMrMsmaP4w__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","This is a summary of formal actions taken by the Grand Forks School Board during its July 14 meeting that were procedural or routine in nature and did not require extended debate. Where a roll‑call tally was recorded, it is included.

Elections
- Board president (organizational election): Dave Berger was elected president. Process: nominations, close of nominations and two roll‑call votes; final recorded outcome: 9 yes, 0 no, 0 absent in the final roll call where the successful nominee received majority support. (See meeting transcript for individual roll calls.)
- Board vice president: Josh Anderson was elected vice president by roll call; final tally recorded as 9 yes, 0 no, 0 absent.

Routine approvals and consent items
- Proposed 2025–26 Board meeting schedule: Approved (roll call recorded: 9 yes, 0 no, 0 absent).
- Consent agenda: Approved (roll call recorded: 9 yes, 0 no, 0 absent).
- Use of building fund dollars for summer projects (painting Cushman Field press box and replacing carpet in Red River Room 611): Approved; amount requested $16,630.85; vote recorded 9 yes, 0 no, 0 absent.
- Food service disposable supplies RFP: Awarded to Cole Paper (incumbent) following RFP review; motion passed 9 yes, 0 no, 0 absent.

Other items
- Administrative recommendation items and committee reports: Finance committee report discussed; no separate binding action beyond items listed above.

Details and supporting documents were included in the board packet; where a complete vote tally was recorded on the transcript it is listed here.

","Summaries and roll call outcomes for routine and consent votes, including officer elections, meeting schedule, consent agenda, building‑fund expenditures, vendor award and other routine business on the July 14 agenda.",{"_33":89,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":90,"_41":91,"_43":92,"_45":93,"_47":94,"_49":95,"_51":96,"_53":97,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":98,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":99,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6518614,"Board declines Reserve housing PILOT today but votes to enter negotiations, 6‑3",4256,1527000,5783000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5386804-a462237b8146bdbf978ef710e5552def&start=1527&end=5783","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5386804-a462237b8146bdbf978ef710e5552def/thumbnail_1527000.jpg","/articles/6518614/North-Dakota/Board-declines-Reserve-housing-PILOT-today-but-votes-to-enter-negotiations-63","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6518614-cc6063818ba01054f09066c9795e4361/orig.mp4?Expires=1771065980&Signature=BVSK-mbUk44v6Il1eFNEYZcZJxSchLJPm38sTBvlZgTsPxRlgtpl1o4jQ4CVNDe8QooG8J9kJFbpicNuOEKMhWbqT6Sjk-uo1DGpb-fJ3weDorq~YBb8eNLx3oOZjdHVrpSl9PzfQdNwOyiNBeGheHb8p7ajhdbpPijM4mrmBlfLktM7cfB7qiq78HwCLreofNvIdvsGVtj0B1IfPmPzEPkmOhGidq73KATUV68RokK~f5vMOXN8E8qXJfaaWGDtVnujloTb5JxZhss-g-6NthgZxVuD4ZDBvgE8KNq69aDhFAWjQS9ipoQukRC4Nitgei0TZ0Bn4mS73CNM2v4QCQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Grand Forks School Board on July 14 voted to deny a payment‑in‑lieu‑of‑taxes (PILOT) request for the proposed Reserve apartment development but simultaneously approved a motion indicating the district is willing to enter negotiations on revised terms. The combined action passed 6–3.

Public comments and concerns: Multiple public speakers during the board’s public comment period argued against tax incentives for apartment developers. Mona Leek told the board she was \"absolutely opposed to giving tax pilots to the developer\" and said incentives unfairly subsidize apartment development and create competition with existing businesses. Andrew Krausnick, owner of Albatross Indoor Golf Club, and other local business owners described potential \"unfair competition\" if apartment amenities (for example, golf simulators) compete with local businesses and cited North Dakota Century Code 40‑57.1 in arguing the incentive could violate state limits on unfair advantage.

City and developer presentation: City Administrator Todd Phelan and staff presented the Reserve project as part of a broader housing strategy. Phelan summarized proposed project values (city assumed a land value of about $1,000,000 and an improved real estate value near $27,000,000), the proposed stepped PILOT structure (90% first five years, 80% years 6–10, 60% years 11–15, with full taxation thereafter), and estimated tax receipts to taxing entities under that structure.

Board discussion: Board members questioned the timing and process for receiving materials (some consultant material arrived late), the vacancy data the city used, and the distribution of costs and benefits across taxing entities. Several board members said they were open to negotiating different terms; others said they prefer to receive the district’s full share of taxes now rather than accept an extended PILOT.

Motion and outcome: The motion before the board — to deny the PILOT request as presented — was moved and seconded. An amendment to that motion to indicate the board’s willingness to enter into negotiations on revised terms was added and passed by roll call, and the combined action to deny while expressing willingness to negotiate passed 6 yes, 3 no.

Key numbers and clarifications (as presented to the board): the developer’s estimated improved real estate value: about $27,000,000; project total investment cited near $28–37 million by city materials; proposed stepped PILOT structure (90/80/60 over 15 years with the first 5 years at 90%); early‑years additional tax receipts to taxing entities estimated at roughly $60,000–$63,000 total for years 1–5 (school share ~$22,000–$23,000 annually in that period), growing to full taxation after year 15 (school share estimated at ~$201,000 at full taxation in city analysis). City packet additions included letters of support from Grand Forks Air Force Base and Altru and updated vacancy information added electronically.

Next steps: The board’s formal denial plus its stated willingness to negotiate means the city and developer have a path to reopen terms and present revised PILOT language and an accompanying development agreement. If negotiations proceed, the board will see revised terms and any agreement before final participation is confirmed.

","After public comment and a lengthy discussion about vacancy rates, competition and district impacts, the school board voted to deny the PILOT application for the proposed Reserve apartment project but approved an amendment expressing willingness to negotiate revised terms.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

School board approves 90%/20‑year PILOT for Agristo plant after 6‑3 vote

Votes at a glance: July 14 Grand Forks School Board meeting

Board declines Reserve housing PILOT today but votes to enter negotiations, 6‑3