Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Budget And Finance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Clay County ranks Fargo-Moorhead diversion as top legislative priority, approves juvenile-facility request and flood-mitigation resolution
Summary
The board approved resolutions to pursue state funding for a non‑secure juvenile facility and for flood-mitigation projects and then voted to prioritize a $44.4 million Minnesota commitment to the Fargo‑Moorhead diversion project for the county’s MMB application; the prioritization passed 4–0 with one abstention.
Clay County commissioners on June 10 approved two resolutions sending legislative requests to the state and then designated the Fargo‑Moorhead diversion project as the county’s top priority for the Minnesota Management and Budget (MMB) application.
County staff said the board must submit the application to MMB by June 13, with the option to adjust materials through Oct. 17. “We have until June 13 to complete the application,” the county administrator told the board during the presentation about two legislative priorities.
The board first approved resolution 2020-515 (listed in the agenda packet) supporting the county’s non‑secure juvenile residential facility funding request; a motion to adopt was made and passed by voice vote. Commissioners then approved resolution 2020-516, which outlines the legislative appropriation request for flood mitigation in Clay County tied to the Fargo‑Moorhead diversion work and related local projects.
After passing both resolutions, a commissioner moved that Clay County indicate a $44,400,000 Minnesota financial commitment to construct improvements and complete land acquisition needed for the Fargo‑Moorhead diversion project (in coordination with the Buffalo-Red River Watershed District) and that this be the county’s priority for the MMB application. The motion was made, seconded, and carried with four votes in favor and one abstention; the chair recorded the tally as “four‑zero with one abstention.” The board recorded no roll-call list of individual yes votes in the transcript.
Commissioners explained their positions during debate. Commissioner Ebinger said, “I loathe having to make a prioritization between these two,” but acknowledged the procedural need to rank priorities for MMB. Other commissioners argued the diversion work has immediate operational and public‑safety implications because the diversion could become operational before certain northern-county mitigation projects are complete and urged urgency on flood projects in areas such as Georgetown.
County staff advised that dollar amounts for the diversion request used the prior year’s figures and would be updated as more recent construction and soft-cost estimates became available; staff confirmed numbers on both requests can be revised through October. The board directed staff to finalize application materials and to continue local coordination with entities including the Buffalo-Red River Watershed District and the diversion authority.
No final state funding was approved at the meeting; commissioners authorized submittal of the county’s requests and set a local prioritization for state consideration.
