Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Committee says HVS consultant may be removed from evaluations if he works for Fargo Dome

May 30, 2025 | Fargo , Cass County, North Dakota


This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »

Committee says HVS consultant may be removed from evaluations if he works for Fargo Dome
At a Visit Fargo‑Moorhead committee meeting, members agreed that HVS consultant Tom Hazinski would be ineligible to perform proposal evaluations for the group if he accepts an engagement to update pro forma numbers for the Fargo Dome.

The decision followed a committee discussion about whether Hazinski’s updating of prior pro forma work for the Fargo Dome would create a conflict of interest if HVS later evaluated proposals for the Visit Fargo‑Moorhead project. Committee chair Charlie Johnson summarized conversations with Hazinski and with Fargo Housing Authority representative Dave Supas and said Hazinski is free to take outside work but the committee should avoid any appearance of a conflict.

“Tom can do what he wants,” Johnson said, “but if he chooses to do that business … we would have to eliminate him from doing any evaluations going forward.”

Committee members discussed the optics of a consultant updating forecasts for a potential private developer while also serving on selection or evaluation work. One participant noted that the consultant’s prior pro forma and market materials are publicly available to all developers and the selection committee, but committee members said even with publicly available work the perception problem could remain.

A committee member moved that if HVS chooses to do the work for the Fargo Dome, the group would look elsewhere for evaluations. No roll-call was taken; members voiced “aye” and the motion carried. Johnson said he would call Hazinski to relay the committee’s message.

The committee did not adopt a written exclusivity clause or formal change to HVS’s contract at the meeting; members said the consultant remains free to take outside engagements but that the committee would not use HVS for evaluation work in that event.

The matter was raised during the meeting’s opening agenda items and was treated as a committee direction rather than a binding contractual action. Johnson said the committee’s board of directors had discussed the situation informally and advised the committee to avoid any appearance of a conflict.

What happens next: Johnson said he would contact Hazinski and inform him of the committee’s position so the group can plan for an alternate evaluator if needed.

View the Full Meeting & All Its Details

This article offers just a summary. Unlock complete video, transcripts, and insights as a Founder Member.

Watch full, unedited meeting videos
Search every word spoken in unlimited transcripts
AI summaries & real-time alerts (all government levels)
Permanent access to expanding government content
Access Full Meeting

30-day money-back guarantee

Sponsors

Proudly supported by sponsors who keep North Dakota articles free in 2025

Scribe from Workplace AI
Scribe from Workplace AI