Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Sidewalk Notice And Repair topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Cities warn proposed 2½-year notice for sidewalk repairs would delay hazard fixes
Summary
Witnesses from Minot and Bismarck told the House committee that House Bill 15-13’s proposed two-and-a-half-year window for property owners to repair sidewalks is too long; local officials described existing notice and special-assessment processes and urged a shorter, locally managed timeline.
Representative Laurie Van Winkle introduced House Bill 15-13, saying the bill would set a minimum timeframe for property owners to repair sidewalks before a municipality completes the work and assesses the property owner. The sponsor told the committee she brought the bill after a Minot constituent said a short city notice created a financial hardship.
City and advocacy testimony: Minot city manager Harold Stewart and city engineering staff described the local process: inspections or citizen complaints trigger an assessment; property owners are notified by certified letter and given options — repair privately or sign a waiver to have the city complete the work and later special-assess the cost. Stewart said letters in a recent case went out April 29 with a contractor-permit deadline of July 22. He urged caution on a four-to-thirty-month statutory minimum, saying municipalities need flexibility to get sidewalks repaired promptly for public safety.
Minot provided statistics showing how the process worked in recent years: in 2024 the city sent 34 sidewalk notices; 11 property owners signed waivers for the city to do the work and 15 completed repairs themselves. In 2023 Minot sent 14 notices and all 14 property owners signed waivers; in 2022 the city sent 62 notices and ultimately special-assessed 45 owners. Stewart said property owners assessed by the city are offered a 10-year special-assessment payback schedule; he gave an example of a $1,700 assessment equating to about $170 per year over ten years.
Bismarck officials made similar points. City administrator Jason Tomonic said local practice is to work with property owners to accomplish repairs within a typical construction season; Bismarck’s contracts and bonded contractors are used for right-of-way work and the city provides special-assessment payback schedules. Bismarck and Minot officials both warned that a statutory 2½-year window would be too long to leave a known trip hazard in place.
Disability-advocacy perspective: Michael Olsen of North Dakota Protection and Advocacy told lawmakers his organization supports well-maintained sidewalks for accessibility and safety but did not support the specific two-and-a-half-year timetable in the bill; he recommended a shorter, timely requirement and said local conditions should inform the schedule.
League of Cities: Bill Wilkin of the North Dakota League of Cities said member cities uniformly opposed a 2½-year delay for known hazards and noted cities already use informal and formal processes to address sidewalks in the public right of way.
Why it matters: The hearing centered on a balance between giving property owners time to arrange repairs and the public-safety interest in keeping sidewalks safe and accessible. Municipal officials said the existing mix of notice, permit deadlines, waiver options and special-assessment payback terms largely addresses owner hardship while allowing cities to remediate hazards within a construction season.
Ending: The committee heard pro, neutral and opposing testimony and asked cities for procedural details; no committee vote on the bill is recorded in the provided transcript excerpt.
