Board chair opened discussion Dec. 30 on four parcels associated with the Fargo–Moorhead area flood diversion project that the Metro Flood Diversion Authority (MFDA) had identified as potentially excess. Darren, a county staff member, told the board the parcels (OIN 1665, 1792, 1793 and 1802) together total about 22.37 acres and were listed in the packet with a price tied to an appraisal of about $5,000 per acre.

Why it matters: acquiring these properties would give Clay County ownership and potential control over land in Minnesota that had been purchased for the diversion project. Commissioners said they were concerned about the county taking on property with easements or access challenges and asked whether the packet and MCCJPA (Morehead/Clay County Joint Powers Authority) process matched the county’s excess‑land policy.

What was said: Darren summarized the MFDA review process and the 30‑day opportunity for member entities to indicate purchase intent. The chair noted the packet’s price and the appraisal basis, saying the price shown in the memo reflected $5,000 per acre. Commissioner Mojo (member of the lands committee) objected to staff’s proposed process at MCCJPA, saying the committee had recommended bundling the parcels and he and another commissioner rejected that approach because bundling could deny former owners their first option to repurchase. "If you tie all 4 together, how can each one have that right?" Mojo asked.

Outcome: Commissioner Eppinger moved that the properties be treated as excess and that Clay County decline to exercise any purchase option. The motion was seconded and approved by voice vote. The board’s action notifies the diversion authority (via Jason Benson or MFDA channels) that Clay County will not purchase these parcels.

Details and next steps: The packet identified the parcels by OIN and listed a total acreage; the board did not direct staff to pursue acquisition and agreed that future handling should follow the county’s excess‑lands policy. Commissioners requested clearer documentation of the disposal process and indicated they expect lands‑committee and MCCJPA follow‑up to align recommendations with policy.

The board voted to decline the offer at the Dec. 30 meeting; staff will notify MFDA/MCCJPA of the decision.