Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Street Utility Fee topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Bismarck commissioners direct staff to refine proposal after mixed public input on street utility fee
Summary
City staff reported 342 survey responses and widespread skepticism about a proposed monthly street utility fee to replace special assessments; commissioners asked staff to return with draft ballot language and options in February, weighing a Home Rule Charter authorization or advisory question and possible phased rollouts of accounts.
City of Bismarck staff on Jan. 13 laid out public-input results and options for a proposed street utility fee that would replace street maintenance special assessments if voters approve the measure. The presentation focused on survey findings, potential rates, and how the city might phase in previously assessed parcels.
Gabe (city staff) summarized the outreach, saying the city received about 342 online survey responses and "about 75% said nearly not interested in the concept at all." He told commissioners the survey is self-selected and not statistically representative but said the comments helped identify recurring public concerns.
Key policy questions identified by staff and discussed by the commission included whether the fee should pay off existing special-assessment debt, which parcels would be subject to a fee, and how to build guardrails into ballot language. Staff reported roughly 14,000 parcels historically subject to special assessments and outlined a phased activation approach that could bring in roughly 2,000 parcels at a time over multiple years.
Staff also acknowledged a prior rate-calculation error in materials distributed to the public and noted corrected nonresidential figures. The initial residential illustrative range discussed earlier was $30 to $35 per month; staff said that corrected analysis and rollout assumptions could push the eventual residential rate lower than the initial estimate.
Commissioners raised several concerns. Commissioner Risch questioned the reliability of an online, self-selected survey and urged investing in randomized, representative polling; he also noted fairness questions for property owners who previously paid special assessments in full. Commissioner (transcript: Zinker/Zanker/Zinkert) and others favored a two-step strategy: ask voters for the authority to create a fee (via a Home Rule Charter amendment or advisory question) and, if approved, return with detailed rate proposals and implementation plans.
City staff said they would return in February with draft Home Rule Charter language and an advisory-ballot option, and recommended including explicit guardrails so voters understand how the fee would be implemented if authorized. No final vote on establishing the fee occurred; the commission directed staff to produce draft ballot language and additional public education materials before any vote.
