Grand Forks City Council seeks change with MPO representation

Jan. 16—GRAND FORKS — With a majority of Grand Forks City Council members frustrated by what they consider a lack of representation on the Metropolitan Planning Organization Executive Board, the council on Tuesday moved to direct its MPO representatives to go to the board and amend the organization's bylaws.

Grand Forks and East Grand Forks are equally represented on the eight-person executive board. Grand Forks council members — five of the seven — seek to have one more representative than the other local units of government on the board, due to Grand Forks' considerably larger population.

The Grand Forks-East Grand Forks MPO oversees transportation planning across the Greater Grand Forks metropolitan area. MPOs are required by federal law and function as a middleman between local government bodies and state and federal agencies.

To designate an MPO, an agreement between the local units of government and the governors of Minnesota and North Dakota is needed. Making major changes to the MPO could mean a redesignation would have to occur.

"Redesignation would be required, and you would have to get the approval of the governors if there was a substantial change to the proportional voting of members," Grand Forks City Attorney Dan Gaustad said. "If there is a substantial change in the decision-making authority or responsibilities of the MPO or if there is a substantial change in the MPO decision-making procedures by the MPO bylaws," redesignation would also be required.

Members of the council were split on whether giving Grand Forks more say on the MPO would make it too powerful.

"Would that give us unilateral, dictatorial veto, having just one extra vote?" Council member Bret Weber asked Gaustad.

"The city of Grand Forks, on its own, would not have the majority vote," Gaustad said.

Currently, the MPO's eight-member Executive Board is made up of two members each from the Grand Forks City Council and East Grand Forks City Council, one member each from the Grand Forks and East Grand Forks City Planning Commissions, and one member each from Grand Forks and Polk counties, for a total of eight members. Representatives are chosen by the respective bodies they represent on the MPO's Executive Board.

In short, each city essentially has three votes and each county has one.

If the MPO is amended as suggested by the council Tuesday evening, the city of Grand Forks could possibly have four of the then-nine votes on the executive board.

Council President Dana Sande said East Grand Forks currently does have the majority say on the MPO Executive Board. That's because in ties, proposals fail.

"I would contend that East Grand Forks has unilateral veto authority over us right now," Sande said. "I would contend that majority rules. We should win if the council decides that's the way things should be."

To amend the bylaws or adopt new bylaws that govern the MPO, notice must be given one meeting in advance of the first vote. It then takes a majority vote at two consecutive meetings of the MPO Executive Board to pass amendments or new bylaws. The MPO Executive Board meets once a month, so the process of amendment can take two to three months at least.

That doesn't account for the time it would take to get approval from the Minnesota and North Dakota governors' offices if a redesignation is needed.

Across North Dakota, all MPOs follow a similar formula of composition and role. Up the river in Fargo, there is the Fargo-Moorhead Metropolitan Circle of Governments, which serves as its MPO. Its Executive Board has 16 members with the number of seats per local government unit determined by the population. There, no one local unit can have more than 50% of the votes on the board.

This means Cass County, Clay County and the cities of Horace, North Dakota, and Dilworth, Minnesota, each have one member; West Fargo two members; Moorhead three members; and Fargo seven members.

Also Tuesday, the council approved a budget amendment to allow an application for a planning grant for the ongoing Red River crossing study.

The RAISE grant — which stands for Rebuilding American Infrastructure with Sustainability and Equity — is a federal program for infrastructure planning. If the crossing study was awarded the funds, it would help reimburse costs for the planning and environmental documentation processes. East Grand Forks, Grand Forks County and Polk County have approved the budget amendment, which is spread equally across the cities and counties. The amendment will cost the city $7,101.

When the council considered the measure at its Committee of the Whole meeting last week,

the vote tied 3-3, sending a recommendation to not fund the grant opportunity to Tuesday's meeting

.

As of late, the Grand Forks City Council has argued that any study or planning for new crossings on the Red River should be focused on Merrifield Road, which is just south of Grand Forks but considerably south of East Grand Forks. During the

final passage of the 2050 Street and Highway plan

, the cities of East Grand Forks and Grand Forks disagreed about the inclusion of the intercity bridge.

Plans to build an intercity bridge may have been set back in recent days after an op-ed by Grand Forks Mayor Brandon Bochenski — published in the Herald — noted that new interpretations of regulations in Minnesota require any bridge built in a current flood plain to have abutment fill. That means that a new crossing would be 10% to 30% longer than previously expected.

The Herald contacted East Grand Forks Mayor Steve Gander

after Bochenski's op-ed was published, and Gander — who previously had sought a neighborhood bridge in mid-town Grand Forks — said he agrees with Bochenski and will not back a plan that includes a "high" bridge.

"I was taken aback by Gander's quotes in the paper today and his agreement (with us) about a bridge at 32nd Avenue," Sande said. "He said he wasn't for a high bridge and it was supposed to be a neighborhood bridge and he's sticking to his word. I really, really appreciate that."

In other news, the council:

* Approved continuing work for the design of improvements to the Greenway between 47th Avenue South and 62nd Avenue South. City staff members were looking for council direction for how to proceed and whether they should design and submit funding applications for improvements to the fishing area there.

* Discussed master planning for Grand Forks Public Health and the Grand Forks Police Department. Grand Forks Public Health will likely be moving across the street from city hall into the new Franklin on 4th building and out of the Grand Forks County Office building.