Bismarck, North Dakota News

" Sorry, I don't know anything about the facility or the bridge, didn't care then and I don't care now, because I feel that when we elect city officials we need to have faith that they are making the right decisions for the whole of the community, and I, for one, don't feel like micromanaging them when I really know nothing about running a city. That's why I voted for these people, because I didn't want the job myself so I just let them do it the best way they know how. "

" They can exchange information. It's done all the time. As far as not being necessary, that's your opinion. The Attorney General has sided against the City several times for what is necessary and what is not. And as far as the them doing business...like changing the zoning to allow a sex offender facility to be located then, turning around and giving them a tax abatement! Let's also not forget about paying for the Mitzel bridge. When they do business like that, I am glad that are being scrutinized. "

" I didn't say anything about conducting business, but rather exchange of information for purposes of being prepared for the open meetings. But it appears that even that won't be done or can't be done because someone would scream that they weren't privy to it, even though it wasn't conducting business and to be honest, very few people are that involved or care that much. But it only takes one to cause an added burden to an already difficult job as a commission. So to stay out of the line of her fire, the commission has to be limited in many areas where I don't feel it's necessary. That's all. they have a job to do, let them do it. "

" To Can of Worms. you might want bone up on on your politics. Numerous entities have been "nailed" by the A.G.'s office for not having open meetings. And why was the open meetings law passed? Because govermental entities were conducting business without the public's knowledge. Commissioners CAN speak to each other about things outside the meeting as long as there are not too many of them together at one time. What's the big deal about having an open meeting if you have nothing to hide? Just exactly who is trying to trip them up? I for one am glad that someone is there to make sure there is some transparency. "

" The way I see this the commission can't take a breath or do whatever it would take to expedite this thing because the public, who probably doesn't care anyway, needs notice and a public meeting has to be organized. The commission is scrutinized at every turn and this will takes eons to hammer out when it can only be done at a commission meeting, because one meeting they will need to decide what information needs research, the next meeting that research won't be appropriate or complete so time between meetings again, and they can't communicate at all between meetings, so every meeting will be incomplete information....and on and on..... Why don't we just let our commission do their job and quit trying to trip them up all the time? Hats off to our commission for trying to navigate all the stumbling blocks thrown in front of them. I have never understood why communication between commissioners at certain levels is so bad. During these "inappropriate" meetings, were they making motions and making decisions? Or were they sharing information and dialogue to try to be better prepared to present to the public at the next meeting? "

" Cluster, I agree. Now that the citizens have seen what a rag-tag ordinance this is, and how it was written so poorly it couldn't even be cleaned up for the election, and how the city now has to devote hours and energy to try to appease the supporters of this thing...this is just silly. If all the businesses do comply, what says the shoppers of Mandan will stay in Mandan anyway? The mall is quite convenient and always will be. There's no guarantee that the businesses will recover their costs or gain any business at all. This puts a burden on the businesses, and takes away more freedom of choice for the business owner, as if they don't know what is good for their business and what is a waste of time and dollars. Obviously the supporters of this thing don't own their own buildings so aren't concerned with the downside of this. Just another example of a do-gooder gone not so good. "

" It is what it is for now. The disturbing part, was the action of Sandra Tibke. Earlier in the meeting she was thanked by the Mayor for working with a group to hammer out some details on an issue. Then she rails against Jerry Serhienko for wanting to the exact same thing. She attempted to "school" him on being a commissioner. The parting shot of her when she finished her rant was one of disdain and disgust. Nice. I think this can be hammered out before the commission meeting but this probably won't happen until the AG's opinion comes out. "

" To "this is a cluster" Just FYI...I didn't have anything to do with drafting the ordinance, nor did I testify at (or even attend) the city commission meeting that is referenced in this article. Please don't compare me to or align me with Susan Beehler. My position on this matter has been and continues to be this: There was a petition passed around the public where a required number of signatures was obtained - the voting public approved the measure as it was presented to them. Now, the city of Mandan needs to get to work figuring out how to work with it. They had their opportunity to change it and couldn't come to any sort of consensus. I agree that the wording of this matter leaves a lot to be desired, but this is what they have to work with. Making public buildings accessable to all of the public will not hurt business in Mandan. Rather, it will open up the possibility of more of Mandan's citizens being able to patronize the few stores that are here. "

" Nice job Susan Beehler & you too summberbaby: This attempt at an ordinance is pathetic. I watched you at the meeting and you so contradict your intent of this ordinance and how it was sold to those of us who voted via your beeding heart story. This ordinance "IS" the final nail in the coffin for any business in Mandan. Susan you mis-informed the general public the way you sold this ordinance and I believe we need to call this back and vote again. You wouldn't get a fraction fo the votes . . . just like what happened in your race for Morton County Commissioner. Nice job in the primarys, but when people realized what you are all about "BAM" you lose!!
The ADA takes care of and is responsible for enforcement of these activities, NOT city councils.
IMPORTANT: Now we have development where a business is required to put in your electronic doors and just so a handicapped person can get into a 4' x 6' landing with staris that go up and stairs that go down. Makes a lot of sense to me Susan!!!
GREAT JOB to my fellow citizens of Mandan . . . we have successfully turned our back on ANY potential business investment in our community. "BismarcK" Does not have this non-sense and therefore the business will play on the east side ofthe river.
SUSAN do us all a favor . . . go back to Bismarck and advocate this non-sense over there . . . then we will get the investment we need in our community. "

" I watched the meeting on T.V., I got one big laugh, I even called my Dad to watch.
Did anybody see the part when the commisioners were voting on this issue? No one knew how to motion, it was funny as heck!
Thanks channel 2 for the entertaiment.
Serhienko is too funny and easily confused in my opinion.
To: Can of worms: The measure was written to include ANY public funding, not just growth fund money, that is how the measure was PASSED!

I do agree with commisioner Gangle, businesses should be classified.
It would be real easy for the city to adopt and enforce the existing National handicap laws as one speaker mentioned to the commissioners, it wasn't even looked into by the City of Mandan. "

" I agree with those who think this is rather silly, and, yes, where does it end? Everytime I go into a soap aisle in a store I sneeze like crazy. If a co-worker wears heavy perfume I sneeze like crazy. Do all buildings have to be hermetically sealed with a costant exchange of air? Really, if businesses can't or don't install these doors they lose business. They need to weigh the cost against what business they feel they would gain. A private business owner should be able to make this decision, as it seems they have less and less say as it is these days. It seems to me that the city has been accused in days past of being bullies, but whoever put this bill together could be considered as such, as well. It isn't all that feasible for some to do this, and if they are made to they may just say to heck with it all and close. Our businesses are struggling, I think we should be supporting them rather than tacking on more burdens. I know the city didn't start this and is just trying to make it work for everyone. Good luck, City, they dropped a real hot potato on you this time. And just those who get funding? If they are getting funding for any reason it probably means they need assistance, so if they need assistance how can they possibly handle this added to their already existing needs? Someone isn't thinking. "

" I say make all businesses in the city limits of Mandan that get government funding abide by this rule AND make all residents of Mandan that get government funding do business with these people. No more trips across the river for 'deals'. Sounds fair to me. "

" I sympathise with your situation as I too am handicapped. However, this attitude that every business must cater to the needs of everyone and every situation is nonsense. Where does it end? If a customer is hypersensative (suprisingly, many are) to off gassing from polyurethane products, will shopkeepers have to remove all plasric packagong from their stores? Business owners and their customers must decide for themselves who to do business with. "

" Public Funds are defined; the Attorney General uses this as a factor when determining whether a meeting falls under the open meetings and records law. A suggestion I gave the city of using a box which an entity applying for a building permit or occupancy permit or any application through the city where it would simply ask if you are receiving public funding. The entity would have to check the box, if they were. If they lied on the application and it was found out, this would be a reason to withdraw the application or to prosecute for fraud. Frank went to the city; they were willing to address his concern. We presented our petitions 3 times and the city commission directed the city administrator to meet with us and discuss options, he never did call us. We put in the final petition and only after the November election and it passing was the city willing to consider more discussion and only after a couple of commissioners had already meet in a private meeting coming up with their version. Because of the private meeting excluding our group and the public, I asked for an attorney general opinion. Why was the public funding used in the draft and not just all buildings? Because I thought it may not pass by the citizens if it was not tied to government accountability with our tax dollars. If the city cannot agree on enforcement with a narrow scope, how would they ever enforce this with all businesses? The city says the staff can not even handle the smaller number of businesses. Mandan granted over 60 tax exemptions to businesses last year, a couple of those the Mayor has ownership in and they gave out money for storefront improvements, these public funds would be a good place to start with enforcement of this new ordinance. These businesses should have to have the best accessibility; it is our tax dollars being used. "

" To summerbaby it is very unreasonable for the city to track all funding and also they cannot require/force businesses to tell them where all their funding comes from. It will slow down building permits as then the city has to go back and see if they are receiving public funds other than city!

Also Francis should have had someone other than just Beehler help him with this because he was right in his intent that all public buildings should be accessible but when Beehler got involved it was changed to the mess it is. It was not very well written when people actually read it and look at it from a legal standpoint not an emotional one. Yes I would love to be able to get into more than just grocery stores or banks in Mandan but I want it to be a legal ordinance that will not get bogged down by red tape which this will! "

" I am in a powerchair and I understand the reason the city needs to clarify this even though I feel that the ones that sponsored this should have thought it out ALOT better and created an ordinance that stated that ALL public buildings are required to have an accessible door for the elderly and handicapped by a certain date unless it is determined that they are unable to comply through the inspectors office ad if they do not comply they will be fined! This is a city ordinance and if they wanted "public funds" to include county, state or federal funds under this maybe they should have gone to the state level which I am currently trying to do to get more than just Mandan to be accessible. Right now I do almost all my shopping except banking and grocery in Bismarck because those are the only two places that I can get into, the rest of Mandan in unaccessible! "

" Francis Herauf, a co-sponsor of this November 4 ballot issue along with Susan Beehler, said "he didn't completely agree with the Nov. 4 ordinance or the one presented. He said he would have liked all public areas to have electronic doors, whether they received public funds or not." So why the rush Francis? Didn't you realize that the ballot language lacked the appropriate detail and specifics? Did you seek out wise counsel to help you draft the language? Were the voters supposed to figure out what Susan Beehler really meant as the result of her statements? An obvious problem that I see with this is that you had a valid concern early on and then you allowed Susan Beehler to become the advocate of your cause. That can only result in trouble and unfortunately it did!!! "

" I think we need a door czar to oversee enforcement. Better write that into the next budget. Whoever wrote this measure was an idiot. "

" to: "to summerbaby" Yes, I actually DO expect them to track this funding. I see absolutely no reason why buildings open to the public can't be required to submit, on an annual basis, where their funding comes from. Now, lets use a little common sense here and assume that privat homes are not "open to the public". Also, if you are receiving, social security, unemployment, welfare, etc, you are probably not a building open to the public. Yes, I do consider federal loans, grants, and monies paid with city, county, state, federal, or school district funds to be public funding. And yes, I include in this any form of tax relief for your "building open to the public". You can disagree with me all you want, and while I agree the ordinance that was voted on in November could certainly have been worded more clearly, the commission had their chance to amend it. Now they have to suck it up and enforce it. "

" foodstamps, medical assistance, and so on "

" I would consider public funds to mean, social security checks, welfare checks, unemployeement checks, tax refunds, fda loans,usda loans,city,county,state,school,federal paychecks, any payment made using a city check. Do you really want the city of Mandan to have to check into every persons background and look into things they have no control of what -so-ever? I don't think they have any business doing that and I applaud them for trying to clean it up. "

" While it's a great idea, there was no forethought into how the city would be able to enforce it. There needs to be a way to implement the solution (without creating a mess, like this) otherwise you just have a case of the "Good Idea Fairy" striking again.

For more information on the "Good Idea Fairy" I've included the link below. The rest of the site is good reading too.
http://soldiersmind.com/images/comics/good_idea_fairy_lrg.jpg "

" Just more proof that when you want something fouled up give to a bunch of politicians and you will have a bigger mess than when you started. "

" thank you to Can of Worms! You said it well.
I, too, thank the City Commissioners and salute the admirable job they are doing in a thankless position. "

" This ordinance, I believe, was initially written by some public citizens, amatuers in legal wording or works, was presented to the city, voted on by some who didn't even read or understand it, and now it has fallen on the city to clean up or try to make it at least workable. That's how I see it. This whole thing has created a hardship on far more people than just those who would use the doors. It just seems that here in Mandan, there is no rest from the perpetual quest to show up the city government. Mandan City Commission: your job is not easy, it's thankless, and I appreciate all you do in handling all the issues dealt to you. "

" Congratulations to the Mandan City Commission for broadcasting its meetings live on Channel 2. The public is now engaged and can see that governing is not a simple process. Now all the citizenry has an opportunity to understand community issues. This is a plus for the entire community. "

" It is not that simple. Wish it were. Does public fund mean any grant from any source, like an organizational grant? Does it include all federal tax write-offs? EXACTLY what public funding will the small city staff be expected to monitor. Seriously, you are a citizen and you don't even know how many different sources of public funds there are? The mayor and attorney know the extensive details involved. You don't. "

" Sounds like Commissioner Serhienko better get some training on proper order of public business and what it means to be a public servant! "

" "Going to have to define public funds"??? Seriously, this guy is our Mayor and he doesn't know what a public fund is? Let me help him out...A "public fund" is anything that didn't come from a private person/entity. The city of Mandan already has a building inspector and one would assume they have a listing somewhere of all businesses in town. I fail to see how this is going to be an insurmountable task for the city employees. If you have a building open to the public, find a date by which all must be in compliance and then enforce the ordinance. According to the article, you can deny public funding or declare the building an emergency. Seems pretty straightforward to me. Also, this will not hamper building in the city. Constructing a building that is accessable to all is only good business and if you look around, the vast majority of new businesses already do this. "

" its really sad... seems like the handicap and old are forgotten about!! I feel also that EVERY PUBLIC building should have handicap access! Not all of us have the great use of two arms and two legs...!!! There are alot of young VETS also with disabilities, thanks to this new war!! Please reconsider... and install at least one electric door.! "