MUNICIPAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY

The Regular Meeting of the Municipal Airport Authority of the City of Fargo, North Dakota, was held Tuesday, November 10, 2020 at 8:00 a.m. in the Airport Boardroom.

The members present or absent were as follows:

Present: Engen (via zoom), Cosgriff (via zoom), Lind
Absent: Haugen, Linn
Others: Bossart (via zoom), Strand (via zoom)

Vice Chairman Lind presiding.

Approved the Minutes of the Regular Meetings of the Municipal Airport Authority Held October 13
and October 27, 2020:
The minutes of the Regular Meetings of the Municipal Airport Authority held October 13 and
October 27, 2020 were approved without objection.

Approved the Airport Vouchers Totaling $58,202.39:
Mr. Engen moved to approve the airport vouchers totaling $58,202.39.
Second by Mr. Cosgriff.
On the call of the roll, members Engen, Cosgriff, Lind voted aye.
Absent and not voting: Haugen, Linn
The motion was declared carried.

Approved the Individual Voucher to Sixel LLC:
Mr. Cosgriff moved to approve the individual voucher in the amount of $1,142.00 to Sixel LLC
for October passenger enplanement fees, Allegiant – Nashville.
Second by Mr. Engen.
On the call of the roll, members Engen, Cosgriff, Lind voted aye.
Absent and not voting: Haugen, Linn
The motion was declared carried.

Approved the Individual Voucher to Flint Communications:
Mr. Cosgriff moved to approve the individual voucher in the amount of $12,533.17 to Flint Communications
for partial payment request for 2020 Airport Marketing Program.
Second by Mr. Engen.
On the call of the roll, members Engen, Cosgriff, Lind voted aye.
Absent and not voting: Haugen, Linn
The motion was declared carried.

Approved the Individual Voucher to TL Stroh Architects:
Mr. Cosgriff moved to approve the individual voucher in the amount of $5,731.75 to TL Stroh Architects
for partial payment request for architectural services in connection with the SRE Building Project.
Second by Mr. Engen.
On the call of the roll, members Engen, Cosgriff, Lind voted aye.
Absent and not voting: Haugen, Linn
The motion was declared carried.

Approved the Individual Voucher to TL Stroh Architects:
Mr. Cosgriff moved to approve the individual voucher in the amount of $7,691.00 to TL Stroh Architects
for partial payment request for architectural services (construction administration) in connection with the SRE Building Project.
Second by Mr. Engen.
On the call of the roll, members Engen, Cosgriff, Lind voted aye.
Absent and not voting: Haugen, Linn
The motion was declared carried.

Received Update on Airport Property – Public Ad:
Mr. Dobberstein stated we publicly advertised the two plus acres in the Stockman Subdivision
(adjacent to property owned by Terry and Patricia Mathern, and on which the Matherns have a
License Agreement with the MAA). He stated the Matherns previously made an offer to purchase
the property but the board decided to publicly advertise the property for sale. He stated the deadline
for offers was yesterday, November 9, but no other offers were received. He stated the Matherns
had offered $5,000 and the appraisal was $38,000, so he and Attorney Bossart will continue to
negotiate a counter offer.
Mr. Dobberstein stated we did our due diligence by having the appraisal done and also by
publicly advertising the sale.

NDPERS Update:
Attorney Bossart was recognized (via zoom) and stated where the matter was left at the last
meeting was that the COF was going to have their internal city meeting and then from there set up
something with the MAA.

Mr. John Strand was recognized (via zoom) and stated they had their follow-up meeting
yesterday and it is his understanding that their written document will be completed this morning or
early afternoon for release to the MAA. He stated then there is a request coming to meet on
Monday, November 16. He stated Chairman Linn requested adequate time for the MAA to review
the document before a joint meeting.

Attorney Bossart stated she is not able to meet on November 16 but would like the meeting
delayed until she is able to attend.

Mr. Strand stated he is certain we will do what we can to accommodate that.
Vice Chairman Lind stated it would be prudent to have Attorney Bossart present at the
meeting.

Airport Construction and Security Update:
Mr. Terry Stroh, TL Stroh Architects, was recognized (via zoom) and reported on the progress
of the SRE Building Project. He stated they are working on pouring the remaining pavement, the
fuel system is fully operational, and the exterior metal panels and roof decking will begin soon. He
stated we are still looking at a completion date in February.

Mr. Jeff Klein, Mead & Hunt, was recognized (via zoom) and stated he does not have a lot to
report. Northern Improvement finished all of the work they were able to complete last Friday. He
stated the electrical subcontractor (Sun Electric) will work on street light poles and fixtures as they
receive them over the course of the winter months.

Discussed ADK Report and Associated Airport Employee Job Descriptions and Ratings:
Mr. Dobberstein reviewed the process so far. He stated the employees in these positions
have reviewed and updated their job class descriptions and he and Darren Anderson reviewed all of
those descriptions and concurred with the updates. He stated the Executive Director job description
will be reviewed by Chairman Linn and Vice Chairman Lind.

Mr. Dobberstein stated he and Mr. Anderson also went through the five positions and
updated the DBM scores for each of those positions. He stated those ratings were provided to the
board members along with the ADK study. He stated there are some differences with our ratings
and the ADK study.

Mr. Dobberstein stated the thoughts today were to concur with the revised job descriptions
that were presented to the board members. He stated this information would then be forwarded to
the Airport Position Evaluation Committee for their review and concurrence.

Vice Chairman Lind stated he did review the descriptions and DBM ratings but he has not yet
had a chance to discuss them with Chairman Linn. He stated he would like to defer some of this to
Chairman Linn. He stated the board could accept the revised descriptions today.

Mr. Cosgriff was recognized (via zoom) and asked the proper order to follow as far as the
APEC. He stated he would think that the APEC would make recommendations to the MAA and then
the MAA takes final action.

Vice Chairman Lind stated the process right now is for the MAA board members to review the
job descriptions and then accept them and move them on to the APEC for further evaluation.
Mr. Dobberstein stated that is the gray area of the MOU. He stated we believe that the APEC
acts differently than the COF’s PEC in that the APEC’s decision is final and cannot be changed by
the MAA or the City Commission, whereas the COF PEC recommendations go to the commission
for approval. He stated the process with our ARFF staff was the MAA concurred with the ADK study
and recommendations and then sent the information to the COF for implementation and they were
rejected. He stated the recommendations were then forwarded to the APEC and those members
reviewed all of the DBM scoring process for each position. After beginning that process the APEC
decided to seek input from ARFF Chief and Executive Director as they were much more aware of
the positions and job descriptions than the APEC. He stated it was a pretty thorough examination
on their part and in the end the pay grades that were approved matched those of the ADK study.
Mr. Engen was recognized (via zoom) and stated the updating of the job descriptions comes
from the MAA first and we then hand that information off to the APEC.

Mr. Cosgriff stated he knows the MOU puts it in a strange position. He stated a position
evaluation committee looks at grading different positions. He stated if there are duties assigned
amongst other people it has a ripple effect and you can’t just pull each position out and look at it as
a unique, stand-alone position. He stated the other problem he has is just the process. He stated
even though the MOU states the APEC has final decision he doesn’t know that squares with the
MAA. He stated typically a board is the final step for approval. He stated he is at a loss on how to
proceed with this. He stated this is a weird step.

Attorney Bossart was recognized (via zoom) and stated she agrees this is a little confusing
because we are in a situation of this hybrid model of two public entities. She states Subsection E
does talk about requests by the MAA for compensation for airport employees, outside of the COF
pay plan, utilizing as a basis for evaluation and decision-making by the APEC. She stated under
state statute the MAA can make decisions regarding compensation, but we have this unique
relationship with the COF and this is where the idea of having the decision making process be with
the APEC comes from. She stated it is a bit of a flip but during mediation the two parties tried to find
something that would be workable for both sides. She stated it might be something that might need
to be revisited for clarification for both sides.

Mr. Strand was recognized (via zoom) and stated it is absolutely clear from our negotiations
and our mediation that the COF does not have the final authority on what comes out of the MAA or
the APEC for airport employees as far as compensation. He stated it used to be that it would come
from the MAA to the COF PEC and then to the city commission but that is no longer the case. He
stated he is not so sure that the MAA doesn’t still have final authority. He stated we can look at that
language but he would say ultimately the MAA board is where the buck stops.

Mr. Dobberstein reviewed the recent process with the four ARFF positions. He stated the
MAA reviewed and concurred with the recommendations in the ADK study, without review of the
DBM ratings, and those recommendations were well within the COF pay plan and were sent to Asst.
City Administrator Redlinger for implementation. He stated about a week or so later we were
advised that HR had rejected the changes and they had to go to the APEC, even though they were
well within the COF pay plan. He stated while we believe that the MOU states that if we are making
recommendations outside of the pay plan it would go to the APEC, it was contrary that the changes
for the ARFF positions were rejected, even though they were within the pay plan.

Attorney Bossart states that needs to be a point of clarification. She stated if the MAA is not
going to send recommendations that are not outside of the COF pay grade she sees it as an
exercise in futility for the APEC to review those.

Mr. Cosgriff stated that would be different than how the COF’s PEC works.

Mr. Strand stated he will follow up and get more clarification.

Vice Chairman Lind stated he would like to suitcase the job descriptions complete today and
approve them today. He stated those would then be forwarded to the APEC and they can review
the DBM ratings and get back to us with their findings.

Mr. Engen stated he thinks the order is that the MAA gets the job descriptions and agrees on
those and then move those on to the APEC. He stated within the ADK study there is leeway for the
possibility of performance bonuses for the executives and he does not think we should leave that out
of the conversation because that can be part of additional compensation for them outside of the
scope of their pay grade.

Mr. Engen moved to approve the job description updates for the benefit of the APEC with the
understanding that the ADK report did comment on the use of bonuses for employees and that
should be incorporated and discussed by the APEC as well.
Motion was not seconded.

Mr. Cosgriff stated from a board governance standpoint, he stated he is not used to a board
level of authority reviewing job descriptions on employees other than a C level or top administrator
level. He stated trying to fit it into the system is a little awkward. He stated a board will deal with the
CEO or CFO but below that it is always the direct supervisor that has the most hands-on and direct
knowledge of a position. He stated as we try to find a way through this, some of this may be that we
are trying to deal with too many levels of authority here.

Mr. Dobberstein stated he does not disagree with Mr. Cosgriff at all. He stated this is a gray
area in the MOU. He stated maybe at the next meeting we can affirm those recommendations put
together for the positions, some of which differ from the ADK study. He stated once those changes
are affirmed with the board they will be sent on to the APEC for final review. He stated he could
argue that all of the recommendations are within the pay plan and should not have to go to the
APEC, but unfortunately that is still the gray area.

Vice Chairman Lind stated he agrees, it is a strange situation for all of us.

Mr. Engen stated he would amend his previous motion slightly and moved that the board
approve the updated job descriptions as presented, with the understanding that the Executive
Director’s position be reviewed by the Chairman and Vice Chairman.
Second by Mr. Cosgriff.
On the call of the roll, members Engen, Cosgriff, Lind voted aye.
Absent and not voting: Haugen, Linn
The motion was declared carried.

Other Business:
Mr. Dobberstein stated October passenger numbers have not yet been finalized but we are
down about 50-55% vs. 2019.

Mr. Dobberstein stated a few years ago we were awarded a DOT Small Community Air
Service Development Grant in the amount of $500,000. He stated local funding to go along with that
is $100,000 from the MAA, $50,000 from the EDC and $50,000 from the CVB, along with some
marketing funds from the MAA and the CVB. He stated the total grant package is $825,000. He
stated this grant was awarded with the idea of initiating service between Fargo and Seattle. He
stated the grant has been extended twice and now we are coming upon the deadline to request the
grant for a third year. He stated it sounds favorable that they will consider the extension. He stated
he reached out to Alaska Airlines and they will sign a letter of support to go along with our request,
but that does not mean a commitment on their part. He stated it does tell us that they are interested
in continuing to analyze the route as a possibility in the future.

The meeting of the Municipal Airport Authority was adjourned until the next Regular Meeting
to be held Tuesday, November 24, 2020.
Time at adjournment was 8:35 a.m.