Convention Center Committee Meeting - October 17, 2025
Present: Katlyn Balstad (via conference call), Charley Johnson, Mallari Ackerman, Clare Hughes, Joe Raso, Kent Kolstad (via conference call), Emma McIntyre, Taylor Snelling, Denise Kolpack, Dave Piepkorn, Shannon Full (via conference call).
Absent: Tim Mahoney, John Strand, Michelle Turnberg.
Others Present: Jim Gilmour, Assistant City Attorney Erik Johnson, Shirley Hughes (via conference call), Susan Thompson.
The Committee reviewed and updated the timeline for the Convention Center project.
• Project Q&A Sessions: The schedule for the two-hour Q&A sessions with the four development groups was confirmed, with a correction to the order made by Susan Thompson.
o Next Week (October 24th): EAPC and Brewhalla.
o Following Week (October 31st): FARGODOME and Enclave.
• RFP Approval: A potential delay was discussed, as finalizing the RFP on November 7th would push the City Commission approval from November 10th to November 24th.
o Proposed Action: The Committee aims to present the RFP to the City Commission on November 10th for approval to speed up the process. This would allow the Phase 2 RFP to be issued to developers around November 12th instead of November 25th, gaining approximately two weeks.
• Proposal Deadlines:
o Developer Proposals Due: The deadline remains January 31st.
o Developer feedback so far suggests this deadline is achievable, but the Committee can adjust the date if concerns are raised during the Q&A sessions.
• Final Recommendation: The Committee intends to deliver a final recommendation to the City Commission by March 16th.
City staff, including Jim Gilmour, provided an update on one-on-one meetings scheduled between City departments and the four developers.
• Schedule: Three meetings are scheduled for the week of October 24th and one for the following week.
• Attendance: City Staff invited Charley Johnson and a representative from Visit Fargo Moorhead to attend these meetings to listen, take notes and report back any major concerns to the Committee.
Tom Hazinski, consultant from HVS, joined the meeting to review his notes and revisions to the Phase 2 RFP draft. The draft was reorganized to separate physical planning, operational and financial issues.
Key RFP Sections and Revisions:
• Site Plan: The document now emphasizes asking for details on overall infrastructure needs (roadways, utilities) as a priority for potential public financial involvement (such as TIF funding). The importance of existing amenities and their walkability was also highlighted.
• Convention Center Concept: Requested details include the plan for all communications technology (AV, broadband, wireless) and consideration for noise attenuation (e.g., train-related issues at certain sites).
• Loading Capacity: Based on Commissioner Piepkorn and Kent Kolstad’s input, this section was refined to be more specific, requesting information on:
o Multiple loading docks and easy access.
o Floor loads (what vehicles can drive onto the floor) for the exhibit hall.
o The possibility of enclosed unloading bays for winter operations.
o Overall turnover capacity and vendor storage space.
• Hotel: The Committee agreed to focus on the brand quality and chain scale of the proposed hotel, rather than mandating a specific brand.
o The desired level is upscale or upper upscale.
o An addition was made to request the size of guest rooms and a sample guest room floor layout to assess operational efficiency.
o The consultant advised that letters of commitment from brands should not be required at this stage due to the associated costs for developers.
• Project Cost Information: Soft Costs (designer fees, licenses, legal, financing) were added to the list to ensure the total cost of development is captured.
• Financing Plan: This was identified as a critical section that must clearly outline the entire capital stack. This includes the developer's equity and debt, and the public sector's share (e.g., TIF, property tax incentives, municipal debt).
• Operating Plan:
o Developers must propose whether the City-owned facility will be run under a Management Agreement (City accounts) or a Lease Agreement (developer assumes financial risk/reward).
o The operating pro-forma period was firmed up to a 5-year plan for consistent analysis.
o Proposals must detail the operating structure for catering and AV (in-house vs. third-party, exclusive vs. non-exclusive), acknowledging interest from local vendors.
o Proposals must clarify the responsibility for ongoing capital maintenance and how it will be funded.
Action Items
• RFP Refinements: Mallari Ackerman will incorporate all revisions and detailed language discussed during the RFP review into the draft.
• Scoring Plan: The Committee will review and decide on the suggested RFP scoring and weighting plan at the end of the Q&A session next week.
• Developer Q&A Submissions: Developers will be asked to email any questions they have for the Committee in advance of their Q&A sessions to Charley or Mallari.
• Timeline Distribution: A calendar version of the updated timeline will be sent to the Committee.
The meeting was adjourned at 2:19 p.m.