Latest news with #SB2398
Yahoo
04-04-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
A pen stroke from reality, SB 2398 seeks to avoid any 'pathway that creates a problem' near military bases
Apr. 4—GRAND FORKS — A bill that creates military "impact zones" and panels to oversee development within them was born in part from concerns about future wind farm developments and a failed agribusiness project from the past. Now, after Senate Bill 2398 was approved by both the North Dakota Senate and House of Representatives, its chief sponsor may finally be able to relish the result of nearly a year of work on the legislation. "There is always satisfaction with bringing a project (to fruition)," said Sen. Jeff Barta, R-Grand Forks. "I feel very good about this." Awaiting the signature of Gov. Kelly Armstrong, SB 2398 is just a pen stroke from final approval. If it happens, it will do two things in particular: Create impact zones adjacent to military installations and also form committees tasked with providing oversight of proposed development within those zones. The bill especially focuses on the Grand Forks region, due to the proximity of Grand Forks Air Force Base, Camp Grafton (5 miles south of Devils Lake) and the Cavalier Space Force Station. Its genesis, according to Barta, was in part "a conversation about wind farms." But a China-backed corn mill, once proposed to be built in Grand Forks, played a role too, he said. Known locally by the name of its ownership group — "Fufeng" — the planned factory was announced in November 2021, when local government and development leaders touted its potential impact to the region's economy. Soon after the announcement came very public discussions centered around its supposed environmental impacts as well as the possibility that it was a national security threat, due to its planned proximity to Grand Forks Air Force Base. In early 2023, the Air Force provided an official opinion, confirming the concerns about security. The city abandoned the plan shortly thereafter. SB 2398's overarching goal is to help avoid similar problems in the future, Barta and other supporters have said. "We have some great things going with the installations here and I don't even know all of the things they are doing," Barta said via telephone Thursday during a break at the Capitol. It's important to keep the nearby lands free of development that could hinder those operations, he added. "It's just allowing them to do the operational things they need to do to stay at the forefront of (their military activities). We don't have a crystal ball knowing where new developments are going to go ... both in the air and on the ground," he said. "It's about knowing that we aren't going down a pathway that creates a problem. We certainly don't want another Fufeng, right? That wasn't the entire genesis behind this, but it was certainly a contributing factor." He believes Fufeng's proponents and civic boosters "did everything that was asked." But well-intentioned projects can sometimes inadvertantly run afoul of military missions, he said. "Not pointing fingers at anyone whatsoever," he said. "We went through the appropriate channels, so everything should (have been) good, only to find out that no, it wasn't." He stresses that SB 2398 is not specifically a response to Fufeng. However, Grand Forks' saga with the project was big news, prompting coverage by the New York Times. Even today, it's being discussed in national circles. In "Seven Things You Can't Say About China," a book that has spent time this spring in the New York Times bestseller list, author Tom Cotton — a Republican senator from Arkansas — referenced Fufeng and the controversy it stirred. During a recent meeting of the City Council, Grand Forks resident Craig Spicer stood during the public comment segment to read a snippet. "Local officials celebrated the economic investment and job creation at first, but engaged local citizens began showing up at meetings to oppose the project and ultimately prevailed, after which they broke out into chants of 'USA,' " said Spicer, quoting directly from the book. As SB 2398 was being mapped out, the Department of Defense took notice, Barta said. "They see we're doing things right in North Dakota and we can further protect these crucial missions that we have going on at every one of our (military installations)." Bruce Gjovig, a member of the Mayor's Base Retention Committee in Grand Forks, wrote testimony in favor of SB 2398, noting that North Dakota lacks state-level legislation to protect installations from encroachment. "When we accept a military installation, we have a duty to protect it," Gjovig wrote. "Coordination and communication are needed between military authorities and state, county and township jurisdictions. This is critical to ensure certain developments align with military compatibility goals." SB 2398's route through the Legislature wasn't a direct one. Its original wording created predetermined and sizable impact zones — 25 miles in each direction — near military installations. The size of those zones raised concern. Now, the zones will be " established by an assessment in a compatible use study and contingent upon the missions of each military base ." Input during the legislative process also prompted a change in the makeup of the committee — technically committees, with an "s." In an earlier form, the bill called for the members to include the governor. That changed, however, and members now include the state agriculture commissioner, as well as a representative from each county within the boundaries of a zone, to be selected by local county commissions; a township representative, to be selected by the boards of township supervisors; a city representative, to be selected by affected city councils; and, on a voluntary basis, the commander of each military installation, or a designee. Barta noted Thursday that if it becomes law, SB 2398 will authorize multiple panels whose members will specialize in the installation in their particular region. "Those committees are specific to the (nearby) installation," he said. "We're trying to bring it as local as we can." The installations themselves have the ability to opt in on the zones and committees.
Yahoo
03-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
North Dakota Senate concurs on military zones measure
Apr. 2—BISMARCK — A plan to create "impact zones" around military installations and a committee to give consideration to developments that could impact missions cleared one more legislative step on Wednesday. The North Dakota Senate voted 46-1 to concur on the final version of Senate Bill 2398, intended to create more collaboration, conversation and oversight for projects planned near Air Force bases at Minot and Grand Forks, as well as Camp Grafton and the Cavalier Space Force Station in northeast North Dakota. The Senate's decision to concur — after the chamber voted 47-0 on Feb. 19 to pass an earlier version and after the House passed the new version last week — means SB 2398 now will head to the desk of Gov. Kelly Armstrong. The only dissenting vote on Wednesday was from Sen. Janne Myrdal, R-Edinburg. During a committee hearing in early March , Sen. Jeff Barta, R-Grand Forks, said the intent of SB 2398 is to get various stakeholders "seated around a table to say 'this is what has to be done in order for you to operate here.' " Originally, as previously reported by the Grand Forks Herald, SB 2398 included predetermined "impact zones" that stretched 25 miles in each direction from the Air Force bases in Grand Forks and Minot. That led to initial hesitation from the Grand Forks City Council , whose members were concerned that the long reach of the impact zone could jeopardize future development in and around the city. Grand Forks Air Force Base is about 18 miles from downtown Grand Forks. The size of the impact zones was amended, now to be " established by an assessment in a compatible use study and contingent upon the missions of each military base ." The committee's makeup also changed over the past two months. Originally, it included the governor among its members; now, members include the state agriculture commissioner, as well as a representative from each county within the boundaries of a zone, to be selected by local county commissions; a township representative, to be selected by the boards of township supervisors; a city representative, to be selected by affected city councils; and, on a voluntary basis, the commander of each military installation, or a designee. During comments on the Senate floor Wednesday, Barta said "the way it originally was written the concern was, given the areas that this might encompass, that there would be too many people at the table." Barta said the goal was to create a committee that would be "stealthy enough" but still able to make important decisions. The House passed the amended version on Thursday, March 27, in a 73-19 vote, pushing SB 2398 back to the Senate for its members to concur.
Yahoo
01-04-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Amended military zone plan headed to North Dakota Senate
Apr. 1—BISMARCK — After passage in the North Dakota House of Representatives, an amended version of a bill that seeks to create military compatibility zones will again be considered by the Senate. The Senate approved an earlier version of SB 2398, which if passed will create "impact zones" as well as a committee whose goal will be to "harmonize land, airspace and electromagnetic spectrum use" within those zones, according to the bill's wording. Although it's an issue that would carry significance elsewhere in the state — Minot, in particular — much of its focus has been on northeast North Dakota and the Grand Forks region due to the location of nearby Grand Forks Air Force Base, Camp Grafton and the Cavalier Space Force Station. Final passage of SB 2398 would protect existing and future military missions within the zones and "ensure that any proposed developments within the designated radius of the installation will be subject to review," according to Rep. Steve Vetter, R-Grand Forks. During a speech prior to Thursday's vote on the House floor, both Vetter and Rep. Landon Bahl, R-Grand Forks, spoke in favor of the amended version of SB 2398. Vetter told House members that the goal is to "bring every entity to the table," including municipalities, townships, counties and the military. During his speech, Vetter referenced the failed Fufeng corn mill, which was proposed to be built in Grand Forks. With Fufeng's ties to China, the Air Force eventually declared the plan a national security threat and in 2023, the city backed out of negotiations with the company's representatives. But before it was scuttled, the Fufeng proposal prompted more than a year of controversy as plans inched forward. "We all remember Fufeng ..." Vetter said. "This bill aims to provide coordination and communication between military bases and the local zoning authorities." Sen. Jeff Barta, R-Grand Forks, also has said the goal is more communication. He introduced SB 2398. During a committee hearing in early March , he said the intent is to pass the bill as a method to get various stakeholders "seated around a table to say 'this is what has to be done in order for you to operate here.' " Already, Barta said during committee testimony and Vetter said prior to Thursday's floor vote, SB 2398 can be considered a mild success, since at the very least, it has sparked conversations about the need for collaboration and conversations prior to developments being placed anywhere near military installations. Additionally, Vetter noted, any coordination and cooperation that happens currently can be jeopardized in the future as leadership inevitably changes on various local and county boards. SB 2398 would ensure continuity in the process, he believes. "This bill is needed to ensure that communication continues, regardless of who is in office," Vetter said. Originally, SB 2398 included predetermined "impact zones" that stretched 25 miles in each direction from the Air Force bases in Grand Forks and Minot. That led to initial hesitation from the Grand Forks City Council , whose members were concerned that the long reach of the impact zone could jeopardize future development in and around the city. Grand Forks Air Force Base is about 18 miles from downtown Grand Forks. The size of the impact zones was amended, now to be " established by an assessment in a compatible use study and contingent upon the missions of each military base ." Also amended was the compatibility committee's makeup. In an earlier form, it included the governor among its members; now, members include the state agriculture commissioner, as well as a representative from each county within the boundaries of a zone, to be selected by local county commissions; a township representative, to be selected by the boards of township supervisors; a city representative, to be selected by affected city councils; and, on a voluntary basis, the commander of each military installation, or a designee. The House approved the amended version 73-19, returning it for Senate consideration. Its earlier version passed the Senate 47-0 on Feb. 19. Next up for SB 2398, Senate members will vote either "do concur" or "do not concur." Before the House vote Thursday, Bahl noted that other states have moved in the same direction that SB 2398 suggests. North Dakota needs to follow suit, he said. "When we accepted these bases, our state accepted the duty to protect them," he said. "Please vote a 'do-pass' on 2398 to protect our bases and protect our future."
Yahoo
10-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Grand Forks pursuing planning commission changes to include military presence
Mar. 10—GRAND FORKS — Local government entities across Grand Forks are looking to add representation from Grand Forks Air Force Base on their planning and zoning commissions, a push spurred by proposed state legislation that focuses on land development near military installations. "The city of Grand Forks and the Grand Forks Air Force Base have a great relationship and we want to continue that," Grand Forks City Council President Dana Sande said. "In my opinion, it just makes more sense for the communities that are affected by these military influence zones (to add representation) instead of creating some commission or even a military influence zone." Both the city and the county of Grand Forks are looking to change their planning and zoning commissions. The proposed changes are still in the preliminary stages and any changes to these bodies are still several weeks away at the earliest. The proposed legislation that has spurred conversation, Senate Bill 2398, has laid out creating a state commission to study encroachment and impact zones around the state's military installations. The bill has been heavily amended since it was originally introduced, but its original version would have created a 25-mile area around the base. In many local interpretations of the proposal, it would have meant nearly every single land use decision in Grand Forks would have been subject to state review. The spirit of the bill originates in the Fufeng controversy, according to the bill's authors. The Fufeng company, which has ties to the Chinese government, was in negotiations with the city to build a wet corn mill plant on the north side of Grand Forks. The project raised national security concerns with its proximity to Grand Forks Air Force Base and the Air Force has said that it was not notified of the project until it went public. The Air Force also said it would have appreciated more notice. Avoiding another controversy like Fufeng, but also other mundane planning and zoning items, was also brought up by the Grand Forks County Commission when members discussed changing their planning and zoning commission at their March 4 meeting. "Even here at this board level, we had to go in and call a special meeting to set up more parameters for that radar tower," Commissioner Mark Rustad said during the meeting. "It's nice to have somebody in the room that has some sort of a sense of this ripple effect our decisions possibly have on the base." The radar tower in question was a special use permit that was approved by the County Commission last summer. The county had approved the meeting, but later had to amend the permit in a special meeting to ensure more communication between the various military entities in the area. With SB 2398 still being considered by the Legislature, some on Grand Forks Planning and Zoning felt like amending their composition needed more time to see how the state decides to move forward, especially given the limited information on whether the base is even interested in having representation on these commissions. "I think we're putting the cart in front of the horse a little bit," Grand Forks Planning Commissioner Steven Wasvick said on March 5. "We don't know a lot of information and all of a sudden it ends up on a bill and ends up on the radio and everywhere else." Adding a military member would also likely ensure that the air base is receiving the many land development proposals and changes that the planning and zoning commissions use. While the meetings are publicly noticed, being a member would ensure direct staff contact rather than having to learn about the material through other means. As of now, the local proposals are still in their infancy. Grand Forks Planning and Zoning gave preliminary approval to an ordinance change on March 5, with the intent to keep the conversation going; the change would still take several weeks and the soonest a change would occur is likely mid-April. The county's proposed change is also still at the beginning, with county staff having been directed by the County Commission to begin drafting a proposal for the base.
Yahoo
07-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Sen. Jeff Barta outlines revisions to military compatibility commission bill during committee hearing
Mar. 6—BISMARCK — A revised proposal to create a military compatibility commission seeks to establish "the rules we are going to play by" for developing land and projects near North Dakota's military bases, its prime sponsor said Thursday. Sen. Jeff Barta, R-Grand Forks, spoke before the House Government and Veterans Affairs Committee on Thursday, explaining the difference between the original version of the bill and how it now reads. The goal, he said, is to pass the bill as a method to get various stakeholders "seated around a table to say 'this is what has to be done in order for you to operate here.'" Senate Bill 2398 seeks to establish a military compatibility commission and so-called "military impact zones," which would extend from the bases and installations that already exist within the state, including Grand Forks Air Force Base, Minot Air Force Base, Cavalier Space Force Station and Camp Grafton South. The intent of the commission is to "harmonize land use in military impact zones, review potential encroachment of military installations in military impact zones and promote the sustainability of military operations in the state," according to the bill. Gone from the bill's original verbiage is a stipulation that the zones extend a predetermined distance from each installation. For GFAFB, for instance, the original distance was 25 miles in each direction, which prompted early concern from the Grand Forks City Council that it could hinder future development in and around the city. "Since I introduced it, and I introduced it just before deadline, it has changed quite a bit," Barta told members of the committee on Thursday. "With that, I consider the bill a success already. It's an indication of the intent of the bill from the beginning, which is to increase communication and cooperation across all entities and political (subdivisions) when it comes to new development in the area." Regardless of distances from an installation — which now would be determined separately, depending on the mission — Barta believes a commission would create more openness and dialogue when potential development is proposed near military operations. "It's only fair to anybody coming to the state to do business that they know what they face," he said. "We're just trying to get all of these people involved and seated around a table to say this is what has to be done in order for you to operate here." Mostly, though, it's "to ensure protection of North Dakota military installations." After Barta explained the revisions to the committee, a representative of the North Dakota wind energy industry spoke against SB 2398 — albeit gently. Levi Andrist said "opposition (to SB 2398) is probably the correct technical term, but we certainly support military compatibility in North Dakota." Andrist said that in 2011, Congress enacted a national Department of Defense clearinghouse that already oversees wind projects, ensuring that they do not compromise military installations and their missions. "This is important: A wind project is legally required under federal law to engage with the clearinghouse, and additionally with the (Federal Aviation Administration), if their structure is over 200 feet tall," Andrist said. "... A project is neither developable nor is it financeable if it does not address the DOD's concerns under this process. A wind project will not get built if there are objections by the DOD or military installations in the state." Additionally, he said, the state Public Service Commission siting process requires hearings to be held in counties where wind projects are proposed. The overall process to create new wind projects is "robust," he said. With that in mind, Andrist said his industry requests "a friendly amendment," since "we very much support the intent of the bill." The amendment he suggests would add the following: "Except for activity subject to the United States Department of Defense clearinghouse, established by federal law, the commission shall do the same things the bill is intended to do." "This amendment would still allow the various types of development to be subject to the military compatibility commission, namely value-added ag projects, aviation activities, commercial activities, industrial development, transportation development and housing development," he said. "This doesn't gut the bill. What the amendment proposes to do is reflect the reality that there is a robust federal review process already required by federal law." Alan Dohrmann, chief operating officer for Gov. Kelly Armstrong, also spoke Thursday, outlining concerns. He has spoken to Barta about some of the ideas, he said, but Barta doesn't necessarily agree with them. However, "the one thing everybody agrees on ... is that encroachment on our bases is an important issue that needs to be addressed," Dohrmann said. "We believe that there are processes in place already that can achieve that aim without adding another board or commission." The main concern of Dohrmann, and therefore Gov. Armstrong, "centers around the fact that to be part of this commission, you must have a military compatibility study. To our knowledge, the only base that has had a military compatibility study done, or compatible use study done, is Grand Forks (Air Force Base), and that was just completed in 2024," Dohrmann said. "As the bill is currently written, if a compatible use study is required, there is a possibility that the only folks who would be on this commission would be the governor, a representative from Grand Forks County if they chose to opt in, possibly a representative from Larimore if they chose to opt in, and then a representative from one of the 41 townships from Grand Forks County if they chose to opt in. ... If they do join, they can look at how to best zone in and around bases and everybody on that committee has zoning authority except for the chair. "It begs the question: Why do we need to add the governor to a committee made up of local zoning officials who already have the power and responsibility and already have to go through the clearinghouse?" Grand Forks resident Bruce Gjovig submitted written testimony on behalf of Grand Forks' Mayor's base Retention Committee. The committee, he wrote, urges a "do-pass" for SB 2398, "to protect our military installations against encroachment by land, airspace, and electromagnetic spectrum (EMS) developments." His letter also suggests a counter-drone amendment to establish a perimeter defense outside the fenceline of installations to better "neutralize threats early." It would include the county sheriff and base security working together for counter-UAS responses. SB 2398 passed through the Senate 47-0 earlier this session. The bill now awaits its fate in the House.
