Jill Schramm/MDN Ward County Commissioners John Fjeldahl, Jim Rostad and Shelly Weppler listen during a budget discussion Tuesday.

Ward County voters will be deciding whether to continue the county’s participation in weather modification.

The Ward County Commission moved Tuesday to place the matter on the June 2020 primary ballot. The 3-2 vote to do so wasn’t near as contentious as the discussion that followed regarding whether and how much to budget for weather modification to fund the program in 2020. The county’s contract with the North Dakota Atmospheric Resource Board for services doesn’t expire until March, and if voters approve continuing those services, funding would be necessary for the rest of the year.

The commission has authority to approve another five-year contract that would provide services through March 2025 or put the matter on the ballot.

“It cannot rest on the shoulder of five people to decide whether we should or should not have weather modification. I have heard equally from both sides. I’ve heard from those who wish to see it continue, and I’ve heard from those who wish to see it not continue, and it really does need to be decided as a whole,” Commission Chairwoman Shelly Weppler said.

“There’s good people on both sides of this issue. That’s the one thing I’ve discovered, visiting with people from both sides. I honestly feel that the best way to determine which direction this program should go isn’t by the five of us deciding, because everyone in this county has a stake in this,” Commissioner John Pietsch said. “If it fails, I have no problem with that. And if it goes through, I would like to see it respectfully supported also.”

Commissioner John Fjeldahl opposed putting a measure on the ballot without addressing the concerns people have about the way the current board has operated and the contract wording.

State’s Attorney Rozanna Larson said the commission has the authority to replace board members if not satisfied with the operations. Fjeldahl said the commission tried to direct the board to cease operations in 2017 and was told by the board that it wasn’t subject to the commission’s authority. The county since has been reducing the levy for the board.

Weppler, Pietsch and Alan Walter voted for the election, while Fjeldahl and Jim Rostad voted against.

Several members of the public with an interest in weather modification attended but did not speak.

Travis Zablotney of Minot said afterwards that he would have preferred the commission vote to end participation in the program but he is satisfied that a public vote will be taken. He said the major controversy isn’t about the weather modification itself but how the program is being run in Ward County, with a couple of people making all the decisions.

The county auditor received a request for a levy of $225,000 toward an 2020 budget of $249,500 for weather modification. That wasn’t an official budget submitted by the board, though, but simply numbers offered up by a couple of board members because, the county was told, board members couldn’t all get together to get a budget to the county by deadline. The board later met and crafted a budget that coincided with the earlier submission.

Fjeldahl argued no money should be budgeted because the request was illegitimate. That perspective went no where with other commissioners, but neither did multiple other motions that came with lengthy discussion.

In the end, the commission voted 3-1 to place $149,500 in the preliminary 2020 budget for weather modification. Fjeldahl dissented. Walter, who had been present earlier in the meeting, had advocated for including a levy of $31,000 to carry the board through March. The commission was unable to reach agreement prior to Walter’s departure due to another commitment.

Walter’s absence left the commission with four members who split every vote on a series of motions. It led to sniping between Weppler and Fjeldahl and general frustration as commissioners struggled to settle on a budget figure.

At one point, Fjeldahl moved to fully fund the $225,000 request – knowing it would fail on a tie vote – as a strategy to kill that figure and get it out of the budget.

“The assumption is that I am just out to kill the program,” Fjeldahl said. “That’s not true. I am tired of the way it is being run, and there’s no guarantee if we don’t take money out of it we are going to get that fixed.”

“We will make those changes to make sure that it’s run efficiently and provide the service to the people in the county if they so desire,” Pietsch said. “If it is passed, the only thing I would like to see is that there’s money there to run the program, that it isn’t going to be starved to death.”

“Should people vote in June and the majority want a program, I feel we would be fiscally responsible to have the money in our budget to operate that program. If it’s a no vote, the money doesn’t get spent,” Weppler said.

Rostad was successful in persuading commissioners to increase the budget contingency line item from $50,000 to $250,000. The contingency fund gives commissioners an account from which to pay for unexpected expenses. Rostad argued a larger fund is needed generally but it also ensures a source of money if voters approve a weather modification program that the county hasn’t included in the budget.

Eventually the commission came to some consensus around $150,000, but that figure had already died in a tie vote. Pietsch moved for $149,500, which ultimately passed as a place holder until the commission takes final action on the budget following a public hearing Sept. 24. The commission can adjust the preliminary budget, but it legally can only adjust downward at this point.