North Dakota
4 major takeaways from North Dakota governor debate • North Dakota Monitor
Independent candidate Michael Coachman differed on several issues Thursday in a gubernatorial debate with Republican Kelly Armstrong and Democratic-NPL candidate Merrill Piepkorn.
Here’s how candidates responded to four major issues highlighted during the debate moderated by Prairie Public News Director Dave Thompson:
Measure 4
Armstrong and Piepkorn said they both oppose Measure 4, which would eliminate assessed value property taxes in the state, while Coachman said North Dakotans shouldn’t be paying property tax now because of Article 10 of the state constitution.
“You will start losing absolute local control in the smaller communities,” said Armstrong, North Dakota’s at-large member of Congress. He added state programs would need to be cut to raise funds to fill the budgetary hole left by eliminating property taxes.
Armstrong, Piepkorn differ on gun laws during second gubernatorial debate
Piepkorn, a state senator, said he worries townships would be put into a difficult position if the measure passes because they don’t have taxing authority.
“They’ve got hundreds of miles of roads they are responsible for and it costs a lot to gravel, and maintain and pave those roads,” Piepkorn said. He added a statewide sales tax, more special fees and a decrease in services could be the result if voters pass the measure this fall.
Coachman said “people aren’t free” if they don’t actually own their property because it can be seized by a local subdivision for failure to pay property tax
“What no one wants to address is what happens when people can’t pay a property tax,” Coachman said. “They come and confiscate all those lands.”
He said he would cut services that “don’t have a purpose” and audit state agencies to find and free up funds to eliminate property taxes.
Abortion
Armstrong said he believes the judge who overturned the state’s abortion law erred in his decision.
“I don’t think that’s the last say and I think the North Dakota Supreme Court will have an opportunity to weigh in,” Armstrong said. He added he’s proud of his anti-abortion record and wants the state’s abortion law to make sense for doctors to be able to use in an emergency room and not be worried about a courtroom.
Coachman said life begins at the moment of conception and he does not support exceptions for rape and incest.
“You can call it women’s health care, it’s murder,” Coachman said. “I’m going to do everything I can to protect life.”
Piepkorn told Coachman he doesn’t believe abortion is murder and said the Legislature has no business in conversations between a woman and her doctor
“We shouldn’t be involved in any of that talk,” Piepkorn said. He added people shouldn’t want this type of government overreach.
Child care
Coachman said the state should not be involved in helping to provide child care for North Dakotans.
“You don’t want the state involved in everything,” Coachman said. “We have to stop the spending … because what you are saying is that we should almost be like a socialist country, or communist country, to take care of everyone. No. It’s a free enterprise.”
Armstrong, Piepkorn talk workforce, culture war issues during first debate
He said child care is best handled at the local level with residents helping each other.
Armstrong said the child care workforce needs to be a focus because new facilities won’t be able to succeed without people to adequately staff them.
“You can’t just build your way out of it,” he said. Armstrong said streamlining grant writing processes for providers would make it easier for them to receive assistance.
Piepkorn said the state should incentivize businesses to start child care programs to help their workers, and even suggested they should start a child care program for workers at the Capitol.
“How about at schools for teachers?” Piepkorn said. “So they can have their children right there in that day care at school.”
School choice
Piepkorn said the state should increase its funding commitments for public education before any extra funding is allocated for a school choice program.
“Taking money away, right now, from public education for vouchers, any money you take and send in that direction, is going to mean less money for the public education we have now,” Piepkorn said.
Coachman said he would support a school voucher program because parents should be given choices with their child’s education.
“Parents should have the opportunity to send the child to whatever program they want, public school, private school, home school; the power needs to be in the parent’s hand,” Coachman said.
Armstrong said he believes in school choice, but doesn’t think vouchers would be a good approach because private schools could raise their tuition to take advantage of the new state money.
“It doesn’t need to be either-or,” Armstrong said. “We can fund our public school system and we can have the best public school system in the country, and we can still allow for significantly more parental autonomy in school choice.”
The final debate of North Dakota’s gubernatorial race will be held at 7 p.m. Monday hosted by BEK TV.
YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE.
GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.
FARGO, N.D. (KELO) — The Sioux Falls Stampede staved off elimination with a 2-1 overtime win over the Fargo Force in game four of the USHL Western Conference Finals Saturday night.
Thomas Zocco scored the game-winner 12 minutes into the extra period. Arseni Marchenko put Fargo on the board first in the first period. Noah Mannausau tied the game for the Herd in the second period.
Sioux Falls outshot Fargo 53-49, including 9-5 in overtime. Linards Feldbergs made 48 saves.
Three of the four games of the series have gone to overtime. The winner-take-all game five is Tuesday at the Premier Center.
New ballot measure guide to be mailed to North Dakota voters ahead of election
Kxnet.com
Welcome to the KXMB/KXMC YouTube channel, your home for all news, sports, and weather in western North Dakota. Subscribe to our channel for the latest information, breaking news, and weather updates.
Submit your photos, videos, and news tips to https://www.kxnet.com/report-it/. You can also message us on Facebook.
Visit KX News: https://www.kxnet.com/
Stream our shows here: https://www.kxnet.com/live-streaming/
Download our mobile app: https://www.kxnet.com/apps/
YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/c/KXNewsND?sub_confirmation
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/kxnews
X: https://twitter.com/kxmb
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/kx_news/
Get our new KXNews+ app on Roku, Apple TV, or Fire TV. Learn more here: https://www.kxnet.com/kx-news-plus/
BISMARCK (North Dakota Monitor) — A federal district court judge indicated he will nullify a nearly $28 million judgment against the federal government related to costs North Dakota incurred during the Dakota Access Pipeline protests so the parties can reach a settlement.
North Dakota is still set to receive a payment Attorney General Drew Wrigley described as satisfactory, but attorneys would not disclose the amount during a Friday hearing.
Attorneys for the United States and North Dakota said the settlement would allow the parties to avoid litigating the case in appeals court,putting the nearly seven-year-old lawsuit to rest.
“We’re hoping we really don’t need to fight any further,” Department of Justice attorney Jonathan Guynn said during the hearing.
The lawsuit, filed in 2019, concerns demonstrations against the construction of the crude oil pipeline, also known as DAPL, that took place in rural south-central North Dakota in 2016 and 2017.
North Dakota claims the federal government caused the protests to grow in size and intensity by unlawfully allowing demonstrators to camp on federal land. The state says it had to pay millions of dollars on policing and cleaning up the encampments as a result. The United States denies the state’s allegations.
North Dakota U.S. District Court Judge Daniel Traynor in April 2025 sided with the state and ordered the executive branch to pay North Dakota the $28 million sum, a decision the U.S. Department of Justice later appealed to the 8th Circuit.
If the settlement moves forward, North Dakota would receive a “substantial monetary payment” from the United States, attorneys said Friday. As a condition of the agreement, the Department of Justice wants Traynor’s judgment and three other orders in which he ruled against the United States to be voided. That includes the court’s 120-page ruling from April 2025.
Both parties said Friday that having the rulings nullified wouldn’t have a significant negative impact on the public, since the documents could still be cited even if they no longer hold the weight of court orders.
At the same time, Guynn said the Department of Justice wants the orders vacated because it doesn’t want the legal conclusions Traynor made to influence the outcome of future lawsuits.
“The downstream consequences of keeping these on the books is troublesome for the United States,” he said during the hearing. If Traynor does not agree to axe the rulings, the United States would likely no longer be willing to settle and move forward with its appeal instead, Guynn added.
Traynor’s orders make findings about the federal government’s responsibility under the Federal Tort Claims Act — the law North Dakota filed the suit under — which the state noted previously in court filings “could have utility holding the federal government to account” in the future.
Still, attorneys for the state said they believe this trade-off is outweighed by the time and money the public would save by not going through the appeals process. North Dakota would also avoid the risk of having Traynor’s judgment overturned by higher courts.
Wrigley said the settlement will be made public once it’s finalized.
The United States’ appeal of Traynor’s decision has been on hold since last summer, when the state and federal government informed the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals they had started settlement negotiations and wished to pause the case.
The 8th Circuit will have to first send the case back to Traynor before he could grant the parties’ requests.
The case went to trial in Bismarck in early 2024. During the four-week trial, the court heard from witnesses including former governors Doug Burgum and Jack Dalrymple, Native activists, federal officials and law enforcement.
The Dakota Access Pipeline carries crude oil from northwest North Dakota to Illinois. It crosses the Missouri River just north of the Standing Rock Sioux Reservation, which prompted the tribe to begin protesting the pipeline on the grounds that it poses a threat to its water supply and sovereignty.
North Dakota’s lawsuit originally requested $38 million in damages from the federal government. Traynor ordered the executive branch to pay $28 million since the U.S. Department of Justice previously gave the state $10 million as compensation for costs it spent related to the protests.
-
New York43 minutes agoMaya Lin Connects Nature to a New Manhattan Skyscraper and Beyond
-
Detroit, MI1 hour agoA chilly start to the week gives way to warmer weather in Metro Detroit
-
San Francisco, CA1 hour agoMother’s Day Gamethread: Giants vs. Pirates
-
Dallas, TX2 hours agoCaitlin Clark Responds to Dallas Wings Win Over Indiana Fever
-
Miami, FL2 hours agoJarvis Landry Doesn’t Hold Back on Dolphins Offseason
-
Boston, MA2 hours agoOle Miss softball to play Boston in NCAA tournament Lubbock Regional
-
Denver, CO2 hours agoNew video shows trespasser on Denver airport runway before deadly collision
-
Seattle, WA2 hours agoGrowing memorials honor young employee found dead at North Seattle beer garden