City Council - Regular Meeting

the numerous elements of the event control list that we have during the year, and then just a thank you to Mitchell South Dakota for this fantastic party here in 2026. Erin, did you get an estimate of the number of people present? This year we are pushing, I would say with the discussions with the restaurants and some of the sellers, I think this year we were close to that amount of 7,000, based on our figures from last year and then the square was definitely full. So this brought us closer to that threshold of 7,000.

Thank you. Thank you all. Would anyone else like to turn around?

I have something quick to say.

Oh well.

Wait.

I also wanted to say that Erin did a great job, I know she's doing well, but she really did a great job helping to bring the committee together and making the whole event possible. Uh, having said that, I'm Elisabeth from Mitchell Main Street and Beyond. It will be a very full autumn just as we enter. And the Dakota Fest right now, if everyone knows it, but we also have the owners of our activities in the center who participate. We have an opus of the center that will come out next week during the Corn Palace Festival. We will also hide the little corn poppy. We did it around January of this year. We will hide the corn poppy in other commercial activities. So let's connect the center a bit with the festival by making everything flow back and forth again. Then we go directly to the first Friday. We will have the Jimmy Webber Band on stage. It was a great request for the four years I've been doing this job. We did it. So come out on September 4th at 5 p.m. He will be on stage. The Detail of Canine Talents at 7 p.m. So anyone is invited to bring their pet and show their talent. Then we will have the traditional activities of the first Friday. We are doing a kind of game on the return to school. So we'll have some silly games, outside of which students can play, with materials for art and crafts. We cross our fingers until we can organize. We'll have the show and shine. You can enter from the 5th main this time in the same traditional space. We are very excited to see it. It's the last of the year because last year it was very cold and we closed everything around 8pm, I think, because we were freezing. So you never know what we have in September. And then the Oktoberfest will already be on September 19th from 11 to 4 and the Auto Outcast meeting will start that day and they will park all the way from the same road to the Corn Palace. It's an incredible show. And then we will have our traditional Basotti dog races. We will have the launch of the tire, the lifting of signs and the launch of the pumpkin as long as the pumpkins, as long as the pumpkins have grown. It was a rather dry year, so we may have to change the schedule, but we will have a lot of fun at the Oktoberfest, and then in October we will have our drink event, which we usually did in July. Our restaurateurs asked us to postpone it for a month or two. So we did it. This is all for the next few months, I am really excited to see what the city has in store for us.

Thank you! Anyone else want advice? Yes, it's your turn.

I spent a lot of time at the baseball tournament, the 12 days I spent at the tournament in the last week and a half, and I had an incredible number of people who approached me saying how beautiful the field was. I want to applaud Roger and Jesse, their team, they did, I mean, people who frequent that place 25-30 years have said they have never seen it so new. so the departure team parks and fun and as I said Roger and Jesse have done an excellent job out there you have not heard a single lie usually you hear them complaining I have not heard a single lie it concerns who was the new president but we can't do anything but everyone liked it so it deserves a little recognition mayor just to add something about

Dan Sebers is the president of the South Dakota Baseball Association. So the amount of volunteers and the amount of time that he spent there every single day. I was almost there every day. The number of volunteers needed, and if you could maybe give us a little summary after I'm done, it would be fantastic on what it means for Mitchell to host this event. And Kevin, you're right. Every municipal employee I saw there, I thanked him personally. It all starts with Roger and Jesse. And I didn't have the opportunity. I don't see Kevin here, but I wanted to thank him personally because I must have missed him while he was outside. But it's fantastic. Most of the people at this table helped and volunteered. We even cooked hamburger on Saturday as an advice. And so not everyone could be there, but of those who came, I really appreciate it. And I'm extremely happy that Alexandre won one because I had five nephews in the team. But regardless of whether they won or not, I wanted to say that it is absolutely incredible and the investment we made in Drake was decisive. Because we would have been so behind in the tournament one Saturday and also our investment made in the field and in the benches this last year. players would not have been able to talk better about the improvements we have brought. So Dan, if you want to make a couple of comments, it would be great.

The impact as regards the people outside the city, there are 13 people in the commission and they come from all over the state of South Dakota, from Rapid. They are here for 12 days in a row. The teams, you know, come from Rapid, Brookings, Aberdeen, you know, from all Milbank, Clark. Clark was in the championship. You know, when they play on Friday and Saturday, they spend the nights during the week. I imagine that when they leave at noon they must return to... But the impact, we had about six huge entrances, you know, practically comfortably full, you know? So the city did well, but the workers, you know, who were there every day, you know, the workers of the Exchange Clubs, fantastic people, you know, you saw Court Trust there, you saw the teachers from Dakota Wesleyan there, you saw the advice there to cook one day and those responsible, you know, they are there every day and... And as far as Mitchell, baseball and Jim Johnston are concerned, you know, they are dealing with t-shirts, selling tickets, programs, 50-50. The list of volunteers is endless, you know, for those who take the tickets, that kind of thing. And all the parents of baseball players who present themselves for what they do for Mitchell is very good in my eyes. It's a positive aspect. You know, they all praised Jeffrey for touching the point on the field and on the benches. Even the new modern benches, they like it. They can stand up, watch, take a look at the review. But the field, the game conditions, that was the number one compliment I heard. But everything was really great. The volunteers were endless. I would not dare to hazard 200. So it's a lot of work, but it's really a good thing for Mitchell. Mitchell has hosted, I think, 7 of the last 8 years. So it's often here. But it's a great deal for Mitchell and the city really supports him.

Ok, thanks. Anyone else?

I had the pleasure this weekend to go down for the Tour 2K. I didn't participate in the 100-mile race, nor in the 30- or 15-mile race, but I was here at the beginning and congratulations to Jeff Hansen. Some people told me that it was very available with them, and a couple of them asked me specifically to give it to them, so the staff of the Corn Palace was appreciated that day. I hope all the cyclists returned before it started to rain, but...

I was safe under a tent at that point.

Thank you. Anyone else? Okay, not being silent. Commission is right. I propose a motion so that the Council of the Community goes on pause and unites as a Commission is right. I approve. I vote for the motion. All those who are in favor of the motion say yes. Same sign. The motion is approved. The motion set today by audience of 26.

I propose to fix the motion.

I vote for the motion. I vote for the motion. Third discussion. Someone among the public would like to discuss. All those who are in favor of the motion say yes. Same sign. Approved. To summon the Municipal Council, I propose a motion so that the adjustment commission is updated. The Municipal Council is resumed in session. Motion approved. Seconded. Seconded. All those who are in favor of the motion, yes. Same sign. Approved. Audit and action on the following questions of Vicenza for alcoholics. On the question of transfer to RL 31-22, sales license to the detail of the on-brush off liquors by Justin Tisi. What works as Legacy Point LLC Micella Israel Espinosa? What works as MUA LLC 511 North Main Street? Micella, the license will be inactive and the video lottery will be included. A few years.

Mr. Mayor, the Municipal Council, Police Department.

We have no reservations.

Thank you.

I propose to approve, yes. Thank you. Further discussion. Someone among the public would like to speak. Come closer!

To give you some information, it is a transfer of license for alcoholics.

It will be an active license for the moment. We are in the final stages of development of the projects for the BAC 40. We hope to conclude within the next month to start the construction process. I give you some information on what we intend to do. It is a building with two floors. On the ground floor we have a commercial space, multi activities to attract other businesses in the center of Mitchell. The alcohol license will be for the bar and restaurant at full service that we will build on the second floor. It extends over six lots, so it will be a rather large building, a restaurant. We will serve breakfast, lunch and dinner. That's all for now, but if you have any other questions, I will be happy to answer.

Will you demolish it to start over? Do you have any intentions?

We will demolish everything as we did with our other restaurants. We do things in the right way. It will be completely demolished, rebuilt from the foundations. A great project. I would just like to thank Israel for its further investment in our city of Michel. He has done a fabulous job with many activities and we continue to welcome him for his future projects. Thank you. Yes, thank you very much. We appreciate your time. Thank you.

Well, does anyone else want to vote? Well, who is in favor of the casino motion? Contrary, same sign. The motion is approved by the request of the Corn Palace Shrine Club for a license for alcoholics for special events at the Amazonic Hall for September 12, 2026 for a wedding. Chief Gapley. Please. No objections. Second, Mr. Mardo. Supported by Mr. Goldham. Further discussion. Anyone from the public would like to speak? Who is in favor of the casino motion? Same sign. The motion is approved. The request of the Cornfield Shrine Club for a license for the sale of alcoholics for special events at the Amazonic Hall on November 14th, 2026 for the AA meeting. Also the Police Department on this matter.

Proposed.

Yes. Seconded by Mr. Schleman. Further discussion. Does anyone among the public want to discuss this? I ask those who are in favor of the proposal. Same sign.

The proposal is approved.

Assignment of the lease for the project of the fire department of Miccia, number 2020.

Mr. Mayor, I advise you, the offers have been opened on August 5 in the council hall of the municipality at 13.30. Eight offers have been received, with the lowest offer from Dan Buscher Construction. The basic offer was 2,834,000, the alternative was 1,970,000. the alternative one was an alternative garage door that opens laterally instead of from the top to the bottom nick kumer main partner of the designer group examined the offers and recommends judging the offer to the lowest bidder van buskirk for the basic offer and the alternative number one for an import of 2,930 and at 600 The staff also recommends to appeal to Van Buskert and they are available to answer any of your questions.

Very enthusiastic.

The plan provides to allocate the extra funds not provided in the budget last year, in this year's, this fall, in the next budget?

Correct. Where do the extra funds come from? Initially it was provided as a metal building. during the design process we decided to move to a prefabricated building only for durability maintenance and longevity so considering the price obtained we believe that it is a good amount especially given the number of offers received a question here I am not at all against alternative 1 the door of the garage that opens laterally and I don't know if Tugio or Shannon should answer

There is a reason, there is an advantage. There is the sliding door of the new barracks that opens laterally instead of from the top to the bottom. The alternative concerned the side sliding doors. It was something that was expected to be studied during the design to improve response times. So there are three doors that they intend to have as a sliding option. the intention is a greater longevity so it is expected that they last about 50 years and then they reduce the response times by about 7 seconds for a call so this was a bit of the expectation we were designing the building to be as effective as possible and get people out as quickly as possible so it was obviously a comfort in the design but in our opinion it was definitely worth it from there everything started and I remember that we talked a lot about maintenance

It seems that they have to replace many mollusks in those large heavy doors that are in the current fire station. I imagined there was a good reason behind it. I just wanted to make sure that not only us but also the public knows because we are investing another 107,000 dollars in tilting doors, which obviously has all the meaning in the world.

So I appreciate your explanation.

Thank you.

If there are any other questions, I'm here to...

You really did a great job on this project. Thanks for the initial project. And then, I don't know. I don't know how many meetings we participated in. I've never participated in so many. There were about 30 or so. But very detailed. It will be fantastic when it's over.

Having said that, I approve the motion with Van Busker, which is the final offer for 2933 in 700. Motion of Mr. Vinton, supported by Mr. Godot.

Any further discussion? Anyone among the public would like to speak? Those who are in favor of the motion signify the opposite. Same sign. The motion is approved. Judgment section and appeal race for the demolition and removal of the water tanks, project number 202646. Mr. Trevi. Mr. Mayor, I recommend this project is also related to the fire station.

The fire station will be located where those water tanks are located in the old water treatment plant. therefore for this reason they must be ours this offer was opened on August 12 at 1 p.m. in the halls of the municipal council seven offers have been received with the lowest offer coming from the alliance construction there was the race program at 154 dollars regarding the general demolition there was an alternative 1 and 2 the alternative 1 and clay material transported by unloading for the burglary and the alternative 2 was for clay material to be used for the burglary the cheapest option was alternative 1 from the unloading for 81 thousand dollars That said, Jacob Sanni, a professional engineer at SPN Associates, has examined the offers and recommends assigning the lowest offer, Alliance, for the base offer and Alternative 1 for a total import of $ 254. Also, the staff recommends assigning Alliance Construction for the base offer and Alternative 1. I am available to answer any questions. Thank you.

I propose to approve. It's crazy, we received 7, 8 before, you know, we only said one, but they are affamati from outside, right? The station is presented by Mr. Padello.

Further discussions.

Joe, there are concerns about the fact that by building a station of firefighters on the filter, this can deepen.

No, we have hired engineering services and geotechnical collaboration that have provided us with recommendations on the materials to be used. since we opted for the clay there is a recommendation on how long it should sit and on how it should be compacted before being able to start throwing the foundations someone from the audience would like to discuss all those who are in favor of motion

Same sign. Motion approved. Section to approve the agreement to 2026-50, agreement of financial consultancy municipal for the independent revision of tax liability. Mr. Johnson.

Okay. So, the council has already seen a couple of these agreements in the past. Once again, it is something new for the city. It is a consequence of a change to the state law of this year that requires an independent review of the tax liability to be carried out as part of the TIF request process. As I said, we approved two with other companies. This would be a further agreement with Meier, Henry, Sargent, LLP. would work in the same way as the other agreements. We will now ask them a TIF question, they will examine the project plan, they will present us with a feasibility report and the council will be able to examine it as part of the normal TIF approval process. Having said that, I think we can open the questions. One thing to note about this, the cost was $3,500. It is considerably lower than the others. But this is also because Meyer Henry Sargent knows the person who is making this proposal for a TIF application. So we kept a small discount. Thank you.

I propose to approve.

Motion by Mr. Goldham.

I support.

Supported by Mr. Green. Any further discussion? Anyone from the audience wants to discuss? In favor of the motion, say yes. Same sign. The motion is approved. We continue the public hearing for the construction of the isolated 400 of East 7th Avenue, north of East 7th Avenue, resolution 250. Mr. Schrader.

Mr. Deputy Councilor. So, I have already presented it twice before. So I will not repeat myself again. Let's start the hearing. We have in front of you a list put together by Mr. Walker of people in favor of the project with their signatures. I imagine that with this we open the discussion to the public.

Well, someone from the audience would like to approach the podium to speak.

The first is only an approval to proceed. That's right.

If I proceed or not, our participation part is over. You can also say your name for those who follow us from home. My name is Don Walker, I live at 417. Yes. On point 13, do we all agree? We would like to proceed with the discussion of the next point. Here it is. Everyone, if the city intends to pay additional funds, over 25%

Are there any questions for Mr. Wolff?

Anyone else from the audience wants to discuss?

So if there is no other public participation, we can close the hearing. If it is judged, obviously we must start somewhere. My recommendation would be to use the evaluation of the plot that we have. just approved the last time, that resolution, no, not the resolution, but the recommendation of the last meeting. With the city that participates 25% in proceeding with our policy, if the owners of the house agree with that division.

The owners of the house do not agree. We would like the city to put additional funds because the fence has not been maintained in the last 20 years and it is falling to pieces. It still costs money to bring it back to La Ghiaia. Some things. I guess I would like to see if we can find a solution.

Thank you.

I think we offered an additional 25% last time, but there have been no discussions since then. I'm out of 25% because what we tried is the last one. I don't know about you, but I say it. Because, you know, the city is not responsible for the small asphalt. I believe that the city is responsible for the maintenance of what has improved, if it has ever done it, breaking into pieces because it has not been done.

I think that in the last meeting there was a discussion about the fact that asphalt roads are difficult to maintain for the city. It has been mentioned that there was some maintenance done to the road. Mr. Walker said that the complex damaged the road and that the asphalt roads are flat. Drainage is very difficult inside them. That's why we do not recommend building asphalt roads in the future. I think it's a big factor for which asphalt vehicles seem to be favorable to owners, both because they are cheaper to build, but then on the other hand it is a long-term disadvantage for maintenance and they do not last as much as cement, which is much easier to maintain and lasts longer.

We totally agree with his statement. We would really like it to be cement again, It broke down in the course of the years We just ask that the city can help with the system They made it worse in the course of the years They did not keep it I want to say, I think, he mentioned that We will arrive in 2029 It will be over Do you intend to repair roads or asphalt from here to 2029?

He would have done something in the city I think the policy said that we will keep them according to the standards of the sector, right?

Correct So you would possibly keep this until 2029

The intention would be to maintain it according to the standards of the GIAIA.

The vehicle is half isolated by Main Street. What happens if there is a pavement?

We, so those existing asphalt vehicles near Main Street, would be maintained as they have been in the last 10-20 years, until they will be in cement. So from here to 2029?

It's asphalt now.

But it has overcome its life cycle.

Can you tell me what the life cycle is?

It's an asphalt crack. Just out of curiosity. He said it lasted about 20 years.

Someone said 20, 25 years with proper maintenance. I don't think we had that.

Given an asphalt crack, I would say it probably lasted as long as it should have.

As far as the cost is concerned, someone knows how much it would cost to bring the clay back to the city.

It would be an extremely low cost.

Do we have our working hand?

I mean, could you at least insert it? I saw that you shouldn't do it.

If we had to bring the clay back, it would cost about 500 and 1000 dollars. Give me our personnel who have it.

They just have to write on the asphalt and put the clay. Well, I think we probably agree on bringing it back to Gaia So you are saying that if the city will not cover more than 25% you would simply prefer to return to Gaia I do not intend to pay twice And many of us agree on this, so everyone here is He says that if the city is willing to provide an additional resettlement All clear no? Then I will receive a motion with everyone aware of all the facts.

I make a motion to bring back the clay.

Do we have a motion from Mr. Mardo to bring back the clay? Second, Mr. Smith. I have a question for you. What does it mean to bring back the clay? Will you remove all the asphalt?

I think that... Justin, correct me if I'm wrong. I think that the motion must concern the current resolution of evaluation So it would only be about proposing an approval with a refusal or a refusal proposal with a yes. However, Mr. Riccardo would like to modify his proposal.

So you and then we have a second here. Let's proceed with the approval proposal and then you can vote not if you want to refuse.

Well, I think that to answer your question, yes. If we reject this, then our citizen policy will be to bring it back. Do you have any idea when you could do it? At the moment it is not on the agenda.

There is further discussion or can we?

Thank you. Just to clarify. So the motion presented was... To keep it similar. So you would vote no? To keep it. How is it? To go back to the clay. Does it mean clay? Yes, it means cement.

Is there anyone else in the audience who would like to discuss it?

Okay, let's make a nominal appeal on this one. So we have a second.

First and second, right? For sure.

The motion does not pass.

The motion does not pass, so it will return to the slide as soon as we insert it into the program. According to the reading of Order 026-09, which modifies section 611 of the Municipal Code on Free Animals, Minister Johnson... All right.

Again, we talked about it for... I think it's the third meeting now. The order, as it was proposed, would eliminate the verbal commands with the air, remote pulses as options and would require the use of a not longer than six-legged calf and I'm trying to do more things here to pull it out. There was an alternative version that the Councilor Schwimin requested was presented to the Council that added a clarifying language regarding... Let's suppose that someone brings their own animal to a friend's house and has the permission to keep the animal without a leash. Something like that would still be allowed, which would have been the intention in the old version of the ordinance, but this makes it explicitly clear within the language itself that this would not constitute a violation. I think I can find the language right here. and my intention was to have family, sons and daughters who have dogs and when they return home technically they cannot have their dog in my yard if it is not in the barn as it is written but the alternative allows with my permission that visitors and friends who have a dog can leave it free in my yard without keeping it in the barn So, as this alternative shows, it's not a big change. It's just a small addition to the language in there to help clarify that issue. And I think there was Tim who had another idea. We haven't defined the text for that part yet, but... Tim.

I don't know if you want to explain your reasoning or what we had in mind if the council wants to bring this modification tonight we can present an amended ordinance with what the council wants to approve so I imagine that at the end of where it says six feet I would add and an electronic collar or a similar wording regarding an electronic device to allow the option of collars as previously provided in the ordinance So what I suggest is simply to eliminate the term verbal command so that it is necessary to have some kind of control device on the animal, whether it is an electronic collar that is controlled with a device of some kind or a physically attached collar to the dog.

as I mentioned in the introduction at the moment we have the options of the guinzaglio of the verbal command or of the remote collar for domestic animals from what I understood from TIM we will eliminate the verbal command but we will keep the remote collar for animals and again whatever the decision of the advice on this point is fine I just need emotions, if we have to bring these changes then I will report the correct version at the next meeting since we will still need a further second reading I would not be in favor of the necklace because it would vandalize the purpose of what was presented to us I mean I wanted to read on the obligation of the vinsagli that is not a law on the vinsagli and I think it's better to vote on this version and then if we want to amend or make changes in this way it will be clear what has been presented because we are a bit catching people by surprise and then as you say we can re-present it but I would prefer to vote on this one tonight and then if we decide to go back to the collars later even in two weeks or when it will be I would be the opposite But personally, I would like to vote on this tonight, if we could, if the others agreed. I think that... I think, as you said, Jeff, that if we have to make significant changes, and consider sticking to a significant change, it should be treated separately, as I said, or it is fully represented, or we vote on this and then make the changes. Because it is a big change that, I'm not saying it's negative, contrary or favorable, but it is a big step that should be discussed on another date, informing the public about what we are evaluating.

Yes, my concern is that I had my two-and-a-half-year-old grandson at Patongyang Park. There was a group of other little children playing there and a dog ran through. The boy had a collar, he was screaming behind him. But those little children didn't want to stop being scared. They tried to climb on the stairs to say, they scare them. And the old people are the same. They see big dogs coming towards them. They can't move, they can't run away. They don't know if they will bite, if they just want to be caressed. So I think we should probably leave it to the guinzaglio for the fact that there are small children and elderly people. I'm becoming one of those elderly people, I can't walk very fast anymore. First image, do we have a motion or further discussion?

For a motion I suggest modifying the order with the text of alternative 1 and then we will report it for a second reading.

I make this motion. So we have a motion and a second to add the text to protect the members of the family in the yard. Anyone else wants to discuss it?

If it is added, it is still voted tonight, it is postponed. It's just the first reading. So for everyone at home and in the public, technically, we are making a significant change to the ordinance. Do you agree?

So, when there is a substantial change in the ordinance during a second reading, the state law requires to report it for a further second reading. So you will adopt the new text tonight and then we will report it for another second reading in two weeks.

As a writer, in your opinion, however, does that example seem to you that it should not necessarily be added to have the same effect?

I think it's a matter of application. I think it's the way it should be applied. I think the language of the alternative, one suggested by Ken, makes it clear in the text of the order itself. So I think it's a good change. My preference would still be to simply vote on this tonight and then if we decide to make changes.

And this is still my point of view. Unless, for me, the modification of Ken on the curtain is... I don't know if I would classify it as a significant change compared to the issue of the electronic collar.

Here's what I mean. We can vote on the original.

Yes, I imagine that if this is what, once again, I don't try to put words in the mouth of anyone here, but if someone wants to vote on the original version of the ordinance, which we discussed in the last two weeks without the modification suggested by Ken, that is the motion we will need. At the moment, Ken's motion was to adopt that alternative.

I imagine that part of the reason why I didn't present the text tonight, or I didn't put it in writing, is because I think people are ready to make us act on this point.

And if people want to see an amendment on the electronic necklace, it is certainly something that I would be willing to support in a future date.

Ken, this makes you change your mind. Regarding modifying your motion before going ahead and opening it to the public.

I can certainly withdraw my motion.

I'm not trying to say what to do, I'm just asking.

I just think it adds a bit of clarity in applying the law, having those additional information in the ordinance. Otherwise, as I was referred to, the intent is there, as I described in this additional statement. So that's how the agents would apply it. If I had a guest in my house and the dog was free, wouldn't they necessarily consider him a wandering dog? But it's not written in the ordinance. In the ordinance it says that you must be the owner of the property. So technically it's a wandering dog.

And I think that statement, as Jarty raised, is not significant.

And I think it's good to include it in this vote, in the current one that has been presented and that people have been able to read. So I have no problem with that.

It's just the electronic necklace that I think should be re-purposed.

It seems to me that Justin told you that it makes a significant change.

Yes, I think that even adopting that alternative with the modification of Ken, we will still have to bring it back for another second reading.

Yes, I didn't think it would be like that, but if you say so, Justin, then I would simply put it on what is currently on the table and then we can bring it back.

They can present their amendments as they wish. Okay, let's say we've tried it like this now. Next time, if we want to present it again, next week it should be a first reading, a second reading, a second reading, a second reading, only one amendment or only one amendment?

Any further modification that we bring after adoption would be a completely separate order.

So I guess it depends only on what you want to do. Do you want to go to the... Regardless of everything, it will require further meetings and further... Audition. We could have one at the next meeting. Or two, if we want to do it again.

Yes, I guess there are two options at this point. You can adopt the order as it was in the last two meetings, or you can adopt the alternative language tonight and then report it for the final action in two weeks.

You know, I obviously take some of the stories told in the last six weeks very seriously, since people don't feel safe taking walks and things like that. And I think everyone here wants people to feel safe when they are in public. But my concern is that, however, we read it at this moment, it does not address the real problem, that is, the dogs that run freely. It does not seem, based on the evaluation of the chief Nipplings or on one of the 20 emails I received about it, that it simply addresses the problem of free dogs without owners present. Guinzaglio without guinzaglio, with the electronic one without the electronic one. They are simply dogs without any supervision. And I think this is already illegal, according to the current order. So it doesn't really seem like you're dealing with the problem.

So to proceed with the thing, I'm willing to withdraw my motion if Sean is willing to withdraw his support. So I will do it, I will withdraw my motion.

And then you are making a new motion.

And I would make a new motion to approve the ordinance as originally written last week.

Ok, we have a motion, a support as it is. No changes. Did everyone understand? Other discussions before giving the floor to the impatient public out there?

Say your name, please. I'm Jerry Stravia. Hey. I just wanted to say that I think it's fantastic that we're moving forward in dealing with the issue of guinzaglio. I'm a guy who lives and lets live for many things, but where we live on Thunderbird is obviously trafficked now anyway, but... The issue of the coat, like two episodes, right? Having a necklace is not a coat, yet people still carry dogs around. I agree. But I don't even want your dog to wander in my garden. First because I have children behind and in my opinion too much freedom is being given to dogs. But why the coat? I feel that this law on the coat is useless because a necklace does not keep them on the sidewalk, it is far from our gardens. Second, when we have the children behind us, but especially when I take my dog to the doghouse, someone arrives with a dog without a dog, but with the collar of that dog. It has already happened to us several times that two different dogs threw themselves against ours. I keep my dog, I put it in the middle, they call him back, but the dog keeps throwing himself at us. And if my children are with me, or if my wife takes a walk, the dog, which is not as big as me, this is a problem. And then, if it's a child, it depends on the size of the dog. Mr. McCraw has already faced it. So I don't think this is actually an order on Queen's Island. Well, this one says... ...guinzaglio. But without an electronic collar. That's how it was proposed. So only guinzaglio.

No electronic collar. So an electronic collar is not good. Correct.

I thought it included either an electronic collar, like it had to have a guinzaglio or a... We were discussing it, it's not what's written there. Thank you. Justin, could you say something about a dog with an electronic collar wandering in someone's garden? It's considered free-footed, or under control. I mean, I assume that when dealing with private property they have to stay on the sidewalk.

Are you talking about the existing ordinance or that proposal? The existing ordinance.

It depends on the circumstances, but I think that if you have an animal that does not listen to the owner and wanders where it should not, then I think it is possible that it can return to our current ordinance.

Many times it is not the dog's fault, it is the owner's fault. I mean, the owner is responsible, not the dog. Well, go ahead.

Since I was a councillor, I've been used to dealing with... Can you say your name for everyone? My name is Gail Honey and I'm part of Per Rescue. I'm used to dealing with the police officers of Contea and the sheriff's office. I just wanted to say that it was a pleasure to be able to deal with this problem with you, the guinzaglio. I went to the mayor, he told me to introduce myself in front of them and I answered, oh no, But it meant a lot to me. It meant a lot to protect not only the dog, but also the human being. And you had to do something. That's why I came to every meeting you held on this issue of the leash. I don't know if it will solve the problem or not. I don't really know. But at least we can try to protect the dog and try to protect the owner. I mean, I've seen dogs end up in the municipal kennel three or four times and then that's it, you know? You have to start giving a break. I mean, start paying fines or something like that. I don't expect the police or the animal control to go around looking for dogs without a leash. I don't expect this. We have to be realistic here. And yes, the dogs will run away from the kennel. But I don't understand why it has not already been restored. You know, it's rather serious that we have the order on the ban on breeds, but not that one on the kennel. You know, it's really sad. I just wanted to say thank you, I appreciate that you have given me space in the last four, five, three meetings. We had them and I appreciate it. Thank you. Thank you.

Hi, I'm Shelby Canigheto, I'm the owner of the Project Academy. You asked me to come and talk about the issue of electric collars. Personally, I appreciate electric collars, my dogs and I love them very much. The paths, of course, now they will be in the guinzaglio, but they have a lot of fun. Personally, I would appreciate it if you decided to add an amendment, maybe creating a path where you can keep them without a guinzaglio. or something similar to the parks for Sioux Falls dogs, where they have both a recinted area and a free area without recintation. It is a right consideration, perhaps as a compromise, for those who do not have many children or similar ones, so that people can still enjoy it to a certain extent. Just points of reflection. I appreciate the use of the leash, even if it is difficult to give private lessons when dogs arrive without a leash and the owners are 15 meters away to yell, wait, come here, Fido! It is not helpful, but I thank you very much.

Thank you.

Anyone else? Good evening, Mr. Mayor. My name is Stefano Bartanzi. I would like to praise Mr. Mardal and Mr. Goldhammer for their comments on today's Mitchell Republic. Mitchell Mardal said that keeping a dog in the doghouse is just nonsense. I agree. Mr. Goldhammer said to be in favor of a law on the doghouse because it is a step in the right direction. I agree. A law that only provides for the doghouse should serve to protect the public. Using the doghouse means being owners of irresponsible dogs. Anything else is not acceptable. The doghouse is the only way to know if a owner has control of his dog? If an electric collar is allowed, no one but the owner knows if it works. What prevents someone from using a collar that doesn't work just to look like it's okay?

The residents who walk in the city should not have to cross the street or change direction just to avoid a dog without a leash. As the police chief on the law of the only leash has previously said, there are no gray areas, everything is clear and simple. So, I think Mr. Mardel said it really well. Keeping your dog in the doghouse is just nonsense. In conclusion, I would like to say that voting for a law on the doghouse, a law that only provides for the doghouse, means that this advice can say that it has done everything possible to protect public safety.

Good. A moment of work, Mr. Macario.

Anyone else? Do you have other discussions about voting? I would like to make a couple of comments, Mr. Mayor, if you agree.

And obviously this is a question in which both parties have convincing arguments. I voted for this particular law last time, Mr. Mayor. And I just wanted to point out the fact that our chief of police in one of our meetings practically said that in most of the interventions they do with animals the law on the guinzaglio would not have had effect now I am not denying the fact that there are problems and that unpleasant things happen and until we eliminate the dogs within the citizen borders unfortunately we will have situations And thinking about it, I said to myself that we are also worried about what has been raised, namely the safety of the dog itself. And you would think that most people would also think that small children, the safety of children, is something that should be of the utmost with their safety in mind. And thinking about it, I asked myself, well, if we don't put a leash on a small child, why don't we do it? And the answer is because we trust parents. Are they all good parents? Absolutely not. But in reality, even among dog owners, we have very bad owners in the city. But this particular ordinance, as it is presented now, will be practically meaningless. because, once again, the boss had indicated that... And what happened in the past? We had an order in force, we mentioned it to Pierre, a person mentioned it to Pierre saying that they have an order in force for the law on herding. And by the way, no one followed it. I contacted four dog owners to Pierre and they answered me, no, it's nonsense. I mean, if you don't trust your dog and you think it needs to be checked, then it's your responsibility. And again, as Mr. Hansen said, or someone else, it's nonsense. So, in my opinion, we won't have the police department running around. If we did, we would have to hire more police officers for this particular order. And if so, I don't think the general public would support the addition of more police officers to be able to chase dogs that do not respect this ordinance. So for these reasons I will vote against. Thank you.

Mr. Smith, you talk about small children without a tail, but children do not run around the parks, running against people, jumping on them, trying to bite them and all the rest. And when I talk about dogs, I do not mean the fact that they bite people. As she said, the police chief said that that is not a problem. I talk about people when a dog runs against me. It does not worry me that they bite me. It worries me that they jump on me or hurt me. And you did not listen to me. I said the safety of the child.

Has a child ever run away, running between cars, ending up on the road or getting in danger? I didn't say anything about the fact that a child runs towards them. I said it's a matter of safety for the child, since they raised the problem of dog safety.

Well, the one I'm talking about that I'm worried about myself with the dog. It doesn't worry me that it bites me. It worries me that it jumps on me and can hurt me. It doesn't interest me, it doesn't worry me that a dog bites me. I've seen so many dogs with electric collars running around. An isolated dog in front of their owners. Now that electric collar works. I don't know.

Okay, thanks.

In addition, they run so fast in front of you with an electric collar. It's a bad training. It's the owner's fault. They have to train their dogs. I also have a three-and-a-half-year-old daughter. She likes to run around. I used to put her in the stroller when she was younger, because otherwise I couldn't stand behind her. And that, in my opinion, is the smart part of being a parent, to make sure I stay in a safe area. Just to do this. But how many animal control agents? Ah, Michel!

I don't think we have agents dedicated to control.

So the city has an agent for the respect of the rules, which I believe is our neighborhood agent whose duties include animal control, but also a certified police officer who responds to calls for service in the city.

What are the requirements to be an animal control agent for this city?

At the moment, excuse me, at the moment you must be a certified police officer. This is his main task, animal control, but he also acts as a police officer.

I didn't know if it was possible to add more agents than animal control to alleviate the problem of dogs without owners, because honestly, Mitchell is the first city in which I live to have only one.

I don't know if we have such a request from these parties. I think they would stay for a long time. I have the impression that you are all ready to ... Well, do you want to say something? I'll say ok. To reiterate what Jeff said about the application, I think this is my main problem with the proposed ordinance. We are proposing an ordinance to respect the rules so that people do not follow those already in force. So it doesn't seem that those who don't follow them now will start doing it just because we create a new one. But I understand the concern. You know, I have grandchildren who are terrorized by dogs and I have a dog. So every time my dog gets close to them, they are terrorized. So I can perfectly understand who is afraid of public dogs. I just don't personally believe that this does anything to solve the real problem. So, as Jeff said, I will vote no to get it done.

I think we're ready to vote.

The nominal vote, please.

Mardo. Davis. Goldhammer. Smith. Greenwood. Schlimmo. Pinton. Quattro.

Does it mean that it's my turn to break the tie?

Then I vote YES.

Motion approved. Thank you, Mr. Goldhammer. Motion for adoption. Seconded by Mr. Smith. Any further discussion? Anyone from the public would like to discuss it? All those in favor of the motion? It will count. The same sign. The motion is approved. First reading of the ordinance.

Just a second. Mayor, Cindy took the emotion of the second for that. Just to make sure that...

It's fast. I did it alone. Okay. First reading of Order 02610 updates the standard agreement of franchising via cable and renews existing franchises. Mr. John.

Okay. As the council probably knows, we have franchising contracts in force, both with Michel Telecom and with Midco. The proposed ordinance you have in front of you would renew those franchising agreements, practically in the same terms currently in force. there are a couple of small updates but it is essentially about renewing or updating the contacts of companies and things like that so there are no major changes in operation or anything else

Mr. Smith, seconded by Mr. Goldham, further discussion? Is there anyone among the public who wants to discuss? Who is in favor of the motion says yes. Same sign? The motion is approved. First reading of Ordinance 02-2026-11 that modifies the provisions for the districts in a discretionary manner in the city of Mitchell. Mr. Jones.

Well, I wish Stephanie was here to share this task with me, but... Again, there has been a change in the legislature this year, actually included together with the modifications to the TIF in the same bill. But one of the things that has changed concerns the way in which these districts are classified that qualify for the discretionary formula. Those who were in the council may remember that in 2023 we adopted a couple of districts. We adopted a residential and then we adopted, as indicated in the ordinance, the historic urban commercial renewal area of ​​Michel. With the modification brought to the state law, they practically eliminated, they changed a section of the state law on which we were operating in those areas of urban renewal. They removed that area of ​​urban renewal as a requirement. the range of what was previously applied to the industrial and commercial, I think, or maybe I remember wrongly, was applied to the industrial and commercial, I think that now they limit it to the industrial or vice versa. Anyway, the problem is that now it would apply to the whole city instead, which only to the limited area that we had intended before. So the solution here would be to simply remove the entire classification. So we will no longer recognize that subcategory as available for the discretionary formula. We will upgrade that area of urban renewal. As I mentioned in the personnel report, since 2023 no one has used it. so there should be no real impact regarding the use in the community if it were something that we wanted to adopt again in the future it is an option that we could consider I will say that the county has the ability to adopt its districts in a discretionary formula they have a different classification for which they allow it that would not apply exactly to what we have covered but would cover some of the same things I hope this gives you enough context. If there are further questions, I will try to answer them.

Only before reading, I propose to approve.

Second. Motion by Mr. Mardal, supported by Mr. Binkley. Further discussion? Anyone from the audience would like to discuss it? Who is in favor of Cassandra's motion? Favorable. Same sign. The motion is approved. Motion to enter the executive session according to SDCL 1.25.23. Consultation with legal advisor on communications, client lawyer, SDCL, client lawyer, SDL. The motion is approved. Goal to me. Second, yes. Won. Those who are in favor of the motion are in favor. Contrary. Same sign. The motion is approved. There will be no actions after the executive session.