City Council - Regular Meeting

Call this meeting to order. Start with the Pledge of Allegiance.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Next is invocation by assembly of God. Okay, roll call.

Stavers. Here. Goldhammer.

Here.

Dosher.

Here.

McArdle. Here. Barrington.

Here.

Bathkey. Here. Charts. Here. Smith.

Here. Okay, we have a quorum. Next is recognitions. Let's start with having Dr. Margallo come up here. Yes. I'm going to read this. I'm going to read this, and then we're going to smile and look at the camera, okay? Okay. So I'm going to proclaim recognizing an extraordinary medical service and retirement of Dr. Lucio Margallo II, MD, FACP. Did I get that right, all those letters? Okay. Dr. Lucio Margallo has devoted more than five decades of distinguished service to his practice of medicine, the advancement of medical education, and the betterment of the Mitchell community in the state of South Dakota. Thank you. Dr. Maragallo has served the Mitchell community through his work with Access Health, Avera Medical Group Internal Medicine, Avera Queen of Peace Hospital, where he has served as a respected member of the medical staff, vice chairman of the medicine committee, medical director of cardiopulmonary services as a trusted physician known for his excellence in patient care. And whereas Dr. Margallo has dedicated himself to educating future generations of healthcare professionals in South Dakota as a clinical professor with the University of South Dakota School of Medicine and the University of South Dakota Physicians Assistant Program. And whereas Dr. Margallo has volunteered as a team physician for the Dakota Wesleyan University in the Mitchell School District, providing care and support to countless student athletes throughout his career. And whereas Dr. Margolo's leadership has extended far beyond clinical medicine through his services as president of the South Dakota State Medical Association, participation on healthcare and community boards, and his volunteer humanitarian medical missions serving vulnerable populations. And whereas Dr. Margalla's career has been recognized through numerous honors and awards, including induction into the Dakota Wesleyan University and Mitchell High School Hall of Fame, the South Dakota State Medical Association, Presidential Award in Services, Leadership, Humanitarian Recognitions, and the dedication of Mitchell High School Athletic Training Room in his honor. Throughout his remarkable career, Dr. Margallo has exemplified professionalism, compassion, servant leadership, and dedication to the health and wellbeing of others, leaving an enduring legacy within the Mitchell community. The City of Mitchell wishes to express its gratitude and appreciation to Dr. Margallo for his lifetime of service and to congratulate him upon this well-earned retirement. So now, I, Jordan Hanson, Mayor of the City of Mitchell, On behalf of the Mitchell City Council and all citizens of Mitchell, hereby proclaim in appreciation and recognition of Dr. Lucio N. Margallo II, MD, FACP, for his medical career, public service, contributions to the Mitchell community, and to extend our heartfelt congratulations and best wishes on his retirement.

That was a long one.

We shortened that down by three pages, too. Congratulations. And now another one. Susan, why don't you stand up?

Me?

Yes, come on up here. Me? Yes, you.

I'm not saying yes. I'm not saying yes. That's not what this says.

Wherever you like. This is the traditional. Proclamation and honor and recognition of City Council Member Susan Charks for her dedicated public service. Susan Charks is faithfully... served the citizens of Mitchell as a Ward 4 City Council member since her appointment in 2013, and throughout subsequent re-elections has demonstrated her commitment to public service. Prior to her service as City Council, Susan Sharks contributed to the community as an educator as a two-term member of the Mitchell School Board, helping to shape the educational experiences of local students. As a local business owner of Got You Covered, one of my favorite business names, she has supported an economic vitality of Mitchell while maintaining ties to the communities she serves. Throughout her tenure of city council, Susan has been an advocate for initiatives that enhance the quality of life, promote economic development and strengthen community pride. She has advocated for advancing community projects, including the restoration of Lake Mitchell, revitalizing efforts on Main Street and the development of recreational amenities such as the city's indoor aquatic facility and expanded youth and park facilities. Susan Charks has demonstrated thoughtful leadership, always guided by her desire to make Mitchell a better place to live, work, and visit. And after more than a decade of dedicated service, Susan Charks has announced she would not seek reelection in 2026, concluding a distinguished chapter of public service to the Mitchell community. Are you crying over there? Now, therefore, be it proclaimed that the City of Mitchell hereby expresses its sincere gratitude and appreciation to Susan Charks for her years of leadership, service, and commitment to the betterment of the community and recognize and thank Susan Charks for her lasting contributions and dedication to public service. The rest is just a seal. Congratulations.

That's a lot of reading to start.

I thought you were wiping a tear, but you're just brushing your hair. I was like, there's motions flowing and everything's good. All right. Approval of consent agenda items. I am superior in the consent agenda may be removed by a city council member for discussion at the beginning of formal agenda items. Would anyone like to remove anything? Move to approve. Second. Mr. McArdle. Second by Mr. Goldhammer. Further discussion? Would anyone in the audience like to discuss this?

Okay, welcome. Dosher. Aye. McHardell. Aye. Barrington. Aye. Basky. Aye. Charts. Aye. Smith.

Aye.

Savers. Aye. Goldhammer. Aye.

Motion carries. Public comment. If you need to address the mayor and members of city council on an item that was not on the agenda, excluding personnel items, please come forward to the podium and state your name and your concern. Presentations are limited to three minutes. Items will be considered, but no action will be taken at this time. Does anyone wish to address the council?

Good evening, Mr. Mayor and Council. My name is Stuart Hanson. Tonight, I'd like to talk about term limits. Shortly after this mayor was elected, I heard through the grapevine that most on this council wasn't going to work with him. After attending two years of council meetings, I truly believe that to be the case. I think a lot of voters do, too. If they didn't, I don't think term limits would have ever come up. It's so easy anymore to guess what the vote will be when this council votes on most everything the mayor brings up. Usually seven to one against, but sometimes six to two against. During the forum at Dakota Wesleyan, County Commissioner Randy Ryder said a company shouldn't have to get rid of a great employee with all their knowledge after nine years. But who decides if that employee really is great or really terrible? The CEO of the company does. And contrary to what Mr. McCarty said, the mayor is the CEO of Mitchell, as stated here on the city's website. Mr. Ryder asked, if a candidate gets 75% of the votes, isn't that fair? It would be for that ward, but that's only about 20% of all the voters in Mitchell. What if 75% of all the voters don't like the job a council person or persons is doing? Wouldn't it be more fair for that 75% to have some say in who they want working for the betterment of the whole community? Jeff McEntee had a paid political ad in the local paper against term limits. Why would that be? Maybe because he's on the golf and cemetery board, and if there were some new council members, he might have a harder time coming up here asking for more money for the golf course, especially since it's an enterprise fund, meaning the golf course is supposed to be funded by user fees. But that would mean the rates for golfing would go up. If you asked all the voters in Mitchell this question, would you rather give the golf course money out of the general fund so golfers didn't have to pay more to golf? Or would you rather take that money and put it towards the water fund and eventually lower our water rates? What do you think their answers would be? There's also a person whose name was on a flyer mailed out saying he was against term limits. Do you think maybe that's because some new council members might hold him accountable for part of his pool being on the city property that's designated parkland? Except for Mr. Bathke, why isn't this council holding him accountable? Is he in the club? Seems like some people are afraid that if there are some new council members, they might also be held accountable. Mrs. Chark said she was against her limits because council members have so much knowledge. Why would you let them go? Does that mean she is doing a disservice to the community by quitting? No. Will the person taking her place be at a huge disadvantage? No. How many of the people saying they are against term limits are benefiting from this council's decisions? So let the voters decide if they're happy with the current council when they vote for or against term limits. Thank you for your time. Thank you.

Would anyone else like to address the council? Okay, hearing none, Board of Adjustment, entertain a motion for the City Council to recess and sit as a Board of Adjustment.

So moved.

Mr. Goldhammer?

Second.

Second by Mrs. Church. All those in favor of the motion, say aye.

Aye.

Opposed, same sign. Motion carries. Hearing an application for JTRT, Advertising Conditional Use Permit, postponed for May 4th and 18th, 2026. JTRT has applied for Conditional Use Permit for... As shown in the agenda, Mr. Danikas.

Mr. Mayor and Council, since our last meeting, I had received one letter from credit leasing saying that the picture sent is not realistic. After the meeting last week, we asked Mr. Coving to provide a more clear picture that represents what the new sign would look like. So he sent that out Tuesday morning. That Tuesday, I sent letters to all the neighbors again. and Credit Leasing did send back a letter in disapproval of that. I believe you also received a letter from a Mr. Goldhammer in favor of the site, and I believe Jeff Trevine also reached out to the whole board with some comments as well. I can add anything that you need if you have any questions. Applicants here, if you have any questions for them as well. Thank you.

Can you clarify which Goldhammer that was? It wasn't me.

No, it's not Jim.

Jamie Goldhammer.

for the record. Okay. Do you have any questions? Motion by Mr. Goldhammer to approve. Second by Mr. Brothke. Further discussion?

Yeah. I'll go ahead. Jeff, do you have some things? Yeah. I've given this a lot of thought. This has been... Why did this have to come up for one meeting before I was going to be done? I've really given this a lot of thought. And I have a few reasons. I'm going to be supporting this, and I want to tell you why. One of the things that I have considered is kind of the explanation that we received from Justin regarding just the legalities and some questions that have been asked about signs. And one of the things that I was reminded of was that it's not enough to just say, that the neighbors are against or we are against, but that we have to give a reason. There has to be a compelling reason for us to say that we're for or against something on the Board of Adjustment. And from what I can understand, every person who's against it, their main reason is the location. where it is placed. And I think it's important for us to remember that the location really shouldn't be even relevant because tomorrow Jeff could come and put up a sign a different sign, a smaller sign, and it would be fine as long as it was within that 300 square feet. So if location really is the main complaint, which it is across the board, everyone that I've talked to, that is the main complaint. i can't support it because because of that the second thing of it the second part of this that is one of the reasons that i'm i'm going to support this is that i was reading that when i was at planning and zoning one of the concerns was that the and i'm gonna i'm probably gonna blow this but the minimum height is six feet and um If he did it at six feet, it would be lowered and then it would completely occlude that sign that we're concerned about, the Northwestern Mutual sign. And so as a concession, he said, I'll raise it to the 10 foot height and that way the sign is visible underneath. So I feel like there has been a concession that has been made with regard to that. The third thing that I've heard repeatedly as I've talked to different people about this is a concern about there being three legs that were not seen to this sign. And so I asked for clarification from Mr. Treveen and he told me that originally there was a design that had the third leg and it would have, again, blocked that sign a little bit more and so instead he changed that to have a two-legged sign i'm looking at you for that confirmation so um so i feel like um there have been a lot of things that um I'm trying to think what the name of the organization, JTRT, is that right? Anyway, that Jeff and his group have, they have made a lot of concessions. And really the main thing that I think is, oh, one more thing. The fact that we are approving a sign that is larger than our ordinance. I look back over 13 and a half years of variances, and I can tell you that we have approved many variances that have exceeded this proportionately. We have approved, you know, I can think of one right now that I pass every day, and I think to myself, that was a big variance that was approved. We see it all the time. And this one is probably less than what we, proportionately less than what we have done on a lot of other sites. So because of that, I'm going to support this. Again, with all due respect to all of the people who I've spoken to and I've given it a lot of thought, but I feel like this is the right thing to do. Historically speaking, and with regards to this particular scenario, I think that Jeff has made all of the, he's done all of the things that he needed to do to make this work. So that's why I'll be voting in favor of it.

I have a thought on that, Susan. I don't have a concern with this sign. I have a concern with the size of it. He's asking for something that's bigger than allowed. If it was within the current limits, I would not have a problem. But I'm just afraid it may open a can of worms going forward. Well, you approved this site. I want one just a bit bigger. And none of the neighbors have complained to buy a bigger one. And then the next one will come in. I want them even bigger. and you okayed that one, where does it stop?

And my response to that would be we have already opened that can of worms by approving other variances that are outside of what our ordinance says.

Mark, how many of those cases are there that she's talking about?

We've approved a lot of variances in the past. Signed variances, none that I know of.

Sign variances, that's what we're talking about here. We're talking sign variances, and we're talking about size. How many, to my question to you, Mark, how many, to contradict what Susan is saying, how many signs have been asked for and granted for extra outside of the size limits? Are you saying none?

The only one would be Macheskis on the bypass. That's the only one that's been over 300 square feet. that should have had a variance that goes with that.

And that's in operation now?

Yes.

And did any neighbors argue against it?

It never made its way to council because it was proposed that it was going to be 300 square feet. And when it was put up, it was put up bigger than the 300 square feet.

So I think what he's saying, John, is that that sign should have required a variance, but it did not come to council.

It was built without a variance. So we didn't, the council did not approve many times this happening.

I guess going off of Susan and Mr. Roshy's, my question is, A, why is there even a variance option if we can't pursue it? And B, Forgot that one.

You can pursue it if that's what you're doing.

Well, then we should remove it if it can't ever be accelerated.

Well, there may be different situations that it may be approved. I don't have a problem with the sign if it was within the size limits that are presently established.

It is within the sign limits that are personally established. Because we can go up to 600 with a variance. It's just not automatically approved. So it is actually within the approved limits with your approval.

Okay.

I would make one other comment that you've made a motion to approve right now, but if you are going to use any of Mrs. Schartz's recommendations or conditions that you implement that into the the motion itself, because otherwise I cannot enforce it at all. Because right now it is at six foot for the site clearance from the bottom, from the ground to the sign itself. If you want it to be at 10 foot, it has to be in the motion. Otherwise it's, I can't make him do that without you guys having that approval for it.

Tim originally made the motion.

So to include language of 10 feet off the ground and two legs, is that... That's the adjustment to the motion.

Is that what you said? That's what she said? So would you like to adjust your motion to 10 feet and two legs?

I'll move to approve pending two legs and 10 feet off the ground.

And who seconded it? That was you. I seconded it. I just want to make sure that the parties involved are okay with that. Just because I want to hear from them, I guess what I'm saying. Just because you had this conversation with them. I want to hear from them. Are they really okay with it? 10 feet. Would you like to come to the podium?

Yeah, Carrie and I both agree that we would do that 10 foot off the ground and go to two legs.

So then we have a second. Tim, does your motion address the size total square footage of a site?

It would be to approve it as they've designed it. Which is oversized. Oversized.

Okay, further discussion? Anyone else in the audience like to discuss this before we vote? Let's do a roll call.

Barrington.

Aye.

Bathke.

Aye.

Church. Aye. Smith.

Nay.

Savers.

Aye.

Goldhammer.

Aye.

Dosher.

Nay.

McCardle? Nay. It's three.

It needs six to carry, so motion fails. Okay. Carrying an action on application JTRT advertising variance permit. Mr. Denegas.

I would say since you just did that motion with the last one, it's the same. It's just within a different part of the ordinance. So I would just make sure that you follow through with this part of the Board of Adjustment as well. So it's done within the minutes.

So I will move to approve. Second.

What are we approving? Your original, the motion that we adjusted with the 10 feet and two legs, I don't know if it matters anymore since it failed, but I just want to be clear.

I don't believe it matters, so I'm approving it. I'll just make the same motion.

Motion to match the first one. Okay. And we have a second. Further discussion before the applicant comes up?

Okay, go ahead. All right. It may be too late for this. Carrie and I have been discussing it kind of day, and I've asked a couple different people when the right time was, and it's probably too late to ask this already. But I was asking for a 16 by 24 sign, and we got to doing some figuring and looking at some software and everything of that sort. You know, right now we're asking for 384 square feet. My other option is I could, we could eliminate four foot off the top and take it down to, or the bottom, whatever you want to say, and take it down to 320 square feet, which I don't know if reducing it, it would save us a lot of money as far as having to reconfigure a whole sign. Otherwise, in the end, as in reconfiguring a sign to a 12 by 24 versus a 16 sign, just trying to look at different options so i probably you know didn't know what time to bring this up but you know stephanie's got pictures of the two different sizes of the 16 or the 7 16 by 20 versus the 12 by 24 and basically i don't know if it's too late for this or you know if you want to see what they both look like someone in the staff is going to have to explain please uh well

There's a few different things we could do here procedurally. If council wants to go back and reconsider the previous action, it would take a two-thirds majority to reconsider that item, reopen it, and revote on it. Otherwise, as things sit right now, with the conditional use permit not being granted, it wouldn't normally be able to come back to council for another six months.

So basically, there's your two different layouts. I mean, Carrie and I both like the wider one. It is four foot shorter. 320 square feet, so basically we're just 20 square feet over versus 84 square feet over. We did just figure that option out today that it is doable and save us some expense even. It's just an option. I guess something for you to consider, and I appreciate the consideration.

So I guess I'll ask the question. Is anyone willing to open it back up and re-vote on 320 square feet? Take the two-thirds.

Refresh my memory. What is the legal limited size?

300 automatically. Is it 288? It's 300. It's 300 up to 600 with your approval.

The 12 by 24 option was the 288. Right. Yeah, that's the standard size.

So that's technically 12 feet under what it could have been. So now with this new option of the 16 by 20 makes us 20 feet over. I mean, we still need a variance for it, which I understand. But it's 20 feet versus 84 feet.

So we'll entertain a motion for whatever you guys would like to do.

What was your question? Same as to match the first one. No, we're talking about the first one.

Yeah, so the motion that was on the table was the same as Tim's for the conditional use, but for the variance. So if council wanted to reconsider, we'd need a substitute motion at this point. And given the way that the vote came out last time, it's probably good that somebody that voted against it either make the motion or second that motion.

So would anyone like to reconsider that or shall we just go ahead and vote on this?

Sure, come on up. Hi, my name is Spencer Mason. I own the ground that this billboard is going to be going on to. You might not know this, but I bought the ground in September of 24, okay? And I was 25 years old at the time. Decided to buy a ground, put up a shop there, and lack of better terms, invest in Mitchell, right? Build a nice shop on the north side where there's nothing out there other than chroma plumbing and stuff like that. And just as a background... I had the option to pay $50,000 less for this ground to have another billboard company who I bought the ground from to put a billboard out there. And they were based out of Minnesota, if my research is right. So not from Mitchell, not any local business or anything like that. But I took that risk and basically reached out to Jeff Treveen to say, hey, do you want to put a billboard out here? And this has been... year and a half now give or take and so just want to let you know you know i wanted to keep as much business local here rather than just saving some money and having a different billboard company come in here because regardless there was going to be a billboard out there but i took the risk to have jeff trevine and yeah i think he deserves this so okay thank you

I was going to say that I did visit with the owners today and it was at least one of the neighbors and it was the size. And they're fully understood that the sign could go there if it stayed within the 300 feet. I think with making this concession, it's a good move. Does it get it down to 300? No, but it gets a lot closer than 384. There's no question about it. I'll make a motion to approve with all the jargon that we had before with the legs and the size.

Well, before we get to that, let's do a motion to reconsider. Oh, I'm sorry.

A motion to reconsider.

Second.

Okay. So we have a motion and a second to reconsider number nine, section eight. So let's vote on. Now we need a two-thirds vote to see if we are even allowed to open for reconsideration. Correct. Okay. Let's do a roll call to open section nine, eight.

Does your motion include?

Right now it's to revote. Right now we're just seeing if we want to revote on the previous item. Do a new motion.

We're voting on if we want to go backwards one and retry. Okay. Let's do a roll call to see if we want to reopen it.

Charks. Aye. Smith. Aye. Savers. Aye. Goldhammer.

Aye.

Dosher.

Aye.

McArdle? Aye. Barrington?

Aye.

Baff, Keith? Aye.

Motion carries. First time I've ever seen anything be reconsidered. So how cool is that? All right. So getting an action on application. So you would like to make a motion for 10 feet above ground. Two legs. Two legs and 320 feet. No larger than 320. No larger than 320 feet max, square feet. Would you like to come up to the podium and just? Second. Okay. Sorry. Thanks, Tim.

Yeah, that would be great. 324 feet. If somebody wants to double check my math on 16 by 20, but I'm pretty sure it's 320.

Yeah, let's do the math. Let's just go ahead and pull the calculator out real quick.

Okay.

Yeah.

Yeah. Everybody's got their phones out.

320. Yeah, per side.

Okay, per side.

Okay, Mark, do you have anything you want to add before we vote on this? My Minnesota math works out for that.

Okay, perfect. Alright, so just to clarify, we have a motion and a second for 10 feet above ground, two legs, and no more than 320 square feet. Is there any further discussion before we do a roll call? Let's do it.

Savers. Aye. Goldhammer.

Aye.

Dosher. Aye. McHardell. Aye. Barrington. Aye. Basky.

Aye.

Charts. Aye. Smith. Aye. 8-0.

Motion carries. All right.

Thank you.

You got one more. You got one more. Okay. Hearing an action on application VTRT advertising variance permit. Same thing.

Move to approve with the same conditions. Second.

Motion and a second with same conditions as previously stated. Anyone in the audience like to discuss this or further discussion from the council? All those in favor of the motion, say aye. Aye. Opposed, same sign. Motion carries. All right. Action to set the date for board of adjustment, hearing 6-15-26. Move to set the date. First, Mr. Goldhammer. Second, Mr. McArdle. Further discussion? Anyone in the audience like to discuss this? All those in favor of the motion say aye. Aye. Opposed, same time. Motion carries. We can bring the City Council to entertain a motion for the Board of Adjustment to adjourn and the City Council to reconvene in regular session. All those in favor of the motion, say aye. Aye. Opposed, same sign. Motion carries. Action to award bid for Randall Community Water District Pump Station Improvements Project 2026-31, Mr. Schroeder.

Mr. Mayor, Council, bids were opened on May 21st in City Council Chambers at 1.30 p.m. Four bids were received, with the low bid being 605 Companies, Inc. at $472,785.00. Matt Erickson, a professional engineer with AE2S, has reviewed the bid and recommends awarding the project to 605 companies. Staff also does recommend awarding the project to 605 companies for the price previously listed. I can answer any questions you have.

Thank you. Move to approve. Mr. Goldhammer?

Second.

Seconded by Mrs. Church. Further discussion? Anyone in the audience like to discuss this? Joe, where are these guys from?

Sioux Falls. Okay. They were on our Cadwell pump station project. So they have worked for the city of Mitchell before.

Okay. Okay. Further questions? Anyone in the audience? All those in favor of the motion, say aye.

Aye.

Full same sign. Motion carries. Action to approve Agreement A-2026-37, Perpetual Easement for Oman Utility and Street Improvements with Lomar Development Company, LLP. Mr. Schroeder.

Mr. Mayor, Council, this is a permanent easement for the Oman project that's currently started. This will be on the southwest corner of the intersection of Oman and 23rd. Staff does recommend council approval and authorize the mayor to sign on their behalf for the permanent easement agreement. Thank you. Answer any other questions you have? Second.

Mr. McCurdle, seconded by Mr. Goldhammer. Further discussion?

So explain to me what that means. Just that there will be encroaching on their property and so we...

Yep. During the negotiation, we gave them an option of us either purchasing the property or an easement. They chose an easement. We're going to have to move their sign that's currently there, remove a couple trees, but it'll be a permanent easement as long as the roadway and sidewalk is located there.

Great. Thanks.

Thank you. Anyone in the audience? All those in favor of the motion, say aye.

Aye.

Opposed, same sign. Motion carries. Action to approve agreement A2026-39, tax increment district 30, assignment agreement, Mr. Johnson.

All right. This agreement relates to tax increment district number 30. As the staff report explains, this relates to a sale of the property recently, basically the old purchaser, Sharpstone Deuce LLC. sold the property to Sharpstone Properties LLC, and now the new owner would be taking over all of the responsibilities under the original project plan and developer's agreement. So that's the basic explanation here. If there's any questions, we can open it up. Thank you.

Justin, we ever had something like this on TIFF?

Not like this where it's been an entire assignment of it, but we have had partial assignments before to facilitate financing where the developer assigned their right to receive the tax increment proceeds from it over to the bank.

So it goes down exactly how it was written up the first time.

Yeah, so nothing changes with how it was approved. All those terms remain the same. Nothing about the project plan changes. You know, the amount that it might generate in increment might be less because we're a couple years into this. But any shortfall from that would be on the developer.

Thank you.

Move to approve.

Mr. Goldhammer. Second. Second, Mrs. Church. I'll abstain. One abstention?

I guess one additional comment I'd make, Dan, would be that the good thing about doing the assignment is it sees that development happen faster because they have a limited time frame to have those improvements made. So that ensures that we'll see something happen on that property within two years.

So that was going to be my question is the 2023 TIF stays in place. Has any of the other cities in the state have done this? Is there a track record? I mean, it's not going to get challenged, will it?

no i i don't see a problem with it being challenged but i'm not familiar with it happening elsewhere um really from our perspective there's no real difference going from working with one entity to another because the project itself is staying exactly the way it was approved.

Okay. And what we had put in place, I don't know how they have to abide by all of the stipulations, but what was given to us at the time was there was small houses, I believe, and it was going to be private. Is all that staying exactly the same?

That's all in the project plan. So it's still going to be single-family owner-occupied homes with the private drive-through. They have to follow what's in the project plan and the developer's agreement. So it's not changing anything that the council has already approved. It's just the developer is a different person that we'd be sending the grant funds to.

Okay. Is it important to know who the owners are? We could have the applicant come up.

I am not the applicant. The applicant is Sharpstone Properties LLC, but I am currently the construction manager for Sharpstone Properties LLC. Eventually, I will become the deed holder of the property.

I'm sorry, become eventually the what? The deed holder. Okay.

Yep. Do you have any other questions that I can answer? No.

I guess the one thing I would point out is one of the things that was unique about this TIF originally in the development plan, it really was something creative and unique that we hadn't tried elsewhere in Mitchell. So at the time, we thought it was a good use of TIF dollars with these smaller houses, kind of condensed lots with the private drive going through those houses. So it's still going to be really good to see if that takes off in Mitchell and a good use of TIF funds.

So it somewhat follows the concept that we're trying out at First Street. It's slab. Yes.

From the perspective of they are single-family homes that are slab-ungrade, yes.

Okay.

And I have heard from a lot of different people that that is a missing niche in our housing industry today in Mitchell. I did have one house for sale on William Street that was such a house. It was a slab on grade and it was nestled amongst a bunch of other twin homes and there were a lot of curious people on that property. And then when that sold, I had a bunch of other people pop up and say, hey, that's something we would be interested in. you know, we like the twin home concept, but you have a shared party wall there. And so this does away with that, and they can still have the slab on grade end. So it's something that's very popular with, like, the aging baby boomers.

So is there anything in there, Pam, that would change as far as the project plan that we've approved?

As Justin and Stephanie have stated, the project is moving forward.

It's exactly the same. Yes.

So, I mean, I can tell you, like, I'm going to have to go to the courthouse and change some covenants because there was a prior builder that was supposed to be building the homes. We are going to be working with a general contractor local here that is very well known. So that is a good thing, and we'll be using local subs, et cetera.

Thank you. I just want to add one thing. You compared it to the first year. The difference between that and first year is this is a HOA. That road will be owned by the homeowners of those homes.

Yep.

And that's it.

It's a private drive.

It's a private drive, so it will be a country road.

And it's a different look, too, with those kind of angled houses. I know when this development plan originally came to us, we looked at some comparisons of similar communities in Sioux Falls. It is unique for Mitchell. It'll be good to see something else happening.

Probably fairly similar to the houses that they're building up by...

streets over there by the high school by that adjustment adjustment training center not like that no these will be 1350 square feet approximately and they will have attached garages so they will be a lot bigger a lot bigger yes okay okay any further questions

Honestly, I mean, we, I think, have two years left on the cost being certified for that TIF, so we're just happy to see that the project can still move forward, too, so.

It's crunch time.

You know, in the audience. All right.

All those in favor of the motion, say aye. Aye. Opposed, same sign. Motion carries. Action to approve agreement A-2026-40, GeoComm Dispatch Map Software Renewal.

Chief Knipley. Mayor, City Council, this is a renewal for the contract that we use for the current mapping system for our 911 center. It's a company we've been using. It just enhances the calling mapping capabilities.

Move to approve. All right.

Question by Mr. Goldhammer, second by Mr. Bethke. Further discussion? Anyone in the audience like to discuss this? All those in favor of the motion today?

Aye.

Opposed, same sign. Motion carries. Action to approve Resolution R-2026-29, Application of Building Resilient Infrastructure Communities Grant. Mr. Schroeder.

Mr. Mayor, Council, the attached resolution would allow the City to apply for a Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities Grant, or a BRIC grant, The grant would financially assist the city in preliminary engineering and determining if the project is eligible for FEMA grant assistance. If approved and moved to the next level, the project would provide funding at a cost share to assist in installing six permanent backup generators at six different lift station sites. It is our current policy to install permanent generators at all new lift station sites. This grant would assist up to 75% with federal dollars. and potentially another 10% with state of South Dakota dollars. Total project cost is currently estimated to be $100,350.49 for this first phase. What that would do is look at if this project is eligible to move on with FEMA dollars, there'd be a benefit cost analysis included with this along with some preliminary engineering. This would require a city share of $33,450 or $20,070. if the state of South Dakota participates at 10%. If this application is successful, the city would then apply to FEMA for a grant to assist with total project cost estimated at $1.5 million for those six backup generators at those six different sites. I do want to note the next item in this is to approve an agreement with AE2S to assist with the application which their estimate for those services as an amount not to exceed $18,000. Just wanted you to be aware of that before you approve this. Staff does recommend approval and a grant authorization for the mayor to sign. I can answer questions that you have. Thank you.

All right, Mr. McCurdy.

Second.

Second by Mr. Goldhammer.

Further discussion?

So in working with FEMA, it kind of brings up another question. I don't know if it's related or not, but when they redrew the maps, are we still working on that of trying to convince them to go back? Or is there anything in there, Joel, that we can include or at least apply for or ask?

in this in this portion there's not so right now we're looking at sanitary sewer funds um the other would be um but with stormwater but we are still looking at okay that area we we didn't shelve that we're still okay good i'm still working with hdr on some of those items okay thank you okay further questions anyone the audience like to discuss this all those in favor of the most insane pull the same sign

Motion carries. Agreement A, 2026-38, Wastewater Infrastructure Risk Reduction in Emergency Power Project Grant with AE2S, Project 2026-43, Mr. Schrader.

Yep, Mr. Mayor, Council, this is basically the exact same thing, except for this is the services with AE2S at a maximum not to exceed amount of $18,000 billed at their hourly rates. Staff recommends approval. and to grant authorization for the mayor to sign. And again, I can answer any questions you have.

Thank you.

Mr. Goldhammer.

Second. Second by Mrs. Church. Further discussion? Anyone in the audience like to discuss this? All those in favor of the motion, say aye. Aye. Opposed, same sign. Motion carries. City of Mitchell report and connect presentation, Ms. Ellen.

Mayor and Council, included in the 2026 budget was the ability for the city to purchase. It's called C-Click Fix. It's an app that allows the community to report or request improvements to be done in Mitchell. We've been live for about a month now. We kind of rolled out a soft launch so that we could work through some of the bugs and get some things figured out before we started really doing a heavy rollout on social media. When we first started looking at this, when Mayor Hansen first started, he always had a list of things that people would bring to him about things that need to be improved in our facilities or parks. And so we wanted to have a tool where residents and visitors can submit and track those things. requests that they have online through the website or through an app, which means you no longer need to know every city department head's email or text anymore in order to report those concerns. Now everybody can do it right through the app and the app automatically will send people where they need to go or send that request to the appropriate staff to get it addressed. So, tonight, what I'm planning on doing is just giving you a really quick overview of what it looks like. You'll be seeing some social media posts. The mayor's done some videos, and we're going to be talking about that a lot more here in the next coming weeks. So, how it works is a citizen can, like I said, either go to a website or go to the app. They get to request a service or report an issue that they've noticed once...

What's the app?

I'm going to show you. It's in here. It's called City of Mitchell Report and Connect, and I actually have a QR code that you can scan and download it. I will be uploading this PDF to the Agenda Center, too, and we will be sharing it online as well. So once you've submitted that request then it gets reviewed by the appropriate department and then from there staff starts working on it. We will provide updates to whoever requests that through the app so you can check on it and see how things are going. So there's two different ways you could download the app. You can either get it from the App Store, which is on the left. The icon will look like that silver circle, or silver, excuse me, gold circle that says City of Mitchell. On the right is the Google Play Store. So you can download the QR code and that will take you right to our app. I'm going to pause. We have people pulling up their apps, so. So once you get the app, in addition to the Connect app, the report a concern part, there's also some direct links to the city's website. So where you can see these yellow highlights here is just showing you can subscribe to alerts. so we have quite a few people that subscribe to like garbage notices they want to know when the garbage schedule schedule changes or they want to know when snow removal is happening this will take you right to that link so you know how to subscribe for those alerts if you click on the contact us it will take you right to the staff directory so if you're trying to find the phone number of someone go ahead john oh will this replace the emails that you send out now regarding

Garbage pickup schedule? Nope, they'll keep doing that.

Okay.

Yep, they'll keep doing that but if these are, if you're already signed up to get an email or a text, this is the same app. So it's just a easier way for people to find it so they can subscribe to the information that they're interested in. You can also see our online payment portal for utility billing, news, calendar events, job openings, get directly to the agendas and minutes or the city's website. But the part that's new for us is the report and connect here. So you can submit requests. Like I said, you'll be able to track the status of that request. You can also see the other requests that people have submitted. So on the right shows all of the requests that we've received in the last month. The mayor did a really good video, so I'm not going to spend a lot of time on these two slides. We'll let you watch the video instead. If you don't like using apps, I've had a couple of people say, I don't want to download that on my phone. You don't have to download it. You can go directly to our website. I created a short link. So if you go to cityofmitchellsd.gov forward slash connect, it will take you right to this page. And then you'll get some information on the left. It will have the buttons to download the app if you're interested. And you can start with a report right there by clicking on the category that you need to report a concern. If you don't like seeing the categories and you would rather just go directly to a map and see what's already been reported, you can do that same website address, cityofmitchellsd.gov forward slash, and this time you're going to type in connect map, and that will take you right to a map version of that website. This is a whole lot of information, but this is basically just showing you all of the different categories that you can report a concern through. So we've got a whole bunch of nuisance property concerns, parking recreation, if there's a concern with a facility or grounds, or I'm sure in the next couple of weeks, we're gonna start hearing about mosquito control. We have prime tips, fire, everything under the sun. The items that are shown in yellow, those are the only ones that are publicly viewable on the map. So if you submit a high grass concern, you will be able to see it, but everybody else in the community won't be able to see it submitted. So only those items that are highlighted in yellow will show on the public map. And that's just really for a concern for privacy. So in the first month we've had 147 requests made. 91 of those though were internal service requests. The city's also using this app to do some of our internal assignments of when we need to do work on utilities, looking at meter issues, when employees are needing to make a request for IT to set up something on their accounts. But then you can see some of the other common requests that we've had is nuisance concerns. We've had some like park facilities. We had a piece of playground equipment that was broke. We've had some trees and boulevards that had hanging branches or dead branches that have been reported. Another frequent one is the finance office was getting a lot of phone calls of someone's garbage can lid was damaged and they need it replaced. Well, now they could actually just request it right on the app versus having to call in as well. This is just a sample of before and after. I submitted this when we first started, just so we could kind of see how it works. So here, and this is right across from City Hall and the ACT parking lot. There was a big limb that broke and fell, and it was actually laying across the street. Some people had dragged it up onto the Boulevard. So I reported it. You can see that it was right away. It was assigned to Kevin Nelson. Kevin Nelson, our Park and Rec Director responded, said, thanks for reporting it, and staff will be handling it this morning. And then there you can see he uploaded a picture once that the branch had been cleared up. So the reporting party, which was myself, got to see that that issue was taken care of. The nice thing about this is we're going to have some before and afters of things that people have reported so we can show that to the public as well. And this is our fun video. I'm hoping it's gonna work. If you are reviewing this after the fact, if you click on this link, it will take you right to the YouTube video that we have on the city's website that has this app. But Mayor Hanson went ahead and did a screen recording so people can see how that app works.

Hey everyone, my name is Jordan, the Mayor of Mitchell, and I want to show you another test of the Mitchell Report and Connect. So I'm going to show you something in the street. First of all, don't walk in the street like I am without being safe, of course. So I'm going to flip this camera around, and you can see here that this curb is missing, which I know is on the list, but I'm just going to show you because it's going to be easy. So I'm going to open up the Mitchell Report and Connect app, okay? On the bottom here in the middle, it says New Request. We can click on this. I'm going to hit New. I'm going to go take a picture. So just click in the middle one right there in the middle. Hit the button. So then you can see here we're missing a curb. Okay. So I'm just going to take a picture. Pretty simple. I'm going to hit okay. Continue with one photo. I'm going to choose my address. I am at 3rd and Gamble right now, which I think it knows where I'm at. Let me just check here. Nope, I'm slightly off. So we're going to find 3rd Street. Yeah, third and Campbell, so it knows where I'm at, okay? So we're going to click that, confirm location. We're going to scroll down to Public Works. Broken curb. Curb missing. Next, show identity. You can hide your identity, show your identity. I'm already logged in since I have full access to the app, and I'm going to submit it. It is done, and as simple as that, less than one minute to do it. Once you're done, you can click on Requests on the bottom here on the right side, kind of the right middle. You can hit the Map button on the upper right. Now, orange means it has been reported, but nobody's been looked at or nobody's looked at it yet. So it's kind of easy to tell what's yours. You can zoom in on that location. You can click that button. You can see it's been assigned, what the address is, what the category it is. And you can also add comments. Other people can add comments. Other people can see them if there's certain deals like broken curb, potholes, and parts stuff. So people can see all of the information of what's going on. So it's just a really nice way to connect with the city without having to have phone calls. You can just take a picture. You can do a picture now and send it. Or you can take a picture and then upload it later. Whatever works best for you. So if you have any questions, let us know. The links are above.

So we also have the ability to do reporting. So if council members are interested in getting a monthly report on any of the categories, they're certainly welcome to do that. Some of those are confidential, like the police tips and stuff. We won't be able to do that. again this is just an overview to show you how it works and you'll be seeing some more information roll out on social media in the next several weeks so i can certainly answer any other questions but that's all we wanted to do is show you how the process works so you can see we're starting to get some use in the first month so

Can you put one in without a picture?

Yeah.

Just describe it.

You can. You can put one in without a picture if you like. We've even had someone who was attempting to use the app and they maybe had a little bit of trouble getting through it. They ended up sending an email to the mayor with... an image attached i was actually able to find where they originally started the request and i just added the pictures into the request too the city can also if we get a phone call from someone at work we can enter in the request for them as well but it still gives us the ability to track from Our perspective with IT internally, it's kind of nice to see the types of use that people are asking for help. I know Ryan was liking to see the different categories of nuisance properties. I do think over time it's going to be really useful for us to be able to see the type of issues that were being reported. So any other questions or comments on the app?

The cool thing is it says the response times, too, so you know, like, from the time they submit it to the time they respond to it and then to the time that it's closed. And then we were following the reports this morning. It's just really neat. Most stuff is completely handled within two days, and it's a fresh app.

So it'll be fun. Yep. If there's no other questions, that's all I had for you on that issue.

Further questions for the presentation? Okay, that's it. End of version.