City Council - Regular Meeting

a little issue so we're just gonna wait a few minutes to make sure his oath of office is on time we'll just wait a few minutes 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, we're going to do Invocation by Trinity Lutheran. And they are not here, so we're going to start with the oaths of office. So those of you that are new, stand up. Raise your right hand and repeat after me. Did you get your copy?

Yep.

All right, so just repeat after me. I, state your name.

I, Tim Goldhammer.

Having been elected to the office of city council person.

Having been elected to the office of city council person.

Ward.

Ward 1.

Within and for the city of Mitchell-Davison County.

Within and for the city of Mitchell-Davison County.

South Dakota.

South Dakota. do solemnly swear that I will support the Constitution of the United States, do solemnly swear that I will support the Constitution of the United States, the Constitution of the State of South Dakota and the Ordinances of said City of Mitchell, the Constitution of the State of South Dakota and the Ordinances of said City of Mitchell, and that I will faithfully and impartially, to the best of my knowledge and ability, faithfully and impartially, to the best of my knowledge and ability,

Perform all duties of the Office of Councilmember Ward.

Perform all the duties of the Office of Councilmember Ward.

Congratulations.

Roll call. Savers. Here. Goldhammer. Here. Davis. Here. McArdle. Here.

Barrington. Here. Schlimgen. Here. Greenway.

Here.

Smith.

Here. All right. Welcome, everybody. Next, election of officers for the president of city council and the vice president of city council. Let's do whatever you guys want.

I move to nominate Kevin McArdle for president of city council.

I got a motion and a second for that. I still, yeah. Any discussion before we vote? You want to vote separately or at the same time? We'll just do the first one. All in favor of the motion, say aye. Aye. Opposed, same sign. Motion carries. Congratulations, Mr. McArdle. Second, Vice President for City Council.

I'll nominate Tim Goldhammer. Second.

Got a motion and a second. Further discussion? Okay. All those in favor of the motion say aye. Aye. Opposed, same sign. Motion carries. Congratulations. Approval of consent agenda items. Items appearing on 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?

Mayor, I don't have anything to remove, but I just want to point out that the three outside volunteers, which is... Very nice that people volunteer for the committees here in Mitchell. Molly Sutton to the Historic Preservation Commission, and Luke Norton to be reappointed to the Park and Rec, and then Taylor Moore to the Golf and Cemetery. So I just wanted to give a little shout out to those people volunteering, and glad that they agreed to serve.

Thank you. Move to approve. Mr. McArdle, seconded by Mr. Goldhammer. Further discussion?

Before we approve it, can somebody just briefly go over item J, the update to the ice arena for the ice arena?

Yeah, there's not very much audio on a lot of these microphones. And Mr. Trader, would you like to answer that?

Yep. So once the architect and the contractor, Van Buskirk, started reviewing the building and double checking what they what was in the design needed to actually be built they found some issues between the adjoining wall between the old ice arena and the new ice arena that required some modifications to the plans what was in the wall was not The way it was supposed to be built was not built correctly. So they are alleviating some of those issues. And to keep the, there was the ability, so it was going to set our timeline back. They needed to do some things differently. And to keep our timeline and our warranties intact, that's been pushed one year. So that will be completed by September of 2027. And it is an increase in cost, roughly $27,000.

Does that work for you?

Yep.

Perfect. Any further questions? Anyone in the audience like to discuss anything on the consent agenda? Okay. Roll call.

Davis.

Here. No, say aye. Aye. Or whatever you want, I should say.

Aye. Aye. Aye.

Aye.

Aye. Aye.

Aye.

Aye. Aye.

Aye. Motion carries. Just remember to turn your mics on, you guys. For everyone that's new here. Board of Adjustment, entertain a motion. Oh, sorry, I missed one. 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. Would anyone like to address the council?

Hello, everybody. For those that don't know me, my name is Christian New. I'm the executive director of the Mitchell Indigenous Archaeological Site, sorry, and Museum. And I just am here on behalf of the site to kind of just, again, show our continued gratitude for the city subsidy grant and give a little update on some of the really cool things we've been able to do with it. I'll keep it brief. First and foremost, our board matched the city subsidy grant dollar for dollar, which was one of the kind of stipulations of our grant when we applied for it, just showing their continued commitment to excavation, preservation, and education. Which leads me to my second point, which is the number of school tours that we've had. A big part of the grant is allowing us to keep school tours free for Any type of school that can come through and just briefly for the numbers in 2024, we had 808 students come through last year. We had 1403 come through this year. We've had 1100 so far with another 500 to 600 expected. So we are blowing past all her records of school tours. And again, we're able to keep them free because of things like the city subsidy grant. In that time, we've had a 275% increase in indigenous schools and communities coming through for school tours. So we're truly opening up Mitchell as a site of education for not just the city, but the region and the state and beyond. Which leads me to my final point. I'll keep it brief. the tech and kind of the research that we're doing out there. We have implemented QR codes and a couple of other really cool technologies out there for the visitor experience, but we are also underway with cataloging all our artifacts. We have a huge amount of data that's been pulled up out of the site, whether it's artifactual material, drawings, photographs, field notes, all of that is being digitized in a centralized database and it's actually being assigned to its pertinent location on a 3D map and model of the dig site. That's going to be really important for our researchers, but it's also going to open us up as a truly regional and beyond hub of research and education. Something that when I'm teaching at Dakota Wesleyan in the fall, I'm really going to look to exploit with the students. And, you know, it's going to become a really cool resource. So I won't take up any more of your time. I just want to say thank you on behalf of myself, our board of directors here. Gary's with me. And yeah, we're really appreciative. Thank you, guys.

Thank you. Would anyone else like to address the council?

I'm a lot shorter than Christian. There we go. I'm Elizabeth Mitchell-Mainsfield. I'm your Hanson City Council. Thank you guys so much for supporting our organization. If you were able to come out first Friday, this last one on July 3rd, it was an amazing night. Thank you to your Mitchell Fire Department and EMS and the police department for what they did that evening to make it incredible. So many family memories were made that night. Then on top of it, that's not just it. These events take the entire community coming together. It's your street. It's your traffic. It's your police. It's your fire department. Park and rec picking up those tables. Thank you. Bless their souls because those things are not light and it was hot last week. So thank you to them for picking them up and delivering them. Corn Pals team, I mean, it is a lot of moving pieces just to make a four-hour event happen. So thank you to everyone that made it possible and came out. It was a great crowd for July 3rd. It's a hit and miss whether you're going to have a crowd or not in Mitchell on July 3rd. So I am grateful for everyone that came out. Then on top of it, this week is actually crazy days already. It is a long-term tradition. We are not going to be doing sidewalk sales because it's supposed to be pretty darn hot. So if you want to come out, the stores will have their AC on. Deals are going to be inside. It's crazy days. It's going to be fun. We have 47 participating businesses this year. With that being said, rolling right into the end of the month and into August is that Palace City Pre-Surges Party on August 6th. I hope to see the community come out again and just make it a banger on Main Street. It's going to be huge if you haven't heard. There's the motorcycle, motorcycle, motorcycle, rodeo games, the actual mechanical bowl, car show and shine. The bike show, of course, is always going to be happening. We had Red Baron on the stage opening up by Turtle Peak Band. There's going to be Quick Draw. There's going to be like Motorcycle Magician out there as well. And so much more. So come on out on August 6th for that Palace City Pre-Surges Party from 5 to 10. And then we roll right into the end of August with, you know, Dakota Fest and festivals. And then we go right into the next First Friday on September 4th. And this is going to be a good way to roll out the season. So thank you all and have a great meeting with your first one.

Thank you. Would anyone else like to address the council?

Hello, Mayor, City Council, new members. Congratulations. My name is Brandon Sigmund. I'm just here to make some comments about Lakeview Golf Course. Regarding city funding, I don't understand all the details about what we're trying to do to improve it. But I do think that there's some general consensus or opinions in the town that the golf course is a money pit. But from what I understand, it actually makes over six figures a year and has been growing. It's a great city facility. I think the city should continue to invest in its improvement. And why? The game is growing at an incredible pace, especially with the younger generation. Every town similar in our size has a municipal golf course. I know the council and the mayor continue to emphasize growth. Sioux Falls courses are very overwhelmed and we're starting to see overflow into Mitchell from them. You know, isn't it possible someone coming from Sioux Falls might come over here, have flexibility with their job and occupation and be like, you know, this is a great place. Maybe I'll move here. Either way, if they don't, they're spending their money here. Regarding the staff, Jason Ganary and Eric Heap do an amazing job with the resources that they're given. I don't think that they get the credit or the appreciation they deserve, in my opinion. They run a tight ship, and our course is often the envy of golfers statewide. In June, we hosted a state championship with nearly 100 golfers participating, several who have never played the course or several of them that had not for many, many years. I actually made it a point to come up to me as both a member of the golf course and as a South Dakota Golf Association advisory board member to say what an amazing facility we have. Some of these folks are members of some of the most prestigious private clubs in South Dakota. Lakeview offers one of the best golf experiences in the region at affordable prices. It is one of the top three reasons I have chosen to live and hopefully retire in Mitchell. I could live anywhere in about a five-state area, with Mitchell being the most illogical location for my career. Nonetheless, we put a stake in the ground. I've purchased a business. I have employees. My wife and I have rental properties here. And having a quality, affordable golf is high on my list as I grow older. And if something were to happen like you in a negative way, it would be a pretty significant reason for me to relocate. So I don't think I'd be alone with that. Maybe not everyone is as strong opinionated as I am on there, but appreciate you listening to it. I think it's a great facility we have, and I think we should continue to invest in it. Thank you.

Thank you. Would anyone else like to address the council?

Mayor, council members, my name is Bob Habegger. I represent the ILB, Independence Baseball League. And in that league, we own two franchises, my family and I. We own a Gem City Bison out of Laramie, Wyoming, and the Oahe Zapata out of Pierce, South Dakota. We play at Hyde Stadium. And we've got the permission of the league to relocate our Laramie franchise, and we are looking at Mitchell. And we'd like to come into Mitchell and be the Palace City Bison. We are playing an exhibition game here Saturday night at the stadium. And the way my people that were here last week are sounding, it's going to be pretty successful. Got several tickets, maybe 350 to 400 tickets sold already for the game. And so I'm just here to introduce myself, our teams, and spread the word that we'd like to bring a baseball team to Mitchell. So thank you for your time. Appreciate that. Thank you.

Would anyone else like to address the council? Okay. Hearing none, we will move on to the Board of Adjustment. Entertain a motion for the City Council to recess and sit as a Board of Adjustment. Motion by Mr. Barrington. Second by Mr. Goldhammer. All those in favor of the motion, say aye. Aye. Opposed, same sign. Motion carries. Action to set the date for Board of Adjustment hearing 72026. Move to set the date. Mr. Goldhammer. Second. Second by Mr. Barrington. 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. Reconvene the City Council to entertain a motion for the Board of Adjustment to adjourn and the City Council to reconvene in regular session. So, second by Mr. Smith.

Second.

Second by Mr. Barrington. All those in favor of the motion, say aye. Aye. Opposed, same sign. Motion carries. Hearing an action on the following alcohol license on application transfer RW7501 retail on-off sale wine and cider license from energy oil company doing business in 1777 Mitchell B. 716 North Raleigh Street. Suite A4 to MG Oil Company doing business at Joker's Casino. Mitchell for 760 North Raleigh Street. Suite A4 video lottery is included. Chief Knifley.

Mr. Mayor, City Council. I review the application. I have no concerns. Recommend approval.

Move to approve. Mr. McArdle.

Second.

Second by Mr. Goldhammer.

Mr. Mayor, I'll be abstaining on the A and B.

Okay. One abstention on two different things. 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. On application transfer, RB3124, retail on-off sale malt beverage in South Dakota, farm wine license for MG Oil Company, doing business at 777 Mitchell, A716 North Raleigh Street Suite, A4 to MG Oil Company, doing business at Joker's Casino at Mitchell, 5716 North Raleigh Street Suite, A4. Video lottery is included. Chief Knipley. Recommend approval on this one as well. Thank you.

Motion to approve.

Motion by Mr. Saber. Second. Second by Mr. Schlingan. 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.

Oh, I missed one here.

An application of Jason Bates doing business with Big Dummies for a special event liquor license located at Horsham Sports Arena for August 7th and 8th for the shootout out the lake. Chiefs can input.

Recommend approval on this one as well. Move to approve.

Mr. McArdle. Second by Mr. Barrington. 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. Action to approve purchase of dump truck from source well contract Mr. Schrader.

Mr. Mayor, Council, staff is requesting approval for the purchase of a dump truck chassis from I-State Truck Center and a combo dump body sander from Sourcewell as well. The dump chassis is approximately $121,592, and the, or excuse me, the dump chassis is $121,592, and the body sander combo is $166,489 for a total cost of $288,081. The equipment was budgeted in 2025. but due to availability, the truck is now able to be procured. This truck is being built by a third party. Typically, we will have them built in-house, but with our amount of vehicles that we've had in and out, we've gotten a little behind, so we would prefer this one be built outside of our shop. The additional cost that's above budget will be paid from the water fund reserves, and the staff does recommend approval, and I can answer any questions you have.

Thank you.

Move to approve.

Motion by Mr. Goldhammer. Second. Second by Mr. Schlumpkin. 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. Action to approve application form for property cleanup incentive program as Owen.

Mayor and Council included in the packet is an application format that will, if approved, would be used for the property cleanup incentive program. In January 2026, the City Council approved an incentive program for the City of Mitchell. It's available for properties that have existing conditions that require the removal of structures or other items in order to use the property for new development. They do have to meet certain criteria that are outlined in the in the resolution that created the incentive program. This is just to approve the format of the application. We did review the application form internally and don't see any concerns with it. If approved by council, staff will add this. onto the city's website and start accepting applications. We did receive an inquiry. It's been two weeks ago now from an individual who's interested in or was at least inquiring about the incentive program and they would like to pursue it. I can answer any questions that you have. Otherwise, we recommend approval of the application form.

Thank you.

Move to approve.

Motion by Mr. Goldhammer. Second by Mr. Sabers. Further discussion?

One quick question there. Is the refund given right away or after the 24 months that they start building? It's probably in here, but I didn't.

In the program, I was trying to see if I can pull it up over there, but this will just be easier, actually. So the guidelines for the program are shown on the screen. The improvements have to be made on the property within 24 months of the cleanup, so we do hold that reimbursement until that's done. You'll see on the application form that on the bottom there is a way for staff to document the cost for when they actually did the property cleanup. We would also need to verify that that assessed value had increased as well, which was the second requirement in the program. So we will be tracking and monitoring that and issuing the refund once the conditions are met in the program.

Further discussion? Anyone in the audience like to discuss this? Okay, all those in favor of the motion, say aye.

Aye.

Opposed, same sign. Motion carries. Action to approve agreement A-2026-42, tax increment district number 46, developer agreement. Mr. Johnson.

All right. This developer's agreement would relate to tax increment district number 46, which was the Legacy Point affordable housing project agreement. that was previously approved by council. For those that are new on the council, this document kind of supplements the project plan that was previously approved. This adds some additional terms as to how that increment gets passed on to the developer throughout the project. It's kind of been a standard form document that we've used on a number of TIFs. Minor changes get made here or there. This time we do have a couple of small changes in Section 6 that basically just line up the certification language with the way that we've been doing the certification process. It's not a huge change. It's just to try to bring it in line with the way that things have been working. So I think with that, we can open it up to any questions. Thank you.

I move to approve Mr. McArdle second by Mr. Smith 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 section approved agreement A2026-43 tax increment district number 47 developer agreement Mr. Johnson

All right. Well, you just heard me explain this, so I'm not going to go through the whole thing again. This developer agreement relates to tax increment district number 47, which would be the John Adamo renovation of the 123 North Main Building.

Thank you.

Move to approve.

Mr. Goldhammer, seconded by Mr. Barrington. Further discussion? Anyone in the audience like to discuss this one? All those in favor of the motion, say aye. Aye. Opposed, same sign. Motion carries. Action to approve agreement A2026-44, water tank demolition and removal with SPN. Mr. Schrader.

Yep, Mr. Mayor, Council. SPN and Associates was requested to provide a proposal for design, bidding, and construction-based services for the demolition of the existing water tanks at the old treatment plant. The proposal includes topographic survey plans and specifications, which will allow contractors to bid the project. bidding phase services and construction administration. The reason for this is this will be the future site for the fire station number two. The city will also retain a geotechnical engineer for soil compaction testing because those tanks are relatively deep. So we want to make sure that that's compacted correctly and ensure that there's no settlement where the future building site is. Staff does recommend approval of the proposed agreement with SBN associates. to perform design and bidding phase services at a lump sum fee of $11,000 and construction phase services at an hourly rate not to exceed fee of $5,000. And I can answer any questions that you have. Thank you.

We're going to take all that. the rock and stuff they take out.

It depends what's in it. If it doesn't have a lot of rebar in it, we would take it at our disposal site. If not, we have had contractors before take it off site and crush it themselves. Or if they don't have any place to take it, which I would say is rare, the landfill would be another option.

Move to approve.

Mr. McCarroll, seconded by Mr. Barrington. 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. Section to approve Agreement A-2026-45, Fisher's Agreement for 1020 South Kimball with Boyd Remnants, Mr. Schroeder.

Mr. Mayor, Council, the City of Mitchell is purchasing a piece of property located at 1020 South Kimball as identified in the attached purchase agreement from Boyd A. Remnants for $113,213.75. The property was appraised and is being purchased at the appraised value. The property owners in the area are donating $56,000 to the project. The city will construct a detention pond on the property to assist with alleviating flood issues in this area. Staff recommends approval of the attached purchase agreement, and I can answer any other questions you have. Thank you.

So we're paying $56,000 and another group's paying $56,000? Is that how it works?

It works. We're paying the difference of $113,000 minus the $56,000.

It's about the same, yeah.

Yeah, pretty close.

Mr. Shavers. Mr. Davis. Further discussion?

So, Joe, we're going to put a retention pond there? Is that my understanding? Correct. And then is it going to actually then drain into the noose? No. Sewer that we put around, is that big enough, obviously, to handle that?

Yep, yep. So kind of the idea would be is ponding that's still currently that would be within the street area. That detention pond would allow that equivalent to be stored within the pond instead of in the street.

I guess one of the comments, too, when the East Central Drainage Study was completed, one of the recommendations they had for the flooding in that area was additional detention ponds to allow the water more time to dissipate.

Does that end up going into Darwin Creek then? Correct.

So how many blocks approximately is it going to help there, Joe? That's such a low area.

So the intersection of Kimball and Hackberry adjacent to Clockworks has been affected before. And then another intersection that would be greatly helped would be, I believe it's Langdon and Juniper. That's adjacent to Patzer's.

That's a bad idea.

And this should help us. Further discussion? Anyone in the audience like to discuss this? Okay. All those in favor of the motion, say aye. Aye. Opposed, same sign. Motion carries. Action to approve agreement A-2026-46, purchase agreement for 320 West 13th Avenue for the 13th Avenue lift station project. Mr. Schrader.

Mr. Mayor, Council, SPN is currently designing the replacement of the sanitary sewer lift station at 13th and Sanborn. The existing lift station is located within the existing right-of-way and be located on the north side of 13th, just east of Sanborn. And the station is approximately 18 feet deep. Staff is recommending purchasing the property directly adjacent to the existing lift station to the north with the address of 320 West 13th. This location would allow the replacement of the lift station with limited impacts to private property and also allow better maintenance access for our wastewater crews. Future replacements of this lift station would also be possible on the newly purchased property. The purchase price within the purchase agreement is $150,000. There is an existing house on the property, and the intent would be to parcel off the house and resell if council so chooses to do that. Staff doesn't recommend approval of the attached purchase agreement. I can answer any questions you have.

Thank you.

Move to approve.

Mr. Goldhammer.

Second.

Second by Mr. Smith.

Further questions. I'm sorry. Go ahead. Um, so if we put the, when we put the lift station there, there will be sufficient room to have the existing house. Do you think Joe?

I do. I do think there to keep, uh, zoning correct. We may need to add an easement in there, um, just for future workability and to get our crews in and out. We'll probably add a driveway access, uh, onto Sanborn. So our bigger trucks can get in and out of there. Um, but we should be able to set it up to keep it within the zoning and also resell the house.

It's currently within just the boulevard right now, so we'll be able to have a lot of space now.

And then access to the house would not be affected either?

No.

Okay.

Okay, 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. Action to approve Resolution R2026-37, Dissolving Tax Increment, District Number 8. Ms. Spaffy?

This tax increment district is the Highland Conference Center. It's been 20 years since the tax increment district was created. So this will dissolve. The total increase in assessed value for TIF 8 is $11,062,130 since the TIF was created in 2006. So this will be going back on the tax rolls.

A couple other notes. There's an updated TIF report in that as well, if you guys would like to review all the TIFs. And then I think it's added $11 million to the tax roll. So that's nice. Anyone else? Anyone in the audience like to discuss this?

Thank you, Mayor and members of the City Council. My name is Steve Sipson, and I first would like to congratulate the three new members of the Council. And I rise in support of this resolution to dissolve TF number eight. I did some checking into it, and yes, $11 million of tax increment will then become available to the tax investor, which that's a good thing. But the issue that I'd like to bring forward is that this particular TF was created to build the Conference Center of Highlands, and that is city-owned. So that's not part of the increment. So when I look at the parcels that were available in that district, there was five other parcels. Three of them already existed at the time of this TIF. Two of them were planned, and the tax increment for those two planned entities, which was... I can't remember the two. One was Ruby's Tuesday, and there's a second one, Comfort Inn. So those were supposed to create an estimated $3.6 million in tax increment to pay for the Highland Conference Center. And when I look back at the increments, it grew to $5 million as early as 2014. And later on, it jumped to $7 million. And I was wondering, with that extra increment amounts available, why did it take 20 years to come to this point? That's my first question. And so I sent a FOIA request to the city and to the county to try to answer some of my questions regarding that. Another point, my last point, is that of the 11 million increment that we will enjoy, only 3.3 million came from those two planned businesses, Ruby Tuesdays and the Comfort Inn. The rest of it came from the three existing businesses that were here at the time of the TIF. So this is an example of almost $8 million of increment that would have happened without the TIF. It was not available to the tax authorities, and I don't think that is fair. Thank you for your time tonight.

Thank you. Anyone else in the audience here to discuss this?

All those in favor of the motion, say aye.

Aye. Opposed, same sign. Motion carries. Second reading on Ordinance O-2026-08, rezoning of Lot 1A. As shown on the agenda, Mr. Jenicus.

Mr. Mayor and Council, notices were sent out to neighbors, published in paper, signs posted. Planning Commission made a motion to recommend approval, although motion failed. One in favor, three against, and three absent. We received three letters in favor of this, eight letters that were opposed. The people that were opposed for it had concerns about traffic in the neighborhood. This is contiguous to the land to the south, which is zoned highway business. 713 West Havens is the Whelan Business Plaza, and that's what the applicant would like to put on this piece of property that's been an open grassy area in cornfield for a few years. There were a couple people that spoke in favor of it at the last council meeting for the first reading. The business that would be going in here would be personal services, office businesses, so small businesses for building blocks for them to grow into future. It'd be six units that they'd like to put in here now with a garage to the north side of it. Some of the concerns are with it being zone to highway business, anything on highway business that's permitted or conditional use could just go onto this piece of property. Not necessarily always true because it doesn't fit the piece of property. You can't put a truck terminal on this piece of property because a truck terminal needs a lot more space for something like that. So just because it's a permitted use doesn't mean it can go onto that piece of property because business-wise it doesn't make sense to fit that. So that is a concern of some people. Traffic was the big concern for a lot of the neighbors that were in opposition of it. I can't answer any questions you have. The applicant's here if you have any questions for him as well.

Thank you.

I move to approve.

Motion by Mr. McArdle.

Second.

Second by Mr. Smith. Further discussion?

As I discussed with people in that neighborhood, the two things that got brought up most regularly to me was the necessity for setback. As you look at the requirements for highway business compared to the other residential requirements that would be potentially put on that property, setback becomes an issue that a lot of them were concerned about. Obviously, traffic... depending on the type of business was a concern. I'm not necessarily in agreement with the latter, but I certainly wouldn't want to be, if it was like my personal property, I don't know that I would want a retail strip mall in my backyard. So that is why I'll be voting no. But I think as far as use for that space, I do think it's a good use, but I just, if it was my backyard, I wouldn't want it. So I can't support it.

Thank you. Anyone else before we open it up to the audience? All right, go ahead.

My name is Lauren Belhoff, and I live directly across from this property. And me and my wife have lived there for, well, 36 years, but we've been residents of Mitchell for 38. We raised our three daughters there, and I've lived there my whole life, basically, almost. My wife passed away a year ago, but we always loved seeing the beautiful empty lot with the corn growing, but always did hope that we would have wonderful neighbors across from us, just single-family residents. I feel that's a better fit for that property. I feel lots should always stay residential because there's residential on all three sides, single family homes. And it's just a good fit for a strip mall in my neighborhood. I'm very concerned about the traffic. ALWAYS HAD TO WATCH OUT BACK AND ONTO MY DRIVEWAY. THEY COME FLYING DOWN THE STREET. IT'S ALREADY HIGH TRAFFIC. THOSE ARE MY CONCERNS. I MEAN, AS HE SAID, THE CITY PLAN COMMISSION HAS ALREADY VOTED THIS DOWN, SO THAT SHOULD BE A LITTLE RED FLAG TO YOU AND ALSO ALL THE Residents in my neighborhood sent in and disapproved of this overwhelmingly. It's like 12 to three or something like that. So I just want you to represent the my neighborhood. And I thank you for listening.

Thank you. Anyone else in the audience like to discuss this?

So I'm Dave Harris with Harris Properties. What was pointed out in the last meeting, which was important, is it's not a residential lot. It's a R4 high density residential. So I look at this as a win for the people around where I could put a 24 unit apartment complex. I'm just asking for six business suites. So traffic could be a whole lot worse than been what we've got. So our businesses are always clean. The property is always clean. Everything's kept up. There is no issues that we've ever had. So that's all I got. Thanks.

Thank you. Anyone else that would like to discuss this? Any further discussion from the council before we go?

Just one thing I want to point out is obviously with the Harris family owning the Wagon Wheel Hotel. I think all of us have seen that over the years and what they've done to that. I think they've been very good neighbors for that neighborhood. I think they've took a piece of property and very beautified it and made it. very friendly for its surroundings. And I think there'd be a great partnership in this area too. So I'm going to be supportive because I think it's going to be a big positive for what they're going to do with that piece of property that has quite a bit been from cornfields to, yeah, very unique areas. So I'll be supporting it.

Come on back to the podium, please.

I've heard the statement, not in my backyard. Well, this is my front door. It's Matt and Abby's front door. It's Dolores and Richard's front door. It's Sherry's front door. So it's not in my backyard. And I just want to say, too, that it's just not a good fit. I don't know what the building's going to look like. I mean, they're building these black buildings now in other places here in town, and I don't want to look at that either. So I just want to say I do not know what's going in there, what it's going to look like, and that would be a big concern to me and my neighbors.

Thank you. All right, let's do a roll call.

Barrington.

Aye.

Schlimgen.

Nay.

Greenway.

Aye.

Smith.

Aye.

Sabres.

Nay.

Goldhammer.

Nay.

Davis.

Aye.

McArdle. Aye. 5-3.

Does this need 6-8? Okay.

Simple majority.

Okay. Motion carries. Motion to adopt ordinance O2026-08. Move to adopt. Motion by Mr. Goldhammer.

Second.

Second by Mr. McCardle.

Further discussion?

Anyone in the audience like to discuss this? Okay. Let's do a roll call on this one too.

Greenway. Greenway. Greenway.

Aye.

Smith.

Aye.

Savers. Aye. Goldhammer.

Aye.

Davis.

Aye.

McHardell.

Aye.

Barrington.

Aye.

Schlemgen.

Aye. Motion carries. Presentation on ex parte communications and conflicts of interest. Mr. Johnson.

All right. Well, I'm going to try to keep this pretty brief. So we're going to have a short presentation here on ex parte communications and conflicts of interest because we've got Several new board members, and it's been a while since the rest of the council's heard this too. So good time to get this information back out in front of everybody. So first here, ex parte communications. This standard applies to quasi-judicial matters, which would be things in front of this board like conditional uses, variants, licenses, permits, things like that. An ex parte communication is a communication with one party without giving the opposing party notice and an opportunity to be heard. So really anything that you're doing outside the context of the meeting itself is probably going to be an ex parte communication. Those ex parte communications can be problematic because they have the potential to compromise one's ability to be a fair and impartial adjudicator. So that means it has the potential to undermine the validity of the action that's being considered. And here in South Dakota, those are basically governed by two sections in Chapter 6-1 of the South Dakota Codified Laws, and we'll go through those real quick. First section there does allow quasi-judicial matters to be conducted informally. If council members relies upon evidence not produced at a public hearing or a meeting, then that evidence needs to be disclosed and included in the public record. So if you happen to be talking about this with somebody and they give you a graphic or something like that, you'd want to disclose that during the public hearing so that it can be made part of the record. Failure to make that disclosure may be grounds for that member's vote to be disqualified on that particular issue. Next section, it does allow council members to receive input from the public directly or indirectly about matters of public interest. Such contact alone does not require recusal. An elected official is presumed to be objective and capable of making decisions fairly on the basis of the officer's circumstances and may rely on the officer's own general experience and background. If the elected official's authority statements or actions regarding an issue or a party involved demonstrates prejudice or unacceptable risk of bias, then the official may be deemed disqualified. And that's kind of leading into the next topic here where we get into conflicts of interest. So much like ex parte communications, conflicts of interest have the potential to undermine whatever finding is at issue. In South Dakota, they're analyzed both under statute and case law. Statute provides that no municipal official may participate in discussing or vote on any issue in which the official has a conflict of interest. There is a conflict if the official has a direct pecuniary interest in the matter, and the officer is responsible for deciding that themselves. and I'll say this later on in the presentation, but if you've ever got a question about that, reach out to me. We'll work our way through that. The other prong of that is that by two-thirds vote of the governing body, even if an official doesn't believe that they themselves are disqualified, the rest of the board can vote to disqualify that official from the matter upon that two-thirds vote. The major case that we talk about here in South Dakota would be the Holborn case, which discusses the Caperton decision of the US Supreme Court. Under those cases, that updated the disqualification standards that we consider here in South Dakota. Last time I gave this presentation, we were talking about a whole different set of rules. This really simplifies the analysis. So first thing to consider, or the first grounds that those cases relied on was where the officer has a direct personal substantial pecuniary interest in a case. That probably sounds very similar to the statute that I just told you about, about having a direct pecuniary interest in the matter. very similar analysis there. The second ground for disqualification that those cases discussed were where there was a significant and disproportionate influence with an official coupled with a close temporal relationship between the influencing event and the pending matter. So in that Caperton case there was campaign donations that were made to this elected official, and then they were going to be involved in these judicial contempt proceedings. So there was a close nexus between the financial donations and then also the matter being heard in front of that official. These are going to be very rare to ever occur. Again, if you've ever got a question on whether something like that, something might rise to those levels, come talk to me and we'll work through it. I already kind of hit on this. These conflict standards have been curtailed quite significantly from what they used to be. But it's still important to keep these things in mind because they can lead to the general public believing that there's unfair bias or unnecessary bias in your decisions. Being aware of those potential bias, you know, events or triggers allows an official to do a conflict analysis even if it doesn't end up being a disqualifying conflict. If you're thinking about it, if you're asking the questions, you're probably ahead of the game here. So talk to me about that when it happens. And that is all we've got for now. Thank you.

Any questions on the presentation?

I don't think any questions, but I think just a point of clarification. And very rarely... Do we have a conflict of interest? But if there is questions, I've called Justin before and just asked, should I be participating or voting or what? So it's rare. It's not that you're a friend of somebody or your acquaintance. It is pretty unique, and we saw one tonight. And so it does happen, but not very often. But I would say just be cautious about And if there's any question whatsoever, just get a hold of Justin.

Yep. And like I said, you know, this isn't coming up for any particular reason other than we've got new members coming on board. And, you know, as I said in here, those standards have changed quite a bit since we last did this presentation with council. So just good to get a refresh on that information.

And keep in mind, we live in a very small town and we know a lot of people. And that, you know, just isn't... If you see a tough vote coming up, you gotta vote.

I'll just chime in with the Board of Adjustment and the Quasi-Judicial Board. Because we are a small community, you cannot talk outside of this hearing because it is a hearing you're judged for that. People will come up to you and give their thoughts and opinions to you. Just simply say, I cannot respond to or answer any questions that you have at that time because you're not giving the other side the opportunity to speak as well. You can listen to them. Please don't respond to it though at all. And hopefully the community understands that portion of it. And then you can just disclose it at the meeting saying, this person spoke to me. That's all you have to say.

Those are both good points, Mark. Thanks.

Okay, any further questions? Okay, we will move on. Motion to enter into executive session according to SDCL 125-2.3, Consulting with Legal Counsel and SDCL 1919-502, Lawyer-Client Communications.

So moved.

Second. Mr. Goldhammer, seconded by Mr. Sabers. Further discussion? All those in favor of the motion, say aye. Aye. Opposed, same sign. Motion carries.

There will be executive session.