All right. Today is February 25th, 6:00 p. p.m. council meeting. Call meeting to order. Please stand for the pledge of allegiance. I pledge algiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the
republic for it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> Excuse me. >> Microsoft. >> I think you have to open Microsoft Teams on the bottom thing.
>> There you go. Just click on that. It'll pull it up for you. >> There she is. Hi. >> Hi. Um, all right. So, present is myself, Chris, >> Michael Brown,
>> Eric Brorend. >> Absent is Katie Kirby. Approve or amend the agenda. Any amendments at all? >> No. All right. Get a motion to approve the agenda. >> I'll make the motion to approve the agenda. >> A second.
>> All in favor? >> I opposed. Motion carried. Uh request to approve the minutes for the February 11th, 2026 meeting.
>> I'll make a motion. I'll second. >> All in favor? >> I motion carried. All right. Motion to pay the bills. I'll make a motion to pay the bills. >> I will second.
>> All in favor? >> I >> I motion carried. Pay them bills. Um the consent agenda is to approve resolution 2026-02
approving lawful gaming gambling premises permit for good Lions Club. Approval of consumption and display alcohol permit for the Lions Club. The allnight grad party donation request of
a pool pass. the Goodyu Community Foundation donation request, which is the Goodyu Education Foundation for a cool pass as well. Get a motion to approve the consent agenda. >> Want to make a motion? >> Second.
>> All in favor? >> I >> I >> opposed. Motion carried. Approve the consent agenda. All right. Moving into old business, the fire truck association joint power agreement. How are we doing with that? Um, so I think we got a pretty
wellestablished um agreement. So, uh, if we go to page six, uh, nine, sorry, page nine, we're going to look at 6.1,
section of funding, >> six, >> page nine, 6.1. >> Oh, okay. Oh, >> hey, Michael. Michael, sorry. I'm sorry. What page are you referring to? >> Sorry. Page nine. It's section six of funding on the joint powers agreement.
>> Page nine. Okay. Page nine. Okay, I got it. >> 61. Correct. >> Yes. >> Okay. exhibit. >> Yeah. Where's Ah there? >> Oh, did exhibit A.
>> It is. It is there. >> Okay. So, >> there we go. Thank you. So, I don't know. There was there was some questions about exhibit A. Um, and I
guess, you know, I'll bring up what what Bob had mentioned was he was concerned that exhibit A did not demonstrate what it says it was supposed to inside the contract, which the contracts under his
assumption or understanding was that exhibit A would be a map outlining the boundary areas. Um, which I guess we've never had. Exhibit A has always looked something to what you have in your packet, which is basically, you
know, the townships with their percentage um owed next to it. Um so I guess to me it's satisfied as exhibit A. Um but I could be totally wrong. Um you
know, it's that's how I feel and view it. But um and then the next section, if we go to page 11, there's a section 7.5, which is the collection of emergency service charges.
Um it's one of those things that if you notice in your packet, it should have been highlighted red. Um, and the reason for that, I'm not quite sure, but it's kind of a unanimous decision at the meeting that we would like to have this
section removed. And so, I would support a motion to pass the joint powers as seen here with the exception of 7.5 removed. Um basically 7.5 talks about that if the association is unable to
collect funds that then funds will be um required to be obtained by the city and or township that the occurrence happened in.
The problem is is townships don't assess and so cities are really the only entity that assesses Um, so for townships it' be costing them more money than what is typically typical and for a
city I mean it's kind of a mute point. Um, but I say we should remove this because in the past we've never done it. This is something new. Um, and I don't foresee the need nor the
requirement to have it. >> Did anybody on the board or the meeting Was that brought up about this? >> Yeah. And that was kind of like it was kind of a uni I won't say overwhelming or unanimous, but it was a very equal feel that the townships were not in
favor of it. And I'm also not in favor of the city them having to be involved in collecting funds for an organization that's kind of outside of them. Um, and so that's where I guess I feel that 7.5
should be redacted from the agreement. I mean, we've never done it before. It's never been done. When we as the association kind of asked why the attorney um which is Bob Rupy put it
into this agreement, the kind of the words we got was well, it's kind of in all the agreements. It's like, well, it doesn't need to be in us. It's not there's no requirement to have this in it. So why do we if we haven't had it before? Why do we need it? >> So then who would go after for the
collection? >> It's it's one of those things that you just you just don't you eat it. I mean it's one of those things. It's an unnecessary thing, but right now same thing. Most um car accidents and car fires, it's kind of a mu point. You collect about 10 15% of them. Um house
and structure fires, you collect a larger percent of them, but there's still people who don't pay. And it's just it's an unfortunate thing. It's not like it used to be back five, 10 years ago where you could call the sheriff or officer or whatever that
responded and get the information. Now you have to go through it data request forms and stuff like that for different stuff like that. And with a volunteer squad, they the guys just don't have the time to do that unfortunately. So it's not uh
>> I have a question if I could. would they enter uh change that member territory served by the association as graphically depicted to maybe say here's the percentages just so it doesn't seem like somebody's looking for a graphic and maybe looking for the
percentages. >> Yeah. And so that was one thing that was talked about. I I think what they mean by graphically depicted is the charts >> which technically in terms is a graph when you I guess I guess there's
multiple different meanings to a graph or graphically >> you know graphically can vis mean quite literally a you know a graphic or a photo or it can also mean a graph which in this term is a graph. So it is deceiving but it also in the very
essence of what a definition of a graph is is fulfilled that so you have made a motion to approve all of this with the exception of removing 7.5. >> I have not made a motion on this. I entertain the
>> entertain sorry >> the idea of making it so >> I guess another question I have this might have brought up before meeting the ownership of property do we carry the majority of property as it is now >> um sorry which section we look at
>> the 4.2 to page six ownership of real property vehicle equipment. It says that each member shall own an undivided equal interest as part owner of the real estate. So people only do 2% but own the same percentage as us. >> Correct.
>> But do we put the most interest in real estate and assets now? >> Um >> that' be my question. Are we putting the majority in to get >> Yes. >> to basically give them more? >> Yes. Putting it's Yeah. putting in 20 almost 22 and a2% to only have 10%
ownership. >> Yeah. >> Which is again it goes it was an odd thing for me to think about too. Um but it also is the camaraderie that GoodU and the greater area of Goodu has to let's look at the
school. um you know, no one has more or less ownership in the school, yet it's equally distributed throughout the school district to pay for things. It's kind of the same thing where it's a sense of pride to have the small
department. So, it's, you know, because with that it it talks about, you know, once if you were to leave then, you know, you don't own any of the property. There's no fixed assets to you. Um, so you're correct. We have the same amount
of ownership in it and the same amount of voting level in it as say somewhat at two or 3%. >> The voting percentage I get I that's understandable. We each got two members on the board. >> I guess my only concern was how much that we're putting in. I know we're
going to be covering covered by a majority of it. I would misunderstand that. It's just what my concern is is how much we already have invested that we're putting in just 10%. So if some let's say five years down the line we
decide to leave the agreement we have now lost that asset. >> Correct. But at the same point, technically as of date, we have not say this, the only money that we've put in is minimal
in comparison to other townships and cities because other townships and cities have had to put in money for trucks for different assets where the city only had to pay the 22 and a half% on building maintenance. Um
so that building maintenance also went with utilities um >> training >> training and so it was how do I say this it was almost a wash
you know and you're right there's no vested ownership in this it's not like when you leave the other departments have to buy you out >> you know there's >> I noticed that even if it's dis let's say disbanded and it's equally distributed, which we're still going to
lose on that on that factor. >> Yeah. >> Now, I guess I personally would feel more comfortable if something like that were to happen that we'd be giving out the percentage what was put in. To me, that seemed like more of a fair asset, especially since we're putting so much
into it to begin with. Yeah, we're not going to get the full back, but I think the percentage should be they're not an equal amount of whatever is invested kind of thing. >> Understand? And I guess like looking at it, how do I say this without scaring us? Looking at it, I would say goodu
next to Goodyu Township really have the most to lose if this was disbanded. Um there are there are Goodyu Goodyu Township and Bell Creek
and Featherstone are the only townships that are 100% comprised inside this agreement. They have no other agreements with their townships. So we would have the most to those us and those other townships have the most
to lose because they don't have another agreement with anywhere else. And for good you, it's a horse a piece. You're either going to pay Redwing or you're going to pay Zamroa. And either way, you got a 105 minute call time. So, we have the most to lose, but also I would say
that we have the most to gain to keep this contract and this joint powers going. >> Yeah. Like I mean, we got the most interest to keep it going, but we could be outvoted. >> Correct. >> Technically, >> correct? >> So, that's I guess that's my concern. And that was one of the the things that
was brought up at the very beginning was, you know, if you you know at 22 and a half% we should have more votes. But I mean that's just not going to happen. >> It's not going to happen. And democratically it's just going to happen
for one and for two. It's just they're they're not going to do it because then how do you you know if you're proportionate like that at minimum everyone gets one vote. So how do you do you know how do you do that then because you get down to these
other that are at 8 six you know 32% you know what do you give them a third of a vote how's that work so um the voting percent I get the two persons I get >> what I I guess my concern is let's say
for let's say majority decide they want to disband they just not like it they want to go a different route with us with the most invested we would have zero say the person with 2% could be that deciding factor and they're going to gain quite a bit out of that. >> Yeah.
>> So I mean that that's my major concern when it comes to the end of it. Let's say if it's disband for some reason I would me personally I'd like to see a change where we would get the percentage back whatever you have invested or whatever you pay for percentage wise that's what you would receive if
disbanded. That would be a little bit more protection for the city of good you as more of a majority investor. Yeah, we're to keep our two votes, which yeah, that's fine. I understand each town two votes, but I don't think our deciding factor of a two or 3% vote
should decide that we only get a 10% versus a 22 that we should receive if they expand it. Kind of a backend protection for the city, I guess, is what I'm looking at. So, I understand the voting, all that stuff. That's that's fine. I understand
that any any board is what it usually is. >> You're saying if they ended up disbanding and sold everything for a million dollars, we would get >> 22%. >> Yeah. We would get the 22% back. Yes. Not just a 10%. Because we're the ones
investing the 22 each each time. We're the ones with the most put into it. You know, fire department, vehicles, equipment, whatever it could be, right? We're putting a majority of it in. And I think it's kind of more of a protective
thing for the city in the end because I'm guessing some cities aren't putting a whole lot in right I would imagine from what they have right now fire department volunteer otherwise. >> Sorry, what was that? >> Like let's say some of these smaller ones let's say >> they don't have their own fire
department or anything like that, right? So they really got zero invested to start but we'll gain 10% on the disbandment of the board. So I see you can see my concern right it's >> I I do understand that I do and I mean
in in reality if let's say disbandment talk was actually true in reality the city of good you would almost have to inevitably almost have to look into purchasing it. I mean that would be >> ultimately that would be the option because >> they would probably end up purchasing
the whole entire thing and starting their own. I mean but then again we're going to be investing now even more if we had to do that right. >> Yeah. >> Instead of just disbanding our at least 22% back and starting something different. That's I mean that's just my
concern. No, I understand. >> Something like that. I would see I would absolutely see that as reasonable as far as contract goes for something like this, especially this large contract. Does it say anything in here about that? >> Well, just disbanding.
>> Yeah, like if they >> It does. It says each member gets >> an equal share. I think >> was that the purchase of equipment or >> um dispersion of assets upon dision 12.
Um so this actually talks about this differently. So the >> oh okay >> upon their share >> in the funding allocation. >> Okay. Okay. Okay. I just thought I said something else. So we are okay. All
right. I thought I said equal share but I'm guessing that must have been for ownership at that point. Okay. This is interesting. Was that talking about like against it? >> I thought at one point it was the way that
>> I think I think the last one >> that that Michael saying it was that way at one point. So now we're just getting rid of that. 5 collection. >> That is correct. Yeah. I mean, it's one of those things. It's never been in there before. Um, you know, even talking
to the treasurer who is obviously the one who's handling payments and accepting and taking payments. I mean, we've never had that in there and he's just looking at it as 30 hard enough to collect money now to expect to track it
through the city entities. It's just going to be kind of a jumble mess because you could be collecting back a couple years worth of payments and doing books. It's just not going to be fun.
Yes. about the 4.3. I see in the comments there she purchasing equipment. Yeah, for the uh trying to think which one is at the time and place opening bids or quotes
discuss the quotes if necessary specification may be amended by bids. Yeah. made the same procedure again followed then at the same time and place respective members shall hold separate meetings on their own townships and boards so we can get that change where
it's not the same time and place otherwise that means at that meeting like it says in here we would have to all have a a meeting as board as a committee or as a city council >> so >> at the exact same time that be like you said that's a lot of people one meeting
to >> um said that to set a time and place to hold a separate meeting or something, you know, something that's going to change it up. That's so I know it says in there we have I believe it's set up to so much time in order for something
like that to be done. You could literally probably take out at the same time and place >> and I would think they probably worried a little better >> because that would almost be like we would have to have a special meeting >> at that time >> at that same exact time that they're holding their meeting.
>> So So what it is is it's not that we would have to have a special meeting for this at the same time that the truck association's having the meeting. It's that we would have to have a meeting at the same time as Bchester as good township, Elk Township, Featherstone
Township, Hickory. And the reason for that is so that you no one can sway a vote one way or another by attending or not attending someone else's meeting. Do you understand what I'm saying? Um, and so that's why they're trying they put that
in there. So, let's say say we're looking at a fire a pumper truck and we pulled out a pumper truck at the last meeting. It was going to be roughly $360,000. Um, of that $365,000, we would have to come up with 22.65% of
it. So the thing that they want is they don't want someone who is four or five 6% to sway anyone who's smaller or larger in percentage to vote or not vote by attending someone else's meeting. So
that's why they put this that we'd all have meetings at the same time. Not that we all have to have a meeting at the same time as the truck association, but that each government entity comprising the truck association have a meeting at the same time. Does that make sense? >> Well, I guess the way it works here is
then at the same time and place. So that means we're going to need all these townships, all these cities all in one building, all in one room having this discussion. Okay guys, this is Janine. Can you guys hear me?
>> Okay, so this is like for the opening of bids, right? >> Yep. Opening bids are quotes by the chairperson. >> Okay. So, so typically the way this works, right, and correct me if I'm wrong if this doesn't read, if you put out a bid, they have to come back
because it's a public ending, they have to come back and like sealed envelopes. Is that correct? >> Correct. Okay. So then everybody meets and then opens up the envelope. That's a meeting, right? >> Is that right? >> Yeah.
>> Cuz that that that's how public bids work, right? You all sit in a room, right? You get let's say you're going to bid for a snowball. You get to make sure that there's no collusion or anything like that, right? >> Correct. >> So then those bids are open. And then
once those bids are open, um, then you would have to have another meeting. I don't think it has to be at the same time, right? Is that is that what the confusion is?
>> Well, it' be the time and place. The time I'm not as concerned about would be the place. Basically, it's stating that >> at the same time and place respect separate meeting. That means every township, every city would all have to be in the same room, same building, same time, same place at the exact same time.
>> Well, they're separate. >> Yeah, >> I'm not reading it like that, but that's just me. I think you can do I think I mean that's just not how public bid process works, right? Because then once
the bid comes out, I'm confusing myself. Okay. Then at the same time and place I think I just took the same kind of place out of it more sense. >> Yeah. If they took that out, it would
make more sense because then you have to go and say this is the bid that has to be accepted. Yeah. I think that's probably >> as I read it without that you're
correct. It it just seems a lot more logical. >> What's really surprising is Bob never pointed this out, did he? >> Correct. >> Yeah. That that's what's that's what makes me think that it it's being read another way because if Bob Bob never
pointed this out. So, I'm wondering if he's reading it a different way as well because he probably knows how the public bid process works and from his pie island stuff. So, I wonder why I'm just I just don't
know why he never would have pointed it out. I don't know. >> Yeah, I don't know either. I mean, I've never been through a a purchase of >> that. That's why that's why I'm wondering that's why I'm wondering if I'm thinking
about it because I've been through it a different way. Um, so who pointed this out? I I guess is my question. >> Eric. >> Oh, Eric. Okay. >> The rest of it the rest of it seems
pretty good. I mean, just few changes you removing that 7.5 and then I think just change that 17.1 to get rid of that fact like you said just put as change to certified mail would be it says for the address of the
association same thing for members Okay. So, who's going to go back to the association and point out these changes then? >> I >> You got it, Michael? >> Yeah. >> Okay. It's almost like this whole entire sentence doesn't make a lot of sense.
>> Which one? >> Just that. >> Okay. 4.3. >> It's funny you bring up 17.1 because I guess I never Some of these were more legal mumbo jumbo that I didn't actually read in depth. We got rid of it. We were just
going to give written notice via US mail. It was we were never going to fax or serve. >> Michael, I I was just going to say we got rid of that fax thing a long time ago. So, I don't know what happened to that. >> Yeah, we got rid of that. >> Got rid of that a long time ago. >> I don't Do we Do we want to put
certified mail to verify that they got it or just hopefully get in the mail? Hope it works. >> Nothing gets lost in the mail. >> No, not at all. >> The rest of that sentence is missing a word. >> Which one?
>> That same fact. those nail facts to the after. >> It's just it's just missing a word. >> Yeah. No, and that's what Yeah, that was part of the reason that when I read it, I was like, "No, we got rid of that whole thing because of that." >> We did. >> Yeah.
Re same time, please. And I agree with you, Chris, reading it. There's just something missing in there because then you jump to once 14 of the 20 members have voted to accept the bid or cool. The association shall accept the bid or quote.
>> Yeah, because they're talking about bids and then opening bids and then approving the bids and then going Yeah, it's going back to voting and accepting. Yeah, it's just
You know, Michael, the way it reads, like I think there might be sentences or chunks missing. >> Agreed. Yeah. >> So, maybe just go and say, "Hey, is something missing?" >> Because that's not how public bid process works. >> Correct. >> So, it makes me think like two versions
back if Bob never pointed this out, it probably was right in one of those versions that we had back in the day. You know what I mean? >> Yeah. Something changed. Yep. >> Yeah. Something definitely changed cuz that he would have caught that. >> Yep. >> Are we at that point where they wanting
us an agreement or is this corrections what they were asking? I mean, they wanted an agreement, but at the same time, I'm not going to agree to something that I think Stony that is. I mean, >> I mean, I think these are pretty minor edits that can be taken care pretty
quickly. >> Yeah. >> I think that's that's the mark to get it passed. I don't see why we said got jokes. >> Yeah, when you said minor, sorry, I didn't mean to juggle.
>> It's all miners. Somebody makes it big. >> Oh. Oh, yeah. They they'll argue over a word. So, >> I know they argue over where a comma goes, >> right? >> I got to excuse myself. I got to make it
to some Verona for a annual meeting. So, >> can we rest of it, Michael, quick or >> Sure, we can. >> Yep. >> All right. >> City Go ahead. >> All right. Um, moving on to the next
citywide cleanup day rates. They looked very good. And I saw that we did get the um email back from waste management saying they'll accept anything.
>> You just need to separate it out. So it's not in >> bring another vehicle. >> Okay. >> Good, good, good. I'm happy happy with that. We have ready to go in
everywhere newsletter everywhere if you're good with the same prices as last year. >> Yep. Yep. >> I mean I think that's >> Yeah. And so like just to clarify so it's going to be per load. So a person individual business decides
that they have four loads worth be $40 not just $10 for >> asking I can't pay $10 each time. >> Okay. No, just double checking. I know I know you talked about a a business that
paid once only. >> No, you have to pay. >> It was a pickup. So >> it was a pickup. They had like five loads of pickup and they prepaid $10 15 bucks. >> I think maybe we could ask them, hey,
how many loads do you have to pick up? >> Because I mean regardless if it's 45 bucks, it's probably still a good deal, you know. >> Yeah, >> it's still a good deal. >> And I was going to say at that point, too, it's one of those things that, you know, you pick up one load and it's like I'm not picking up the rest until we get paid for the rest type scenario.
>> So, all right. Um, anything else on >> You just need a motion to accept. >> Do we They did say they're taking TV stuff like that. >> Y >> So, get a motion for the citywide cleanup day, the rates, $10 per load,
drop off, and $15 curbside pickup per load. >> I'll make a motion. >> I'll make a motion. >> I'll second. >> All right. All in favor? >> Oppos? Motion carried. New business. Mitch. Is he Was he
supposed to be here? >> Okay. Well, >> he's not. >> Yes. Um, we'll move on to the next uh resolution 26-03. Resolution accepting the donation of the $250 in the Goodyu County Co-op Electric
Operation Roundup for the pool fund. Um, have you guys all read that? You have get a motion for that. >> I'll make a motion. >> Second. >> I'll second. >> All right. Eric will second.
>> All in favor say I. Opposed. >> Motion carried. All right. Good. That's $250 towards Corine for Jason. Um, all right. Moving on. Public works comment. Anything?
>> I think I'm going to say it. They got another received another grant this week for the generator. >> Yay. >> So should be around we have the match this one but $45,000 with the match. So can't start work till we get the money.
So hopefully by next week we can move forward. >> Okay, good. >> So and then just one other thing potholes around town. We're going to fix them in case you get complaints. Can't do it until they're thought out. >> Chief saying Friday you're going to be
busy fixing bowels. >> Beautiful day. >> All right. >> Good. Good. Good. Anything else? Jason, >> I I'm good. >> Okay. Uh Lori, you got or sorry, not Lori.
>> She might have something else. >> We have anything. >> All right. Um any council comments? Katie, anything? No. >> All right. Um, I do not have anything. Anything from the sheriff's department?
>> Nothing. >> Unless you guys have. >> All right. Anybody else got anything? Going once, twice. >> All right. We have a motion to adjurnn. Motion. >> Second.
>> All in favor? I >> motion carries. Meeting adjourned. >> Meeting I've ever been to >> just take off again. I got the dog or the dog. Stay alive still.