Call the meeting to order. All rise for the pledge of >> allegiance. I pledge algiance 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. Roll call. All members are present. Approval of the agenda. We have uh one change uh under new business. The fire department policy is being removed from there.
Is there any other changes to the agenda? Hearing nothing. Do I have a motion to approve the agenda? With that change? >> Motion to approve. >> Motion by Joe. Do I have a second? >> Second. >> Second by Heidi. >> Call the question. All those in favor
signify by saying I. >> I. >> Opposed. Motion carries. Five in favor. None against. Approval of the minutes of the December 17th, 2025 regular meeting. You all receive them in your packet. Is
there any changes clarification needed within that set of minutes? Hearing nothing. Do I have a motion to approve the December 17 meeting minutes? >> So move.
>> Motion by Brad. Do a second. >> A second. >> Second by Heidi. >> Call the question. All those in favor signify by saying I. I I opposed. Motion carries. Five in favor, none against. This now brings us to our public open
forum. Is there anyone here that would like to speak to the council? Is there anyone here that would like to speak to the council? Call a third time. Is there anyone here that would like to speak to the council? Seeing no one, our public open forum is
now closed. We have no public hearings. We then move on to reports and pres presentations. Uh EDA report. So the EDA uh they met today in regular session Wednesday, January 7th at noon. They did welcome their new member VJ
Wellie. He took the position vacated by Brent Leiser representing the Sock Center Chamber of Commerce. They elected their officers. The officers for this year are Kevin Upoff the chair, Joe Fickman, vice chair, and Heidi Leech is the secretary treasury. We did receive the draft of the hospitality study. They
did do we just got it just before the meeting. They did some quick review of it, and we'll have some recommended changes before it's finally released. Also, they're recommending we proceed with the final plat of author's edition phase two, but are seeking some feedback on the infrastructure plans before we
proceed with that part of it. So, we'll be working with the city engineer on that. Um, Arow Health U, we requested the final documentation uh for their STDP loan and I did get an email this afternoon, so about two o'clock. So, they she did get that to me. I haven't had time to go through it yet to see if
it's all there, but we'll be working that forward. Um, they also received a request from a purchaser for a two lock combo and author's edition and they wanted to kind of like get two for one and they denied that request because that is something that they've done in the past and they wanted to remain
consistent. And then the SCDP grant application, we should know by the end of January whether we are going to be invited for a full application. So in the February meeting, I should have a report on that. Uh we do not have action tonight from the EDA.
>> Okay. Any questions, concerns? Parkboard report. >> So the park board also met uh this evening at 5:00 in their regular session. They did elect officers for 2026. Uh Scott Kowski is the chair and Chris Cammer is the vice chair or the
acting chair if he's not going to be there. They did approve their bylaws and order of business, but one thing they did do was in the winter time they're going to meet by monthly. So they'll meet January, they'll not February, they'll meet March, not April, and then this summer they'll meet straight through. So they'll have eight meetings
instead of 12 for the year. Um also, uh they discussed the future archery range project. Ben is going to be meeting on that. So, they'll come up with a plan of what that might look like and figure out the final location and come back to the park board with that at a later date. Um, the challenge park repairs, the
parts have been received. Um, and then they're going to be putting those in and just see how that it has to do with a timer pad underneath that runs the timer. And so, the public works will be installing that. And if they continue to go out, we're going to have to discuss whether or not we even want to have the
auto timers. And then uh the tower field ball field upgrades. That's something that's on the agenda every year. This is about the time we start working on them. So Ben's working on that. They won't be doing they're going to work on some infield grass, but probably not till after the season is over. Uh he did
report though that um the or the baseball association has secured scoreboards for the three fields. And then also I guess the final thing I had was meeting dates and I've already told you about that. So we have no action for the park board tonight.
questions, concerns. Okay, then we will move on to the city engineer update. >> Good evening, mayor and council, and happy new year to all of you. Uh not a lot going on other than Highway 71 at this point in time as as you can
imagine. Uh other than providing Vicki with a little bit of some background information on the author's edition for if they're want to move forward with that that next plat on there. But Highway 71 uh we are moving along quite well. We have the preliminary design
based on everything that we discussed uh last last year now. um have that mostly complete uh in granted's preliminary design feasibility level kind of thing. We have most of the quantities put together for that. We are starting to put together the actual cost estimate
for that. Uh in terms of the actual timing, it looks like things are going to take a little bit longer to complete mainly because some of the stuff is out of our control. We have to wait for Mindot really to come up with what's the costs of things that the city's going to have to pay for from there so that we
can actually finish the feasibility report and put all that in. So we would have a full complete assessment package for it. So we'll sort of be done with our portions. We've actually given them already some of our preliminary designs so that Mindot has those. Um, but it
looks like from uh from Terry Guard, it looks like we'll be end of February, March before we get some cost estimates from them. Um, and then after that, we really there's there's some issues we need to discuss with them such as off
corridor, meaning off of the Highway 71 corridor itself. Uh cost sharing for things such as the storm sewer on the north side that will eventually go down Second Street North. Um we have um Second Street South as well, the storm
sewer that collects from downtown and goes out that way as well as our eighth street and going further out that way. Plus, you remember we had some costs for for this last year's project that we've kind of held as well. So those things are all need to be discussed with them
and come up with what those numbers are going to be in order to really finalize um the feasibility report. So, what I intend to do is to give you kind of here's the numbers that we have and I'll be able to do that probably maybe not
the next meeting but maybe the following meeting I would say so you kind of get a sense of kind of where we are as we go along. That's probably I think the best thing I can do is to just kind of keep you up to date of where things are moving to until we get numbers from from
MIDOT and then and then we'll then we'll have a good chunk of it except for all those negotiations I just previously mentioned. So that's kind of where that is at. Um so things are moving moving together. Um, one of the things that we
may need to do is to uh before we finalize the feasibility report, we might need to move forward with some of the actual final design on things such as what I would do is things we know we absolutely have to do, which is the corridor itself.
So that would keep things kind of the ball moving forward while we kind of wait for some of those costs to put together. But that's one thing. We don't have to make a decision now by any means, but that's just one thing that's on my mind that we may need to think about sometime here in the near future
as to whether we want to move forward without the feasibility report being finalized on some of that some of that work so things can keep moving forward. So um anyway, that's really the report I have at this point. I entertain any questions you might have,
>> questions, concerns. >> Okay. Okay, >> thank you. >> Action items 7A, approve resolution 2026-01, adopting rules of order for council meetings. >> Yeah, I just I wanted to add one thing
quick on to what Keith said. Um, just to let you know that we're scheduling the public meeting uh for the Highway 71. It's going to be in the last two weeks of February. Um, she's going to get me that final date. And I said if I can get the date by January 20th, we can include it in the PUC bill. Uh plus we'll have
some other advertising be more like an open house meeting here where they'll have the boards and they'll have the videos and they'll have their staff here and people can come in as they have time and ask questions and kind of see what it's about. So we'll be having that public meeting coming up. People should watch for that.
>> Is that intended to be like an evening? >> Yes. >> Okay. >> It may be like a five o'clock type thing like maybe 5 to 7 or something like that. Okay. where they'll come out with their staff and have their all their boards and and you guys can be here and and um so we'll be able to do that and
start getting the word out so people can ask the questions that we've been asking. Plus, we have our next advisory board meeting on the 15th. So that's one more meeting coming up. >> So sorry about that. Okay, on to our annual rules of order. So every calendar year the council must conduct their
annual meeting. So the first regular meeting of the year is considered SAC center's annual meeting which is tonight. and you must adopt the rules of order and at a minimum appoint the newspaper, the acting mayor and the depository. So we have two actions here of course we have the resolution adopting the rules of order. What I have
in here is the one from prior year. You know if you want to recommend any changes you now is the time to do that. Um the only changes that we've generally ever made is sometimes they we'll move the uh I think public open public open
forum has moved around over the years. I think it kind of works where it is now, but if there's anything you want to change on the order, now would be the time. Otherwise, I'd ask you to adopt resolution 20261 adopting the rules of order for the council meetings.
>> Any questions, suggestions or I will look for a motion to approve resolution 20261. >> Motion to approve. >> Motion by Scott. Do I have a second? >> I'll second. >> Second by Joe. Last minute discussion.
Call the question. All those in favor signify by saying I. >> I. >> Opposed. Motion carries. Five in favor, none against. 7B, approve resolution 2026-02, appointing council members to serve on
various boards and commissions and also making annual appointments. And with that, I will go down the list. Um, acting mayor, I'm going to leave that as Heidi.
Um, engineer would be Stantech. City and attorney is Peton. City attorney for complaints is Nickel Mo Law. Medical director Dr. Mary Thomas. Chaplain would be Jared Matthew. Uh, H
board liaison, I will be taking Scott's place on that board. Park board Scott will remain there. Planning Commission will be Brad. Uh EDA, I left that the same. Heidi and
Joel. Senior center liaison. I will take that one instead of Brad. Um airport commission, I will remain on the airport commission. CVB board instead of Brad it'll be
Scott. Policy planning committee will be instead of Brad and myself it'll be Brad and Joe. Operations committee Scott and Warren as
who it is now it'll be Scott and Brad and personnel and finance committee will be remain Heidi and Joe. Official newspaper, Sock Center Herald. Depositories will be Minnesota National
Bank, Pine Country Bank, Magnify, 4M Fund, Multi- Bank Securities, and Bremer Bank. The official signatorries will be Vicky Willer, Jack McCirkoff, and myself. Fire Chief Jeff Brman Shankle, First
Assistant Ben Clink, Second Assistant Adam Mortz, Secretary Treasurer Nick Sunderman, training safety officer will be Weston Wander. Questions, comments? >> I have a couple questions, Warren.
>> Yep. Um maybe for the guys on the fire department. Are those the same officers as last year? >> Yep. >> Y nothing changed. You >> say it's catch a caretaker. Okay. >> All right. Um, and then my other question was is when is the last time
we've gone out and looked at uh other engineering firms or searched and had that discussion? >> It's been what, 12 years? >> No, we've done it twice since I've been here, >> but each time we've retained the same
one that we had before. >> So, I suppose it's probably been >> I don't know, gosh, over 10 years. I'm on my 12th year as mayor and >> we've never done it then. I think we did
it when Brad you were mayor at the time I think is the last time. >> Okay. >> Which is probably what 15 years ago. >> 14 15. Yeah. >> 14 15 years. >> I'm sorry. I don't know the exact date. >> Okay. Um so then my question is is we
haven't kind of gone out to uh do an RFP for engineering firms for 10 to 15 years is what I'm hear. is I mean how long do we want to go before we consider doing that? I mean there might be other firms interested. There might be pricing issues there. There might be all kinds
of things. I'm just wondering when and we should consider that or maybe nobody's interested in doing it. I just that's a long time to not go out and seek >> an update whether it's pricing, whether it's interest or whether it's whatever.
Right. >> Valid point. It's just uh it's a lot of work. >> Yeah. >> So, whoever watch committee it usually goes to uh policy. Right. >> When we did it before we did an RFP and
advertised and then we solicited people and then they came in and made presentations to the full council. >> Right. So, >> so >> I don't recall if the committees themselves were involved if we just came straight to the full council.
>> Yeah, I can't remember either. It's been a while. But I think just from the lack for perspective of amount of years an RFP would would be would warrant it, you know, the time. I I just think that we need to, you
know, there might be other firms that would love to be part of sock center and there might be none. you know, I don't know, but I think we don't know if we don't ask. >> Yep. >> Yeah. I think I think for 2026, obviously, we're we're starting the year. We we look at, you know, retention for 2026, but, you know, if that's a
that's a conversation we look at going off for RFPs as it leads into that 2027, >> you know, new year um appointments where we need to have that information. >> I I agree. But every year we appoint the same ones every year because we never have the RFP done prior to the meeting. Now, we've had the conversation here
tonight where we can, you know, say, "Okay, we're we've got the year to to make that that decision, take that action versus, you know, >> January 7th when we're making appointments is, you know, we can't, you know, pick something new at this point." >> Do you feel like it's a we can make the
move anytime like >> appoint it for now, but go up for our fees beginning of the year and see what happens? >> I I think it's it's something you can do. I mean to be honest I don't know that there's you know I just think we need to go out to an RFP whether we do
it at the end of the year we say okay we're going to stay where we're at now but come third quarter or fourth quarter let's bring it back to the council and at least get it on >> get it out there so everybody has a fair shot whether it's Stantech or anybody else they need to have the opportunity to >> I remember the last time we had about
seven different >> firms that came in >> Yep. And when it all came down said and done, the company Stand Deck was the one that got it because they knew everything about the city and they there was no learning process or
learning curve for us to teach them the the new ones. So that's the reason why it and the price was cheaper. >> Are we contractual for a year? >> Generally, we'll go year to year. >> So that's where you're basing that decision or that point. That's where we
we make the decision or you know go out during the whether it's June, July, August, whatever date you want to pick with that. But in in preparation for it to be ready for the new year if we make make any moves if if decided by the council. >> I I believe when we did it before we had
it was I think it was like toward November in November that we had >> um the presentations and then the deliberation was in December with the anticipation in January would be a turnover. um at that time you know we had several came. I will tell you though
that you know the engineering firms they put a lot of a lot of effort and a lot of documentation and a lot of presentation into it and they bring out like a big show. Y >> so unless we're really are serious about considering that you know I don't want
to run them through all the exercise if you're not serious about possibly making a change. I mean, I don't want to just do it just for the sake of doing it. If you're seriously think, yeah, we need to look at this, you know, in the in the interest of it has been a long time, then that's great that you'll look at
it, but not just not just because, so to speak, I I will say to your point, Brad, for questioning, I've had public question um the engineering aspect of uh the city's choice. I will tell you it's
tough in the middle of a project for sure. >> And the main thing is he just got started in depth on on 71, >> right? >> And I remember the conversation 15 years ago, we had that exact same comment is is it's really difficult when you're middle of a project because there isn't
a year that we don't have some type of project. And um so I I I I hear what you're saying, but >> I'm just thinking of Highway 71. >> I know you are. I know you are. >> Kicked down the road 10 years. That's uh yeah, I would think something we could
have. >> Well, it's something that we can consider and we've you know, if we can do it in the last half if >> in the meantime, we'll all have food for thought. You know, see if there's a need, we can look at it at that time and put it on the agenda then. >> That's great.
>> But right now, I don't think there'd be a >> wouldn't be fair to >> How about I just put it on the agenda in the in the summer? >> Yeah. June or something like that and then we still got time to get it taken care of before the end of the year >> and then see if there's any interest in
it. >> Fair enough. I think that's a good idea. >> Is that fine with everybody? >> Okay. Any other questions or concerns with the appointments? I tried to take into consideration
people's workloads and their schedules and >> Thank you. >> and what I knew was coming up. Um, I know that if you're an elected official, your employers have to give you time off. It's state law. It may not be paid,
but they have to give you time off. So, and they cannot >> hold it against you either. So, that's the reason >> I'll have to revisit that. >> I We'll have to talk about >> I looked I looked up the statute. I think I think if you're elected, yes.
But if you're appointed, I don't know if it's the same year. All five of us are elected officials. >> Is that is that state law in Minnesota and >> Minnesota? >> Okay. I'm an employee of Michigan, so I have to look into that. >> You always got to throw that in there.
>> But it's, you know, people serving on different committees and different things is is great in my opinion because everybody gets a chance. >> Yeah. And I tried to also divide it out that each of us got three >> things to take care of. >> So, >> looks great.
>> Okay. Um, no other questions. Do I have a motion to approve resolution 20262 approving the annual appointments? >> So, moved. >> Motion by Brad. Do I have a second?
>> Second. >> Second by Joe. Call the question. All those in favor signify by saying I. >> I. >> Opposed. Motion carries. Five in favor, none against. 7 C. Approve appointment of ambulance
director. >> So after opening up the ambulance director position within the department and also publicly advertising it. Three individuals were interviewed for the position by the personnel committee, the assistant ambulance director and myself. Upon completion of the interviews, the committee recommends that the position
be offered to Brian Zales effective immediately. It does carry the six-month probationary period in accordance with our city policy. Uh Stuart will also remain on until January 31st in a training capacity. So the action tonight I'm requesting is to approve the appointment of Brian Zales as the
ambulance director. And he did he did appear before the city council before um when the ambulance was purchasing some equipment, but he is in the audience tonight too if if you want him to come up and say a few words. >> Okay. Do what's the council's wishes? You just
want to approve the appointment and >> personnel committee went through their work, right? >> That's what I thought. That's what their job is. >> Okay. Do I have a motion to approve the appointment of Brian Zales as the ambulance director? >> Motion to approve. >> Motion by Heidi. Do I have a second?
>> I'll second. >> Second by Joe. Last minute discussion. Call the question. All those in favor signify by saying I. >> I. Opposed abstensions motion carries five in favor none against. Welcome
aboard. 7D acknowledge employee advancements. >> So according to our labor agreement with Teamsters Local 320, we have two public works employees that are going to advance to the next step. Mike Freeler will advance to step three on January 23rd and Ryan Borstrom to step four on
February 6th. This is not an approval. This is just an acknowledgement of those appointments. >> Okay. Any questions or concerns? Okay, then we'll move on. Approve resolution 2026-03 adopting fee schedule for penalties.
>> So, this was the the penalty uh schedule that was tabled at the last city council meeting. Uh they wanted to look at potential rate increases, but the so the ordinances were all reviewed that determined which could be amended and which had the fines and penalties embedded in that ordinance. And then an additional column was added to the
schedule regarding the penalty for that offense. So if you can see, we wrote in red off to the side, this is this is what we found in the ordinance. Um, so what I'm looking for tonight is to approve the resolution adopting that schedule of of offenses and voluntary administrative penalties pursuant to any
recommendated changes you might have. I think the concern was there are a lot of them that have been in place since 2006 when the ordinance was when this part was codified >> um and hasn't changed. I think the alcohol and the cigarette ones, you know, they're pretty standard with everybody else. Where we get to where
we're a little bit off is when you get down to um the traffic code that's in the traffic violations that are embedded in the code. There's a $75 one and a bunch of $50 ones and then $100 ones. Um so I don't know if you want to make them
all consistent at the same amount or if you're happy with how they are. questions, comments. So, what's in red is basically what we're going to
>> what red what's in red is what's in that code. You know, a lot of them tell them that the penalty uh goes to 1099, but then we also have 10998. So, what what this is is any of these could be a criminal penalty, but we have the ability to do an administrative penalty.
And as administrative penalty, this is the fine that would be administratively. So basically, when you pay an administrative penalty, you're kind of like, "Yeah, I plead guilty. I was wrong. Here's the money. I'm done." Um, if they don't or they have the option if they don't want to do that, they can do
the court process. Um, so what you're doing here is actually looking is what is that administrative penalty for these uh infractions, so to speak. >> Okay. Any comments so far,
concerns? >> It just seems like we should update them. But I look, you look across them and you're thinking to yourself, well, what are you going to put them to? You know what I mean? And >> well, I was thinking if we went to a 100 bucks on each one of them that there's 50.
>> So you to double everything that was 50. >> Yeah. >> And are you looking at like anything that's 50 or the >> Yeah. Well, basically anything that like traffic violations, most of it's all 50. And I was thinking they're just doubling it
cuz it's been 19 years. >> And is $50 enough to cause a reaction that is >> Well, we ran into that with when we went out and did sidewalks. We found out Well, if the city's going to do it for
this price, we're just going to not do our sidewalk because it's cheaper than hiring somebody. So, we had to raise it. So, can >> I'm thinking that we got to start and if I'm right, if it's an administrative, it doesn't go on their
record. Right. >> Correct. >> Yes. >> Correct. So, actually it may be a hundred bucks, but at least it's not on their record. You know, if they want to put it on their record, go ahead. But
>> So, are you just saying the traffic violations? >> I was saying that's where the most of the ones where we have the ability to change them by this code are mostly in the traffic section. >> Yeah. Right. >> And traffic and parking, you know, that type of thing.
>> Yep. snowmobile violations and then of course the nuisances. But the nuisances, remember those are $100 a day each and every day there are violations. >> That's a good point. Yeah, that's $100 per day. Right. Right. >> Yeah.
>> Because it's until you until you correct the violation, it's a new violation every day. >> Right. comments, concerns, the council's wishes. Nobody wants to be the bad guy. I think
I think it would be nice to go back to kind of like what we do with our typical fee schedule and maybe do a line item if we can. I hate to put it off anymore, but if there's like an opportunity to maybe put it to policy and >> that's fine
>> and see if they can do it line by line and see what makes sense based on what we've found with is it actionable or is it based on a >> let policy committee look at it? Is that what you're saying? Yeah, it's it's anything that we can
change at any time. It's just you don't see anything else not go up in price and things. >> I know. And I I just think it m it makes maybe more sense to go let's not do a global and and do it actual what what
makes the most sense line by line. >> Right. >> Okay. And I forgot who's on policy since you look >> Joe and uh >> me and Brad >> and Brad. Okay. So >> sorry to kick it down the curb to you. >> We changed it. So >> for you.
>> Okay. General consents >> just to send it to policy committee. >> Sure. >> Okay. And that's what we will do. and unfinished business. 8A direction on intersections controls for trunk highway
71. >> So, and I had sent this email out to all of you. Uh, MINDOT received their comments back from their geospatial unit who have the following recommendations. Uh, Fourth Street North. So, you're will be a if you're coming out of Fourth Street North by the DMV, it'd be a right
out only. Actually, both directions come out of Fourth be right only. Um, you could not cross at fourth street. You'd have to either take a right or >> it's basically going to be a median in between there. So you >> and then if you're heading north, you can't turn left to go onto like to the
hospital at 4th Street. You'd have to go up to the roundabout. >> Yeah. >> And then also Pine Street South by the Wigggon Trail by Arvig there. They would like that to be right in only on northbound. So you can't go into that street coming from the north heading
south because of the vioaduct there. There's no center turn line. So that's why they want it right in only and that's their recommendations. I did send back the input from each of you that had sent it to me. I don't know if you have any additional input or if what you had sent me is the way you wanted to. I mean
I think we had so one of you had said something wanted to keep that Pine Street South open to both directions and I think one of you said just close it all together. So >> yeah, I'm the one >> closing all together >> mainly because >> keep it open because what how many
people take a left-hand turn there? Is it really really >> come down to take a left and go on eighth and shoot or >> and a half? >> Yeah. No, 10th >> down street. Straight across. >> Straight across down by the vioadock. >> Oh yeah.
>> Well, that's where we end up with people slamming on brakes and everything because they're taking a left >> left up the hill. that going to the right is more of an angle and the only people that I ever go on that road are the AR is ARVIC that I've
ever seen. Everyone else goes out to 9 and a half and comes out to Main Street. >> So to me that's the reason why there was no reason to even have that >> short section of part of the road even there just eliminate it. >> Mhm.
And then that would also at the same time give more room for the they want to have that access coming from the Wagon Trail down to the sidewalk at Main Street. Well, this way it gives them more room if we close that street off
and wouldn't probably have to be as steep. I don't know where they're starting it, but to me the only road that that road is only there for basically one company because there's only one house on that street >> until you get to nine and a half and
they're using nine and a half. So >> I'm not a fan of closing it entirely um personally, but >> and it's only a suggestion. Yeah, >> you know, we can live with it, but it's just >> So, if I'm understanding this right, if
you come down Pine Street South by W Trail, right in only. So, you're only going to be able to access it >> from the south. >> From the south going and taking a right and going up it. >> Mhm. >> Where the people generally now, which if
it's ARV, they come down, they come to it, and they're going to go north on 71. >> Yeah. you know, because you're going to if you're going to go south, you're going to go out there parking lot as an example. I mean, I guess I worked there 10 years, but if when we came when and people would come out normally, um, this
could change by now. But used to come out on that street if you're going to go south because you're already kind of you're working your way that direction, so to speak, just by being on that gravel road. Um, and >> the only reason why I mentioned it, too, is if it's if it's RV traffic, they've
already got a parking lot with two accesses on the main street. >> Yeah. >> So, >> well, I think we >> and it squares them up with traffic, so they could see both directions. >> They don't have a bridge blocking if they want to all of a sudden decide they're going to take a left and go south, >> right? I Yeah, I don't think we can make
in my opinion, we can't make the decision solely based on RV. I would >> No, but you know, it's there's only one house there, too. Was there a specific reason that the geospatial unit requested this? >> Because they felt like southbound
traffic that would be stopped to take a left to go into that road would back up traffic because there's no center turn lane. >> I mean, I lived >> and there's, you know, there's no room to get around. You're underneath the vioaduct basically at that point. >> And if you're trying to take a left and
go into that road that um you're going to back up traffic. I have never seen this an issue. I lived a block away for 12 years. >> I don't think there's a lot of traffic there, but they're looking at their their committee that has this recommendation just based on anticipated
traffic flow. I guess >> I don't think there's that much traffic on that road period. >> That's why I'm just I don't think it's really a discussion. I think it's a non-issue. They might be looking at it from
not being a resident and just >> expected traffic. >> I'm going to throw this out here, but Joel, what do you think? You're the one that the only people I ever see on that road is our squad sitting there for
>> We have 20 years. We had this right that for that reason. >> Yes. Main Street. >> True. >> I get both
safety standpoint >> because that's the one area that's not going to have a center turn lane. turn left. >> Then maybe we have to just refer it back to the folks that are experts in traffic design. I guess that's kind of who did
it, right? And on and when they get comments back like this and they're changing traffic flow from what we already have. That's when our approval comes in. So they can't make a change on that situation unless we tell them we're okay with it.
>> So they receive comments back from their own internal >> Yep. staff saying based on our studies or our experience this should be this way. >> Okay. >> Okay.
What's >> I mean I guess provided my initial input and >> I guess as I ponder on it if I got any different thoughts I can email you but I don't have anything more at this point. >> Okay. So
go along with what they got for right now and then when we get farther along we can if we see other concerns we can bring it up to them. >> Is that how that works? >> I like that. >> First three makes sense >> rather than knee-jerk
>> type stuff. So okay and then uh move on to local option sales tax update. >> Just an update. We've reached out to uh Senator Tory Westerm's office and Representative Mary Franson's office. Uh drafting a bill amending our sock center sales tax by raising the maximum allowed
to be collected. We'll be sending that to the capital in the next week or so because we need to get that in there by the 31st of January. And then at that point then they schedule it for committee. So it could happen anywhere from February to May. I did look back I guess I was down there the end of February in front of the House and the
end of March in front of the Senate last time. So it could but then we didn't get an answer till the end of May, >> right? >> So but just that it was we just keep pushing it forward and moving it forward and we'll see what happens. >> Does it have any bearing if we reach out to Tori or Mary and just to let them
know it's important to us or you know some people have connection? >> Last time when I did it actually they came here and uh we had a discussion about it you know or I'll go there or do Zoom or something but they're pretty good at it. their staff is is, you know, they do this for a living, so
>> yeah, >> they're pretty good at it. And then you get it down to the House and the Senate, and they have a whole another staff that actually puts it in the bill form and assigns it the number and gets it scheduled. So, um, yeah, once I send that in and they take off with it, then it's pretty much wait to get called.
>> Yeah. >> So, having an additional voice doesn't have any influence or >> um, they're going to put it forward because we're requesting it. Okay. Okay. I mean, it's not like they're going to say, "No, I'm not going to do it for you." >> Right. >> Right. >> So, >> talking to them after, you know, if they
put it forward, it's pretty much, >> you know, we can't convince them until >> they come to the committee, the the House and the Senate. So, they'll come and they'll be with me at the table at the testimony. So, they actually come to that. So, um they'll be there at that
time and at that time then they provide input too based on that there are that we're their constituent. So, Okay, any other questions on that? New business has been removed. We'll
then be on to our consent agenda. We have schedule of claims unpaid claims of1,389,94868 paid claims of $72,869 for a total of 1,462,81768. We have resolution number 2026-04
accepting contributions of $18241 from the men's card playing group to be allocated to the senior center. Uh $60,000 from the Sock Center Fire Department relief association for the fire department. $500 from Dan Well
Southtown to be allocated to the ambulance department. $2,000 from the sock center area seniors to be allocated to the senior center, $200 from Logan Gruber to be allocated to the fire department. And on behalf of the city and the council, I want to
thank those groups or people for those donations. Uh we have gambling application for exempt permit request from Holy Family School for a raffle on March 1st, 2026 at Holy Family School. Is there any questions or concerns about
the consent agenda? Hearing nothing. Do I have a motion to approve the consent calendar as presented? >> Motion to approve. >> Motion by Heidi. Do I have a second? >> I'll second. >> Second by Brad. Last minute discussion. Call the question. All those in favor
signify by saying I. >> I. Opposed. Motion carries. Five in favor, none against. Informational items. Just a couple things, you know, Charter Spectrum sent us their um changes for the year and also their price changes. So, that's
what was the memo this week. Rather than just channel lineup changes, it also included all the upcoming price changes. And then also the fire department uh their quick attack chassis has arrived from John Ford. It's been picked up. It's actually sitting out here in the garage right now. Um the department will be taking it over to Sou Falls to get it
outfitted and maybe a year from now, you'll get to see it. That's maybe wishful thinking to get in one year, don't you think? >> Right. >> Could be. So, and that's all I have. >> Okay. Any questions about either one of those two items? >> Okay. And we have reached the end of our
agenda. Do I have a motion to adjurnn? >> Nope. Go ahead. >> Okay. Motion by Scott, seconded by Brad. It's the way I heard it. Call the question. All those in favor signify by saying I. >> I oppose. Motion carries. Five in favor,
none against. Meeting adjourned.