Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Drainage Contract topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Drainage District 3 board votes to enter closed session to discuss ISG contract; Dickinson County will receive updates

2211896 · January 31, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

At a joint Drainage District 3 meeting, board members approved an agenda and minutes, then voted unanimously to enter closed session with legal counsel to discuss a contract with ISG for a drainage project; Dickinson County declined to join the closed session and asked for progress updates.

The joint Drainage District 3 board met and unanimously voted to enter a closed session with legal counsel to discuss an ISG contract related to a drainage project. Meeting participants said Dickinson County declined to attend the closed session and asked that the joint board be kept informed as the matter progresses.

The closed-session motion was moved by Helmers and supported by Loring; a roll-call vote recorded ayes by Helmers, Loring, Scholte, DeBoer and the presiding officer, and the motion carried. The closed session was described in the meeting as being requested to review the ISG contract and to consult with legal counsel under code 21.51(c).

Earlier in the session the board approved the Drainage District 3 agenda on a motion from Helmers with support from Debord, and accepted minutes from the Jan. 14 meeting on a motion by Loring, supported by Helmers. The board also adjourned its regular meeting before opening the Drainage District 3 joint session; that adjournment was moved by Scholte and supported by Lauren.

Board members and staff discussed whether Dickinson County would participate in the closed session. One speaker noted that Dickinson County had been offered access to the closed session but declined and instead requested periodic updates. A board member said the intent of the closed session was to avoid taking any action or adopting an approach that might limit the joint board’s options in the future while counsel reviews the contract.

No contract text, dollar amounts, timetable or further details about the ISG work were discussed on the public record during the portion of the meeting captured in the transcript. The board moved into closed session following the unanimous vote; the public portion of the transcript ended after that vote.