Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the Infrastructure Bridge topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Council hears proposal to back county grants for relocating bridge; city not asked to fund work

Madelia City Council Workshop · December 9, 2024
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

Council members discussed Resolution 2024-27, a proposed resolution of support for a county-led effort to apply for grants to move or store a flood-impacted bridge; city staff said Madelia would not be asked to provide funding, though members noted likely public reaction and safety concerns.

The Madelia workshop heard discussion of Resolution 2024-27, a resolution of support for a participating local unit of government to back county grant applications to move, rehabilitate, or store a bridge affected by flooding. Chair opened the agenda item and asked whether council members wanted to discuss the resolution.

A council member identified Michael mccardy as the county engineer who intends to pursue grant funding to remove or relocate the bridge and said Michael indicated the city would not be required to provide money for the project. The speaker said, "I did come back to Michael and ask is there going to be any ... need for us the city of medelia to give any funding for this project and he said no." (Speaker listed as Council member 1.)

Members discussed ownership and community reaction. One council member said the structure is both a start-site marker that some residents value and, because children climb on it, a potential safety risk. That speaker urged the council to be prepared to answer questions if the county pursues removal or relocation and said, "there's going to be some blowback on that, so we need to be prepared as a council to answer for it." (Council member 2.)

No formal action on Resolution 2024-27 was recorded during the workshop beyond the discussion of support. The transcript indicates the council expressed general willingness to provide a letter of support but clarified the city has no ownership role and, according to the county engineer as described by council members, would not be asked to contribute funding.

The workshop closed with a motion to adjourn; the motion was approved by voice vote.