Rachel Lorang and Alexa Larson go over their results from their dog park survey they conducted.(Photo/Sarah Ebeling)

Sarah Ebeling | Managing Editor

The Hartford City Council met in regular session on Tuesday, March 3. 

With a full council at the meeting, after roll call and approving the agenda, minutes and claims, the group got right to public comments and other agenda items. 

During public comments Mayor Jeremy Menning explained to the group that he had met with a couple members of the Hartford Area Sports and Rec (HASR). After the last council meeting, HASR was asked to come back with more information for the council to compare in regards to their request for $40,000. Menning noted at their meeting, with himself and council member Arden Jones, they talked through some logistics and as of last week’s meeting, HASR had not been able to find a competing organization yet and they are still working on that. Menning noted that they would really like to have the contract before they bring it in front of the council to make sure it is the company or organization they feel good about moving forward with. He noted that they had another meeting scheduled to see how things were going. 

Next on the agenda was Deana Larson and Alexa Larson and Rachel Lorang, members of Girl Scout Troop #50087. The group updated the council on their findings about a possible dog park. 

Girl Scouts Alexa Larson and Lorang explained to the council that they had conducted a survey at Hartford’s Hometown Christmas to find out what Hartford residents thought about a potential dog park. They noted that 94 people completed the survey and the duo spoke about people’s thoughts on the park, location and questions that came up. 

Deana Larson asked the council what they thought about the results. 

Council member Scott Nelson asked about a dog owner who might be disabled or couldn’t walk their dog and what options they would be for them. Alexa Larson said that they had not discussed that but they could. 

Council member Mark Monahan asked about separating the dogs, big vs. small. 

Both Alexa Larson and Lorang spoke on why it is common in other dog parks to separate them. 

Monahan also asked about the city’s liability. Deana Larson noted it would fall under the city’s insurance. 

Jones asked about clean up and the group explained that it was up to the dog owners. 

Menning questioned the group, asking if they had a recommendation of size and a place for the park. Deana Larson told the group that they would like to see the engineers for a recommendation. 

Hartford resident Bev Skyberg-Taylor spoke, telling the group she didn’t do the survey and doesn’t have a problem with a dog park, but does have a concern on where they locate the park. She noted that she had spoken to Jesse Fonkert, Hartford Chamber and Economic Development Director.  Skyberg-Taylor noted that Fonkert indicated that a prime spot would be located right outside her front window. 

“There is a big tree there. You’re water supply is there,” she said. “I have a problem with the location and if you are going to consider your members of the community I think I should be heard about that.” 

She continued, “Because you are putting a fence 200 feet from my front window.” 

Skyberg-Taylor explained that she has two large dogs, both with medical issues, that would never use the park. But, if the park was located in front of her house, it would cause problems for her and her pets. 

She said she knows she is the only home on her road but if the council were to look at dog parks in Sioux Falls, they are not located near homes. 

“I am begging you,” said Skyberg-Taylor. 

Menning explained that they were not looking at a proposal at that time but that he appreciated Skyberg-Taylor’s input. 

Council member Scott Nelson told the group he would not endorse putting a dog park in an area where these sort of things could happen. 

Menning thanked and commended Larson and Lorang for their presentation. 

The council discussed the SD Department of Transportation bridge re-inspection program along with hearing reports from different city departments. 

The council also spent some time discussing the conversion of the current water meters to the new system. The current system the city has is becoming outdated and they are in the process of switching to a new, cellular system. However, come June, the old software system is going to be dropped, making the city need to become more aggressive at switching out the older meters. With over 1000 meters that need to be switched out, they city had planned on taking about five to six years to finish the conversion. But, as the software glitches are continuing, the city is having more problems and that their software support is ending. 

The city had budgeted about $55,000 for this year’s 200 meters. 

Monahan questioned knowing which meters go bad and if the city is able to tell. 

Public Works Superintendent Craig Wagner explained that once the batteries go dead, he can not read the meters anymore. 

After more discussion Monahan made the motion and the council approved ordering 500 more meters. 

Final discussion was held regarding possible ordinance changes. City Administrator Teresa Sidel went over a list of some of the issues that have come to light in the last year. From sidewalks to burning leaves and blowing grass into the city streets and many other issues, the council asked Sidel to look into some of the issues and bring it back to another meeting.