Trending
FAIRMONT-- On Monday the Fairmont City Council considered updated contracts with both the Fairmont Ag Society (Martin County Fair Board) and Fairmont Youth Hockey Association for continued use of the Martin County Arena.
While Council Member Britney Kawecki had originally asked for both items to be tabled, the requests received no second and they stayed on the agenda.
City Administrator Jason Baker provided some background on the contract with the fair board, which the city entered into in June of 2004. However in October of 2025, the council authorized issuance of the required six month termination notice so that a new contract could be done for the 2026-27 season.
Baker went through some details of the contract, which he called interim, which will be in place from Sept. 15, 2026 through Sept. 14, 2027 and will not automatically renew.
Per the one year agreement, the city will have exclusive use from Sept. 15, 2026 through April 15, 2027 and the Martin County Fair Board will have exclusive use from April 16, 2027 through Sept. 14, 2027.
The agreement also preserves the city's ownership and removal rights of the refrigeration equipment that was installed under the 2024 improvements agreement.
A notable portion of the contract, which the council discussed, addresses the structural steel repairs identified in past studies by both Wold and Braun. The city must pay 70 percent of the cost, which is expected to be about $85,000.
"Beginning in the 2027 budget, staff is also proposing to set aside $30,000 annually through 2031 for the city facility repair and maintenance obligations. This annual appropriations will total $150,000 over the five years and will redirect the $30,000 historically budgeted for the hockey association after their payment ends," Baker said.
Council Member Randy Lubenow asked Baker if he was aware that the hockey association said that if the contract wasn't approved at Monday's meeting, they would not be able to get into the facility as planned on Sept. 15 and Baker said no, he was not aware of that.
Lubenow also had some concerns regarding the structural steel repairs, which he said do not look bad to him. He questioned whether the rusty beams posed a hazard.
"I just don't believe that the city should be on the hook for the painting of the beams," Lubenow said.
Council Member Britney Kawecki said there were several things she had a problem with in the contract, one of which was the timing in which the contract was brought to the council, just one day before it is supposed to start.
"How do we agree to do a contract without any discussion. We've had zero discussion, starting with whether we even want a new contract, we as a council," Kawecki said.
She also had an issue with the steel beams, but said that a previous Wold study that was done identified far more problems than just the beams.
"What happens if the team manager is in a wheelchair and he can't get upstairs? Nobody cares about what," Kawecki said.
She also took issue with the cost that comes with the contract and thus the repairs for the facility.
"As a city, since 1985, we have given over $3 million to the hockey association," Kawecki said.
She felt like the council should have discussed what it wanted in the contract, rather than a ready-made contract coming to the council for approval.
"This is too much on the backs of the taxpayers. Too much," Kawecki said. "I believe this should be tabled because we haven't had a discussion on it."
However, Council Member Jay Maynard pointed out that the $3 million has been spent over 41 years. He also stressed that owning a building requires maintaining the building.
Maynard said he was in favor of approving both this contract and the one with the hockey association.
Kawecki made a motion to reject the one year contract with the Fairmont Ag Society (Martin County Fair Board). The motion received no second and failed.
Lubenow said he would approve the one year contract with the Fairmont Ag Society, but did not support keeping the steel beam repair as part of it until the beams can be looked at by a more qualified group. He made that into a motion.
"We need an engineer's report that says the beams will fail because of the rust, it's nothing cosmetic because at this point we don't know if it's cosmetic or what it is. I mean the fair board obviously isn't concerned about rust in their buildings because they're not doing anything about it," Lubenow said.
When asked, Baker said that the steel beams was a sticking point for the fair board.
"If we come back to them to table that portion but approve the rest, they might agree to it," said Baker.
Kawecki said she felt like it would be too hard to pull a portion out of the contract, which is why she wanted to table it.
"I fell like we're being pushed into a contract and we've never discussed other options," Kawecki said.
Council Member James Kotewa also admitted that he was not comfortable with all aspects of the contract.
"There's a lot of questions here. You have three distinct group with three different purposes... we have a lot of issues we need to address here," Kotewa said.
Kawecki asked what would happen if no contracts were approved and the city opted either group or another to lease it.
The city's attorney, David Assaf, said tabling the contract was a possibility.
"The expectation, should the city not wish to enter into an agreement with the fair board at this point, should be that the fair board and hockey association would have to evaluate use of the facility for the season this year," he said.
Baker asked Assaf what would happen if the council chooses not to enter into an agreement with either organization and whether the two could come up with their own use agreement, while the city still owns the facility
"Given the way the ownership structure has been described, I think the preferable outcome would be that both parties have some say... if the city doesn't have this agreement in place, I don't think that would affect the city's ownership interest in the facility," Assaf said.
After 45 minutes of discussion, Kotewa pointed out that Lubenow has a motion on the table. Kotewa seconded the motion.
Maynard had concerns that the fair board wouldn't approve the amended contract.
"Then they're the ones who say no to Fairmont hockey season," Lubenow said.
After additional discussion Baarts also expressed worry that something could be missed in the contract.
He asked Baker what it would take to get the fair board and hockey association together to look over the contract.
"I know hockey wants it approved and they want to start, but this is pretty important for everybody," Baarts said.
Kawecki called for the vote. In a roll call vote, Lubenow's motion passed 4-1 with Kawecki opposed.
*Editor's note: Another article about Monday's Fairmont City Council meeting, including the discussion about the contract with the Fairmnot Youth Hockey Association, will appear in Wednesday's Sentinel.