HomeMy WebLinkAbout2010_01_26 CC PKTCity Council Packet
January 26, 2010
Brookings City Council
Tuesday, January 26, 2010
City Hall Council Chambers
311 Third Avenue
5:30 p.m. – Work Session (NOTE START TIME)
6:00 p.m. – Regular Meeting
Mission Statement:
The City of Brookings is committed to providing a high quality of life for its citizens and fostering a diverse economic base through
innovative thinking, strategic planning, and proactive, fiscally responsible municipal management.
5:30 P.M. WORK SESSION
** Work sessions are open to the public. During the work session the city staff would brief the council on items for that
particular meeting, introduce future topics, and provide a time for Council members to introduce topics.
1. Analysis of the 25/75 second penny issue.
2. City Council Member Ex-Officio Reports.
3. City Council member introduction of topics for future discussion. *
4. Council Invites & Obligations.
*Any Council member may request discussion of any issue at a future meeting only. Items can not be added for
action at this meeting. A motion and second is required starting the issue, requested outcome, and time. A
majority vote is required.
6:00 P.M. REGULAR MEETING
1. Call to order.
2. Pledge of Allegiance.
3. Record of Council attendance.
4. Action to approve the following Consent Agenda Items *
A. Action to approve the agenda.
B. Approval of minutes.
C. Action on Resolution No. 08-10, a Resolution Dissolving Tax Increment District
Number Two of the City of Brookings, South Dakota.
D. Action to authorize the Mayor to sign documents regarding the R&T Center Grant
Amendment.
E. Action on appointments to the Brookings Health System Board of Trustees.
F. Action on Resolution No. 09-10, awarding the contract for the bids for the Bike
Trail Project.
G. Action on Resolution No. 10-10, a Resolution Directing Preparation of Assessment
Roll, Dividing Assessments Into Installments, and Providing for the Collection
Thereof for Sidewalk Assessment Project 2009-01SWR (2009 Sidewalk Repairs)
Motion to approve, request public comment, roll call
* Matters appearing on the Consent Agenda are expected to be non-controversial and will be acted upon by the Council at one time,
without discussion, unless a member of the Council or City Manager requests an opportunity to address any given item. Items removed
from the Consent Agenda will be discussed at the beginning of the formal items. Approval by the Council of the Consent Agenda items
means that the recommendation of the City Manager is approved along with the terms and conditions described in the agenda supporting
documentation.
Presentations, Special Requests/Invites & Reports
5. Presentation of the Annual Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Day Awards.
6. Open Forum.
1
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
7. SDSU Student Senate Report.
Informational
Contract Awards/Change Orders
8. Action on Resolution No. 11-10, A Resolution Authorizing Change Order No. 2 Final
(CCO#2 Final) for 2008-03STI Downtown Streetscape Project, (Paving Contract),
Bowes Construction Company, Inc.
City Manager Introduction
Motion to approve, Request Public Comment, Roll Call
Ordinance First Readings
9. Ordinance No. 01-10: An Ordinance Amending Article I. of Chapter 6 of the Code of
Ordinances of the City of Brookings and Pertaining to the Sale of Alcoholic Beverages
on Sunday by the Off-Sale Licensee in the City of Brookings.
Public Hearing: February 9th
** No vote is taken on the first reading of ordinances. The title of the ordinance is read and the date
for the public hearing is announced.
Alcohol Licenses
10. Action on Resolution No. 12-10, a Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to sign an
On/Off Sale Wine Operating Agreement for the Brookings Municipal Liquor Store.
City Manager Introduction
Motion to approve, Request Public Comment, Roll Call
Second Readings/Public Hearings
11. Public Hearing and Action on Resolution No. 13-10, a Resolution Levying Assessment
for Street Assessment Project 2008-02STA (15th Street South, Christine Avenue &
Camelot Drive Utility, Grading and Curb & Gutter Project).
City Manager Introduction
Open & Close Public Hearing
Motion to approve – Roll Call
12. Public Hearing and Action on Resolution No. 14-10, a Resolution Levying Assessment
for Street Assessment Project 2009-02STA (15th Street South, Christine Avenue &
Camelot Drive Paving Project).
City Manager Introduction
Open & Close Public Hearing
Motion to approve – Roll Call
Other Business
13. Swiftel Center Public Education Discussion.
14. Adjourn.
Brookings City Council
Tim Reed, Mayor
Mike Bartley, Deputy Mayor & Council Member
Tom Bezdichek, Council Member
John Kubal, Council Member
Mike McClemans, Council Member
Jael Thorpe, Council Member
Julie Whaley, Council Member
Council Staff:
Jeffrey W. Weldon, City Manager
2
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
Steven Britzman, City Attorney
Shari Thornes, City Clerk
View the City Council Meeting Live on the City Government Access Channel 9.
Rebroadcast Schedule: Wednesday @ 1pm, Thursday @ 7 pm, Friday @ 9 pm, and Saturday @ 1 pm.
The complete City Council agenda packet is available on the city website: www.cityofbrookings.org
If you require assistance, alternative formats, and/or accessible locations consistent with the Americans with Disabilities Act, please contact
Shari Thornes, City ADA Coordinator, at 692-6281 at least 3 working days prior to the meeting.
3
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
5:30 P.M. WORK SESSION
** Work sessions are open to the public. During the work session the city staff would brief the council on items for that
particular meeting, introduce future topics, and provide a time for Council members to introduce topics.
1. Analysis of the 25/75 second penny issue.
By previous Council action, you wanted to have a policy discussion about the City of
Brookings use of second penny sales and use tax revenue as it pertains to types of
expenditures. Our second penny has historically been used for capital expenditures and
securing financing for large, capital projects. State statute once required cities enacting
the second penny authority to use it exclusively for capital projects. That statute has
been amended to repeal this and now allows us to use it for operating expenses just as
the first penny. However, cities can designate the use of the second penny as they
deem appropriate and Brookings has, so far, dedicated the second penny to capital uses.
In addition to exclusive capital use, by policy we have further divided the second penny
designating 25 percent for public safety, leases, land acquisition, and debt retirement
related thereto. The remaining 75 percent can also be used for land acquisition,
infrastructure investments, and any debt retirement related thereto. Attached is
authorizing documentation which describes this policy.
The purpose for revisiting this policy is to consider whether or not the 25/75 division is
too strict and should it be re-adjusted to some other split amount, re-defined, or
eliminated completely to give us maximum budgetary flexibility to address needs that
change from year to year.
Having examined the proposed expenditures and timeline for Capital Improvement Plan
items that would be financed with 25 percent second penny, it is clear there will not be
sufficient revenue to sustain the financing for the items identified. We have revised the
CIP so most items in the 25 percent revenue stream will need to be financed as
“essential” instead of “discretionary”. The standard definition of 75 percent second
penny funding has been for “public improvement” and generally contains more items
that could be considered “discretionary.” Obviously, this gets to the inherent
differences in prioritizing any of the expenditures.
Elimination of the distinction of 25/75, and opting for having all second penny revenue
designated for capital improvements, land acquisition, or debt related thereto, allows for
more flexibility to meet our changing needs and allows us to better appropriate funds
for adjusting priorities. In other words, eliminating this budgetary constraint allows us
to better align our revenue stream with prioritized expenditures regardless of what type
of expenditure it is.
Of course, the council has the final authority in determining what expenditures to
consider as part of the annual review of the Capital Improvement Plan.
Estimated Time: 25 minutes
4
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
City of Brookings
Ends Policy 1, Financial Stability
Establishing what is to be done, for whom, at what cost, and Executive Limitations to define
unacceptable means.
Financial Stability – Key Performance Area
Financial stability is considered a key performance area by the Brookings City Council, and
appears in the Mission Statement as “fiscally responsible municipal management.”
One of the duties of the City Manager is the development of a process that keeps the Council
aware of upcoming budgetary needs and requests, so that the Council may aid in the creation
of ongoing budget priorities. Good stewardship requires the Council to discern what is in the
best interests of the citizens, and budget accordingly.
Therefore, budgeting for any fiscal period or the remaining part of any fiscal period shall not
deviate materially from Council Policies as established in key performance areas, or other City
Council policies. The City Manager is therefore prohibited from budgeting or spending that:
1. Lowers the City’s bond rating;
2. Violates Federal, State, or Municipal laws; ethical standards; and generally accepted
accounting and budgeting principles.
In addition, the City Manager may not bypass Council judgment to allow budgeting that:
1. Allows expenditures to exceed revenues, including the contingency as an expenditure;
2. Increases the property tax rate;
3. Includes capital expenditures that have not been previously approved by the Council; in
a Capital Improvement Plan or other council action;
4. Causes the City to incur new debt;
5. Increases operating expenses (meaning personnel and capital excluded) in any
department beyond inflation using at least a rolling six month average of the Midwest
Consumer Price Index;
6. Provides for employee compensation and benefits that exceed market standards;
Guideline A:
With respect to budget preparations, the City Manager shall stay within the confines of what
constitutes a conservative perspective, as it is the Council’s intention to:
1. Make conservative revenue projections using the previous five-year average as a
benchmark, with an emphasis on the previous year actual and current year actual.
Projections using current data should not be made with less than 6 months rolling actual
data.
2. Provide valuable citizen services;
3. Lighten the debt load of the City;
4. If a property tax rate is justified only because of state limitations, a special reserve will
be created.
5. The City has established the policy that financial, service and program performance
measures be developed and used as an important component of decision making and
6
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
incorporated into governmental budgeting. The City encourages all departments to
utilize performance measures. At a minimum, performance measures should be used to
report on the outputs of each program and should be related to the objectives of each
department. Performance measures should:
a. Be based on program objectives that tie to the City Council’s goals and
program mission or purpose;
b. Measure program results or accomplishments;
c. Provide for comparisons over time;
d. Measure efficiency and effectiveness;
e. Be reliable, verifiable and understandable;
f. Be reported internally and externally;
g. Be monitored and used in decision-making processes; and
h. Be limited to a number and degree of complexity that can provide an
efficient and meaningful way to assess the effectiveness and efficiency of
key programs.
Guideline B:
In addition, as the City Manager assumes his duties, the Council requests that the City Manager
keep information flowing to the Council, especially concerning plans relating to consolidation or
expansion of any City departments. Therefore, the City Manager may not consolidate or
expand any City Department without first informing the Council of the intended action.
Guideline C:
With respect to reserve funds the City Manager’s overall budgetary goal will be to present a
budget that allows for reasonable reserve creating options for the Council. The City Manager
may not bypass Council judgment to allow budgeting that:
1. Lowers the General Fund Reserve below a 3-month operational level:
a. The 3-month calculation shall be based upon General Fund expenditures, derived from
the previous year’s Audited Financial Statement. The reserve amount shall reflect the
targeted reserve amount, deficiencies below the targeted reserve amount and any
discretionary funds available above the targeted reserve amount.
b. General Fund reserves may be used at the Council’s discretion to address temporary
cash-flow shortages, emergencies unanticipated economic downturns, one-time
opportunities and capital needs related to buildings, structures and vehicles used
specifically in the operation of the General Fund. They provide flexibility to respond to
unexpected opportunities that may help the City achieve its goals.
The funds identified in “b” above may be used at the Council’s discretion to address
temporary cash flow shortages, emergencies, unanticipated economic downturns, and one-
time opportunities. They provide flexibility to respond to unexpected opportunities that
may help the City achieve its goals.
2. Lowers the following funds below the following:
a. The Industrial Development fund – a cash flow reserve of 10% and a capital reserve of
90% funded with revenue from the sale of industrial lands with a minimum of $500,000
in capital reserve.
7
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
b. The Special Assessment fund – a reserve based on an annual analysis of current
development and future needs.
c. The Storm Drainage fund - a cash flow reserve of 20% of annual revenues and a capital
reserve based on the capital improvement plan with a minimum of 80% of annual
revenues from the previous year.
Council options for further reserves include:
a. Transfer to increase the reserve of another fund that is not at the established
target;
b. To finance un-funded necessities of the previous year’s budget reductions;
c. To pay off debt with a portion of the reserve;
d. To finance the expansion of City services;
e. To offer property tax, or other tax relief.
Guideline D:
The use of one-time revenues will be guided by this policy. Examples of one-time revenues
include: infrequent sales of assets, bond refunding savings, infrequent revenues from
development, and grants. These revenues may be available for more than one year (a three-year
grant), but are expected to be non-recurring. Examples of expenditures for which the City may
wish to use one-time revenues include startup costs, stabilization (to cover expenditures that
temporarily exceed revenues), early debt retirement, and capital purchases.
The City Manager will not bypass Council judgment in making use of one-time revenue. In
utilizing one-time revenue, the City Manager will carefully analyze and minimize the need for
ongoing expenditures.
Guideline E:
Capital expenditures will be planned each year in a five-year capital improvement plan. The
annual budget will provide a separate accounting of capital expenditures in each department.
The city manager should plan major projects with an estimated expenditure and with sources of
funding identified. The general fund expenditures for furniture, equipment, and buildings is
expected to fluctuate, but an average of 10% of the total general fund expenditures is expected,
this includes the amount funded by the 25% 2nd Penny funds.
Guideline F:
Upon the City Council’s adoption of an annual budget and five year capital plan that is
presented in accordance with Guidelines A through E, the City Manager assumes responsibility
for ensuring compliance with the budget as an established City Council Policy. This includes
expenditure control, and program and service delivery within that budget.
Minor deviations are tolerable and encouraged to maintain cost control and deliver quality
services. Examples of minor deviations are variances of purchases and costs between line items
in a budget, changes in programs and services resulting in cost savings or without cost, the use
of grants that do not cause future costs, and the purchases of minor equipment. This list is not
exhaustive.
8
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
Major deviations require notification and sometimes-prior approval by the City Council.
Examples of major deviations include the use of the contingency fund, program eliminations or
additions, the use of cash instead of debt when debt was planned, changes in the capital
improvement plan, and change orders in capital projects. This list is not exhaustive.
To facilitate a budget that can respond to changing needs, the City Council will approve a
contingency fund for the City Manager to utilize at his/her discretion. Examples of uses for the
City Manager’s contingency fund include: unbudgeted training opportunities for staff; purchases
of software, hardware, and small equipment that was unbudgeted; one-time expenditures to fill
a major position vacancy; one-time expenditures requested by outside entities; and
emergencies in general. The Manager would be expected to make an effort to avoid utilizing
the contingency.
The City Manager will report compliance or deviations from this Guideline for Financial Stability
on a quarterly basis.
Guideline G:
Budgets for Enterprise Funds will be prepared by the City Manager with a goal of providing
quality services and sustaining a maximum return to the General Fund on a long-term basis. A
return on assets (ROA) will be calculated on an annual basis.
9
500,0001,000,0001,500,0002,000,0002,500,00025% 2nd Penny Cash FlowCapital PurchasesAnnual Revenue & CashCash Balance(FiTkAiii‐500,0000500,0001,000,0001,500,0002,000,0002,500,0002009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 201625% 2nd Penny Cash FlowCapital PurchasesAnnual Revenue & CashCash Balance(Fire Truck AcquisitionScheduled ‐2010,11,13,15)
Second Penny25% Second Penny Projections3% projectedAssuming an annual increase of 3.0%Growth0.02 InterestYear20092010201120122013201420152016ExpendituresDebt ServiceLease Payment Golf Carts/Park22,300 22,300 22,300 22,300 22,300 25,000 25,000 25,000 Lease Payment/Motor Graders37,419 37,419 37,419 37,419 53,086 Lease Payment/Fire Trucks-Prin117,858 122,914 128,187 133,686 139,421 145,402 151,640 Lease Payment/Fire Trucks-Int40,287 35,231 29,958 24,459 18,724 12,743 6,505 Total Annual Debt Service217,864 217,864 217,864217,864233,531183,145183,14525,000Cash ProjectsStreet Sealing192,000 205,000 220,000 235,500 250,000265,000280,000295,000Street Dept-Vehicles/Equip212,000 323,000 225,500 92,086 375,000 388,125 250,000 E-911226,843 190,000 210,000 217,350 224,957 232,831 240,980 249,414 Law Enforcement Vehicles/Equip78,896 85,110 140,100 124,200 80,700 92,000 100,000 120,000 Fire Department Vehicles/Equip75,000 425,000 585,000 418,000 693,000 500,000 Fire Department Facilities37,200 41,000 Forestry-Facilities & Parks271,528 50,000 Edgebrook57,462 60,513 60,513 60,513 25,000 Total Cash Projects1,093,467 905,110 1,629,613 1,281,063 1,401,256989,831 1,509,105914,414Total Annual Expenditures1,311,331 1,122,974 1,847,477 1,498,927 1,634,787 1,172,976 1,692,250939,414RevenuesPayments for late delivery15,180 Interest Income10,000 10,750 11,556 12,423 13,355 14,356 15,433 16,590 25% Sales Tax Revenue1,193,750 1,200,000 1,236,000 1,273,080 1,311,272 1,350,611 1,391,129 1,432,863 Total Annual Revenues1,218,930 1,210,750 1,247,556 1,285,503 1,324,627 1,364,967 1,406,562 1,449,453Annual Net-92,40187,776 -599,920-213,424-310,160191,991-285,688510,039Ending Cash Balance864,331 952,107 352,187138,763-171,39720,594-265,094244,945Restricted Cash Balance Cashflow151,916 151,916 151,916151,916151,916151,916151,916151,916,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,2ndPenny 25% Projects Nov 09.xlsx
$15,000,000.00 $20,000,000.00 $25,000,000.00 Axis Title75% Public Improvement‐Present Obligations‐Nov 09Cash BalanceAnnual ExpendituresAnnualRevenue$‐$5,000,000.00 $10,000,000.00 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021Annual Revenue
Second Penny Assuming an annual revenue increase of 1.03Year 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021ExpendituresDebt Service2003 Swiftel/Library Principle 790,000 810,000 840,000 870,000 900,000 2003 Swiftel/Library Interest143,840 118,560 91,830 62,850 32,400 2001 Ice Arena/PAC Principal**-2021285,000 300,000 310,000 325,000 340,000 585,000 755,000 790,000 835,000 875,000 920,000 970,000 1,015,000 2001 Ice Arena/PAC* Interest410,656 398,401 385,201 371,251 356,301 340,321 312,241 275,624 236,519 193,725 148,881 101,731 52,019 2005 Retail/Principal295,000 305,000 315,000 325,000 340,000 355,000 365,000 2005 Retail/Interest82,011 71,673 60,718 49,248 37,160 24,400 10,725 2006 Aquatic Pool/Principal308,000 308,000 308,000 2006 Aquatic Pool/Interest46,200 30,800 15,400 2009 Larson Advance/LIC Exterior150,000 2009 Larson Advance/LIC Exterior4,050 4,050 4,050 2009 Innovation Campus Loan/Principal44,134 45,473 46,853 48,274 49,739 51,248 52,803 54,405 56,055 57,756 2009 Innovation Campus Loan/Interest 78,838 35,207 33,868 32,488 31,067 29,602 28,093 26,538 24,937 23,285 21,585 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200 Total Annual Debt Service2,361,907 2,347,684 2,410,237 2,237,940 2,086,402 1,385,262 1,523,507 1,146,165 1,152,060 1,149,266 1,149,423 1,152,271 1,147,560Cash ProjectsRailroad Switch15,191 Boys & Girls Club100,000 100,000 Swiftel CIP117,623 350,000 483,000 152,000 105,000 103,500 Critical Need-Forestry Aerial Truck135,000 Bike Trail Improvement Project- 101,000 SDSU Research Park150,000 150,000 SDSU Wellness Center500,000 Nature Park50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 Larson holding barn concrete floor & turf125,000 Automation irrigation system/Edgebrook170,000 Airport Expansion294,880 500,000 S Main Ave sewer line extension500,000 Spl Assmnt-Street-15th St S/7th Ave S870,000 Street Improvements516,000 420,000 400,000 300,000 150,000Street Development700,000 500,000 1,650,000 0 2,500,000 SDSU Innovation Campus694,000 Animal Control/Humane Society Bldg100,000 100,000 Bob Shelden baseball field upgrade200,000 Adult baseball fields (2) Southbrook175,000 Mickelson Middle School baseball lighting190,000 Railroad Traffic Signals1,350,000 Fire Station550,000 Aquatic Center/Lazy River2,000,000 City/School Partnership Park-Land200,000 R & T Center-Chip seal parking lot7,000 Total Cash Projects1,017,814 3,750,880 3,130,000 2,717,000 1,805,000 2,803,500 2,700,000 0 0 0000Total Annual Expenditures3,379,721 6,098,564 5,540,237 4,954,9403,891,402 4,188,762 4,223,507 1,146,165 1,152,060 1,149,266 1,149,423 1,152,271 1,147,560Revenues75% Sales Tax Revenue3,506,250 3,611,438 3,719,781 3,831,374 3,946,315 4,064,705 4,186,646 4,312,245 4,441,613 4,574,861 4,712,107 4,853,470 4,999,074Donations46,200 36,200 20,800 11/12/2009Public Improvement Planning Tool Page 1
Second Penny Assuming an annual revenue increase of 1.03Year 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021Interest82,570 54,525 55,532 56,942 58,325 60,070 61,872 63,728 65,640 67,609 69,637 71,726 73,878Total Annual Revenues3,635,020 3,702,163 3,796,113 3,888,316 4,004,640 4,124,774 4,248,517 4,375,973 4,507,252 4,642,470 4,781,744 4,925,196 5,072,952Annual Net255,299 -2,396,401 -1,744,123 -1,066,624 113,238 -63,988 25,010 3,229,808 3,355,192 3,493,204 3,632,321 3,772,925 3,925,3920.1Ending Balance5,759,990 3,363,589 1,619,466 552,842 666,080 602,092 627,103 3,856,911 7,212,103 10,705,307 14,337,628 18,110,552 22,035,945Minimum Bal 10% cash flow339,923 339,923 339,923 339,923 339,923 339,923 339,923 339,923 339,923 339,923 339,923 339,923 339,923Restricted Cash Debt2,174,923 2,174,923 2,174,923 2,174,923 1,401,423 1,401,423 1,401,423 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000Available Cash3,245,144 848,743 -895,380 -1,962,004 -1,075,266 -1,139,254 -1,114,243 2,516,988 5,872,180 9,365,384 12,997,705 16,770,629 20,696,022*Estimated figures11/12/2009Public Improvement Planning Tool Page 2
05,000,00010,000,00015,000,00020,000,00075% Proposed Public Improvement Cash FlowAnnual ExpendituresAnnual RevenuesCash‐10,000,000‐5,000,00005,000,00010,000,00015,000,00020,000,0002008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 202175% Proposed Public Improvement Cash FlowAnnual ExpendituresAnnual RevenuesCash(Chart Includes SDSU Request)
Assuming an annual revenue increase of 1.03Year 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021ExpendituresDebt Service2003 Swiftel/Library Principle 765,000 790,000 810,000 840,000 870,000 900,000 2003 Swiftel/Library Interest168,320 143,840 118,560 91,830 62,850 32,400 2001 Ice Arena/PAC Principal**-2021275,000 285,000 300,000 310,000 325,000 340,000 585,000 755,000 790,000 835,000 875,000 920,000 970,000 1,015,000 2001 Ice Arena/PAC* Interest422,206 410,656 398,401 385,201 371,251 340,321 312,241 275,624 236,519 193,725 148,881 101,731 52,019 2005 Retail/Principal290,000 295,000 305,000 315,000 325,000 340,000 355,000 365,000 2005 Retail/Interest91,908 82,011 71,673 60,718 49,248 37,160 24,400 10,725 2006 Aquatic Pool/Principal308,000 308,000 308,000 308,000 2006 Aquatic Pool/Interest61,600 46,200 30,800 15,400 2009 Larson Advance/LIC Exterior150,000 2009 Larson Advance/LIC Exterior4,050 4,050 4,050 2009 Innovation Campus SRF Loan/Principal44,134 45,473 46,853 48,274 49,739 51,248 52,803 54,405 56,055 57,756 2009 Innovation Campus Loan/SRF Interest78,838 35,207 33,868 32,488 31,067 29,602 28,093 26,538 24,937 23,285 21,585 2009 Innovation Campus Loan/GF Principal105,213 107,868 110,590 113,381 116,242 119,175 122,183 125,266 128,427 131,668 134,991 2009 Innovation Campus Loan/GF Interest66,369 63,714 60,992 58,201 55,340 52,406 49,399 46,315 43,154 39,913 36,591 *Swiftel Expansion Principal 209,112 219,810 231,056 242,878 255,304 268,365 282,096 296,528 *Swiftel Expansion Interest 351,058 340,359 329,113 317,293 304,866 291,804 278,074 263,642 *City Hall Principal 133,297 138,727 144,379 150,262 156,384 162,755 169,386 176,287 183,469 *City Hall Interest 160,009 154,578 148,926 143,044 136,922 130,550 123,920 117,019 109,836 *Airport Expansion Principal 1,807,490 1,898,994 1,995,131 2,096,134 2,202,251 *Airport Expansion Interest 477,685 386,181 290,045 189,041 82,924 *SDSU Performing Arts Center Add'n 352,503 370,537 389,495 409,422 430,369 452,387 475,532 499,862 525,435 *SDSU Performing Arts Center Add'n603,710 585,676 566,718 546,791 525,844 503,826 480,681 456,352 430,778 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200 Total Annual Debt Service2,383,234 2,361,907 2,347,684 2,581,819 2,409,522 3,151,202 5,651,707 5,789,951 5,412,610 5,418,507 5,415,710 3,130,692 3,133,542 3,128,830*Swiftel Center $8.5M/Library $2.8MCash ProjectsRailroad Switch15,191 Boys & Girls Club100,000 100,000 100,000 Swiftel CIP225,000 117,623 350,000 483,000 152,000 105,000 103,500 Critical Need-Forestry Aerial Truck135,000 Bike Trail Improvement Project- 101,000 SDSU Research Park150,000 150,000 150,000 SDSU Wellness Center500,000 Nature Park50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 Larson holding barn concrete floor & turf125,000 Automation irrigation system/Edgebrook170,000 Airport Expansion294,880 500,000 S Main Ave sewer line extension500,000 Spl Assmnt-Street-15th St S/7th Ave S870,000 Street Improvements516,000 420,000 400,000 300,000 150,000Public Improvement Planning Tool with SDSU Proposals
Assuming an annual revenue increase of 1.03Year 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021ExpendituresStreet Development700,000 500,000 1,650,000 0 2,500,000 SDSU Innovation Campus694,000 Animal Control/Humane Society Bldg100,000 100,000 Bob Shelden baseball field upgrade200,000 Adult baseball fields (2) Southbrook175,000 Mickelson Middle School baseball lighting190,000 Railroad Traffic Signals150,000 1,350,000 Fire Station550,000 City/School Partnership Park-Land 200,000 R & T Center-Chip seal parking lot7,000 Aquatic Center/Lazy River2,000,000 City/School Partnership Park-Land 200,000 SDSU McCory Gardens1,000,000 SDSU Performing Arts Addition11,800,000 Total Cash Projects2,114,560 1,017,814 3,750,880 3,130,000 15,517,000 1,805,000 2,803,500 2,900,000000000Total Annual Expenditures4,497,794 3,379,721 6,098,564 5,711,819 17,926,522 4,956,202 8,455,207 8,689,951 5,412,610 5,418,507 5,415,710 3,130,692 3,133,542 3,128,830Revenues75% Sales Tax Revenue3,773,029 3,506,250 3,611,438 3,719,781 3,831,374 3,946,315 4,064,705 4,186,646 4,312,245 4,441,613 4,574,861 4,712,107 4,853,470 4,999,074DtiDonations61,600 46,200 36,200 20,800 Interest131,590 82,570 86,400 51,188 22,634Interfund Loan Repayment17,097 16,413 15,712 14,993 14,256 13,50012,726 11,931 11,117 10,282 9,426 8,549Total Annual Revenues3,966,219 3,635,020 3,751,134 3,808,182 3,869,720 3,961,308 4,078,961 4,200,146 4,324,971 4,453,544 4,585,978 4,722,389 4,862,896 5,007,623Revenue Bond Proceeds12,800,000*Tax Increment Revenue/TIF 1 FAA Grant Match4,000,000 6,000,000Total Debt Proceeds 0 000 12,800,000 4,000,000 6,000,0000000000Total Revenues3,966,219 3,635,020 3,751,134 3,808,182 16,669,720 7,961,308 10,078,961 4,200,146 4,324,971 4,453,544 4,585,978 4,722,389 4,862,896 5,007,623Annual Net-531,575 255,299 -2,347,429 -1,903,636 -1,256,802 3,005,106 1,623,753 -4,489,805 -1,087,639 -964,963 -829,732 1,591,697 1,729,354 1,878,7930.1Ending Balance5,504,691 5,759,990 3,412,561 1,508,925 252,123 3,257,229 4,880,983 391,177 -696,461 -1,661,424 -2,491,156 -899,460 829,894 2,708,687Minimum Bal 10% cash flow339,923 0000000000000Restricted Cash Debt2,192,673 2,174,923 2,174,923 2,174,923 3,454,923 3,454,923 2,677,573 2,677,573 2,677,573 2,677,573 2,677,573 2,677,573 2,677,573 2,677,573Available Cash2,972,095 3,585,067 1,237,638 -665,998 -3,202,800 -197,694 2,203,410 -2,286,396 -3,374,034 -4,338,997 -5,168,729 -3,577,033 -1,847,679 31,114*Estimated figuresPublic Improvement Planning Tool with SDSU Proposals
$
DEBT WORKSHEET 2009
Brookings Debt Limit 42,750,224.00$
Debt Outstanding
Description of Bonds Outstanding Principal Outstanding Interest Total Outstanding
-$ -$
Sales Tax Bonds -$ -$ 15,134,504.00$
2001 Sales Tax 8,305,000.00$ 205,328.00$ 8,510,328.00$
2003 Sales Tax 4,210,000.00$ 71,920.00$ 4,281,920.00$
2005 Sales Tax 2,300,000.00$ 42,256.00$ 2,342,256.00$
-$ -$ -$
Storm Drainage -$ 2,000,000.00$
SRF Loan (Total proposed $8M)2,000,000.00$ -$ 2,000,000.00$
-$ -$ -$
Tax Incremental Bonds -$ -$ 5,359,000.00$
TIF #3/Valley View Add'n 1,035,000.00$ -$ 1,035,000.00$
TIF #4/Sieler Add'n 440,000.00$ -$ 440,000.00$
TIF#1/SDSU Innovation Campus 3,884,000.00$ -$ 3,884,000.00$
Other Indebtedness -$ 766,000.00$
Acquatic Center 616,000.00$ -$ 616,000.00$
Larson Ice Center 150,000.00$ 150,000.00$
TOTAL CONSTITUTIONAL DEBTTOTAL CONSTITUTIONAL DEBT 23 259 504 00$23,259,504.00
Remaining Debt Limit 19,490,720.00$
Proposed Bond Issue 41,800,000.00$
Storm Drainage 6,000,000.00$
Airport 12,000,000.00$
City Hall 5,000,000.00$
Swiftel Center Expansion 7,000,000.00$
SDSU Performing Arts Expansion/McCory Gardens 11,800,000.00$
Over Debt Limit ($22,309,280.00)
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
5:30 P.M. WORK SESSION
** Work sessions are open to the public. During the work session the city staff would brief the council on items for that
particular meeting, introduce future topics, and provide a time for Council members to introduce topics.
2. City Council Member Ex-Officio Reports.
Pursuant to council direction, “City Council Member Ex-Officio Reports” will be a
standing agenda item at all Council Work Sessions. The Council Members that serve as
Ex-Officio members on the Brookings Health System Board and Utility Board will
provide verbal reports regarding recent meetings they have attended.
Utility Board: Council Members Bezdichek and Kubal
Health Systems Board: Council Members Whaley and Thorpe
19
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
5:30 P.M. WORK SESSION
** Work sessions are open to the public. During the work session the city staff would brief the council on items for that
particular meeting, introduce future topics, and provide a time for Council members to introduce topics.
3. City Council member introduction of topics for future
discussion. *
*Any Council member may request discussion of any issue at a future meeting only.
Items cannot be added for action at this meeting. A motion and second is required
starting the issue, requested outcome, and time. A majority vote is required.
20
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
5:30 P.M. WORK SESSION
** Work sessions are open to the public. During the work session the city staff would brief the council on items for that
particular meeting, introduce future topics, and provide a time for Council members to introduce topics.
4. Council Invites & Obligations.
DATE DAY
EVENT &
BRIEF
DESCRIPTION
TIME
LOCATION
TOWN
ADDRESS
DIRECTIONS
January 26th Tuesday Council Meeting 5 & 6 p.m. Council Chambers
February 2nd
Tuesday
Rib Dinner with
your Legislators
5:00
Legislative
Briefing
6:00 Dinner
Kings Inn Convention
Center
February 3rd
Wednesday
Municipal
Government Day at
the Legislature
February 17th Wednesday
City Council
Strategic Goal
Setting
5 to 7 pm Swiftel Center
February 18th Thursday
City Council
Strategic Goal
Setting
8:30 am to
4:30 pm Swiftel Center
February 18th
Thursday
Business Day at the
Legislature (SD
Chamber of
Commerce &
Industry)
March 13-17th
Sunday –
Wednesday
NLC –
Congressional City
Conference
Washington, DC
March 31-
April 1st
Wednesday
– Thursday
Annual SD Airports
Conference
Deadwood Gulch
Gaming Resort
Deadwood, SD
Sept. 23-25
Thursday –
Saturday
NLC 18th Annual
Leadership Summit
“Leading the
Charge in Local
Government”
Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania
November 29
– December 4
Monday –
Saturday
NLC-Congress of
Cities
Denver, CO
21
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
6:00 P.M. REGULAR MEETING
1. Call to order.
2. Pledge of Allegiance.
3. Record of Council attendance.
4. Action to approve the following Consent Agenda Items *
A. Action to approve the agenda.
B. Approval of minutes.
C. Action on Resolution No. 08-10, a Resolution Dissolving Tax Increment District Number
Two of the City of Brookings, South Dakota.
D. Action to authorize the Mayor to sign documents regarding the R&T Center Grant
Amendment.
E. Action on appointments to the Brookings Health System Board of Trustees.
F. Action on Resolution No. 09-10, awarding contract for the bids for the Bike Trail Project.
G. Action on Resolution No. 10-10, a Resolution Directing Preparation of Assessment Roll,
Dividing Assessments Into Installments, and Providing for the Collection Thereof for
Sidewalk Assessment Project 2009-01SWR (2009 Sidewalk Repairs)
Motion to approve, request public comment, roll call
Presentations, Special Requests/Invites & Reports
5. Presentation of the Annual Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Day Awards.
6. Open Forum.
7. SDSU Student Senate Report.
Contract Awards/Change Orders
8. Action on Resolution No. 11-10, A Resolution Authorizing Change Order No. 2 Final (CCO#2
Final) for 2008-03STI Downtown Streetscape Project, (Paving Contract), Bowes Construction
Company, Inc.
City Manager Introduction, Motion to approve, Request Public Comment, Roll Call
Ordinance First Readings
9. Ordinance No. 01-10: An Ordinance Amending Article I. of Chapter 6 of the Code of
Ordinances of the City of Brookings and Pertaining to the Sale of Alcoholic Beverages on
Sunday by the Off-Sale Licensee in the City of Brookings. Public Hearing: February 9th
Alcohol Licenses
10. Action on Resolution No. 12-10, a Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to sign an On/Off
Sale Wine Operating Agreement for the Brookings Municipal Liquor Store.
City Manager Introduction, Motion to approve, Request Public Comment, Roll Call
Second Readings/Public Hearings
11. Public Hearing and Action on Resolution No. 13-10, a Resolution Levying Assessment for Street
Assessment Project 2008-02STA (15th Street South, Christine Avenue & Camelot Drive Utility,
Grading and Curb & Gutter Project).
City Manager Introduction, Open & Close Public Hearing, Motion to approve – Roll Call
12. Public Hearing and Action on Resolution No. 14-10, a Resolution Levying Assessment for Street
Assessment Project 2009-02STA (15th Street South, Christine Avenue & Camelot Drive Paving
Project).
City Manager Introduction, Open & Close Public Hearing, Motion to approve – Roll Call
Other Business
13. Swiftel Center Public Education Discussion.
14. Adjourn.
22
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
CONSENT AGENDA #4
4. Action to approve the following Consent Agenda Items *
A. Action to approve the agenda.
B. Approval of minutes.
C. Action on Resolution No. 08-10, a Resolution Dissolving Tax
Increment District Number Two of the City of Brookings,
South Dakota.
D. Action to authorize the Mayor to sign documents regarding
the R&T Center Grant Amendment.
E. Action on appointments to the Brookings Health System
Board of Trustees.
F. Action on Resolution No. 09-10, awarding contract for the bids
for the Bike Trail Project.
G. Action on Resolution No. 10-10, a Resolution Directing
Preparation of Assessment Roll, Dividing Assessments Into
Installments, and Providing for the Collection Thereof for
Sidewalk Assessment Project 2009-01SWR (2009 Sidewalk
Repairs)
*Matters appearing on the Consent Agenda are expected to be non-controversial and will be acted upon by the Council at
one time, without discussion, unless a member of the Council or City Manager requests an opportunity to address any given
item. Items removed from the Consent Agenda will be discussed at the beginning of the formal items. Approval by the
Council of the Consent Agenda items means that the recommendation of the City Manager is approved along with the terms
and conditions described in the agenda supporting documentation.
Action: Motion to Approve, Request Public Comment, Roll Call
City Manager Recommendation: Approve
23
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
CONSENT AGENDA #4
B. Approval of minutes.
The draft Brookings City Council minutes from January 12th, December 15th, December
8th, November 17th and September 22nd are enclosed for Council review and approval.
24
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
Brookings City Council
January 12, 2010
(unapproved)
The Brookings City Council held a meeting on Tuesday, January 12, 2010 at 6:00 p.m., at City
Hall with the following members present: Mayor Tim Reed, Council Members Julie Whaley, John
Kubal, Mike McClemans and Jael Thorpe. Council Members Mike Bartley and Tom Bezdichek
were absent. City Manager Jeff Weldon, City Attorney Steve Britzman, and City Clerk Shari
Thornes were also present.
6:00 P.M. REGULAR MEETING.
Consent Agenda. A motion was made by Kubal, seconded by Whaley, to approve the
consent agenda as follows:
A. Action to approve the agenda as printed.
B. Action on appointments to Complete Count Committee. Pursuant to
Resolution No. 08-09, the City of Brookings appointed the following volunteers to serve
on an ad hoc Brookings Complete Count Committee, whose terms will serve through
the completion of the 2010 Census: Tim Reed, Mayor; Don Larson, County
Commissioner; Mike Struck, City Community Development Director; Bob Hill, County
Planning; Kara Beers, Dept. of Social Services; Marysz Rames, SDSU Vice President for
Student Affairs; Matt Tollfeson and Patrick Weber, SDSU Senate; Dr. Roger DeGroot,
Brookings School Superintendent; Joyce Hodges; Ryan Brunner; Pastor Pam Fitzgerald;
Cyndy Boesch, and Cami Powers.
C. Action on Resolution No. 01-10, Maintenance and Encroachment Agreement
for Projects PH 0295(341) PCN 01QK and P 0014(161)422 PCN 01QL.
Resolution No. 01-10
Maintenance and Encroachment Agreement for South Dakota Federal Aid Construction
Project Number PH 0295(341) PCN 01Q and Construction Project Number
P0014(161)422 PCN 01QL
Whereas, the City of Brookings is desirous in construction of the projects for traffic
signals at the northbound ramps of I29/US14 and on US14 at its intersection with 32nd
Avenue by the State of South Dakota Department of Transportation; and
Whereas, the City of Brookings is desirous in entering into a Maintenance and
Encroachment Agreement between the Department of Transportation and the City of
Brookings; and
Therefore, Be It Resolved that the City of Brooking duly authorizes the Mayor of the
City of Brooking to sign all documents for the Maintenance and Encroachment
Agreement between the Department of Transportation and the City of Brookings.
This resolution is effective immediately upon passage.
D. Action on Resolution No. 02-10, a Resolution Fixing Time and Place for
Hearing Upon Assessment Roll for Street Assessment Project No. 2008-
25
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
02STA (15th Street South, Christine Avenue, and Camelot Drive Utility,
Grading and Curb & Gutter Project).
Resolution No. 02-10
Resolution Fixing Time and Place for Hearing Upon Assessment Roll for Street
Assessment Project No. 2008-02STA (15th Street South, Christine Avenue, and Camelot
Drive Utility, Grading, and Curb & Gutter Project)
Be It Resolved by the City Council of the City of Brookings, South Dakota, as follows:
1. The assessment roll for Street Assessment Project No. 2008-02STA having been filed
in the office of the City Clerk on the 4th day of January, 2010, the City Council shall
meet in the Council Chambers, City Hall, in said City on Tuesday, the 26th day of
January, 2010 at 6:00 o'clock PM, the said date being not less than twenty (20) days from
the filing of said assessment roll for hearing thereon.
2. The City Engineer is authorized and directed to prepare a notice describing, in
general terms Street Assessment Project No. 2008-02STA, the date of filing the
assessment roll, the time and place of hearing thereon, stating that the assessment roll
will be open for public inspection at the office of the City Engineer and referring to the
assessment roll for further particulars.
3. The City Clerk is authorized and directed to publish said notice in the official
newspaper at least one (1) week prior to the date set for hearing and to mail a copy
thereof, by first class mail addressed to the owner or owners of any property to be
assessed at his, her or their last mailing address as shown by the records of the Director
of Equalization at least one (1) week prior to the date set for said hearing.
E. Action on Resolution No. 03-10, a Resolution Fixing Time and Place for
Hearing Upon Assessment Roll for Street Assessment Project No. 2009-
02STA (15th Street South, Christine Avenue and Camelot Drive Asphalt
Paving Project).
Resolution No. 03-10
Resolution Fixing Time and Place for Hearing Upon Assessment Roll for
Street Assessment Project No. 2009-02STA
(15th Street South, Christine Avenue, and Camelot Drive Asphalt Paving Project)
Be It Resolved by the City Council of the City of Brookings, South Dakota, as follows:
1. The assessment roll for Street Assessment Project No. 2009-02STA having been filed
in the office of the City Clerk on the 4th day of January, 2010, the City Council shall
meet in the Council Chambers, City Hall, in said City on Tuesday, the 26th day of
January, 2010 at 6:00 o'clock PM, the said date being not less than twenty (20) days from
the filing of said assessment roll for hearing thereon.
2. The City Engineer is authorized and directed to prepare a notice describing, in
general terms Street Assessment Project No. 2009-02STA, the date of filing the
assessment roll, the time and place of hearing thereon, stating that the assessment roll
will be open for public inspection at the office of the City Engineer and referring to the
assessment roll for further particulars.
3. The City Clerk is authorized and directed to publish said notice in the official
newspaper at least one (1) week prior to the date set for hearing and to mail a copy
thereof, by first class mail addressed to the owner or owners of any property to be
26
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
assessed at his, her or their last mailing address as shown by the records of the Director
of Equalization at least one (1) week prior to the date set for said hearing.
F. Action on Resolution No. 04-10, a Resolution rescinding Resolution No. 109-
09 and pertaining to the annexation of property in the city of Brookings.
Resolution No. 109-09 was adopted by the City Council on October 27, 2009. In
December, Mr. Dean Christie, owner of the land annexed by Resolution No. 109-09,
came to City Hall and advised that he had entered into a contract to sell his land to
another party earlier in 2009 but the actual transfer of the ownership of the land would
not take place until April 1, 2010. He indicated that he had not sought to annex his
land.
A review of the file indicated the future owners, and not Mr. Christie, had erroneously
signed a “Petition to Annex” which is required to be signed by the owners of not less
than 3/4ths of the value of said land as stated in SDCL 9-4-1. Therefore, the petition
was not legal.
This rescission will render the City Council’s action of October 27, 2009 null and void.
A Petition to Annex, signed properly, is expected later this year on this same parcel.
Resolution No. 04-10
Resolution Rescinding Resolution No. 109-09 and Pertaining to the
Annexation of Property in the City of Brookings.
Be It Resolved by the City Council of the City of Brookings, South Dakota as follows:
Whereas, Resolution No. 109-09 concerns the annexation of property to the City of
Brookings, and
Whereas, it has been determined that the Petition for annexation was not signed by the
owners of at least three-fourths of the value of the territory sought to be annexed, and
Whereas, State law, particularly SDCL 9-4-1, requires that the Petition for annexation
be signed by the owners of at least three-fourths of the value of the territory sought to
be annexed,
Now, Therefore, based upon the foregoing determination, it is appropriate and
necessary to rescind Resolution No. 109-09, and accordingly,
It Is Hereby Resolved by the City Council of the City of Brookings, South Dakota,
that, upon passage and publication of this Resolution, that Resolution No. 109-09 is
hereby rescinded and of no force or effect.
On the motion, all present voted yes; motion carried.
Resolution No. 05-10 – Change Order. A motion was made by McClemans, seconded by
Whaley, to approve Resolution No. 05-10, a Resolution Authorizing Change Order No. 1
(CCO#1 Final) for 2009-01SWR Sidewalk and Curb & Gutter Replacement Project, Concrete
27
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
Contractors, Inc., Brookings, SD. No public comment was made. All present voted yes;
motion carried.
Resolution No. 05-10
A Resolution Authorizing Final Change Order (CCO#1 Final) for 2009-01SWR Sidewalk
and Curb & Gutter Project; Concrete Contractors, Inc.
Be It Resolved by the City Council that the following change order be allowed for 2009-01SWR
Sidewalk and Curb & Gutter Project: Construction Change Order Number 1 Final, and Adjust
estimated bid quantities to final “as build” quantities for a total decrease of $3,808.30 to close
out the project.
Resolution No. 06-10 – Change Order. A motion was made by Thorpe, seconded by
Kubal, to approve Resolution No. 06-10, a Resolution Authorizing Change Order No. 1
(CCO#1 Final) for Brookings Roof Replacement Project, BHI Construction, Inc., Sioux Falls,
SD. No public comment was made. All present voted yes; motion carried.
Resolution No. 06-10
A Resolution Authorizing Change Order No. 1 (CCO#1 Final) for Brookings Roof
Replacement Project; BHI Construction, Inc.
Be It Resolved by the City Council that the following change order be allowed for the
Brookings Roof Replacement Project: Construction Change Order Number 1 (Final), and
Decrease of $741.00 to install standard EPDM membrane instead of reinforced membrane
because the specified 45-mil membrane cannot be installed in a ballast roof and Increase of
$8,618.40 due to the necessary replacement of wet insulation of 1,008 sq. ft. at $1.90 per
square foot for a total increase of $7,877.40 to close out the project.
Resolution No. 07-10 – Street Assessment. A motion was made by Whaley, seconded by
McClemans, to approve Resolution No. 07-10, a Levying Assessment for Street Assessment
Project No. 2009-04STA (East/West Alley from 11th Avenue to 12th Avenue between 1st Street
and 2nd Street). No public comment was made. All present voted yes; motion carried.
Resolution No. 07-10
Levying Assessment for Street Assessment Project No. 2009-04STA
Whereas, the City Council has provided for the following work to be completed under Project
No. 2009-04STA (East/West Alley from 11th Avenue to 12th Avenue between 1st Street and 2nd
Street)
Be It Resolved by the City Council of the City of Brookings, South Dakota, as follows:
1. The City Council has made all investigation which it deems necessary and has found and
determined that the amount which each lot or tract will be benefited by the construction of
the street improvement heretofore designated as Street Assessment Project No. 2009-
04STA is the amount stated in the proposed assessment roll.
2. The assessment for Street Assessment Project No. 2009-04STA is hereby approved and the
assessment thereby specified are levied against each and every lot, piece or parcel of land
thereby described.
3. The assessment shall be divided into five (5) equal annual installments for alleys.
4. Such assessments, unless paid within thirty (30) days after the date of mailing of a statement
of account by the City, shall be collected by the City in accordance with the procedure for
Plan One in Sections to 9-43-51, South Dakota Compiled Laws of 1967, as amended.
28
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
5. Interest of ten (10) percent per annum shall accrue on the unpaid balance of the
assessment.
Ordinance No. 33-09. A public hearing was held on Ordinance No. 33-09, an Ordinance
pertaining to an application for a Conditional Use for a major home occupation (manual press
operation) within the City of Brookings at the South 100 feet of Lots 13 and 14, Block 5,
Parkdale Home Addition. Public Hearing: It was clarified that the property owner had also signed
the application form. The applicant provided clarification on the activities including location of the
equipment. A motion was made by Kubal, seconded by Thorpe, to approve Ordinance No. 33-
09. All present voted yes; motion carried.
Ordinance No. 34-09. A public hearing was held on Ordinance No. 34-09, an Ordinance to
Change the Zoning within the City of Brookings at Lot 18, Block 1, Nelson Second Addition be
and the same is hereby rezoned and reclassified from a Residence RMH District to a Residence
R-1A District. No comments were made. A motion was made by McClemans, seconded by
Whaley, to approve Ordinance No. 34-09. All present voted yes; motion carried.
Ordinance No. 35-09. A public hearing was held on Ordinance No. 35-09, an Ordinance
pertaining to an application for a Conditional Use for a major home occupation (weight loss
service) within the City of Brookings at Lot 13, Block 6, Brookdale Addition. Public Hearing:
The applicant provided additional information regarding her business. A motion was made by
Thorpe, seconded by Whaley, to approve Ordinance No. 35-09. All present voted yes; motion
carried.
Adjourn. A motion was made by Whaley, seconded by Kubal, to adjourn. All present voted
yes; motion carried. Meeting adjourned at 6:23 p.m.
CITY OF BROOKINGS
ATTEST: Tim Reed, Mayor
Shari Thornes, City Clerk
29
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
Brookings City Council
December 15, 2009
(unapproved)
The Brookings City Council held a meeting on Tuesday, December 15, 2009 at 4:00 p.m., at City
Hall with the following members present: Mayor Tim Reed, Council Members Julie Whaley, John
Kubal, Mike McClemans, Mike Bartley, Jael Thorpe, and Tom Bezdichek. City Manager Jeff
Weldon, City Attorney Steve Britzman, and City Clerk Shari Thornes were also present.
Executive Session. A motion was made by Whaley, seconded by Kubal, to enter into
Executive Session at 4:04 p.m. for personnel matters with the City Council and City Manager
present. A motion was made by Whaley, seconded by Bezdichek, to exit Executive Session at
5:05 p.m. All present voted yes; motion carried.
Review of Second Penny Sales Tax split issues (25/75). By previous action, the City
Council requested a policy discussion about the City of Brookings use of Second Penny Sales
and Use Tax Revenue as it pertains to types of expenditures. The SD State Statute that
regulated how the Second Penny Sales and Use Tax could be spent has been repealed. The
City of Brookings ordinance for the use of the one percent Second Penny Sales & Use Tax
mirrors the repealed State Statute. Historically, the second penny has been used for capital
expenditures and securing financing for large, capital projects, land acquisition and debt
retirement. In addition to exclusive capital use, by policy the City of Brookings has further
divided the Second Penny designating 25% for public safety vehicles and equipment, firefighting
vehicles and equipment, leases, land acquisition, supplement the special E-911 fund and debt
retirement related thereto. The purpose for revisiting this policy is to consider whether or not
the 25/75 division is too strict and should it be re-adjusted to some other split amount, re-
defined, or eliminated completely to give us maximum budgetary flexibility to address changing
needs from year to year.
Due to the changes in state law, Bartley felt a policy discussion was warranted. The elimination
of the 25/75 split gives local governments more control over their budgets. The elimination
also makes things simpler because how the projects were categorized was also sometimes
difficult. He asked the Council to consider changing the ordinance to eliminate or change the
percentage. If the ordinance were changed, the Council would continue to make decisions on
funding priority instead of categorizing.
Steve Britzman provided additional clarification on current statute. Under new state law, the
first and second penny funds would no longer have specific requirements and governing bodies
have the a range of choices with the state statute as their guide. Choices available to the
Council include: 1) retain current 25/75 split, 2) eliminate percentages, or 3) change
percentages.
McClemans expressed an interest in retaining the current ordinance citing he liked the
guidelines and didn’t see a major reason to change the ordinance, but could review again if a
demonstrated need existed.
30
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
Reed said he also likes the distinction and having 25% blocked off for city uses and had concerns
funds might get allocated to a large project and direct city services could be neglected. He also
felt the percentage helps control the money.
Whaley felt the percentage helps keep funding within the guidelines, but asked the City Manager
if the percentages were a problem or nice to have. Weldon said if the 25/75 division was gone,
it would provide more flexibility for capital project planning.
Bartley felt funding decisions should be based on the merits of the request and this change
would allow additional flexibility.
There was discussion about changing the percentage, but the City Manager didn’t know if any
other percentage combination was any better. He recommended the Council either eliminate
the percentage or retain the current ordinance. There was also discussion about it changing on
an annual basis due to current needs; however, a one-year deviation would require an
ordinance change.
ACTION: A motion was made by Bartley, seconded by McClemans, to request staff give a
recommendation on the consequences of changing no split verses retaining what we have.
Bartley, Bezdichek, McClemans, and Whaley voted yes, and Reed, Thorpe, and Kubal voted no;
motion carried.
6:00 P.M. REGULAR MEETING.
Consent Agenda. An executive session to consult with legal counsel about pending or
current litigation was added to the agenda. A motion was made by Kubal, seconded by Thorpe,
to approve the consent agenda as follows:
A. Action to approve the agenda as amended.
B. Action to award bids for the Lighting Efficiency Project.
Staff recommends awarding the bid to P3 Electric of Hayti, SD in the amount of $98,160.00.
The bid meets the desired outcomes of the EECBG Program while also meeting the desired
light levels at the specified facilities. The City will front the cost of the project and be
reimbursed by the Energy Efficiency Conservation Block Grant and utility rebate. Any
surplus funds will need to be applied towards another energy efficiency related project. The
desired outcomes of the EECBG Program and the Lighting Efficiency Project are: 1)
Increased energy efficiency, reduced energy consumption and reduced energy costs through
efficiency improvements in the buildings, and 2) Improve foot candle of lighting at each of the
facilities while becoming more energy efficient. Bids received: Larson Ice Center/Swiftel
Center Seating Areas, Mezzanine, Lobby & Concourse Areas: Muth Electric $20,638.00, P3
Electric $73,500.00, Perry Electric $104,529.00, Clites Electric $96,750.00 (Alternate -
$78,735.00), Kindt Electric $105,773.46, Travis Electric $78,996.00 and Engelstad Electric
$89,520.00 (Alternate $104,700.00). Holding Barn (if funds available): Muth Electric
$20,638.00, P3 Electric $18,000.00, Perry Electric $20,911.00, Clites Electric $22,845.00
(Alternate $25,380.00), Kindt Electric $26,052.48, Travis Electric, $27,583.00, and Engelstad
Electric $32,381.00 (Alternate $35,800.00). Park & Recreation Gymnasium (if funds
available): Muth Electric $8,314.00, P3 Electric $6,660.00, Perry Electric $7,332.00, Clites
Electric $7,785.00 (Alternate $7,770.00), Kindt Electric $15,001.29, Travis Electric
31
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
$9,295.00,and Engelstad Electric $9,045.00 (Alternate $10,000.00). BASE BIDS: Muth
Electric $140,792.00, P3 Electric $98,160.00, Perry Electric $132,772.00, Clites Electric
$127,380.00 (Alternate $111,885.00), Kindt Electric $146,827.23, Travis Electric $115,874.00,
and Engelstad Electric $130,946.00 (Alternate $150,500.00).
C. Action on annual Volunteer Board, Committee, and Commission appointments.
Board of Adjustment - appoint Jason Hoffelt (2nd Alternate) (1/1/2010-1/1/2012), and
reappoint Dick Peterson (1/1/2010-1/1/2013); Brookings Committee for People who have
Disabilities - reappoint Dona Kornbaum (1/1/2010-1/1/2013); Brookings Transportation
Board - reappoint Dean Kattelmann (SDSU Admin representative), Robb Rasmussen
(Downtown Brookings, Inc. representative), Mike Forgy (East Central Mental Health
representative), and Dr. Roger DeGroot (Brookings Schools representative) (1/1/2010-
1/1/2013); Historic Preservation Commission - reappoint Mary Bibby (1/1/2010-1/1/2013);
Human Rights Committee - reappoint Joel (Jay) Vargas and Penny Hauffe (1/1/2010-
1/1/2013); Library Board - reappoint Mac Harris (1/1/2010-1/1/2013), Swiftel Center
Committee - reappoint Rod Schaefer (City Appointment) and Deb Garbers (Chamber
Appointment) (1/1/2010-1/1/2013); Traffic Safety Committee - reappoint Daryl Englund
(Jogger/Bicyclist representative), Brad Whaley (Street Superintendent representative), Louis
Skubic (Senior Citizens representative), and Skip Webster (Automobile Insurance
representative) (12/31/2009-12/31/2012), and Visitor Promotions Committee - reappoint
Tom Jones (at-large), Amy Einspahr (at-large), Zeno Wicks (SDSU representative), and
Victoria Blatchford (Chamber representative) (1/1/2010-1/1/2013).
D. Action on Resolution No. 130-09, declaring three police vehicles as surplus
property.
Resolution No. 130-09
Declaring Surplus Property
Whereas, the City of Brookings is the owner of the following described equipment formerly
used at the City of Brookings Police Department: One (1) 2005 Dodge Durango Police
Vehicle, VIN #1B4HS38N12F156172; One (1) 2006 Ford Crown Victoria Police Vehicle,
VIN #2FAFP71W06X155035; One (1) 2007 Ford Crown Victoria Police Vehicle, VIN
#2FAFP71W17X157457
Whereas in the best financial interest, it is the desire of the City of Brookings to sell same
as surplus property;
Whereas, the City Manager hereby authorized to sell said surplus property.
Now, Therefore, Be It Resolved by the governing body of the City of Brookings, South
Dakota, that this property be declared surplus property according to SDCL Chapter 6-13.
The Dodge Durango and Ford Crown Victoria police vehicles have been replaced by two
new Ford Crown Victoria police cars.
E. Action on Resolution No. 131-09, authorizing the City Manager to sign an
operating agreement renewal for Jim’s Tap, 309 Main Avenue.
Resolution No. 131-09
32
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
Jim’s Tap Operating Agreement Renewal
Be It Resolved by the City of Brookings, South Dakota, that the City Council hereby
approves a Lease Renewal Agreement for the Operating Liquor Management Agreement
between the City of Brookings and Jim’s Tap for the purpose of a liquor manager to
operate the on-sale establishment or business for and on behalf of the City of Brookings at
309 Main Ave., also known as Jim’s Tap.
Be It Further Resolved that the City Manager be authorized to execute the Agreement on
behalf of the City, which shall be for a period of five (5) years.
F. Action on Resolution No. 132-09, a Resolution authorizing loan of private funds
for Larson Ice Center Exterior Improvement Project.
Resolution No. 132-09
Resolution Authorizing the Issuance of Promissory Note for
Larson Ice Center Exterior Project
Whereas, a municipality is authorized to borrow money from any source willing to lend the
money by issuing a promissory note under South Dakota Codified Laws (SDCL) §§ 9-25-13
to SDCL 9-25-16, inclusive, and
Whereas, the City of Brookings is completing the construction of the Larson Ice Center
Exterior Project, and has received a commitment from Dale Larson, of Brookings, to loan
the City of Brookings funds for the construction costs for the Larson Ice Center Exterior
Project, and
Whereas, the City desires to borrow the sum of $148,123 Dollars from Dale Larson
pursuant to a Promissory Note issued in conformity with SDCL §§ 9-25-13 to 9-25-16,
Now Therefore Be It Resolved by the City of Brookings as follows:
1. The City hereby determines it will finance $148,123 Dollars of the cost of such
improvements in accordance with a Promissory Note issued to Dale Larson in
conformity with SDCL §§ 9-25-13 to 9-25-16. The Promissory Note is also issued in
conformity with and under the authority of SDCL Chapter 6-8B.
2. The City Manager and City Clerk are hereby authorized to execute the loan documents
on behalf of the City.
INSTALLMENT PROMISSORY NOTE
LOAN AMOUNT: $148,123.00
EFFECTIVE DATE: December 16, 2009
MATURITY DATE: February 16, 2012
BORROWER'S NAME AND ADDRESS: City of Brookings, P.O. Box 270, Brookings, SD
57006.
Lender’s name and address: O. Dale Larson, 2333 Eastbrook Drive, Brookings, SD 57006
33
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
For value received, the City of Brookings, South Dakota promises to pay Lender at the address
set forth above, the principal sum of One Hundred Forty-eight Thousand One Hundred
Twenty-three and 00/100 Dollars ($148,123.00), together with interest thereon on February
16, 2012.
INTEREST: Borrower agrees to pay interest on the outstanding principal balance from
December 16, 2009, at the rate of Five percent (5%) per year until the maturity date. Interest
will be computed annually using the simple interest method.
PAYMENT: The principal sum of $148,123.00, together with accrued interest shall be paid in
full on February 16, 2012.
REMARKS: The purpose of this loan is to finance construction costs of the Larson Ice
Center Exterior Project.
NOTICE: THIS IS AN UNSECURED NOTE.
PREPAYMENT: The City shall be allowed to pre-pay this Note at any time without penalty.
STATUTORY AUTHORIZATION: This note is issued in conformity with the provisions,
restrictions and limitations of SDCL §§ 9-25-13 to 9-25-16, inclusive, and this note is payable
from the sources therein provided.
SIGNATURES: The Borrower and Lender each agree to the terms of this Note (including the
additional terms on the back of this Note).
City of Brookings, South Dakota O. Dale Larson
BORROWER LENDER
Jeffrey W. Weldon, City Manager O. Dale Larson
Attest:
Shari Thornes, City Clerk
1. Unsecured Note: This is an unsecured, interest bearing Promissory Note, which is not
secured by a mortgage upon real property.
2. Applicable Law: This Note is executed pursuant to and shall be construed in accordance
with the laws of the State of South Dakota, and shall be enforceable in any court of
competent jurisdiction.
3. Late Payment: Borrower shall have a grace period of twenty (20) days for the payment of
any payment of principal and interest. In the event Borrower shall fail to make any payment
when due and shall fail to cure such payment within twenty (20) days following the due date
thereof, the Lender shall have the right to call the entire balance under this Note due and
payable. All payments not timely made shall bear interest at a rate of twelve (12%) percent
per annum from twenty (20) days following the due date until fully paid.
4. Default: For the purposes of this provision, the occurrence of any of the following events
shall constitute a default hereunder:
(a) A failure by Borrower to pay any principal or interest when due under this instrument.
In the event that a default shall occur, as above described, and shall not be cured by
Borrower, the Lender shall thereupon have the right to declare the entire unpaid
principal amount to be immediately due and payable in full. Borrower waives notice of
the occurrence of any default, and further waives demand, protest, notice of dishonor
and notice of protest and notices of any and all action at any time taken or omitted by
the holder of this Note. Borrower agrees that no course of dealing or delay or
34
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
omission or forbearance on the part of the holder of this Note in exercising or
enforcing any of its rights or remedies hereunder shall impair or prejudice the holder of
this Note in the enforcement of the rights and remedies of the Lender.
G. Action on Resolution No. 133-09, a resolution removing Uncollectible Accounts
Receivable from the Records.
Resolution No. 133-09
Uncollectible Accounts Receivable Removed From Records
Whereas, The Brookings Municipal Landfill had a total of $409.15 in uncollectible landfill
charges in 2009: $387.00 – VeraSun (filed bankruptcy) $22.15 – Larkin Construction
(deceased); and
Whereas, efforts to collect and recover from customers was unsuccessful;
Now Therefore, Be It Resolved the amount of $409.15 in landfill charges be determined as
uncollectible and removed from the records.
H. Action on Resolution No. 134-09, A Resolution Fixing Time and Place for
Hearing upon Assessment Roll for Street Assessment Project 2009-04STA (Alley
from 11th Avenue to 12th Avenue between 1st Street and 2nd Street).
Resolution No. 134-09
Resolution Fixing Time and Place for Hearing Upon Assessment Roll for
Street Assessment Project No. 2009-04STA
(Alley from 11th Avenue to 12 th Avenue between 1st Street and 2nd Street)
Be It Resolved by the City Council of the City of Brookings, South Dakota, as follows:
1) The assessment roll for Street Assessment Project No. 2009-04STA having been filed in
the office of the City Clerk on the 9th day of December, 2009, the City Council shall meet
in the Council Chambers, City Hall, in said City on Tuesday, the 12th day of January, 2010 at
6:00 o'clock PM, the said date being not less than twenty (20) days from the filing of said
assessment roll for hearing thereon.
2) The City Engineer is authorized and directed to prepare a notice describing, in general
terms Street Assessment Project No. 2009-04STA, the date of filing the assessment roll, the
time and place of hearing thereon, stating that the assessment roll will be open for public
inspection at the office of the City Engineer and referring to the assessment roll for further
particulars.
3) The City Clerk is authorized and directed to publish said notice in the official newspaper
at least one (1) week prior to the date set for hearing and to mail a copy thereof, by first
class mail addressed to the owner or owners of any property to be assessed at his, her or
their last mailing address as shown by the records of the Director of Equalization at least
one (1) week prior to the date set for said hearing.
I. Action on Resolution No. 135-09, A Resolution Directing Preparation of
Assessment Roll, Dividing Assessments into Installments, and Providing for the
Collection Thereof For Street Assessment Project 2008-02STA (15th Street
35
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
South, Christine Avenue and Camelot Drive water, sewer, grading and curb &
gutter).
Resolution No. 135-09
Resolution Directing Preparation of Assessment Roll, Dividing Assessments Into
Installments, and Providing for the Collection Thereof for Street Assessment Project 2008-
02STA (15th Street South, Christine Avenue, and Camelot Drive Utility, Grading and Curb &
Gutter Project).
Be It Resolved by the City Council of the City of Brookings, South Dakota, as follows:
1) More than twenty days have elapsed since the adoption and publication of Resolution of
Necessity No. 32-07 for Street Assessment Project No. 2008-02STA. The referendum has
not been invoked, and no written protests against the making of said improvement have
been filed with the City Manager.
2) A contract for Street Assessment Project No. 2008-02STA has been duly executed, and
the City Council is authorized to levy special assessments pursuant to the provisions of
chapter 9-43, SDCL 1967, as amended.
3) The City Engineer has caused an estimate of the expense of the work to be made and
filed in her office showing the total cost of said improvement as follows: Contract price of
$501,274.61; Engineering, inspection, fiscal, legal expense, publication for $29,481.85 for
total expense of $530,756.46.
4) The total cost of said improvement shall be paid as follows: Assessable costs of
$491,364.28. City Assumed Extra Width and Thickness and Paving (15th St. S.): $9,910.33
5) There shall be made and filed in the office of the City Clerk an assessment roll for said
improvement. The assessments shall be on the basis of benefits upon each lot or tract of
land contiguous to the sidewalk constituting said improvement.
6) The assessment shall be divided into ten (10) equal annual installments.
7) Unless paid to the City in advance of maturity, the assessments shall be collected by the
City Manager in accordance with the procedure for Plan One in Chapter 9-43, SDCL 1967,
as amended.
8) The interest rate to be borne by the unpaid installments of the special assessment is ten
percent (10%).
J. Action on Resolution No. 136-09, A Resolution Directing Preparation of
Assessment Roll, Dividing Assessments into Installments, and Providing for the
Collection Thereof For Street Assessment Project 2009-02STA (15th Street
South, Christine Avenue and Camelot Drive asphalt paving).
Resolution No. 136-09
Resolution Directing Preparation of Assessment Roll, Dividing Assessments into
Installments, and Providing for the Collection Thereof for Street Assessment Project 2009-
02STA (15th Street South, Christine Avenue and Camelot Drive Asphalt Paving Project).
Be It Resolved by the City Council of the City of Brookings, South Dakota, as follows:
1) More than twenty days have elapsed since the adoption and publication of Resolution of
Necessity No. 27-09 for Street Assessment Project No. 2009-02STA. The referendum has
not been invoked, and no written protests against the making of said improvement have
been filed with the City Manager.
36
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
2) A contract for Street Assessment Project No. 2009-02STA has been duly executed, and
the City Council is authorized to levy special assessments pursuant to the provisions of
chapter 9-43, SDCL 1967, as amended.
3) The City Engineer has caused an estimate of the expense of the work to be made and
filed in her office showing the total cost of said improvement as follows: Contract price of
$171,563.16, Engineering, inspection, fiscal, legal expense, publication of $7,906.24 for Total
Expense of $179,469.40.
4) The total cost of said improvement shall be paid as follows: Assessable costs of
$131,770.61. City Assumed Extra Width and Thickness and Paving (15th St. S.) $39,792.55.
5) There shall be made and filed in the office of the City Clerk an assessment roll for said
improvement. The assessments shall be on the basis of benefits upon each lot or tract of
land contiguous to the sidewalk constituting said improvement.
6) The assessment shall be divided into ten (10) equal annual installments.
7) Unless paid to the City in advance of maturity, the assessments shall be collected by the
City Manager in accordance with the procedure for Plan One in Chapter 9-43, SDCL 1967,
as amended.
8) The interest rate to be borne by the unpaid installments of the special assessment is ten
percent (10%).
On the motion, all present voted yes; motion carried.
Resolution No. 137-09. A motion was made by McClemans, seconded by Whaley, to approve
Resolution No. 137-09, a Resolution awarding Bids for Landfill Compactor. No public comment
was made. All present voted yes; motion carried.
Resolution No. 137-09
Resolution Awarding Bids - Landfill Compactor
Whereas, the City of Brookings has received the following bid for one (1) 2010 Landfill
Compactor: AL-JON Manufacturing Base Bid of $552,537.00, Trade-in for AL-JON 2005
Compactor in the amount of 90,000.00 for a total Net Price of $462,537.00.
Now Therefore, Be it Resolved that the bid from AL-JON Manufacturing, in the amount of
$462,537.00 plus the trade-in for the above-mentioned 2010 Landfill Compactor be accepted.
Bids received: Option #1 (Price of New Compactor with Guaranteed Repurchase Price in 5
years): Butler Equipment Co., Sioux Falls, SD bid $705,772 with a repurchase price of $155,000;
AL-Jon Mfg., Ottumwa, IA bid $552,537 with a repurchase price of $135,000; and Sheehan Mack
Sales & Equip., Sioux Falls, SD bid $559,153.00 with a repurchase price of $95,000. Option #2
(Price of New Compactor with Guaranteed Repurchase Price in 5-Years): Butler Equipment Co.
bid $705,772 with a repurchase price of $155,000; AL-Jon Mfg. big $552,537 with a repurchase
price of $135,000; Sheehan Mack Sales & Equip. did not bid. Compactor Trade-In Values: Butler
Equip. estimated $50,000; AL-Jon Mfg. estimated $90,000; Sheehan Mack Sales & Equip did not
state an amount. Net Price: Butler Equip. net price of $655,772 with a 180-210 day delivery
date; AL-Jon Mfg. net price of $462,537 with a 90-120 day delivery date; Sheehan Mack Sales &
Equip. did not state. Alternate Bid (consisted of different wheel cleats): AL-Jon Mfg. provided an
alternate bid. Under Option #1 and #2 new compactor price stated as $538,769 with a
37
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
guaranteed repurchase price in 5-years of $135,000, stated Compactor Trade-In Value of
$90,000 leaving a Net Price of $448,769 with a 90-120 day delivery date.
Resolution No. 138-09. A motion was made by Bartley, seconded by McClemans, to approve
Resolution No. 138-09, a Resolution awarding bids for the Fire Department Top Mount Custom
Rescue Style Pumper (E-4 Replacement). No public comment was made. All present voted yes;
motion carried.
Resolution No. 138-09
Resolution Awarding Bids on Top Mount Custom Rescue Style Pumper (E-4 Replacement)
Whereas, the City of Brookings held a bid letting at 1:30 pm on Tuesday, December 1, 2009;
and
Whereas, the City of Brookings has received the following bids for the E-4 Replacement:
Manufacturer Base Bid Alternate Total
Fireguard Inc. / Crimson $437,779.00 ($11,840.00) $425,939.00
Sutphen Corp./M&T Fire Safety $538,758.00 $558,758.00
Sutphen Corp./M&T Fire Safety Alternate Apparatus $443,993.00 $443,993.00
Toyne, Inc. $430,182.00 $430,182.00
Emergency One, Inc./Ed M. Feld $511,050.00 $511,040.00
Now Therefore, Be It Resolved that the bid of $430,182.00 of Toyne, Inc., be accepted.
Resolution No. 123-09. A motion was made by Thorpe, seconded by Bartley, to approve
Resolution No. 123-09, a Resolution authorizing Final Change Order on Chip Seal Project. No
public comment was made. All present voted yes; motion carried.
Resolution No. 123-09
A Resolution Authorizing Final Change Order (CCO#1 Final) For
2009-06STI Chip Seal Project - Topkote, Inc.
Be It Resolved by the City Council that the following change order be allowed for 2009-06STI
Chip Seal Project: Construction Change Order Number 1 Final - Adjust estimated bid
quantities to “as build” quantities for a total decrease of $17,042.54 to close out the project.
Resolution No. 139-09. A motion was made by Bartley, seconded by Kubal, to approve
Resolution No. 139-09, a Resolution authorizing Final Change Order on 2008-03STA
Downtown Streetscape Project, Winter Brothers Underground, Inc. No public comment was
made. All present voted yes; motion carried.
Resolution No. 139-09
A Resolution Authorizing Change Order #10 (CCO#10) for
2008-03STI Downtown Streetscape Project
Winter Brothers Underground, Inc., Sioux Falls, South Dakota
Be It Resolved by the City Council that the following change order be allowed for 2008-03SSI,
Downtown Streetscape Project:
Construction Change Order Number 10:
Omit Concrete Sloped Curb: Decrease of $78,480.00
Add Supplemental Planting Soil in bumpouts: Increase of $1,100.00
38
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
Add Mix Dry Cleaning Entry Stairs: Increase of $1,668.00
Add Ram Pub Concrete Drainage Pad: Increase of $768.00
Adjustment for actual measured quantities: Decrease of $27,645.75
Acceptance of Non-conforming Work:
Deduct for concrete surface finish: Decrease of $4,607.00
Deduct for Concrete Radial Joint Pattern: Decrease of $7,500.00
Deduct for Chipped Concrete Walkway: Decrease of $3,000.00
Total Change Order Number 10: Decrease of $117,696.75
Resolution No. 140-09. A motion was made by Whaley, seconded by Thorpe, to approve
Resolution No. 140-09, a Resolution authorizing Final Change Order on 2009-03STI Willow
Springs Circle Street Improvement Project. No public comment was made. All present voted
yes; motion carried.
Resolution No. 140-09
A Resolution Authorizing Final Change Order (CCO#1 Final) for
2009-03STI Willow Springs Circle Street Improvement Project
Bowes Construction Inc., Brookings, SD
Be It Resolved by the City Council that the following change order be allowed for 2009-03STI
Willow Springs Circle Street Improvement Project: Construction Change Order Number 1
Final: Add 8” PCC Valley Gutter and Fillet for an increase of $1,772.37 to the contract. Adjust
estimated bid quantities to actual “as build” quantities for a total decrease of $2,230.00. Adjust
contract completion date to November 2, 2009 and charge the contractor one day of
liquidated damages for November 3, 2009 in the amount of $300.00.
1st Reading - Ordinance No. 33-09. A first reading was held on Ordinance No. 33-09: An
Ordinance pertaining to an application for a Conditional Use for a major home occupation
(manual press operation) within the City of Brookings at the South 100 feet of Lots 13 and 14,
Block 5, Parkdale Home Addition. Public Hearing: January 12th
1st Reading - Ordinance No. 34-09. A first reading was held on Ordinance No. 34-09: An
Ordinance to Change the Zoning within the City of Brookings at Lot 18, Block 1, Nelson
Second Addition be and the same is hereby rezoned and reclassified from a Residence RMH
District to a Residence R-1A District. Public Hearing: January 12th
1st Reading - Ordinance No. 35-09. A first reading was held on Ordinance No. 35-09: An
ordinance pertaining to an application for a Conditional Use for a major home occupation
(weight loss service) within the City of Brookings at Lot 13, Block 6, Brookdale Addition. Public
Hearing: January 12th
Ordinance No. 32-09. A public hearing was held on Ordinance No. 32-09: Budget
Amendment #3, An Ordinance Authorizing a Supplemental Appropriation to the 2009 Budget
for the Purpose of providing for additional Funds for the Operation of the City. A motion was
made by Bartley, seconded by Whaley, to approve Ordinance No. 32-09. All present voted
yes; motion carried.
39
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
Resolution No. 141-09. A public hearing was held on Resolution No. 141-09, a Levying
Assessment for Street Assessment Project 2008-04STA (East/West Alley from 6th Street to 7th
Street between 7th Avenue and 8th Avenue). A motion was made by McClemans, seconded by
Whaley, to approve Resolution No. 141-09. All present voted yes; motion carried.
Resolution No. 141-09
Levying Assessment for Street Assessment Project No. 2008-04sta
Whereas, the City Council has provided for the following work to be completed under Project
No. 2008-04STA (East/West Alley from 6th Street to 7th Street between 7th Avenue and 8th
Avenue)
Be It Resolved by the City Council of the City of Brookings, South Dakota, as follows:
6. The City Council has made all investigation which it deems necessary and has found and
determined that the amount which each lot or tract will be benefited by the construction of
the street improvement heretofore designated as Street Assessment Project No. 2008-
04STA is the amount stated in the proposed assessment roll.
7. The assessment for Street Assessment Project No. 2008-04STA is hereby approved and the
assessment thereby specified are levied against each and every lot, piece or parcel of land
thereby described.
8. The assessment shall be divided into five (5) equal annual installments for alleys.
9. Such assessments, unless paid within thirty (30) days after the date of mailing of a statement
of account by the City, shall be collected by the City in accordance with the procedure for
Plan One in Sections to 9-43-51, South Dakota Compiled Laws of 1967, as amended.
10. Interest of ten (10) percent per annum shall accrue on the unpaid balance of the
assessment.
On/Off Malt Beverage License – Boss’s Pizza & Chicken. A public hearing was held on
an on/off alcohol malt beverage license for Boss’s Pizza & Chicken, 420 Main Avenue, Lots 11,
12, 13, Block 7, Original Plat Addition, Darin Nagelhout, owner. A motion was made by Kubal,
seconded by Thorpe, to approve. All present voted yes; motion carried.
City Manager 2010 Compensation Package. A motion was made by Reed, seconded by Whaley,
to approve the 2010 City Manager compensation package for 2010 with a 4.5% increase from the
current salary of $112,000 and increasing the car allowance to $500 per month including mileage for city
trips outside the county. All present voted yes; motion carried.
Joint Intergovernmental Space Needs Project. Weldon, Bartley and Kubal, the city’s
representatives on the joint city/county building committee, reported land can be acquired for
the proposed site south of the library, and the numbers are doable. There are many issues to
resolve moving forward, including further analysis of space and building needs, but the Council
has been asked to make a decision by December 29th. Action by the City on a particular site
would send a message to the County Commission indicating the city is ready to move forward
with a joint facility. Property adjacent to City Hall is also available and the investment would be
roughly the same; however, that site would be city-only and there would be greater savings in a
shared space with the County, and would also be more consumer friendly with one stop.
40
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
John Mills spoke in favor of the joint venture and urged the Council to approve moving
forward.
ACTION: A motion was made by Bartley, seconded by Reed, to proceed with a joint
city/county facility.
Discussion: This would be a policy statement for direction on the part of the city. There will be a
number of opportunities for this project to come back to the City Council for approval (contracts,
purchase agreements, etc.).
Whaley thanked the committee for their work, but noted she planned to vote against the proposal
because of the many anticipated hurdles with a joint venture. She further noted the amount of
property that would be removed from the tax roles with that particular site hadn’t been discussed. And,
if this is to be a joint facility she feels all things should split 50/50 and that needs to be straightened out
now.
Reed agreed with John Mills that this is an opportunity to do something never done before and to be a
model to other city/county joint ventures. He agreed it won’t be easy, and that there will be give and
take involved and in essence more work.
Whaley asked if the City and County should meet in joint session early January to talk about the
project.
On the motion, all present voted yes, except Whaley voted no; motion carried.
ACTION: A motion was made by Reed, seconded by Bartley, to request the City Manager,
within the first quarter, bring back to the City Council how the Police Department would
utilize the current city hall facility and what types of changes would have to be made to the
extent he feels necessary. All present voted yes; motion carried.
Executive Session. A motion was made by Kubal, seconded by McClemans, to enter
executive session at 6:52 p.m. for purposes of consulting with legal counsel regarding pending
litigation with the City Council, City Manager and City Attorney present. All present voted
yes; motion carried. A motion was made by Whaley, seconded by Kubal, to leave executive
session at 7:28 p.m.
Adjourn. A motion was made by Kubal, seconded by Thorpe, to adjourn. All present voted
yes; motion carried. Meeting adjourned at 7:30 p.m.
CITY OF BROOKINGS
ATTEST: Tim Reed, Mayor
Shari Thornes, City Clerk
41
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
Brookings City Council
December 8, 2009
(unapproved)
The Brookings City Council held a meeting on Tuesday, December 8, 2009 at 5:30 p.m., at City
Hall with the following members present: Mayor Tim Reed, Council Members Julie Whaley, John
Kubal, Mike McClemans, Mike Bartley, Jael Thorpe, and Tom Bezdichek. City Manager Jeff
Weldon, City Attorney Steve Britzman, and City Clerk Shari Thornes were also present.
Review of City Subsidy Application Policy and Process. Pursuant to Council request,
Weldon provided a review of the City’s subsidy funding policy and application process. He
noted that now most general funding requests are turned down. He questioned if the City
should continue to advertise its funding cycle or specify short-term funding only, rather than
any ongoing activities. Requests that are not part of the City’s core services or not related to
the City’s mission were not funded.
Whaley asked if start-up requests, such as the “Helping Hand” organization, should be in a
different category. The application asked for revenue statistics; however, in the case of an
organization such as this asking the number of people helped or served would be more
appropriate. She said there are many good organizations of this type needing short-term or
start-up and questioned if the City should set aside specific funds.
Weldon commented if the City awards an organization with funds one year they will probably
submit a request the following year.
The concept of one-time public assistance funding applications was discussed. The application
currently states the Council also recognizes its support of programs and services outside the
scope of city departments may be necessary to fulfill the commitment and achieve the desirable
quality of life for its citizens. As a matter of policy, the City of Brookings will consider using
municipal funds to assist in the following areas, but are not limited to, opportunities in the areas
of: Affordable Housing, Arts & Culture, Child Care & After-School Programs, Diversity,
Economic Development, Education & Literacy, Environment, Government Stewardship, Health,
Parks, Recreation & Open Spaces, Partnerships, Preservation/ History, Safety and
Transportation/Transit.
Kubal asked if the City required funded organizations to submit performance measurement
documentation as cited in the application. Weldon said the City hasn’t been doing them.
Weldon said he makes recommendations on which applications to fund and appropriate funding
categories (general, second penny). The Council receives the full application packet on disk for
every organization.
Bartley commented the organizations receiving ongoing funds may be subject to a performance
review.
42
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
If performance reviews or measurements are to be required, then the type must be determined
and more review done by the City.
Streamlining the application was suggested. The City Manager was directed to streamline the
application process. Reed commented that he wants to retain the categories because he likes
to see where the city is spending its money.
6:00 P.M. REGULAR MEETING.
Consent Agenda. A motion was made by Whaley, seconded by Bartley, to approve the
consent agenda as follows:
A. Action to approve the agenda.
B. Action on Resolution No. 119-09, Uncollectible Checks Removed from
Liquor Store Records.
Resolution No. 119-09
Uncollectible Checks Removed from Liquor Store Records
Whereas, The Brookings Municipal Liquor Store has received a total amount of $952.62
in insufficient funds and no account checks; and
Whereas, these checks and bills have been processed for collection with the States
Attorney and Sheriff’s Office and have been considered uncollectible for 2008; Barry
W. Bennett for $62.33, Susan Ramirez for $20.34, Jody Rowen for $19.18, Stephen S.
Waldner for $131.95, Lindsey A. Ironoad for $283.04 and $37.39, Monica Lemme for
$79.31, $133.04, $99.89 and $86.15.
Now, Therefore, Be It Resolved that the checks totaling $952.62 for the Liquor Store
be determined as uncollectible and removed from the records. Such checks will be
retained by the State’s Attorney Office to support possible subsequent collection of that
debt.
C. Action to approve abatement of the 2009 Drainage Fee for Parcel No.
40160-00200-008-00, West 25’ of the South 105’ of Lot 8, Block 2, First
Addition, location of the former law office building on the northeast corner
of 3rd Street and 5th Avenue.
The City of Brookings accepted the donation of a parcel of property located at the
northeast corner of 3rd Street and 5th Avenue, which is described as Parcel Number
40160-00200-008-00, the West 25’ of the South 105’ of Lot 8, Block 2, First Addition.
This parcel is now owned by the City of Brookings and the former law office has been
removed. This parcel had a drainage fee calculated of $18.75. Since this is now owned
by the City, the drainage fee should be abated to have a fee of $0.00. Approval of this
request will authorize the Brookings County will abate the drainage fee of $18.75 from
Parcel Number 40160-00200-008-00.
D. Action on Revised Resolution No. 112-09, a Resolution Fixing Time and Place
for Hearing Upon Assessment Roll for Street Assessment Project 2008-
04STA (East/West Alley from 6th Street to 7th Street between 7th Avenue and
8th Avenue).
(Revised) Resolution No. 112-09
Resolution Fixing Time and Place for Hearing Upon Assessment Roll for Street
Assessment Project No. 2008-04STA
(East/West Alley from 6th Street to 7th Street between 7th Avenue and 8th Avenue)
43
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
Be It Resolved by the City Council of the City of Brookings, South Dakota, as follows:
1. The assessment roll for Street Assessment Project No. 2008-04STA having been filed
in the office of the City Clerk on the 9th day of November, 2009, the City Council shall
meet in the Council Chambers, City Hall, in said City on Tuesday, the 15th day of
December, 2009 at 6:00 o'clock PM, the said date being not less than twenty (20) days
from the filing of said assessment roll for hearing thereon.
2. The City Engineer is authorized and directed to prepare a notice describing, in
general terms Street Assessment Project No. 2008-04STA, the date of filing the
assessment roll, the time and place of hearing thereon, stating that the assessment roll
will be open for public inspection at the office of the City Engineer and referring to the
assessment roll for further particulars.
3. The City Clerk is authorized and directed to publish said notice in the official
newspaper at least one (1) week prior to the date set for hearing and to mail a copy
thereof, by first class mail addressed to the owner or owners of any property to be
assessed at his, her or their last mailing address as shown by the records of the Director
of Equalization at least one (1) week prior to the date set for said hearing.
E. Action on Resolution No. 122-09, a Resolution Directing Preparation of
Assessment Roll, Dividing Assessments Into Installments, and Providing For
the Collection Thereof For Street Assessment Project 2009-04STA (Alley
from 11th Avenue to 12th Avenue between 1st Street and 2nd Street).
Resolution No. 122-09
Resolution Directing Preparation of Assessment Roll, Dividing Assessments into
Installments, and providing for the Collection thereof or Street Assessment Project
2009-04STA (Alley from 11th Avenue to 12th Avenue between 1st Street and 2nd Street)
Be It Resolved by the City Council of the City of Brookings, South Dakota, as follows:
1. More than twenty days have elapsed since the adoption and publication of a
Resolution 50-09, Resolution of Necessity for Street Assessment Project No. 2009-
04STA. The referendum has not been invoked, and no written protests against the
making of said improvement have been filed with the City Manager.
2. A contract for Street Assessment Project No. 2009-04STA has been duly executed,
and the City Council is authorized to levy special assessments pursuant to the
provisions of chapter 9-43, SDCL 1967, as amended.
3. The City Engineer has caused an estimate of the expense of the work to be made
and filed in City Hall showing the total cost of said improvement as follows: Contract
price $24,165.11; Engineering, inspection, fiscal, legal expense and publication $1,449.91:
Total $25,615.02
4. The total cost of said improvement shall be paid as follows: Assessable costs
$25,615.02
5. There shall be made and filed in the office of the City Manager an assessment roll for
said improvement. The assessments shall be on the basis of benefits upon each lot or
tract of land contiguous to the alley constituting said improvement.
6. The assessment shall be divided into five (5) equal annual installments.
7. Unless paid to the City in advance of maturity, the assessments shall be collected by
the City Manager in accordance with the procedure for Plan One in Chapter 9-43,
SDCL 1967, as amended.
44
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
8. The interest rate to be borne by the unpaid installments of the special assessment is
ten percent (10%).
On the motion, all present voted yes; motion carried.
Open Forum. John Moriarty expressed concern regarding deer in his apple orchard and
requested Council review of deer hunting within city limits at the December 15th meeting. He
was asked to meet with staff prior to that time.
2009 Strategic Plan Update. Weldon provided the following update:
Brookings City Council Goals for 2009 Strategic Plan
Goal Setting Retreat – February 19, 2009
Adopted March 10, 2009
1) Airport Site Selection
Policy Statement: Complete the FAA mandated dual track analysis to resolve the airport
runway issue by year-end to decide: 1) re-align the main runway at the current site; or 2)
relocate the airport to a proposed site southeast of Brookings.
Action Steps: Complete the FAA-mandated environmental impact analysis. Hold necessary
public hearings; provide public education on the issues. Select preferred site. Conduct financial
analysis. Identify, begin property acquisition process for selected site. Begin development of
Airport Layout Plan.
AIRPORT SITE SELECTION ANALYSIS: The FAA continues to analyze our consultant’s work
on the Environmental Assessment (EA). After policy review, it has been returned for a second
legal review. As a result, the public hearing process continues to be delayed and is not
expected to be held until early 2010. Subsequent steps have also been delayed pending
completion and FAA acceptance of the EA. One additional parcel needed for property
acquisition for the on-site alternative has been secured.
2) Storm Drainage
Policy Statement: Complete the Storm Water Management Master Plan, and identify and
prioritize specific Storm Water Management construction projects. Begin construction of said
projects.
Action Steps: Prioritize 13 project areas pursuant to Master Plan (scheduled for March 24,
2010). Develop a long-range financial plan for all projects. Select initial projects for storm
drainage remediation/correction. Revise design standards for detention/retention ponds. Begin
property acquisition process for initial project(s).
STORM DRAINAGE ANALYSIS: These action steps have been completed with the exception
of revision of design standards, which will be completed within the first quarter of 2010. All
storm drainage projects from the Master Plan have been prioritized. Property has been
acquired for Project #1. A comprehensive financial plan for all projects has been developed and
adopted. Design for Projects #1 and #2 are underway with construction to be completed in
2010.
3) 34th Avenue/20th Street Improvement Project
Policy Statement: Complete the Engineering Feasibility Study, and begin planning for the
construction of an upgrade to 34th Avenue, construction of 20th Street South extension, and an
I-29 overpass for 20th Street South.
45
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
Action Steps: Form an intergovernmental committee consisting of city, county, township, and
business community representatives to provide oversight of the project. Brookings County
needs to enter project area mileage into STIP needs designation. Identify parcels/property
owners where right-of-way needs to be acquired. Lobby for state law changes to provide for a
transportation district. Prepare for 2010 construction of 34th Ave. (Hwy 14, Prince Dr., and
DOT signal changes). Develop East District Plan, which includes the following area: 34th Ave.,
Swiftel/Larson Centers, DOT property, Wiese Business Park, Tellkamp Industrial Park, and
future industrial expansion area. Begin federal lobbying effort for Federal Highway Funding for
this project.
34th/20th STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT ANALYSIS: These action steps have been
completed with the East District Plan being revised to be a planning document built upon the
Comprehensive Plan. We continue to work with property owners for land acquisition for
future development. The intergovernmental committee has been formed and meets regularly.
The county has completed a turn-back process with the townships for jurisdiction over the
roadway. Lobbying efforts at the state and federal level have begun with a series of meetings
and printing of an informational brochure regarding the project. Phase I construction (34th Ave.
from Hwy 14 to Prince Dr. and signal improvements) is slated for the 2010 construction
season. Parcels have been identified where additional right-of-way needs to be acquired.
4) Railroad Safety Crossings
Policy Statement: Improve the safety of all in-city railroad crossings with city streets through
short-term strategies that install quad-gates and other appurtenances at crossings; medium-
term strategies that accomplish grade separation at intersections where possible; and long-term
strategies that accomplish a railroad by-pass around Brookings.
Action Steps: Continue long, intermediate, and short-term plans adopted in 2008. Apply to
DOT for safety crossing at 22nd Avenue. (Completed.) Secure federal appropriation of
$750,000 for safety improvements. (Awaiting congressional approval from this session.)
Formalize schedule of subsequent crossing improvements. Establish City-County Rail
Authority. Work with Canadian Pacific Railroad on Community Partnership Agreement.
RAILROAD SAFETY CROSSINGS ANALYSIS: DOT safety crossing was changed from 22nd
Avenue to Main Avenue. The DOT application for safety crossing funding at this location was
approved, the crossing design has been approved, and construction is slated for the 2010
construction season for Brookings’ first Rail Safety Crossing Improvement Project.
Congressional funding of our Rail Safety Application has been stalled in Congress with the
failure of Congress to pass any transportation bills this Congressional Session. A formal
schedule of future crossing improvements has been adopted with such improvements on a two-
year cycle to coincide with applications for state funding. The Rail Authority has been
established and the final two members are being sought for appointment. No progress has
been made on a new Community Partnership Agreement with the Canadian Pacific/DM & E
Railroad.
5) Space Needs Analysis
Policy Statement: Address the projected space and building facility shortage identified in the
completed Space Needs Study. This is to be accomplished by examining: 1) expanding current
facilities, 2) replacing current facilities, or 3) combining a new facility with Brookings County.
Action Steps: Work with intergovernmental committee on comprehensive facility planning.
Explore acquiring/re-development of former Sawnee Hotel for City Hall expansion.
46
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
SPACE NEEDS ANALYSIS: Additional detail on space needs has been completed from the
studies and a dual-track process has been conducted analyzing a joint facility with the county or
a single facility for the city alone. The City and County agreed to undertake an analysis
examining two potential sites for a joint facility. The process is well underway and will be
completed by year-end, which will determine whether it there will be a joint facility or if each
entity will pursue their own respective building projects. Exploration efforts have been
completed examining the feasibility of the former Sawnee Hotel, with a positive outcome. The
owners of the former Sawnee Hotel are willing sellers as they have their own building plans,
which include disposing of their current property.
6) Swiftel Center Expansion Project
Policy Statement: Continue to analyze the potential/feasibility of expanding the Swiftel Center
for convention, storage, and office needs as well as the possibility of partnering with a private
developer for an attached hotel.
Action Steps: Identify any additional information needed to consider the project. Final decision
on build or not-to-build. If the decision is to build: Identify scope of proposed project.
Contract with architect for design services. Begin recruitment efforts for hotelier. Secure
County Resource Center space. Develop financing plan. Conduct public education efforts.
Consider adjusting TIF District. If the decision is not to build: NO FURTHER ACTION
NEEDED.
SWIFTEL CENTER EXPANSION PROJECT ANALYSIS: Additional information was identified
as being needed involving schematic design and cost analysis updates; information was acquired
and presented. A build/no-build decision has not yet been made and public
information/education initiatives are slated for the first quarter of 2010. Efforts to recruit a
hotelier have been undertaken but will be a continual process and are contingent upon a final
decision on the project. Unofficial interest exists among hoteliers. Efforts have begun to
negotiate acquisition of the County Resource Center, but have not been completed.
7) Supplemental Issues: Acquire DOT property for future commercial/retail development
(Still working with DOT; so far not a willing seller.). South Fire Sub-station (No further
action.). Develop five-year staffing project plan (Completed.). Develop alternative budget
scenarios for modified service levels (Completed.). Program for downtown private
revitalization (Funds for consultant study eliminated; no further action.). Phase II bike lane
designation on city street determination (Completed.). Adaptive reuse/modify Research &
Technology Center (Completed.). Create sustainability committee to analyze “green” and
environmental issues (No action taken, Mayor’s priority for 2010.). Make technological and
“interactive” advancements to the website (Completed, but is on-going with budgeted funds.).
Goal #1: Quality of Life
Strategy A (Bicycle-pedestrian friendly): Make the community more bicycle and pedestrian
friendly. Adopt plans to promote, encourage and construct bicycle lanes on certain streets and
continue the development of comprehensive bicycle-pedestrian pathway system that connects
neighborhoods, schools, parks, SDSU and other civic and cultural amenities.
Strategy B (Park system planning and development): Develop a Park System Master Plan which
will guide the long-range development of the park system. The plan should be consistent with
the City’s overall Comprehensive Plan. The plan should address means to increase play at
Edgebrook Golf Course. Identify physical improvements to existing city parks and trail systems
and strategically identify locations for future parkland.
47
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
Strategy C (Nature Park): Complete an adoptive reuse plan to convert the old landfill into a
Nature Park Preserve Area.
Strategy D (Community wellness): Develop a community wellness initiative which forges
partnerships into a community grass-roots coalition designed to promote health and wellness.
Strategy E (Education and literacy): Develop a community-based partnership by facilitating a
redesign of educational systems to survive and thrive in a new economy to support the city’s
investment in knowledge based economy (i.e. Research Park).
Strategy F (Housing opportunities): Implement the recommendations of the Housing Study to
develop more diverse housing options to meet the needs of current and future residents.
Examine and address issues of neighborhood density and character. Continue to assess TIF
District Housing Policy.
Strategy G (Wi-Fi hotspots): Help facilitate the creation of wireless districts in public areas,
parks, and business areas.
GOAL #1: QUALITY OF LIFE ANALYSIS: Significant improvements have been made toward a
more bicycle-friendly community. Share-the-Road designation routes have been completed in
partnership with SDSU, two grant cycles of the state grant program, Safe-Routes-to-Schools,
have been successfully secured and a third grant cycle will be applied for relative to Strategy A.
The park system now has a soon-to-be-completed Park Master Plan and will be adopted the
first quarter of 2010 for Strategy B. The Nature Park was delayed due to funding but is slated
for the coming year. A landscape architect is in the process of being selected to develop a
Nature Center Master Plan that will guide development. A Dog Park is also part of this project.
Several community wellness grants have been applied for, but rejected. The most recent grant
application was approved; a work plan will be developed for the coming year. No specific
initiatives have been launched relative to education and literacy except the Innovation Campus
Research Park continues as a major construction project promoting university-based research
with economic development. The housing market has changed dramatically with the recession.
New home construction driven by market demand remains strong given the state of the
economy, but there has been a recent over-build of multi-family units resulting in a soft market
for this type of housing. This type of housing construction responded quickly to the initial
shortage of rental units. Relative to Wi-Fi “hotspots”, BMU maintains most public areas and
the Central Business District is already served by vendors. Changing technology will improve
service quality and coverage areas.
Goal #2: Economic Development
Strategy A (marketing, workforce development): Continue to support the mission and goals of
the BEDC and Vision Brookings.
Strategy B (Retail development): BEDC and the City should partner on specific initiatives
designed to attract and retain retail businesses.
Strategy C (Purchase property for future development): Seek means to purchase or otherwise
acquire property that can be land banked for future resale to encourage commercial and
industrial development and investment.
Strategy D (Road system into developing areas): The City should continue efforts to
strategically identify and construct future street systems to help develop industrial parks or
other commercial corridors.
Strategy E (State property acquisition): Continue to monitor opportunities for the acquisition
of the state DOT parcel as a means of land banking for future retail/commercial development
(Specific strategy to Strategy C).
48
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
Strategy F (Rail Authority membership): Obtain membership on the Brookings Rail Authority
to use as a means of improving rail service and safety.
Strategy G (Transportation funding legislative changes): Lobby for legislative changes that
provide local option funding mechanisms to meet local transportation challenges.
Strategy H (Downtown): Work with BEDC/DBI to develop a district plan for the Central
Business District which includes private development, rehabilitation, and reinvestment in
commercial property; and expands residential opportunities and historic preservation.
GOAL #2: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ANALYSIS: The economy has stalled Strategies A
and B resulting in a surplus, instead of a shortage, of qualified workforce or interest in retail.
Retail development needs to continue so we are well-positioned for retail expansion with the
economic recovery. Strategy C is in progress for one specific parcel but the timing is
somewhat determined by the potential seller. Strategies D and F have been completed.
Strategy E also continues but the seller is less interested in actually selling. Strategy G has been
stalled due to the economy and prospects for state funding. There has been no significant
progress on Strategy H except for some preliminary staff research into Business Improvement
Districts (BIDs) and other community initiatives for downtown private re-development.
Goal #3: Partnerships
Strategy A (I-29 business clusters): Promote the development of industry clusters along I-29
among communities in proximity to the interstate. Develop specific strategies for regional
economic development.
Strategy B (SDSU): Continue to collaborate with SDSU on mutually beneficial projects and
programs that may develop from time to time.
Strategy C (Intergovernmental relations): Maintain ongoing intergovernmental relationships and
develop partnerships with state and federal legislations, SDSU officials, SDSU student
association, school board, county board, and township board officials.
GOAL #3: PARTNERSHIPS ANALYSIS: Significant progress has been made on Strategy A, the
I-29 Corridor Project. A multitude of partners have signed on to the project and sufficient
funds have been raised to pay for the consultant contract as well as seed funds remaining to
finance the initial steps of project implementation depending upon the final outcome of the
study. The consultant has been selected through a competitive process and their six-month
scope of work has just begun. Strategies B and C are on-going and manifest themselves in a
wide variety of projects and initiatives which develop from time to time.
Goal #4: Fiscal Responsibility
Strategy A (Reserves): Continue the practice of officially dedicating undesignated reserves for
specific projects.
Strategy B (Debt levels): Strategically schedule issuances of debt so their placement
accomplishes the highest level of prudent capital investment while maintaining the highest level
of financial stability.
Strategy C (Core Services Plan): In light of current economic and fiscal constraints, staff shall
develop optimal budget scenarios describing basic or ‘core’ services in addition to the
traditional budget proposal. Such format shall follow outcome based performance budgeting
parameters.
Strategy D (Subsidy Funding): City shall notify subsidy recipients early in the budget process
that a policy limiting subsidies to current year’s levels will guide final budget decisions, past
funding is not guaranteed, and awarded amounts may be adjusted during the year.
49
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
GOAL #4: FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY ANALYSIS: These strategies have become indoctrinated
as standard operating procedures in our budgeting and financial management practices in
accordance with the Governance and Ends Policy. Performance-based budgeting is a core
principle in budget development, but we have not yet taken this issue to the next level by more
effectively using it as a decision-making tool. Debt level analysis and reserves are analyzed on
an on-going basis and the core services plan was developed with the proposed 2010 budget.
The budget contains items slated for immediate cuts in the event of a corresponding downturn
in revenues. Subsidy funding was conducted in accordance with Strategy D and the policy will
be revisited for possible updating prior to year-end.
Goal #5: Governance
Strategy A (Budget development): Implement initiatives designed to solicit and secure public
input through public forums on performance based budgetary issues and spending priorities.
Strategy B (Public education, openness in government): Implement initiatives to inform and
educate the public about the workings of their city government through various mediums such
as website, cable TV, surveys and newsletters.
Strategy C (Council training and development): Provide training opportunities such as the
National League of Cities Conferences, South Dakota Municipal League and others that invest
in elected officials’ education and training.
GOAL #5: GOVERNANCE ANALYSIS: Strategies B and C have been implemented this year
and are the subject of on-going practices. Public education and openness in government
continues to be advanced with technology but more needs to be done in this area with the two
chief operating boards of the City; Brookings Municipal Utilities and Brookings Health System.
Strategy A followed our usual process for budget development with two major public work
sessions on the budget at the City Manager Recommendation level for Council consideration.
More could be done here for public input during the budget development process if the
Council wishes.
Preview of proposed 2010 Construction Projects. Weldon reported the following are
programmed construction projects for various departments for the coming year: Streets:
Lefevre Dr. cul-de-sac reconstruction, mill/overlay 3rd Street from 3rd Ave. to 5th Ave., 34th
Street dig-outs at various locations, 3rd Ave. S. dig-outs from 2nd St. to 5th St., 34th Ave. N.
digouts from 6th St. to Hwy 14 Bypass, Railroad St. concrete slabs from 1st to Western, 22nd &
Orchard intersection traffic signals (with DOT), Main Ave. railroad crossing safety crossing
signals/arms, various locations on Street rotation list for 7-yr. rotation for seal coating.
Buildings: City Hall ADA-compliant entrance (depends upon space needs), East Fire Station
concrete drive approach/lighting/door, re-roof Rental house (22nd Ave.), Swiftel Center various
capital budgeted capital items and lighting, Larson Center Arena and holding barn lighting,
Larson Holding barn concrete floor (depends upon Soccer Assoc.), Airport AARF bldg.
maintenance building for plow (depends upon airport location), R & T Center HVAC canopy
repair and alterations, Pioneer Park Bandshell roof replacement, Hillcrest Park Tennis Building
roof/new siding/windows, Hillcrest Park large picnic shelter tables/grilles/sink facilities, Hillcrest
Park re-roof three older picnic shelters, Armory Building re-paint/stucco repair, Camelot Park
Neighborhood tot lot playground/rebuild in NW corner, Fire Lodge Building re-paint exterior.
General Construction: South Main Avenue sanitary sewer extension, Storm Drainage Project
#1 construction, Storm Drainage Project #2 construction, Storm Drainage Project #3 design
50
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
only, Innovation Campus Street and utility, Bike Trail extension, 34th Avenue reconstruction
from 6th St. to Prince Drive, Airport Layout Plan design at selected location.
Parks: Cracksealing trail sections/sealcoating approximately 1 mile at Aquatic Center, Hillcrest
Park playground equipment, Southbrook Nature park and dog park (design and phase I
construction), Edgebrook irrigate front 9, Edgebrook pond irrigation analysis, Everest ponds
(study only), Edgebrook sand trap improvements, Edgebrook re-build #1 tee box.
SDSU Northwest Quadrant Presentation. South Dakota State University officials
updated the City Council and public on the University’s future plans for the Northwest area of
SDSU’s Campus. The following is a summary of their presentation:
University Rationale: Northwest Neighborhood Feasibility Study follows through on Phases I &
II of Residential Life and Dining Services Master Plan. It aligns with the University’s Strategic
Plan by enhancing student success by engaging students in campus experience, improving
retention and graduation rates, increasing graduate student enrollment, and by providing
contemporary living environments.
Northwest Neighborhood Strategic Objectives: 1) sustainable development, 2) fill gaps in
current facilities and services for campus and community, 3) create opportunities for
partnerships, 4) develop fair and equitable transaction structures, and 5) adopt consistent
architectural guidelines.
Feasibility Study -- Timeline and Milestones - Brailsford & Dunlavey (B&D), retained to
complete study January 2009.
• B&D Site Visit - March 2009: Conducted student, faculty, staff and community stakeholder
focus groups; toured SDSU and Brookings facilities; and met with developers & banking
leadership
• B&D Site Visit - June 2009: Toured Agricultural Heritage Museum; Toured recently opened
apartment complexes; Met with civic/business leaders & developers
• B&D Site Visit - August 2009: Reviewed preliminary report with SDSU and Brookings
leadership and developers
• SDSU Participation March-August 2009: Edited and implemented student surveys;
maintained on-going communication with campus and Brookings stakeholders
• B&D completes study and recommends potential development opportunities, October
2009.
Conclusions - University-Based Projects: 1) Campus Gateway - Mature trees, curved masonry
entry piers, gateway parks, 2) Historic Equine Stable - Integrate with Agricultural Heritage
Museum function, and 3) Agricultural Heritage Museum - Proposed 40,000 sq. ft. building
Conclusion – Partnerships: 1) Active Adult Community: Embraces national and regional trends
leveraging university as an asset (e.g. Dickinson State), integrates with City efforts to build
capacity for attracting this demographic, and 2) Hotel / Conference Center: Supports
identified, on-campus needs, opportunity to collaborate with community and Innovation
Campus
51
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
B&D Conclusion: The above concepts require additional detailed analysis
Apartment Complex:
• Analyzed data from 2008 Residential Life and Dining Services Master Plan. Site visits to
SUNY-Buffalo, Drake, UND and NDSU. Interviews with Mankato State, USD, and the
University of Illinois. On-campus, upper-division apartment complex would improve
graduation rates.
• Distributed student surveys concerning apartment configuration, features and price points.
• Conducted seven focus groups with faculty, staff, students, administrators and community
stakeholders.
• Reviewed rents of 102 properties; including rental houses.
• Target Market: Full-time juniors, seniors, graduate students, paying $300 - $399 per
mo./person excluding utilities (Survey Responses = 1,455).
• Analysis shows target market lives 1.3 miles on avg. from campus (102 units).
• Relevant comparable units analyzed – 6 new high-end complexes averaging 1.7 miles from
campus with rents at about: $1,060 per unit/per month (3 bedroom) or $353 per
person/per month, $860 per unit/month (2 bedroom) or $430 per person/month, All rates
exclude utilities
• Conclusion: Demand for 88 unit (300 bed) private apartment with near campus location
and rents at about: $2,000 per unit/per month (4 bedroom) or $500 per person/month,
$1,176 per unit/month (2 bedroom) or $588 per person/per month. Rents express in 2009
dollars and exclude utilities and charges for parking and other amenities
• Conclusion: Include 4,000 sq. ft. of retail to serve residential apartment.
• Pro forma cost estimate = $16.9 million.
What is Next?: 1) Ongoing broad discussions on feasibility study conclusions, potential
partnerships and implementation options for each program element, 2) Draft Request for
Proposals (RFP), for review & comment for apartments that will market test the consultants’
conclusion. RFP -- A mechanism for prospective private partners to submit statements of
interest or proposals following terms established in the RFP document, and 3) Anticipated RFP
process for apartments: Submit to BOR request to proceed with RFP. Upon BOR approval
continue development of RFP process or processes. Hold pre-issue conference to refine RFP
document and process. Name review and selection advisory panel. Develop and finalize
selection criteria for RFP review. Issue RFP following Board of Regents capital project policy.
Collect and evaluate responses to RFP with input from advisory panel. Follow BOR policies to
implement if RFP process is successful. Continue investigating interest in and options for other
program elements.
Discussion: Reed asked if the trend was to have students closer to campus. Yes, having the students
closer to campus and a providing a mix of housing types is more desirable. He also asked, with the
current campus boundaries if some redevelopment of neighborhoods was being considered. Yes.
Whaley asked if the 300 unit apartment was for students only. Yes, the tenants would be upper class
and graduate students. Whaley commented she serves on the adult/assisted living board task force
and their recommendation was that the number of assisted living beds was adequate until 2021 and
52
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
questioned why the University’s statistics cited a need in 2012-13. They responded that the 2012-13
date would just be for apartment needs. The adult community work information was less detailed and
the recommendation was to continue to work with the community to determine that need.
Whaley asked how much in property taxes and other incentives would be generated by these units, or
would they be considered university owned and exempt? They responded the master developer would
be the builder/operator/owner of the apartment facility which would be subject to taxable improvement
rates. The private entity would have a ground lease with the Board of Regents.
Whaley noted many developers are building apartments and the rates and occupancy numbers are
down. She questioned if this was the right time for SDSU to get into this area or if this was just a
major plan to start with. She commented some citizens are questioning SDSU’s involvement in this
complex as well as retail uses on campus. SDSU officials said they can’t answer specifically, but it
depends on responses to the RFP. The developer would do their own market tests to determine if the
area could support this facility.
McClemans said the concept is intriguing, but his largest concern is that 53% of housing in Brookings
are rentals, which is a major cottage industry in town. These rental owners pay property taxes and
make investments. He questioned if the proposed facility would be 9 or 12 month leases? He said 9
month leases greatly affect the entire community. He noted Brookings was fortunate to have a robust
market through the mid 2000’s and 5% vacancy was normal. However, if overbuilding occurs and
rentals don’t fill, it’s a huge problem for the entire community.
University representatives clarified the proposed facility would be 88 units housing 300 people owned
by a private developer. The University would evaluate and accept submissions based on predetermined
criteria and it will be important to have a community-based panel in the criteria development.
Update on City/County Space Needs Issues. Kubal, Weldon, and Bartley gave an update
on the project. The joint committee has held three meetings and has invited all the property
owners from both proposed sites. The committee was also able to obtain costs from almost all
the owners, noting all the owners of the proposed site south of the Library have submitted
prices. The group held a special meeting last week to evaluate the proposals. The self-imposed
deadline is Dec. 29th at which time the City and County need to decide whether or not to
pursue a joint facility. Weldon has also assembled costs for a city-only project.
Bartley noted the City’s last meeting of the year will be December 15th and the Council will
need to make a decision.
Whaley asked if a joint meeting should be scheduled. The committee representatives said no,
the committee should work together as a group. Whaley questioned if the committee was
making the decision and if it was a done deal? No.
Bartley said some of the issues are uniquely the City’s. The concept of building together needs
to be decided based on land acquisition costs. This project could get derailed at several points,
including a referral. The City owes a response to the County Commission as the City asked
them to consider a joint option before moving forward on their own. He feels the City must
53
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
make the effort on the short timeline. Reviewing sites and costs was step one, now both
entities need to decide whether or not to move forward. The committee is not making a final
decision. This project can still stop.
Whaley expressed concern that a committee of four has narrowed this down to two sites.
Weldon said Al Heuton’s task force looked at three combined sites, but that report never
addressed a city-only site. The joint group eliminated one of the three sites. He further noted
the first task force didn’t approach property owners.
Whaley said Heuton’s report indicated which owners would sell. Weldon said the owners
south of the library submitted a petition to the County indicating they would be willing to
discuss a sale.
Whaley also expressed concern if there would be adequate parking for city and county
employees and the public at these sites.
Kubal noted the committee is conducting preliminary work as requested by the full council and
if the report doesn’t meet with the City Council and County Commission’s approval in its
entirety, then the project would not go forward.
Reed noted the original task force’s report did analyze parking, projected growth, public use,
landscape requirements and multi-story options.
1st Reading – Ordinance No. 32-09. A first reading was held on Ordinance No. 32-09: An
Ordinance Authorizing a Supplemental Appropriation t the 2009 Budget for the Purpose of
providing for additional funds for the Operation of the City. Public Hearing: December 15, 2009
Ordinance No. 30-09. A motion was made by Bartley, seconded by Kubal, to approve
Ordinance No. 30-09: An Ordinance amending the Zoning Ordinance pertaining to the
definition of a Coffeehouse. No public comment was made. All present voted yes; motion
carried.
Ordinance No. 31-09. A motion was made by McClemans, seconded by Kubal, to approve
Ordinance No. 31-09: An application for a Conditional use to establish an apartment with 3
units on the West 183 feet of the East 288 feet of the South 140 feet of Block 11, Parkdale
Home Second Addition (208 West 8th Street). No public comment was made. All present
voted yes; motion carried.
Liquor & Wine Renewals. A public hearing was held on the annual liquor and wine license
renewals. No public comments were made. A motion was made by Thorpe, seconded by
Bartley, to approve the annual liquor and wine licenses. All present voted yes; motion carried.
Liquor (On-Sale): Applebee’s/Porter Apple Co. B Inc., 3001 LeFevre Dr.; BraVo’s Inc., 610
Medary Ave.; Cubby’s Sports Bar & Grill / GDT Inc., 307 Main Ave.; Danny’s / David Olson Inc.,
703 Main Ave. So.; BPO Elks/ Brookings Lodge 1490, 516 4th St.; Fireside Inc., 2515 E. 6th St.;
Jim’s Tap, 309 Main Ave.; Half Pint Enterprise Inc / Lantern Lounge, 303 3rd St.; 9 Bar Nightclub
(Nine Inc.), 303 Main Ave.; Pavilion Inc., 2500 6th St.; Pheasant Café & Lounge, 726 Main Ave.
54
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
So.; Prairie Lanes Inc.; Ram & O’Hare’s Ent LLC/The Ram, 327 Main Ave.; Ray’s Corner /
Fergen Enterprises Inc., 401 Main Ave.; B&L Sullivan Inc./Sully’s Irish Pub, 421 Main Ave.;
Skinner’s Pub Inc., 300 Main Ave.; GEO Dokken Post 2118/VFW, 520 Main Ave.; Municipal
Liquor Store, 780 22nd Ave. So. Wine (On-Off Sale): BraVo’s Inc., 610 Medary Ave.;
Cottonwood Bistro, 1710 6th St.; Georges Pizza, 311 Main Ave.; Guadalajara, 1715 6th St., Suite
F; Hagman’s Bakery, 307 3rd St.; Hy-Vee Food Store, 700 22nd Ave.; Old Sanctuary, 928 4th St.;
The Shamrock, 1104 22nd Ave. So.; Skinner’s Pub Inc., 300 Main Ave.
Landfill Bid. The City received the following bids on December 1, 2009: Sanitation Products,
Sioux Falls, SD bid $157,065.00 with a trade-in allowance of $7,500.00 for a total bid of:
$149,565.00. Olympic Sales, Inc., West Fargo, ND bid $155,279.00 with a trade-in allowance of
$16,000.00 for a total bid of $139,279.00. Holcomb Freighter, Inc., Sioux Falls, SD bid
$146,281.00 with a trade-in allowance of $8,500.00 for a total bid of $137,781.00. A motion
was made by Kubal, seconded by Whale, to award the bid for a Landfill Rear Loader Refuse
Body and Truck Chassis to Olympic Sales Inc., of West Fargo, ND in the amount of
$139,279.00. No public comment was made. All present voted yes; motion carried.
Resolution No. 121-09. A motion was made by Bartley, seconded by Thorpe, to approve
Resolution No. 121-09; a Resolution Authorizing the Execution of Real Estate Purchase
Agreement (Pitts Property). No public comment was made. All present voted yes; motion
carried.
Resolution No.121-09
Resolution Authorizing the Execution of Real Estate Purchase Agreement
Be It Resolved by the City Council of the City of Brookings, South Dakota as follows:
Whereas, the City of Brookings desires to purchase the following described property:
Sublot “A” of Outlot One (1) in the Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter
(SW¼NW¼) of Section Twenty-seven (27), Township One Hundred Ten (110) North,
Range Fifty (50) West of the Fifth Principal Meridian, County of Brookings, State of
South Dakota, and
Whereas, the property has been offered for sale and the City of Brookings has
received a proposed Purchase Agreement, the terms of which are satisfactory to the
City of Brookings;
Now, Therefore, It Is Hereby Resolved by the City Council of the City of Brookings, South
Dakota, as follows:
A. That the City acquire title to the above-described property pursuant to a Purchase
Agreement with Randy Pitts and Brenda Pitts, for future land use needs of the City
of Brookings, South Dakota; and
B. That the Mayor, City Clerk and City Manager are authorized to execute the
documents required to complete this transaction in accordance with this Resolution.
REAL ESTATE PURCHASE AGREEMENT
55
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
THIS REAL ESTATE PURCHASE AGREEMENT is made and executed by and between the City
of Brookings, South Dakota, a South Dakota Municipal Corporation, (hereinafter referred to as
“Buyer”), and Randy Pitts and Brenda Pitts, husband and wife, (hereinafter referred to as
“Sellers”).
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, the Buyer desires to acquire the real property described below and Sellers agree to
convey to the Buyer pursuant to the terms of this Real Estate Purchase Agreement, the real
estate described below.
NOW THEREFORE, IN CONSIDERATION OF THE MUTUAL COVENANTS AND
AGREEMENTS CONTAINED HEREIN, IT IS MUTUALLY AGREED BY AND BETWEEN THE
PARTIES HERETO AS FOLLOWS:
1. Purchase of Real Property. The Sellers hereby agree to sell to Buyer and Buyer hereby
agrees to purchase from Sellers the following described real property: Sublot “A” of
Outlot One (1) in the Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter (SW¼NW¼) of
Section Twenty-seven (27), Township One Hundred Ten (110) North, Range Fifty (50)
West of the Fifth Principal Meridian, County of Brookings, State of South Dakota.
2. Purchase Price. The Buyer shall pay to Sellers the sum of Two Hundred Sixty-five
Thousand and no/100 ($265,000.00) Dollars for purchase of the above-described
property, payable as follows:
A. An earnest money down payment in the sum of One Thousand and
no/100 ($1,000.00) Dollars shall be paid by Buyer to Sellers at the time of
execution of this Real Estate Purchase Agreement. Sellers hereby
acknowledge receipt of said down payment.
B. The balance of the purchase price in the sum of Two Hundred Sixty-four
Thousand and no/100 ($264,000.00) Dollars shall be paid at Closing.
3. Real Estate Closing Documents and Miscellaneous. Sellers shall convey said property
free of liens and mortgages, but said property may be subject to easements, rights of
way and restrictions of record. In addition, the Buyer and Sellers, as the case may be,
shall also perform the following:
A. Title Insurance Policy. Sellers shall provide a Title Insurance Commitment, the
amount of which shall be based on the purchase price, which shows Sellers have
marketable and merchantable title to the real property which is the subject of
this Agreement. At the time of Closing, the Buyer and Sellers shall each pay one-
half (½) of the cost of the Title Insurance Policy.
B. Deed Preparation. The Buyer will prepare the Warranty Deed and
Certificate of Real Estate Value.
C. Transfer Fee/Recording Fee and Real Estate Taxes.
1. This transaction is exempt from transfer fees.
2. The Buyer shall pay the recording fee for the Warranty Deed.
3. The 2009 Real Estate Taxes shall be prorated from the date of Closing with
Sellers paying the pro-rated share to the date of Closing. Because the
56
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
property will be owned by the City of Brookings, which is a political
subdivision, the property is exempt from real property taxes after the date
of Closing.
D. Closing Date. The Closing Date shall occur as soon as title insurance is available
and the contingencies have been resolved. A mutually acceptable Closing Date
shall be selected by the parties, which is anticipated to be approximately
December 31, 2009.
E. Possession. Buyer shall acquire possession of the above-described property
immediately following Closing.
F. No Personal Property Included in this Agreement. No personal property is
included in the sale of the above-described real estate.
4. Contingencies. The obligations of the Buyer under this Agreement is contingent upon
the following conditions:
A. That Sellers provide clear and marketable title to the Buyer concerning the
above described real property, by Warranty Deed, which contains only easements,
rights of way and reservations of record.
If there are any title restrictions, defects or burdens to which Buyer objects, other than
easements, rights of way and restrictions of record, such objection shall be stated in
writing to Sellers, and Sellers shall be allowed a reasonable time of not less than sixty
(60) days in which to correct the same, and the Closing date shall be delayed for not
less than sixty (60) days to provide Sellers with time to correct said defect.
The obligations of the Buyer under this Agreement are further contingent upon the
following condition:
A. The Buyer’s obligation to purchase the property described herein shall be
terminated if the City Council’s decision to purchase the property is either successfully
referred by the voters or if any Resolution authorizing the expenditure of City funds for
the purchase of the above-described property is successfully referred by the voters.
Referred means the voters at an election vote to nullify the decision of the City to
purchase or pay for the property described herein. In the event of a successful referral,
this Agreement shall be null and void and the Buyer’s down payment shall be promptly
returned to Buyer.
5. Notice. This Real Estate Purchase Agreement was prepared by Steven J. Britzman,
Attorney for the Buyer, 521 Sixth Street, Suite 104, Brookings, South Dakota 57006.
6. Entire Agreement. This written Agreement constitutes the complete Agreement
between the parties and supersedes any prior oral or written Agreement between the
parties regarding the subject matter of this Agreement. There are no verbal agreements
that change this Agreement and no waiver of its terms will be effective unless such are
made and executed in writing and duly acknowledged as received by the parties.
57
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
7. Binding Effect. This Agreement binds the parties hereto and their heirs, successors and
assigns, if any.
Resolution No. 128-09 - Change Order. A motion was made by Bartley, seconded by
Thorpe, to approve Resolution No. 128-09, a Resolution authorizing Change Orders #1
through #4 (Final) for Larson Ice Center Interior Red Rink Project, Beck & Hofer Construction.
All present voted yes; motion carried.
Resolution No. 128-09
A Resolution Authorizing Change Orders 1 thru 4 (Final) For Larson Ice Center Red Rink
Project, Beck & Hofer Construction
Be It Resolved by the City Council that the following change orders be allowed for the Larson
Ice Center Red Rink Project: Change Order Number 1 – Extend hot water line to existing
mixing valve for an increase of $1,552.03; Change Order Number 2 – Walkway bridge revision
for an increase of $3,366.50; Change Order Number 3 – Changes to plastic laminate lockers
for an increase of $4,131.92; Change Order Number 4 – Repair concrete floor at exterior
doorway (increase $1,632.78), connect radiant tube heat to building controls (increase
$2,699.81), light fixture revision ($ 0 change), replace lockers with in-stock lockers (decrease
$2,881.64) for a total increase of $1,450.95; Adjust total contract amount (CO 1 thru 4) by an
increase of $10,501.40 and close out the project; and Adjust contract final completion date to
September 21, 2009.
Resolution No. 129-09 – Change Order. A motion was made by Kubal, seconded by
Thorpe, to approve Resolution No. 129-09, a Resolution authorizing Change Orders #1
through #6 (Final) for Larson Ice Center Exterior Project, Mills Construction, Inc. All present
voted yes; motion carried.
Resolution No. 129-09
A Resolution Authorizing Change Orders 1 thru 6 (Final) For Larson Ice Center Exterior
Project, Mills Construction, Inc.
Be It Resolved by the City Council that the following change orders be allowed for the Larson
Ice Center Exterior Project: Change Order Number 1 – Remove and re-route existing sub-
surface conduits for an increase of $7,036.00; Change Order Number 2 – Replace existing
settled sidewalk for an increase of $1,110.00; Change Order Number 3 – Removal of existing
signage for an increase of $1,038.00; Change Order Number 4 – Change wall material on
canopy ends for an increase of $7,143.00; Change Order Number 5 – Revised north entrance
sidewalk to provide accessibility for an increase of $3,061.00; Change Order Number 6 –
Provide pipe caps at downspout transitions for an increase of $395.00; Adjust total contract
amount (CO 1 thru 6) by an increase of $19,388.00 and close out the project and Adjust final
completion date to November 9, 2009.
Resolution No. 124-09 – Change Order. A motion was made by Bartley, seconded by
Whaley, to approve Resolution No. 124-09, a Resolution Authorizing Change Order #1
(CCO#1 Final) for Airport Fuel System – Concrete Work, Mills Construction. All present
voted yes; motion carried.
Resolution No. 124-09
58
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
A Resolution Authorizing Change Order No. 1 (CCO#1 Final) For Airport Fuel System
Project – Concrete Work, Mills Construction
Be It Resolved by the City Council that the following change order be allowed for the Airport
Fuel System Project – Concrete Work: Construction Change Order Number 1 (Final) Increase
the contract by $432.00 due to the need of a light pole at the new Jet Fuel tank location to
close out the project. Adjust contract final completion date to September 1, 2009.
Resolution No. 125-09 – Change Order. A motion was made by Bartley, seconded by
Whaley, to approve Resolution No. 125-09, a Resolution Authorizing Change Order #1
(CCO#1 Final) for Airport Fuel System – Tanks, Sioux Equipment. All present voted yes;
motion carried.
Resolution No. 125-09
A Resolution Authorizing Change Order No. 1 (CCO#1 Final) For Airport Fuel System
Project - Fuel Tanks, Sioux Equipment
Be It Resolved by the City Council that the following change order be allowed for the Airport
Fuel System Project (Fuel Tanks): Construction Change Order Number 1 (Final). Increase the
contract by $825.00 due to the need for a larger diameter hose for the Jet Fuel tank to close
out the project. Adjust contract final completion date to November 30, 2009.
Resolution No. 126-09 – Change Order. A motion was made by Bartley, seconded by
Whaley, to approve Resolution No. 126-09, a Resolution Authorizing Change Order #1
(CCO#1 Final) for Airport Fuel System – Electrical Work, Perry Electric. All present voted
yes; motion carried.
Resolution No. 126-09
A Resolution Authorizing Change Order No. 1 (CCO#1 Final) For Airport Fuel System –
Electrical Work, Perry Electric
Be It Resolved by the City Council that the following change order be allowed for the Airport
Fuel System - Electrical Work: Construction Change Order Number 1 (Final): Adjust contract
for additional work to disconnect old Jet Fuel electrical connections, wiring for a jet fuel water
separation heater and supplying a new security light and pole for a total increase of $1,804.93
to close out the project. Adjust contract final completion date to October 7, 2009
Resolution No. 127-09 – Change Order. A motion was made by Bartley, seconded by
Whaley, to approve Resolution No. 127-09, a Resolution Authorizing Change Order #1
(CCO#1 Final) for Airport Fuel System – Tank Restoration Project, VJ Ahlers Construction.
All present voted yes; motion carried.
Resolution No. 127-09
A Resolution Authorizing Change Order No. 1 (CCO#1 Final) For Airport Fuel System Tank
Restoration Project, VJ Ahlers Excavating, Inc.
Be It Resolved by the City Council that the following change order be allowed for the Airport
Fuel System Tank Restoration Project: Construction Change Order Number 1 (Final): Remove
a concrete platform underneath the Av Gas tanks for an increase of $732.89 and adjust plans
quantities to as-build quantities for a decrease $5,746.55 for a total decrease of $5,013.66 to
close out the project. Adjust contract final completion date to November 6, 2009
59
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
Parking Ad Hoc Committee. A motion was made by Reed, seconded by Kubal, to approve
the formation of a Parking Ad Hoc Committee with the following representation: Planning
Commission chair, Traffic Safety Committee Chair, SDSU Student Association, SDSU
administration, a city council member, and two citizens at large and support staff to be assigned
by the City Manager. Council Discussion: Bartley objected to the creation of this ad hoc committee
citing the Planning Commission had already addressed the issue and the next step was for the Traffic
Safety Committee to review the issue. He thought it becomes difficult to establish policy when the
problem is localized. All present voted yes; except Bartley voted no; motion carried.
TABLED ITEM: McCrory Gardens Visitors Center. A motion was made by Thorpe,
seconded by McClemans, to remove the McCrory Gardens Visitors Center discussion from the
table. All present voted yes; motion carried.
Mayor Reed requested an opportunity to comment on if he had a personal conflict taking action
on university requests. He noted that he works for the SDSU Foundation as the development
director for the College of Engineering and is an employee of the Foundation, which has its own
Board of Directors and doesn’t report to anyone at SDSU. If a request specific to the College
of Engineering were before the City, he would have to recuse himself. SDSU has asked the
Foundation to raise private funds for this project, but the Foundation isn’t carrying the project.
The University is responsible for requesting funds from the Board of Regents and any other
donors, such as the City. The SDSU Foundation only asks for private funds from individuals or
organizations which is why University personnel are here to make this request. The City
Attorney concurred with the Mayor’s assessment of his involvement.
ACTION: A motion was made by Reed, seconded by McClemans, to pledge $250,000 to the
McCrory Gardens Visitor Center with terms of payment and a Memorandum of Understanding
between the City and the University to be worked out.
Discussion: The Council reviewed its future financial obligations noting the aquatic center obligation will
end in 2013 and suggested this debt not commence until that one is finished. Weldon said it depended
on when the money was needed and what fits into the city’s debt schedule. He and the Finance
Manager will meet later that week to review long range capital and the debt schedule.
Reed commented he didn’t think the city could commit more than $250,000 at this time, but a number
is needed first and then the City could figure out how to pay for it.
Bezdichek agreed McCrory Gardens was a wonderful facility, but cautioned that other facilities or
events could be adversely impacted by the Center. He felt the $250,000 amount was a more
appropriate City commitment to the project rather than the original request of $1,000,000, and
questioned why SDSU wasn’t funding the Center.
It was noted the University’s construction funds are already obligated.
Whaley expressed concern that the Center would compete with the City’s facility and private
venues for wedding receptions and banquets.
60
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
Reed noted the specific area funded by the city would be an issue to work out in the MOU.
McClemans also expressed concern about competing with the private sector. University
officials said the new facility would be an education and visitor center with its primary focus as
an educational benefit to McCrory Gardens, the campus and the public. The reception hall and
meeting rooms are ancillary uses to support the primary educational benefits of the Gardens.
Bartley commented the MOU can stipulate that the city funds are for the educational area only
and that the City is sensitive to not competing with the private sector.
On the motion; all present voted yes; except Whaley voted no; motion carried.
Adjourn. A motion was made by Whaley, seconded by Thorpe, to adjourn. All present voted
yes; motion carried. Meeting adjourned at 8:36 p.m.
CITY OF BROOKINGS
ATTEST: Tim Reed, Mayor
Shari Thornes, City Clerk
61
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
Brookings City Council
November 17, 2009
(unapproved)
The Brookings City Council held a meeting on Tuesday, November 17, 2009 at 5:00 p.m., at City
Hall with the following members present: Mayor Tim Reed, Council Members Julie Whaley, John
Kubal, Mike McClemans (left at 6:00 p.m.), Mike Bartley, and Jael Thorpe. Council member Tom
Bezdichek was absent. City Manager Jeff Weldon, City Attorney Steve Britzman, and City Clerk
Shari Thornes were also present.
Swiftel Center architect presentation. Dan Miller, JLG Architects, gave an overview of
the Swiftel Center Expansion Project. From the initial VenuWorks study, they have performed
a cursory/overview estimate and focused on updating the numbers to current market place
standards. Phase I consists of an additional ballroom, new support space with kitchen and
receiving areas, and renovation of existing meeting rooms to be more visible and accessible.
Phase II consists of storage space, dressage rooms, support space for performances and such,
and renovating/updating the public restrooms. This would include the marshalling area; the
space between the Swiftel Center and the Larson Ice Arena. It would be a cold
covered/enclosed area for staging livestock animal events and a loading/unloading area.
In looking at the marshalling area, Weldon commented the idea behind it is to provide a staging
area for loading/unloading. The area between the two buildings would be enclosed with large
overhead doors for access for semis, busses, etc. This enclosure would provide some
protection and weatherization with potentially reducing energy losses when accessing the arena
and getting the arena back to a hospitable temperature for the public.
Mayor Reed asked if the marshalling area could be used as a livestock holding barn. Richter
stated, yes, it could be used for livestock and would also benefit the go-cart and motocross
races as well. The area is approximately 10,000 square feet. The way the facility is today, the
north doors open to the outside and often struggle to get the arena back to a hospitable
temperature if the doors are open for a long period of time. However, this concept needs to
be brought to the Fire Marshall to verify it will fit within all codes.
Miller stressed in order to have a synergy happen with the Swiftel Center and its economic
impact, there should be a joint venture with a developer. They have allocated some space for a
future on-site hotel and showed some drawings of what it could look like. Some pictures of the
quality/type of ballroom space along with its flexibility, as well as a corridor area, and the
additional vestibule on the South side were also shared.
Phase I cost estimate is $3.67 Million for new construction and $456,000 for renovations.
Phase II cost estimate is $923,000. Both phases have an increase in cost over the previous
study: Phase I is 8.6% higher, and Phase II is 16% higher. Site development could be 8% less if
shared with a hotel developer. The overall cost is $7.6 million; 15% higher from the previous
estimate. The significant factor in the cost increase is market change.
62
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
Reed asked about the original stage planned for the west side of the building. Miller responded
as part of a functional discussion for how much it would get used for the value put into it, they
cut it back and instead spread the addition lengthwise alongside the existing building. Reed
asked about the concerns of an adequate power supply for events held on the west side.
Richter stated the stage area would be removed from the project, at least for now, and as far as
the power supply issues on the west side, they are in good control of those concerns and could
rectify the situation with additional outlets.
Reed commented the HVS Study showed a smaller number of break-out rooms. Richter
explained the HVS Study compared to the VenuWorks Study, the ballroom square footage was
12,000 versus 10,000. The plans reviewed today show the ballroom with 10,000 square feet.
They originally looked at turning the Daktronics Room into three rooms which could be
subdivided into 6 additional meeting rooms, and cut that back to 5.
Bartley asked if any consideration was given to outside storage facilities for dirt, panels, gates,
etc. as they pose issues sitting outside. Richter replied it is not included in these plans;
however, the storage area is on the CIP within the next five years and would be located north
of the RV Park. Bartley asked what would be done prior, during, or after this project and how
would it be funded as he wondered if it could or should be combined as the hotel would be
located where the current outdoor storage area is located.
Weldon clarified this proposal envisions the city taking over the County Resource Center.
However, the budget does not include a consideration for compensation to the county for the
purchase. That is an issue out there, but it is not part of this budget. He is unsure if it would
be a purchase of the space, a lease, or a trade-out of property as this has not been negotiated.
The cost of moving offices from the loft to the new office space is not included in this
construction.
Bartley questioned the entire design seems to be based upon an attached hotel. If the hotel
isn’t there, the extra facilities are not needed. He asked how it is envisioned approaching
hotels and moving forward with no money.
Weldon stated there are a couple issues all can agree on: 1) the community has a shortage of
conference and meeting facilities, and 2) this project, in and of itself, doesn’t work without a
hotel partner. Presented as part of this project, is the opportunity to find a hotelier to sell or
lease a portion of the ground to, so a private developer could build a 80 to 100 room hotel.
Some hotel chains have expressed preliminary interest in this project, but nothing specific or
concrete; with the primary interest in only operating the hotel. There has been more due
diligence done on this project than any other past or present project; studied for over two
years with two different feasibility studies conducted. This issue deserves some public dialogue
to bring the issue full circle as to whether or not this is to remain a community priority. It has
been on the top of the strategic plan for the past two years. Responding to Council Member
Bartley’s question, how to approach hotels is an issue Weldon is looking for direction on and
clarification where it fits within the process.
63
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
Miller has seen projects go either way; build all at once, or build the convention center first,
then look for a hotel. The Alerus Center in Grand Forks, ND is an example of building the
convention center first, and finding a hotel later. Building the convention center first makes it
easier to attract hotel developers, as they can see what they are attaching onto. The
VenuWorks study looked at a five-year economic impact valued at $21 million per year; this
number was based on studies of facilities without an attached hotel. The updated Convention
Visitors Bureau numbers show a 25% increase over the initial study. The economic impact and
success of a facility is based on the number of bookings. If the Swiftel Center continues to have
the success with bookings as currently, some of those economic impact dollars will be seen
without a hotel, but there would be increased synergy if there was a hotel.
Whaley stated it was nice to see some numbers. She wants to go forward with this project,
even though it might be a tough sell. She is optimistic a hotel will follow.
Reed is concerned with the $21 million economic impact. The 2008 impact statement, with
98,825 people had an estimated economic impact of $9,400,000. The HVS Study stabilized
attendance around 78,600; stabilized attendance included team practices for traveling teams,
the Pride of the Dakota’s rehearsals, etc. Reed figured actual economic impact to be closer to
$7.8 million. The HVS Study estimated 93,586 people in attendance, which was an increase of
about 15,000 people. Reed came up with an additional $800,000 in economic impact using the
same model with the increase in attendance. Reed wants to understand where the $21 million
comes from.
Richter stated in talking about economic impacts and models, there is some difference between
numbers. VenuWorks went off the base year, 2008, with a $9.4 million in economic impact;
90,000 people in attendance. The majority of the Swiftel Centers events are arena-type events
with 2% of those attendees staying over-night. That is a very conservative number as more
than 2,000 hotel rooms are rented in a year’s time due to events held at the Swiftel Center.
The overly conservative Board of Directors use $104/day for an overnight visitor. Five-year
projections, which include the first year, add an additional 16,000 visitors with to this expansion
project. By year five it VenuWorks projects just over 50,000 whereas HVS Study shows it
closer to 14,000. The national number for an overnight visitor’s average spending is
approximately $280,000; Brookings uses $104,000, a highly conservative number. If you plug
those numbers in at $280,000 or $280/day spending, that is how the $21 million economic
impact is figured. When adding the convention facility portion to the economic impact model,
they kept 2% of attendees as staying overnight, but increased the convention business attendees
to 35%, which is still extremely conservative. The average convention attendee stays three
nights; incorporated into this is gas, hotel room charges, meals, shopping, etc. It is all
incorporated into how the economic dollars work and why communities such as Brookings
build these facilities. In looking at convention attendees, 90% is a more realistic percentage of
those staying overnight; in the convention business, people are attracted from outside the area
to come to a convention. The difference between HVS and VenuWorks, is VenuWorks
conducts studies from a management based side. VenuWorks has the advantage of being the
day-to-day managers of the building and seeing what is attracted and what isn’t. VenuWorks
has a strong conviction and from day one before the building was built, the advisory board has
talked about having a full-fledged convention center. Eleven years later it is getting closer to
64
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
that happening. They are convinced and confident this is the right direction to grow out this
facility for Brookings.
Kubal stated the economic impact figures are very impressive and doesn’t have any reason to
doubt them. However, he sees an image issue where this is not filtering down to the general
public. In running for office, not one person told him spending more money on the Swiftel
Center was one of their highest priorities. However, in some recent informal conversations,
people have indicated their reluctance to spend more money on the Swiftel Center.
Richter agreed with Kubal this has to be brought to an Open Town Hall Meeting. If the hard
questions can’t be answered, then this project has no merit to move forward. There is support
out there, but public education is needed and hasn’t been done. There have been two
feasibility studies; a validation study and the original study. Schematic drawings and updated
cost estimates have been done, now the public needs to weigh in on the project.
Weldon stated the public has a lot of questions about the merits of a capital investment of this
magnitude. The Council hasn’t authorized staff to start that kind of a dialogue, and what the
public doesn’t know is very easy, conservative, and safe to oppose at the very beginning. There
is an obligation to explain the issue to the community; the council needs to give authorization
to do so. It is clear and convincing a hotel and additional conference/meeting facilities are
needed in this community. Capitalizing on an investment the city and taxpayers have already
made is the prime way to do this so nothing is recreated or duplicated unnecessarily. The
Swiftel Center is the initial investment. It needs to be updated, modernized, and kept going. In
terms of debt service, this project will not begin until the current Swiftel Center is paid for,
which makes this project relatively painless to pay for. The fact is if the Swiftel Center
becomes antiquated, outdated, and functionally obsolete, it might as well close, because at that
point, the marketability will go down, and the operating subsidy will only increase. Investments
are needed to stay current and in business. Weldon would like to see this get to the point
where it generates enough Triple B Tax to not need a general fund subsidy. There is a rational
nexus there; the visitors using the facility would actually be paying for the facility. It makes
sense, is good policy, and fiscal management. The subsidy will benefit those who benefit from
visitors. This subsidy would support the hotels, restaurants, gas stations, and shops through the
economic impact.
Thorpe questioned what attempts have been made to engage developers or private developers
with this project, whether it be existing or new event centers. She is having a hard time seeing
how something of this magnitude can cash flow; how is doubling the investment going to get
money out of it and would like to see more information.
Weldon stated there has been some preliminary discussions with some hotel developers; they
are more interested in running hotels, not so much interested in running convention or
conference centers, and if they did, they would want a subsidy. Both Aberdeen and
Watertown have city-owned facilities managed by private companies, and are subsidized by the
city as the owner of the facility. This is a public events facility, which is rare that it will actually
make any money. As a quality of life issue, the same can be said for the Aquatic Center, the
65
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
Larson Ice Center, and several other quality of life amenities investments have been made in
and this isn’t any different.
Richter clarified the term public facility is used when a facility is built by a municipality, county
government, or a university. The Sioux Falls Convention Center, the Sioux Falls Arena, the
Washington Pavilion, the Fargo Dome, and the Alerus Center are all publicly financed facilities.
They are subsidized in some form by the General Fund of the cities or Third Penny Sales Tax.
In 2009, the Swiftel Center’s expenses to operate minus the CIP budget was around $1.5
million. Revenue made on events, food, beverage, rent, equipment, etc., was almost $1.2
million. This allows a budget shortage of $300,000; the subsidy bridges that gap. If the
economic impact is around $10 million, the Second Penny Sales Tax collected is $200,000. The
$300,000 shortage would be decreased by $200,000, leaving a budget shortage of $100,000.
Most of the events at the Swiftel Center are subject to the Third Penny Sales Tax. If a 3% Sales
Tax is collected on all events at the Swiftel Center, the economic impact would be $300,000.
Weldon stated the $300,000 general fund subsidy directly supports the building; the building’s
sole function is to have events to attract visitors to town and to keep our citizens here and
entertain the quality of life. When visitors are attracted to town, they support the businesses
which directly benefit from visitor spending (hotels, restaurants, gas stations, etc.). Brookings
is not in a unique situation subsidizing the Swiftel Center. When private businesses to build
such a facility, they look at the bottom line; cities look at the economic return on investment
and quality of life issues.
McClemans stated his concern with the entire project is the return on investment. Ten million
has been spent and now talking about spending another $9 million. Economic impact, sales tax
revenue, subsidies….there is no talk on the return of the already invested $10 million. The
study shows the subsidy increasing from $300,000 to $450,000 and questioned if this is the best
use of the city’s funds. It can be called economic impact or sales tax revenue, but the reality is
a lot of money spent to turn dollars which will never be gotten back. The study is very well
done, but he doesn’t support it.
Hypothetically speaking, Weldon asked if a private developer wanted to build a private water
park, if the city should close down the Aquatic Center. McClemans stated it is already built.
Weldon added the Swiftel Center has been built too. Weldon doesn’t know what the
University is going to be doing in the future and it is not in the best interest to pass up
opportunities in community investment on speculation of who might do what when. He asked
McClemans if he was looking to get a return on capital investment and what kind of capital
return on investment has been had with the Larson Ice Center or the Aquatic Center. Weldon
does not understand McClemans analogy. McClemans stated it continues to be a situation
where the subsidy is in theory covered by sales tax, and $19 million is a tremendous investment
in a facility. Weldon asked how it differs from other investments. McClemans responded the
Aquatic Center is used by the children in the community. Weldon added it is used only 70 days
a year. McClemans commented that is pretty limited and maybe a dome should be installed
over it with some of the $9 million.
Bartley commented the pool, soccer fields, golf course are all quality of life issues subsidized by
the city. They bring people to town to shop, buy food, etc. The Swiftel Center has helped
66
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
recruit retail, restaurants, and other amenities college students want to have in a community.
This community elected to step forward to put money in this facility to encourage other
businesses to come to this community and enhance the quality of life, which is an expansion of
city dollars no one can put a figure on. If a return on investment is tied to this, looking at the
millions of dollars invested in this community, the Swiftel Center trumps it. The Swiftel Center
has been a great deal for Brookings.
ACTION: A motion was made by Bartley, seconded by Whaley, to move forward to the
architectural design phase with whatever public hearings are deemed necessary.
Discussion: Whaley commented bids need to get out. Using the SDDOT property as an example, no
one will invest in it until something is bought. The city has invested in the Swiftel Center; the convention
center will only enhance it.
Kubal asked Whaley if he heard her correctly in that she is ready to take bids. Whaley stated bids
could be taken now, or wait another six or seven more months and endure increased costs. Kubal is
concerned there hasn’t been enough public information provided of what this will do for the City of
Brookings. Kubal is not worried about subsidies if there is a possibility of a return on investment via
economic impact, but he is not convinced this is where it is going to go.
Whaley expressed concern with $250,000 spent on two studies, and then possibly just put this project
on the shelf. A contractor could take the floor plans and come up with a cost estimate. If a hotel sees
this project moving forward, ground could be broke in April. Much can go on in less than a year’s time.
Having a public hearing was part of Bartley’s motion. The project can be cancelled at any point prior to
the bid letting. Bartley stated having council support to move onto the next step is needed; remaining in
limbo is not an option.
Thorpe agreed this will enhance the quality of life, however, she is uncertain it is a fair rationale for
moving ahead with a nearly $10 million investment. She will have a hard time justifying to the residents
of Brookings, in such an uncertain economy, to invest this amount of money in such a project.
Reed expressed concern with economic impact ranging from $1 to $10 million dollars. With a
convention center, a night’s stay is worth more, and a comparison of the 2008 numbers is needed to
see what the actual increase would be; the amount people spend will not increase, just the number of
people. A request for proposal is needed to understand if this is actually feasible. It needs to be
determined if the location beside the Swiftel Center is indeed the ideal location, however, if this is the
only option, it will limit what can be done.
Weldon agreed with Council Member Thorpe, no matter how much effort or work has gone into a
project it is not a justification to do it. It has to be right for the community and it has to make a lot of
sense. Public education is needed, and Weldon would need support for such an undertaking. He
doesn’t see any reason to hire any more consultants or do any additional reports which can’t be done
directly in house to get this to a yes or no issue for the community.
67
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
On the motion, Kubal questioned if he understood it to mean actually hiring an architectural firm.
Bartley clarified the motion was to move to the architectural phase with such public hearings as may be
necessary; doing the public hearings first.
Reed clarified the motion states to go ahead with the architectural design. The City Manager needs to
be given clear direction. Kubal asked if the motion would involve paying for an architect at this stage.
Bartley clarified before hiring an architect, a contract would have to be approved. Bartley is more
concerned to get the dialogue started with the direction being the final design phase. We are in
agreement to move forward if the public hearings, the design work, and the financing all works out.
The motion says to push forward and that is all.
Reed is concerned of being locked in with our methodology on this one site.
On the motion, Bartley and Whaley voted yes; Kubal, McClemans, Reed and Thorpe voted no.
Motion failed.
ACTION: A motion was made by Whaley, seconded by Bartley, to set up a public hearing at
the Swiftel Center set soon to move in a forward direction. Reed made a friendly amendment
to hold the public hearings at the Council Chambers for it to be televised. Bartley added a
friendly amendment with location and date to be determined by the City Manager. On the
motion, all present voted yes; motion carried.
(McClemans left meeting at 6:00 p.m.)
6:00 P.M. REGULAR MEETING.
Consent Agenda. A motion was made by Bartley, seconded by Kubal, to approve the
consent agenda as follows:
A. Action to approve the agenda.
B. Action to approve the October 27, 2009 City Council Meeting minutes.
C. Action on Resolution No. 110-09, updating the EEOC Statement.
Resolution No. 110-09
Equal Opportunity Policy Statement
It is the fundamental policy of the City of Brookings to provide equal opportunity for all
residents, applicants and employees as it pertains to provision of services and
employment opportunities in order to ensure that there will be no discrimination
against any person on the basis of race, creed, color, religion, sex, age, national origin,
citizenship status, sexual orientation, political affiliation, genetic predisposition or carrier
status, disability, marital or veteran status, or any other basis prohibited by state or
federal law.
D. Action on Resolution No. 111-09, for 2010 Dental Insurance Contribution
Rates.
Resolution No. 111-09
Establishing Dental Insurance Monthly Contribution Rates for the City of Brookings
Dental Insurance Plan
68
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
Whereas, Be It Resolved, that the 2010 employee and employer contributions for the
dental insurance plan be established as follows: City General and Public Safety Employees
(Employer’s Share - 75% of Single Rate)/Employee’s 2010 Share/Total): Employee Only
($26.13/$8.71/$34.84), Employee/Spouse ($26.13/$40.71/$66.84), Employee/Children
($26.13/$42.57/$68.70), and Family ($26.13/$67.01/$93.14).
E. Action to appoint Patty Bacon to Ryan Howlett’s vacated position on the
Human Rights Committee (term 11/17/2009 through 1/1/2012).
F. Action on an amendment to the Police Union Contract; On page 1 was title
change within the contract for the International Brotherhood of Teamsters Union, and
on page 23 was a change in the clothing allowance for investigators within the Police
Dept. from $250 to $350. This change does not impact the cost or past practice, since
it has been $350 for a few years; it only corrects an oversight in language.
G. Action to approve a Preliminary Plat for Lots 1 – 7, Block 6, Valley View
Addition.
H. Action on Resolution No. 112-09, a Resolution fixing time and place for
Hearing Upon Assessment Roll for 2008-04STA (East/West Alley from 6th
Street to 7th Street between 7th Avenue and 8th Avenue).
Resolution No. 112-09
Resolution Fixing Time and Place for Hearing upon Assessment Roll for Street
Assessment Project No. 2008-04STA
(East/West Alley from 6th Street to 7th Street between 7th Avenue and 8th Avenue)
Be It Resolved by the City Council of the City of Brookings, South Dakota, as follows:
1. The assessment roll for Street Assessment Project No. 2008-04STA having been filed
in the office of the City Clerk on the 9th day of November, 2009, the City Council shall
meet in the Council Chambers, City Hall, in said City on Tuesday, the 8th day of
December, 2009 at 6:00 o'clock PM, the said date being not less than twenty (20) days
from the filing of said assessment roll for hearing thereon.
2. The City Engineer is authorized and directed to prepare a notice describing, in
general terms Street Assessment Project No. 2008-04STA, the date of filing the
assessment roll, the time and place of hearing thereon, stating that the assessment roll
will be open for public inspection at the office of the City Engineer and referring to the
assessment roll for further particulars.
3. The City Clerk is authorized and directed to publish said notice in the official
newspaper at least one (1) week prior to the date set for hearing and to mail a copy
thereof, by first class mail addressed to the owner or owners of any property to be
assessed at his, her or their last mailing address as shown by the records of the Director
of Equalization at least one (1) week prior to the date set for said hearing.
On the motion, all present voted yes; motion carried.
69
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
1st Reading – Ordinance No. 30-09. A first reading was held on Ordinance No. 30-09: An
Ordinance amending the Zoning Ordinance pertaining to the definition of a Coffeehouse. Public
Hearing: December 8, 2009
1st Reading – Ordinance No. 31-09. A first reading was held on Ordinance No. 31-09: An
application for a Conditional Use to establish an apartment with 3 units on the west 183 feet of
the east 288 feet of the south 140 feet of Block 11, Parkdale Home Second Addition (208 West
8th Street). Public Hearing: December 8, 2009
Ordinance No. 27-09. A motion was made by Whaley, seconded by Thorpe, to approve
Ordinance No. 27-09: Budget Amendment #2, an Ordinance Authorizing a Supplemental
Appropriation to the 2009 Budget for the purpose of providing for additional funds for the
operation of the City. No public comment was made. All present voted yes; motion carried.
Ordinance No. 28-09. A motion was made by Bartley, seconded by Kubal, to approve
Ordinance No. 28-09: An Ordinance amending the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Brookings
and pertaining to off-street parking requirements for a two-family dwelling for the purposes of
administration of the Zoning Ordinance.
Council Discussion: Kubal asked for clarification on the two additional parking spaces for each
dwelling unit; if it should read for each additional bedroom and not dwelling unit. Dan Hanson,
Planning & Zoning Coordinator, stated currently two parking spaces are required per dwelling
unit regardless of the number of bedrooms. The proposed change would go one step further
and tie together dwelling units and number of bedrooms to the parking requirements. Once a
duplex exceeds two bedrooms, one additional on-premise parking space is required for that
unit, providing ample on-premise parking. Very few duplexes have four bedrooms, mainly
because four unrelated individuals occupying a dwelling unit in a single family or two family
dwelling is not allowed.
Weldon understood a required parking space for each additional bedroom. Hanson stated a
duplex requires four parking spaces. However, if one unit is a three bedroom and the other
unit is a two bedroom, five parking spaces are required. If both units are three bedroom units,
six parking spaces are required. It is a combination of dwelling units and the number of
bedrooms.
Kubal asked for clarification if a duplex had two units with four bedrooms each, they would be
required to have six parking spaces, not eight. Hanson stated that is correct, and this would
also apply for conversions.
Whaley asked in regards to conversions, how would compliance of the ordinance be enforced.
Hanson stated parking in boulevards and front yards is restricted. He gave a scenario of adding
an extra bedroom to an existing duplex; along with the permit to install a bedroom, an
additional parking space would also have to be installed where city ordinance legally allows. If it
isn’t, then they wouldn’t be allowed to add the bedroom. This wouldn’t be an issue in most
cases, as parking is allowed on side lot lines, the sides of the garage, or off of an alley. Most
places could find a location, but it would be linked.
70
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
Weldon stated this and the issue of grandfathering has been discussed at the Planning
Commission. This ordinance would be prospective and not retroactive or complied with any
pre-existing conditions.
Britzman explained grandfathering and how it relates to this issue. This is a complex issue as to
how to modify the zoning rules as they affect existing zoned property. The city possesses
police powers to regulate the use of public right-of-way; streets and alleys are within the city’s
authority to regulate parking for the welfare and safety of the community. Police Power is a
phrase labeled by the court systems, meaning the authority to look out for the community’s
safety and welfare. How far a community can go to impose new rules on existing is a debated
topic on a variety of different issues nationwide, and has been the subject of four fairly recent
Supreme Court decisions as to whether or not a governmental entity has gone too far in
imposing regulations. Regulations have a valid purpose, but the extent in which they impact
people can be viewed as being beyond the authority of the governmental entity to regulate.
Whether or not modifications can be made as they apply to existing situations, such as current
rental dwellings, may include the possibility of further zoning ordinance changes applied
throughout the city. Caution is being exercised in being aware of the issues and litigation which
has occurred throughout the country where regulations went too far. There is one case in
South Dakota dealing with parking issues; this is due mainly as South Dakota does not have the
population density issues which exist in larger metropolitan areas. Britzman is currently
researching possible additional regulations which would be subject to the public input of the
Planning Commission and City Council decision making process and will be able to provide a
better recommendation in a couple of weeks. If there is a valid reason, and a valid regulation
goes with it, there is the authority to proceed.
Reed stated more work is needed on the parking issue and will be a topic in the coming months
to hopefully resolve some issues.
No public comment was made. All present voted yes; motion carried.
Ordinance No. 29-09. A motion was made by Whaley, seconded by Thorpe, to approve
Ordinance No. 29-09: An Ordinance amending the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Brookings
and pertaining to Emergency Services as a permitted use in certain business and industrial
districts for the purposes of administration of the Zoning Ordinance. No public comment was
made. All present voted yes; motion carried.
Resolution No. 115-09. A public hearing was held on Resolution No. 115-09, a Resolution of
Intent to Lease Real Property to Private Person (Lyle Johnson – Nichols property). No public
comment was made. A motion was made by Whaley, seconded by Kubal, to approve. All
present voted yes; motion carried.
Resolution No. 115-09
Resolution of Intent to Lease Real Property to Private Person
Be It Resolved by the governing body of the City of Brookings, South Dakota, that the City of
Brookings intends to enter into a Lease with Lyle Johnson for a period of two (2) years,
71
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
commencing January 1, 2010 and ending December 31, 2011, and pertaining to the following
described property:
The designated hay/pasture land, forth-eight (48) acres more or less, in Section 21, T110N-
R50W in the City of Brookings, Brookings County, South Dakota.
The Lease will be an amount of Sixty Dollars and no Cents per acre ($60.00) for hay/pasture
land, payable first half on April 1 and the remaining half on November 1 of each year.
Be It Further Noted, that a Public Hearing on this Resolution was held on November 17, 2009
at 6:00 o’clock P.M. at the City Council Chambers and that all persons were given an
opportunity to be heard on the intent to lease real property.
Resolution No. 116-09. A public hearing was held on Resolution No. 116-09, a Resolution of
Intent to Lease Real Property (South Dakota Ag Experiment Station – Airport). No public
comment was made. A motion was made by Bartley, seconded by Whaley, to approve. All
present voted yes; motion carried.
Resolution No. 116-09
Resolution of Intent to Lease Real Property
Be It Resolved by the governing body of the City of Brookings, South Dakota, that the City of
Brookings intends to enter into a Lease with South Dakota Ag Station for a period of one (1)
year, commencing on January 1, 2010 and ending December 31, 2010 and pertaining to the
following described property:
The designated hay land and farmland on the Brookings Regional Airport, two hundred seventy-
four (274) acres more or less in Sections 26, 27, and 35, T110N, R50W, in the City of
Brookings, Brookings County, South Dakota.
The Lease will be an amount of Forty Dollars ($40.00) per acre for hay land and Seventy-two
Dollars ($72.00) per acre for crop land, payable first half on April 1 and the remaining half on
November 1. The City of Brookings may terminate this Lease at any time in the event a parcel
of the above described property is to be sold by the City of Brookings. If a portion of the
leased land is sold, the number of acres to be paid for will be adjusted at the unit price per
acre.
Be It Further Noted, that a Public Hearing on this Resolution was held on November 17, 2009
at 6:00 o’clock P.M. at the City Council Chambers and that all persons were given an
opportunity to be heard on the intent to lease real property.
Resolution No. 106-09 - Change Order. A motion was made by Bartley, seconded by
Whaley, to remove Resolution No. 106-09 from the table. A motion was made by Kubal,
seconded by Bartley to approve Resolution No. 106-09, a Resolution authorizing Change Order
No. 4 (CCO#4) for 2008-09STI Rio Grande, Napa Valley, and Cumberland Court Project,
Rounds Construction. All present voted yes; motion carried.
72
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
Whaley stated the change order increases the overall project cost by $57,000. The original
plans didn’t envision storm sewer collection. The developers changed their mind and wanted
to add storm sewer collection to this project. The cost is eligible for the TIF and would be
repaid under reimbursement.
Resolution No.106-09
A Resolution Authorizing Change Order No. 4(CCO#4) for 2008-09STI
Rio Grand, Napa Valley & Cumberland Court Project, Rounds Construction
Be It Resolved by the City Council that the following change order be allowed for 2008-09STI
Rio Grand, Napa Valley & Cumberland Court Project: Construction Change Order Number 4
Adjust contract for additional HDPE storm sewer and rear yard area drains for an increase of
$57,885.51 to the contract.
Adjust the contract final completion date to December 15, 2009.
Resolution No. 113-09 – Change Order. A motion was made by Thorpe, seconded by
Whaley, to approve Resolution No. 113-09, a Resolution Authorizing Final Change Order
(CCO#1 Final) for 2009-04STA Alley Assessment Project (from 11th Avenue to 12th Avenue
between 1st Street and 2nd Street), Bowes Construction, Inc., Brookings, SD. All present voted
yes; motion carried.
Resolution No. 113-09
A Resolution Authorizing Final Change Order (CCO#1 Final) for 2009-04STA Alley
Assessment Project (11th Avenue to 12th Avenue between 1st Street and 2nd Street)
Bowes Construction Inc., Brookings, SD
Be It Resolved by the City Council that the following change order be allowed for 2009-04STA
Alley Assessment Project: Construction Change Order Number 1 Final
Adjust estimated bid quantities to “as build” quantities for a total decrease of $2,534.39.
Resolution No. 114-09 – Change Order. A motion was made by Bartley, seconded by
Kubal, to approve Resolution No. 114-09, a Resolution Authorizing Final Change Order
(CCO#2 Final) for 2009-02STA 15th Street South, Camelot Drive, and Christine Avenue Street
Assessment Project, Bowes Construction, Inc., Brookings, SD. All present voted yes; motion
carried.
Resolution No. 114-09
A Resolution Authorizing Change Order No. 2 (CCO#2 Final) for
2009-02STA 15th Street South, Christine Avenue and Camelot Drive Street Assessment
Project, Bowes Construction Inc.
Be It Resolved by the City Council that the following change order be allowed for 2009-02STA
15th Street South, Christine Avenue and Camelot Drive Street Assessment Project:
Construction Change Order Number 2 (Final)
73
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
Adjust the bid quantities to final as-built quantities for a total increase of $1,365.09 to the
contract.
Adjust contract substantial completion date to August 6, 2009.
Resolution No. 117-09. A motion was made by Bartley, seconded by Kubal to approve
Resolution No. 117-09, Creating Capital Reserves for Governmental Funds. No public
comment was made. All present voted yes; motion carried.
Resolution No. 117-09
Creating Capital Reserves for Governmental Funds
Whereas, the City of Brookings has established Governance Policies & Ends Policies, which
defines, protects, and prioritizes the workings of City Government,
Whereas, Ends Policy 1, Financial Stability, Guideline E requires a (5) five year capital
improvement plan,
Whereas, South Dakota Codified Law 9-21-14.1 authorizes municipalities the accumulation of
funds for a period longer than one year for specific capital outlay purposes otherwise
authorized by law,
Whereas, South Dakota Codified Law 9-21-14.2 states such resolution shall be enacted by a
two-thirds vote of the governing body stating clearly the purposes for which the funds are to
be accumulated and the maximum amount that may be accumulated,
Whereas, South Dakota Codified Law 9-21-14.2 further states the funds accumulated shall be
expended within sixty months from the date of the resolution or if the specific purposes for
which the funds are accumulated are deemed no longer necessary, these funds shall revert to
the general fund,
Now, Therefore, Be It Resolved, the following capital reserve funds be created for these
governmental funds per the (5) Five Year Capital Improvement Plan and the City Manager with
the approval of the Council be allowed to spend these funds when the need arises:
Solid Waste Collection Fund – 2010 5-year capital improvement plan/Automated Truck -
$200,000; Solid Waste Disposal Fund – 2010 5-year capital improvement plan/ Loader -
$750,000; Solid Waste Disposal Fund – 2010 5-year capital improvement plan/Trench #5 -
$200,000; General Fund – acquisition of Land - $2,000,000; General Fund – 2010 5-year capital
improvement plan/2011 CIP - $771,950; 75% Sales & Use Tax – 2010 5-year capital
improvement plan/Streets & RR Crossing - $2,720,000; 25% Sales & Use Tax – 2010 5-year
capital improvement plan/portion of 2011 CIP - $1,000,000.
All other resolutions in conflict herewith are hereby repealed.
74
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
Resolution No. 118-09. A motion was made by Whaley, seconded by Thorpe, to approve
Resolution No. 118-09, accepting the property for future park land in Valley View Addition.
No public comment was made. All present voted yes; motion carried.
Resolution No. 118-09
A Resolution Accepting a Gift of Real Property to the City of Brookings, South Dakota.
Whereas, Blairhill Properties, Inc. desires to gift and convey real property to the City of
Brookings, South Dakota, to be used for public purposes and specifically to provide a
playground for the Valley View and Esther Heights neighborhoods and future adjacent
subdivisions, said real property being described as follows: Lot Sixteen (16) in Block Two (2) of
Valley View Addition, City of Brookings, County of Brookings, State of South Dakota, and
Whereas, the property is conveyed with the restriction that the property shall revert to
Blairhill Properties, Inc. if it ceases to be used by the public as a playground serving the Valley
View and Esther Heights neighborhoods, and future adjacent subdivisions, and
Whereas, the City Council recognizes the significant benefits the community will enjoy as a
result of the gift of this real property by BlairHill Properties, Inc.,
Now, Therefore, It Is Hereby Resolved by the City Council that the real property described
above is gratefully accepted by the City of Brookings, South Dakota, subject to the restriction
set forth herein.
I-29 Corridor Study Agreement. A motion was made by Whaley, seconded by Thorpe, to
approve the Fixed Price Technical Services Agreement; I-29 Corridor Study. No public
comment was made. All present voted yes; motion carried.
Fixed Price
Technical Services Agreement
This agreement is entered into by and between City of Brookings, a public entity organized and
existing under the laws of the State of South Dakota and having offices at 414 Main Avenue,
Brookings, South Dakota 57006 (hereinafter referred to as the “CITY”) and Regional
Technology Strategies, Inc., a nonprofit corporation organized and existing under the laws of
the State of North Carolina and having offices at 205 Lloyd Street, Suite 210, Carrboro, North
Carolina 27510 (hereinafter referred to “the Contractor “).
The CITY desires to utilize the services of the Contractor and the Contractor desires to
provide those services, and in consideration the CITY and the Contractor do agree as
follows:
1. The Contractor shall perform the services as more specifically described in the Scope of
Services contained in the Addendum to this agreement, “Regional Growth Strategy for the I-
29 Corridor” and including the optional Phase One task, “Comparative Benchmarking of
Similar Universities and Communities.”
75
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
2. The performance period for the contract shall be six months. It is anticipated that the
contract shall commence on December 1, 2009 and end on May 31, 2010.
3. This contract is issued on a Firm Fixed Price (FFP) basis for a total price of $117,500.
Payment by the CITY under this agreement shall not exceed this amount.
4. The Contractor shall submit invoices and monthly reports presenting progress to date by
activity to: Al Heuton, Executive Director, Brookings Economic Development Corporation
and Jeff Weldon, City Manager, City of Brookings. Invoice terms are net 20 days. The final
invoice should be marked "Final Invoice'.
Payments shall be made according to the following schedule and terms:
$13,750 Upon Execution of the Contract
Six monthly payments as presented below. Each payment shall be due to RTS upon
approval by the CITY of the monthly status report describing progress on activities
scheduled to be performed as set forth in the six month project timeline included in
the Addendum to this agreement.
$15,000 Month One
$15,000 Month Two
$15,000 Month Three
$15,000 Month Four
$15,000 Month Five
$15,000 Month Six
$13,750 Due Upon Acceptance of Final Phase 2 Strategic Action Plan
5. This agreement may be terminated, in whole or in part, by written notice of the CITY for
any reason. The notice of termination shall specify the extent to which performance is
terminated and the effective date of such termination.
The Contractor shall submit a termination claim to the CITY within 60 days of receipt of the
notice. The Contractor and the CITY may agree upon the amount to be paid by reason of
the termination, provided, that total payments under the agreement shall not exceed the
total contract amount and shall not include anticipatory profits for the work terminated nor
consequential damages because of the termination.
6. The CITY may at any time, by written order, require the Contractor to stop all, or any
part, of the work. Upon receipt of such an order the Contractor shall take all reasonable
steps to minimize the incurrence of costs allocable to the work covered by the order during
the period of work stoppage. The CITY shall either: (i) cancel the stop work order, or (ii)
terminate the work covered by such order.
7. Any dispute arising under this contract or the performance thereof which is not settled by
agreement between the parties shall be settled by appropriate legal, equitable, or
administrative proceedings. Pending any decision, appeal or judgment the Contractor shall
proceed diligently with the performance of this contract unless otherwise directed by the
CITY.
76
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
8. The Contractor's relationship with the CITY is that of an independent contractor.
Therefore, the Contractor shall be solely responsible for its own financial obligations.
Further, the Contractor is not covered by the CITY's insurance including, but not limited to
Worker's Compensation, Professional Liability, General Liability, and/or Automotive Liability
insurance.
9. This contract contains all of our understandings and agreements relating to the services
and may be changed only in writing signed by the CITY's authorized representative. This
contract shall be governed by the laws of, and enforced within the jurisdiction of the State of
South Dakota.
ADDENDUM
The Contractor is to provide services as described in the Contractor's September, 2009
proposal (attached) entitled “Regional Growth Strategy for the I-29 Corridor”.
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
By and Between the
City of Brookings, a South Dakota municipality,
and the
City of Watertown, a South Dakota municipality
Whereas, in furtherance of the development of the I-29 Corridor Regional Growth Strategy,
the I-29 Corridor Task Force has requested proposals from consultants for services to assist the
I-29 Corridor Task Force in conducting a regional economic growth analysis, development of a
regional growth strategy and strategy implementation efforts (“the project”), and has now
selected a consultant; and
Whereas, the I-29 Corridor Task Force includes numerous member entities, including the
City of Brookings and the City of Watertown. The City of Brookings and the City of
Watertown are municipal corporations authorized to enter into agreements with one another
for joint or cooperative action pursuant to SDCL Chapter 1-24; and
Whereas, the I-29 Corridor Task Force requires a public agency, such as the City of
Watertown or the City of Brookings, to serve as a contracting entity and fiscal agent for the
project; and
Whereas, the City of Brookings has agreed to serve as the contracting entity and fiscal agent
on behalf of the I-29 Corridor Task Force.
Now, Therefore, the parties do hereby agree as follows:
1. The City of Brookings will serve as a contracting entity and fiscal agent on behalf of
the I-29 Corridor Task Force for the project, and
2. The City of Brookings will contract with the consultant selected by the I-29
Corridor Task Force, and as fiscal agent for the I-29 Corridor Task Force for this
project will receive funds from the I-29 Task Force member entities and other
77
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
sources, and will disburse payments to the consultant, and will perform such other
tasks as fiscal agent as necessary and as the parties hereto agree and subsequently
set forth in amendments to this Memorandum of Understanding.
McCrory Gardens Visitors Center. A motion was made by Reed, seconded by Whaley, to
table discussion on the McCrory Gardens Visitors Center. All present voted yes; motion
carried.
City Council member introduction of topics for future discussion. Whaley asked for
an update on the City/County Space Needs Task Force to be on the December 8th Regular
Council Meeting.
Thorpe asked for an update on the status of the Old Landfill Nature Park. Weldon stated it
could be added to the December 8th Regular Council Meeting.
Adjourn. A motion was made by Whaley, seconded by Kubal, to adjourn. All present voted
yes; motion carried. Meeting adjourned at 7:22 p.m.
CITY OF BROOKINGS
ATTEST: Tim Reed, Mayor
Shari Thornes, City Clerk
78
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
Brookings City Council
September 22, 2009
(unapproved)
The Brookings City Council held a meeting on Tuesday, September 22, 2009 at 5:00 p.m., at City
Hall with the following members present: Mayor Tim Reed, Council Members Julie Whaley, John
Kubal, Mike McClemans, Mike Bartley, Jael Thorpe, and Tom Bezdichek. City Manager Jeff
Weldon, City Attorney Steve Britzman, and City Clerk Shari Thornes were also present.
Presentation by Habitat for Humanity on “Brush of Kindness” Program. Connie
Swain, Executive Director for the Brookings Area Habitat for Humanity spoke about their
newest initiative called “A Brush with Kindness.” ABWK is a home renovation program for
low-income homeowners, elderly and disabled who are unable to keep up with the exterior
maintenance of their home.
Policy Discussion regarding the possible pre-screening of economic development
requests. This item is on the agenda pursuant to a request made by Council Member
McClemans on July 14, 2009.
McClemans noted that applications for city funds are due by June 15th annually prior to the
budget process. He suggested that someone in economic development conduct an analysis of
those applications with respect to what is being requested and outcomes involved of the
applications. He further suggested an analysis and recommendation plan be provided to the
City Council. He is looking for more substance and comparatives.
Bartley asked if he is looking for more development of the request prior to coming to the City
Council. He said the city manager has the ability to seek more information and make that
recommendation. If the Council isn’t getting enough information, then direct the manager to
determine what additional substance and analysis is needed.
Kubal noted the City sees many economic development requests come forward with, in many
instances, glowing promises. He would like to see some evidence, which may be difficult. If a
program or project hasn’t been tried in Brookings, perhaps comparatives from similar sized
cities.
Whaley expressed concern about requests coming in after the deadline. The funding
application process is publicized. Applicants submitting big capital requests after the deadline
have had an expectation for the Council to completely change planning directions and find them
money, putting everyone in an uproar. Those funding requests need to be brought forward
through the City Manager and not have complete surprises, especially when others’ funding is
cut or not funded at all and then for the Council to hear and fund a late submittal.
Bartley said there isn’t adequate time for the Council to do all the fact finding and validation on
these large projects. It takes time to handle them properly, that’s why it’s important that these
requests are received on time and put into the future budget process to go through the
79
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
necessary steps. That has been done in this case, but the confusion with the SDSU request is
that the Council thought it was for 2010 which wasn’t the case.
Reed noted in the National League of Cities and ICMA book, the role of the city manager also
includes that of being the economic development person. However, in Brookings those are
shared responsibilities and because of that sharing he would like to see an interface between
the city and BEDC where the BEDC weighs in on individual funding requests and how they
relate to economic development strategy.
McClemans said the process should seek a certain amount of neutrality and lack of duplication.
Maybe the economic development or BEDC director is leaning towards bringing people to
town. If the City and BEDC coordinate, duplication will be reduced and we’ll get more bang
for the buck.
Weldon said there are a variety of issues on the table. As for a policy and process on subsidies,
the council adopted a comprehensive and detailed policy on subsides including criteria. The
process involves the Council getting a full copy of everything submitted. Some applications
involve economic development and some don’t. Applicants are not generally invited to make
presentations. However, there was a deviation with the Performing Arts Center request
because it was so unique. As part of the city manager’s budget proposal, he will make a
recommendation on funding on all applications submitted. His recommendation will indicate
how he feels each funding request fits into the city’s budget and mission. He’s unclear if the
Council wants that process changed.
Weldon said he works closely with the BEDC on tax increment projects, land and building
purchase requests, and anything else economic development related. The City’s community
development director and city engineer also attend BEDC meetings and provide an additional
level of input and understanding on each economic development project.
As to neutrality, Weldon said it is his job as chief policy advisor to make recommendations on
each issue and the Council wouldn’t want him to be neutral. He has an obligation to give the
facts and his recommendation on how each issue and project would affect the City.
Review of the subsidy policy occurred within the last two years. He said Performing Arts
Center funding request followed the same process, but the funding isn’t for 2010, so there’s
some breathing room.
McClemans noted the city has limited funds and limited bonding capabilities with many heavy
issues still out there facing the city. He doesn’t have a problem with spending money on
campus, but is not sure to what degree is appropriate.
Reed asked if there was any specific action desired at this time or if there’s specific information
council members feel they aren’t getting. There needs to be consistent agreement on what
everyone needs when a project comes through.
80
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
The City Manager is following the City Council’s current policy. Is a review and possible
revision desired? Weldon said all applications are put on a CD and provided to the Council.
All members have an opportunity to weigh in on every application submitted. He and city staff
try to anticipate Council questions and tries to provide information in a comprehensive manner
without making it overwhelming in order so that the Council has enough information to make
good decisions. If he is falling down on that, he would need to know that as well.
McClemans said the City Manager is not falling down in that area and the Council has a subsidy
policy and an application in place. However, the manager may need more direction from the
Council in allocating what type of funding should be brought forward. He suggested more
planning be done on the use of the 25/75 second penny sales tax funds. Weldon noted the city
finance manager has assembled financial projection charts to anticipate cash flow, revenue, and
projects which may be helpful to the Council in addressing some of those issues.
ACTION: A motion was made by Mayor Reed, seconded by Whaley, that at a future Council
meeting before the end of the year, the Council review 2nd penny and subsidy application
processes. All present voted yes; motion carried.
City/County Joint Facility. The Council held further discussion regarding the City’s space
needs to include the County Resource Center space at the Swiftel Center and co-locating
county and city administrative buildings.
Reed said the Council needs to decide if they are interested in co-locating and if they are, how
much would be needed to go through the process and the timeline.
Bartley said there is interest in the community for a one-stop government center downtown
for convenience and customer service. The decision now is if the city wants to join forces with
the county. There would be a lot of hard work involved accomplishing this, but he thinks it’s a
good plan and the City should move forward. There is a pressing need for law enforcement
and thinks it would be beneficial to make a decision before it becomes critical.
Reed noted there are two sites under consideration for a joint facility. Both could become
unavailable. Bartley said the City would need to be serious and move forward. One location is
the back half of the 300 block of Main facing 5th Avenue. The other spot is the 500 block of
Third Street on the south side to the alley. Al Heuton’s task force looked at four sites that also
included the Senior Citizen Center, the 1921 Building, and the 5th Street Gym.
Kubal asked if the proposal would be all or nothing. Would the facility include all administrative
services from both governments? He wasn’t sure if there is enough similarity in functions
between the two. He could visualize a phased in approach. The co-located law enforcement
center makes sense to him. He did note that many county seats through the nation have
combined with municipalities, but wasn’t certain that it all has to go in one big movement. A
justice center would be an incredible first step.
McClemans said he didn’t feel he could make a decision to co-locate without knowing the cost
of the expansion. He’s not opposed to co-location, but not until he knows costs.
81
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
Reed asked McClemans if he would support the project if the information came back as positive
and it saves money. McClemans said yes, with a sensible cost.
Whaley said the City has approached the county for the last 2 ½ years about this issue, but the
County has had plans and meetings and they are much further down the road. She is very
opposed to a joint facility and feels the city should continue with its own projects. The County
is in a rush and the City doesn’t rush. She’s in favor of building to the north adjacent to the
current city hall and expand the police department into the current city hall building.
Thorpe agreed that the City needs to know the financial details, but in general would be in
favor of a co-located facility. She noted it would be very complicated, but would save overhead
costs and provide more opportunities for idea sharing with staff in the same place.
Bezdichek thinks it would be difficult for the city and county to orchestrate a co-location and
leans towards the city going forward with their own plans.
Bartley encouraged the Council to think outside the box. He said they can do all kinds of
different things if they can get over idea that we have to be separate.
ACTION: A motion was made by Bartley, seconded by Bezdichek, to move forward with a co-
located facility with the County and City on office space, but also law enforcement; planning
within one year Discussion: Reed was concerned that the law enforcement piece would muddy the
waters. Bartley said he thinks it’s a critical need. Kubal agreed law enforcement was the primary need
and should start there before looking at basic administrative needs. On the motion, Bartley and
Reed voted yes; Bezdichek, Kubal, McClemans, Thorpe and Whaley voted no; motion failed.
ACTION: A motion was made by Reed, seconded by McClemans, to move forward with a co-
located facility with county and city on administrative office space, planning to occur within one
year and all sites will be evaluated during the process. Whaley, Bezdichek and Kubal voted no;
Bartley, McClemans, Reed and Thorpe voted yes; motion carried.
City Council Member Ex-Officio Reports. Whaley reported the Hospital purchased land
to the south. She gave an update on the building project and the timeline is tight with proposed
groundbreaking on November 1st.
Whaley also reported the long-term care board met and should have their report completed by
October 31st.
6:00 P.M. REGULAR MEETING.
Consent Agenda. Action on the auditing services contract with BKD, LLP and action on
Resolution No. 92-09 were removed from the consent agenda. A motion was made by
Thorpe, seconded by McClemans, to approve the consent agenda:
A. Action to approve the agenda as amended.
B. Action on Resolution No. 86-09, directing Preparation of Assessment Roll,
Dividing Assessments into Installments, and Providing for the Collection
82
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
Thereof for Street Assessment Project 2008-03STA (Downtown Streetscape
Project).
Resolution No. 86-09
Resolution Directing Preparation of Assessment Roll, Dividing Assessments into
Installments, and Providing for the Collection Thereof for Street Assessment Project 2008-
03STA Downtown Streetscape Project
Be It Resolved by the City Council of the City of Brookings, South Dakota, as follows:
1. More than twenty days have elapsed since the adoption and publication of Resolution
No. 11-08, A Resolution of Necessity for Street Assessment Project No. 2008-03STA. The
referendum has not been invoked, and no written protests against the making of said
improvement have been filed with the City Manager.
2. A contract for Street Assessment Project No. 2008-03STA has been duly executed, and
the City Council is authorized to levy special assessments pursuant to the provisions of
chapter 9-43, SDCL 1967, as amended.
3. The City Engineer has caused an estimate of the expense of the work to be made and
filed in her office showing the total cost of said improvement as follows: Assessment cost of
$288,583.27, Engineering, inspection, fiscal, legal expense, publication of $17,314.99 for total
expense of $305,898.26.
4. The total cost of said project is as follows: Bid Schedule No. 1 Base Bid - $3,687,292.50;
City Assumed Cost of $3,398,709.23 and Assessment Cost $288,583.27
5. There shall be made and filed in the office of the City Manager an assessment roll for
said improvement. The assessments shall be on the basis of benefits upon each lot or tract
of land contiguous to the sidewalk constituting said improvement.
6. The assessment shall be divided into ten (10) equal annual installments.
7. Unless paid to the City in advance of maturity, the assessments shall be collected by the
City Manager in accordance with the procedure for Plan One in Chapter 9-43, SDCL 1967,
as amended.
8. The interest rate to be borne by the unpaid installments of the special assessment is
zero percent (0%).
C. Action on Resolution No. 87-09, Resolution Awarding Bids for Airport Fuel
System Removal and Site Restoration Project.
Resolution No. 87–09
Resolution Awarding Bids for
Airport Fuel Tank Removal and Site Restoration Project
Whereas, the City of Brookings opened bids for the Airport Fuel Tank Removal and Site
Restoration Project on Tuesday, September 15, 2009 at 1:30 pm at Brookings City Hall; and
Whereas, the City of Brookings has received the following bids for the Airport Fuel Tank
Removal and Site Restoration Project: VJ Ahlers Excavating, Inc., Brookings, SD at $56,357.70
and Prussman Contracting, Inc., Brookings, SD at $101,869.40.
Now Therefore, Be It Resolved that the low bid of VJ Ahlers Excavating, Inc., Brookings, SD for
the Airport Fuel Tank Removal and Site Restoration Project in the sum of $56,357.70 is accepted.
83
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
D. Action on Resolution No. 88-09, concurring in the Placement of Stop Signs at
the Intersection of 7th Street and 6th Avenue.
Resolution No. 88-09
Concurring in the Placement of Stop Signs
at the intersection of 7th Street and 6th Avenue
Whereas, Section 82-373 of the Revised Ordinance of the City of Brookings, provides for
approval by the City Council for placement of stop signs in locations other than along
through streets.
Now, Therefore, Be It Resolved that the City Council concurs in the recommendation of
the Traffic Safety Committee and the City Manager and approves the placement of stop
signs on 7th Street at its intersection with 6th Avenue.
E. Action on Resolution No. 90-09, A Resolution Authorizing Change Order No. 1
(CCO#1) for 2009-08STI, Street Maintenance and Overlay Project, Bowes
Construction, Inc.
Resolution No. 90-09
A Resolution Authorizing Change Order No. 1 (CCO#1) for
2009-08STI Street Maintenance and Overlay Project
Bowes Construction Inc.
Be It Resolved by the City Council that the following change order be allowed for 2009-
08STI Street Maintenance and Overlay Project: Construction Change Order Number 1:
Cold pavement concrete milling for a total increase of $1,271.48.
F. Action on Resolution No. 91-09, A Resolution Authorizing Change Order No. 1
(CCO#1) for 2009-02STA, 15th Street South, Camelot Drive and Christine
Avenue Assessment Project, Bowes Construction, Inc.
Resolution No. 91-09
A Resolution Authorizing Change Order No. 1 (CCO#1) For
2009-02STA 15th Street South, Christine Avenue and Camelot Drive
Street Assessment Project - Bowes Construction Inc.
Be It Resolved by the City Council that the following change order be allowed for 2009-
02STA 15th Street South, Christine Avenue and Camelot Drive Street Assessment Project:
Construction Change Order Number 1 - Remove 4’ of Curb and Gutter, unclassified
excavation, repair of a water valve and change of asphalt from Class G Type 1 85% quartzite
to Class G Type 1 for a total decrease of $1,486.64.
G. REMOVED FROM CONSENT - Action to authorize the City Manager to sign a
contract for auditing services with BKD, LLP.
H. REMOVED FROM CONSENT - Action on Resolution No. 92-09, a Resolution
Authorizing City Manager to Sign an Agreement for Federal Aviation
Administration Grant, AIP Project No. 3-46-0005-22/2009, Conduct Wildlife
Hazard Assessment.
On the motion, all present voted yes; motion carried.
84
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
Audit Services. A motion was made by Reed, seconded by Whaley, to authorize the City
Manager to sign a contract for auditing services with BKD, LLP. All present voted yes; motion
carried.
Resolution No. 92-09. A motion was made by Kubal, seconded by Bartley, to approve
Resolution No. 92-09, a Resolution Authorizing City Manager to Sign an Agreement for Federal
Aviation Administration Grant, AIP Project No. 3-46-0005-22/2009, to conduct a Wildlife
Hazard Assessment.
Council Discussion: Bezdichek was under the assumption this was the previous Wildlife Hazard
Assessment. Weldon stated they were able to secure some additional funding for two projects: 1) to
help pay a portion of the increase in the contract, and 2) pay for the Wildlife Assessment. This
documentation is accepting a grant in the amount of 95% of the cost of the project, totaling $55,822.
The State’s share will be $1,175 and the City’s $1,763. This study is a result of the bird strikes on
aircraft at the airport in the past, and is independent of the Environmental Assessment.
Mike Wilson, Airport Manager, stated the $44,880 in the 2010 Budget is for USDA Wildlife Services to
perform the Wildlife Assessment. However, FAA funding does not allow federal agencies to conduct this
study if private entities are available. There are only seven people in the nation eligible to do this type
of study; one of which is located out of Aberdeen. Not being able to use the USDA for the study plays
a part in the increase in cost.
Bezdichek asked where it is stated this study is required to be conducted. Wilson stated the
requirement is a result of the Hudson River crash. Following that incident, a national review of bird
strikes was done and it was found we had a geese strike in 2003 which caused substantial damage to
an aircraft. We also have had five strikes between 2002 and 2005 involving both seagulls and geese.
This assessment should have been done at that time, but was not.
Bird strike information formerly was not made public. It is now public information. Bezdichek asked
about the conclusions drawn from this study. Wilson stated one conclusion would be to remove all crop
land from the airport and the second would be, along with the Wildlife Hazard Management Plan, to
specify what animals are a problem, and where the seagulls are located in the area. The Wildlife
Biologist has been on site doing preliminary assessments. Visiting the Landfill and other seagull food
sources will also be done. Wilson clarified crops, as soybeans are currently planted at the airport,
would be replaced with crops which do not attract birds and specific warm-season grasses. In essence
the cropland would be converted to hayland.
Bezdichek questioned if a Wildlife Assessment Study had been done previously or if this would be the
first one conducted. Wilson stated all commercial service airports, and now general aviation airports,
must have these studies conducted. Bezdichek questioned if other airports in South Dakota, such as
Sioux Falls or Watertown, have had these studies done, and why would the FAA want to spend
additional money to conclude a possible answer they already have such as which crops do not attract
certain birds. Wilson stated each study is specific to the individual airport and there are certain crops
local wildlife prefer, and this will also provide ways to control the wildlife in our area. Bezdichek
questioned if no other state study could be used for these conclusions. Wilson stated Brookings is
85
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
unique with Six Mile Creek being within 1,000 feet of one of the runways and there are no other South
Dakota airports with water that close.
Bezdichek stated his frustration lies with the FAA and how they frivolously spend money. This study will
not be completed for another 12 months. He has lost most all competence in the FAA and will not
support any required studies or mandates from them.
Weldon clarified this grant will take the place of the $42,000 budgeted in 2010.
The bird strikes at the Brookings Airport were found by the safety office in Chicago. This study must be
done, in order to keep in obligation of the airport grants received in the past. Kubal asked who will
bear the cost and what will be the outcomes, especially with the predetermined outcome of a Wildlife
Hazard Management Plan. Wilson clarified the cost of the plan itself is included in this project, but,
any costs that the Wildlife Hazard Management Plan finds that we need to change, will be city costs,
such as cropland, or putting hay in instead of the crops.
Bezdichek does not believe the Brookings airport is so far different than any other airport in South
Dakota, and the information obtained by the FAA could not reasonably be used for our airport, but
instead $58,760 will be spent on this study. Kubal agrees it looks as if there is a foregone conclusion,
before the money is even spent, that they are going to say there is a wildlife hazard and we need to
manage it. Kubal questioned what would happen if we refuse to do this study. Wilson stated if this
study isn’t done, we would probably lose our federal funding and we would still have to conduct the
study for a cost of $45,000. In the worst case scenario we would be found in violation of the airport
grants received over the past 20 years and it could go as far as repaying every grant received as well as
no longer having a federally funded airport. Kubal said it sounds like the better thing to do here is to
spend the money and conduct the study.
On the motion, all present voted yes, except Bezdichek and McClemans voted no; motion
carried.
Resolution No. 92-09
Resolution Authorizing City Manager to Sign an Agreement for
Federal Aviation Administration Grant
AIP Project No. 3-46-0005-22/2009
Conduct Wildlife Hazard Assessment
Whereas, the Brookings City Council desires funding to Conduct Wildlife Hazard Assessment
for Airport Improvement Project No. 3-46-0005-22/2009; and
Whereas, The City of Brookings is obligated to and hereby agrees to be reimbursed by the
Federal Aviation Administration for 95% and SD State Aeronautics Department for 2% of the
allowable costs incurred in accomplishing Airport Improvement Project No. 3-46-0005-
22/2009; and
Whereas, that Federal Aviation Administration is hereby requested to authorize Airport
Improvement Project No. 3-46-0005-22/2009 in accordance with the approved grant
agreement.
86
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
Now, Therefore, Be Resolved, that the City Manager is hereby authorized to sign all documents
related to an agreement for the Federal Aviation Administration Grant AIP Project No. 3-46-
0005-22/2009.
1st Reading – Ordinance No. 23-09. A first reading was held on Ordinance No. 23-09, an
Ordinance to Change the Zoning within the City of Brookings for the North 320 feet of Block
11, McClemans Addition from a Residence R-1A District to a Residence R-3A District. Public
Hearing: October 13, 2009
1st Reading – Ordinance No. 24-09. A first reading was held on Ordinance No. 24-09, an
Ordinance to Change the Zoning within the City of Brookings for Lot 9, Block 2, University
First Addition from a Residence R-3 District to a Business B-2 District. Public Hearing: October
13, 2009
2nd Reading – Ordinance No. 21-09. A motion was made by Bartley, seconded by Whaley,
to approve Ordinance No. 21-09, an Ordinance appropriating monies to fund the necessary
expenditures and liabilities of the City of Brookings for the 2010 Fiscal Year and providing for
the annual tax levy and annual tax for all funds.
Council Discussion: Bartley thanked city staff for their work and effort put into the budget process.
Reed expressed concerns with the sustainability of the current budget into the future as the choices
made today build on last year’s budget. Taxable sales from January through August were down 3% and
he hopes it will be less than 5% by end of year. He is concerned, as the first reaction to a down period
is cutting capital and doesn’t see this as a most wise decision. More expenses are created when capital
is cut; equipment needs to be maintained if cannot afford to replace. This causes what Reed explains
as a large bubble. For example, the Street Dept. equipment requirements in the next year is four to
five times what is being done this year and is not financially feasible to do over one year’s time. When
something is put off over time, it is still there and becomes this bubble continually being pushed out. If
the second penny money is eroded from the general fund, our improvements and investment ability in
the large scale could be lost. Investing has allowed the growth in sales and property tax bases. If the
second penny money is taken out, it is similar to cutting the Swiftel Center subsidy and allocating those
funds to the Forestry Dept. or the Library.
Reed questioned three different Capital Items and if they could be put off for a year: 1) the concrete
floor and turf mats in the Larson Ice Arena, 2) Swiftel Center Arena Lighting, and 3) automated
irrigation at the Golf Course. Weldon answered the issue of the concrete floor and turf mats in the
Larson Holding Barn is driven by requests from the Soccer Association to have an indoor practice
facility. There has been some staff discussions of a partnership in such a project. The Swiftel Center
Arena Lighting includes a rollover of funds from the past two years for a total of $60,000 which wasn’t
spent, as it was known an improvement was needed in the lighting of the facility. The automated
irrigation system at the Golf Course is a prudent thing to do. Enterprise operations should be financially
self-sufficient if you can get them to that point and should be able to repay their capital improvements.
AMENDMENT: A motion to amend was made by Reed, seconded by McClemans, to consider
the $170,000 expenditure for the Golf Course Automated Irrigation System loan paid back in
87
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
four years or in a time determined by city staff, being no more than 10 years. Friendly
amendment: Reed amended his motion to include ‘according to state requirements’ and the
second agreed.
Discussion: Bartley questioned if there was any interfund loans similar to this involving other
departments. Weldon answered there is an interfund loan from the Liquor Store to the Golf Course on
seven Mowers which is an automatically scheduled repayment over five years.
Rita Thompson stated an advance or a loan between funds cannot extend beyond more than five years
according to state statute. This has been done previously with the Airport; involving an interfund loan
from the landfill for airport equipment purchase. Weldon commented he would like some flexibility on
being able to set up a repayment plan according to when the Golf Courses finances can sustain that
repayment. Reed asked if a loan could be forgiven. Thompson stated the loan could be forgiven.
Britzman added the term could be to comply with state requirements for repayments over the duration
of the loan.
Bartley clarified this $170,000 project is budgeted for next year and if the budget would be reduced by
$170,000. Reed stated, no, it would be a payback. Bartley asked if this was necessary since the
budget stays the same. Reed feels it does, as it is an expenditure of money this year. Bartley asked if a
Resolution would have to be done now or later as part of the interfund loan and the budget process.
Thompson stated a Resolution would be done later on, as revenues and expenses are budgeted and this
would be an asset and a liability. Bartley asked if it would be better off to not include this in the budget
process at this point, but make a Resolution later on for a interfund loan. Britzman added these are
guidelines associated with the budget, and there is no reason why the budget couldn’t be modified with
this understanding at this time. It may not be crucial to the balancing of the budget, but it is something,
if the council agreed that that was the plan or the guidelines for repayment that it could be appended
to this budget with a motion. Weldon doesn’t see any problem with having it as a budget amendment;
it lays out the guidelines, but we would actually codify that in terms of a Resolution.
Thompson stated a Section 8 could be added to the ordinance stating that would be a loan according
to state requirements. Reed stated that is a prudent way of working with the second penny money if it
can be paid back from the funds that are using it.
ON THE AMENDMENT #1: Bartley, Bezdichek voted no; Kubal, Thorpe, Reed, Whaley and
McClemans voted yes. Motion passed.
AMENDMENT #2: A motion was made by Reed, seconded by McClemans, to remove the
$125,000 from the 5-year capital plan for the concrete floor in the holding barn. Discussion:
McClemans asked Reed if he wanted to remove it completely. Reed stated it could be pushed forward
a year, but it doesn’t seem as though there is a good plan for this yet. It is one of those place-holders
with no consensus of what to do. Whaley stated as far as the floor goes, they could get the facility so
practices could be held out there, and the restroom facilities could be something added later. Whaley
doesn’t see any reason to remove it from the CIP. McClemans is not sure pulling this from the budget
is necessary at this time. MOTION WITHDRAWN: Reed withdrew his motion. McClemans
withdrew his second.
88
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
Reed commented it is needed to look at the facilities plan for the Holding Barn Area and
prioritize what needs to be done.
Richter talked about the Swiftel Center lighting issues; wanting to be more efficient (green) and
have brighter lighting for the competitions held in the facility.
ON THE MAIN MOTION AS AMENDED, all present voted yes; motion carried.
Ordinance No. 22-09. A public hearing was held on Ordinance No. 22-09, an Ordinance
pertaining to an application for a Conditional Use for a taller broadcast tower height in the
Business B-2A District (tower height of 90 feet on Lot 6, Block 1, Insbrook Park Addition, also
known as 227 22nd Ave.). No public comments were received. A motion was made by Whaley,
seconded by Bartley, to approve Ordinance No. 22-09. All present voted yes; motion carried.
Proposed Sales Tax Legislation. The South Dakota Municipal League is encouraging
municipalities to support legislative action to enact an additional penny sales tax. No action was
taken.
Executive Session. A motion was made by Whaley, seconded by Bartley, to enter into
executive session for purposes of consulting with legal counsel employee contract negotiations
at 7:23 p.m. with the City Attorney, City Manager and City Clerk present. A motion was made
by Kubal, seconded by Thorpe, to exit executive session at 7:47p.m.
Adjourn. A motion was made by Bartley, seconded by McClemans, to adjourn. All present
voted yes; motion carried. Meeting adjourned at 7:49 p.m.
CITY OF BROOKINGS
ATTEST: Tim Reed, Mayor
Shari Thornes, City Clerk
89
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
CONSENT AGENDA #4
C. Action on Resolution No. 08-10, a Resolution Dissolving Tax
Increment District Number Two of the City of Brookings, South
Dakota.
The City of Brookings created Tax Incremental District Number Two on May 28, 2007.
The purpose of Tax Incremental District Number Two was to offer tax increment
financing as a tool to stimulate and leverage private sector development and
redevelopment in an area at a much faster pace than might occur otherwise. South
Dakota Codified Law 11-9-13 details the provisions for the expenditure of funds
associated with the tax incremental district. The timeframe for expending the funds for
infrastructure improvements is five (5) years from the date of creation of the tax
increment district. Tax Increment District Number Two is set to expire on May 28,
2012.
Tax Increment District Number Two is located with the northern, southern, western
and eastern boundaries of the following described real properties and shown on the
following map:
Block 3, and Lot 5 of Block 8 and Block 8, excluding Lot 1A, Wiese Addition
SW 1/4 of the SE 1/4 of Section 19-T110N-R49W
Block 1, Wiese Addition
The intent for creating the District was to stimulate and leverage private sector
development and redevelopment of commercial uses within the district area.
Development within the District has not materialized to date and no project costs were
incurred nor obligations issued pledging tax increment revenues. Dissolving the district
will end the five (5) year period in which to issue expenditures for improvements within
the district. All funds held in the Tax Increment District Number Two fund will be paid
to the Brookings County Treasurer and will be apportioned to the respective tax
levying agencies.
The City has the authority to create a new tax increment district for this area at such
time as development is ready to proceed.
90
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
Resolution No. 08-10
Resolution Dissolving Tax Increment District Number Two of the
City of Brookings, South Dakota
Whereas, the City of Brookings created Tax Increment District Number Two on May 28, 2007;
and
Whereas, under SDCL §11-9-46 a tax incremental district shall terminate when either (1the
positive tax increments are no longer allocable to a district under § 11-9-25 or the governing
body, by resolution, dissolves the district, after payment or provision for payment of all project
costs and all tax incremental bonds and notes of the district; and
Whereas, no project costs were incurred nor obligations issued pledging tax increment
revenues.
Now Therefore, Be It Resolved By the City of Brookings, South Dakota as follows:
Section 1. Termination. Tax Increment District Number Two shall be terminated as of the
date of this resolution.
Section 2. Allocation of Tax Increment Fund. Any moneys remain in the Tax Increment
Number Two fund, shall be paid to the treasurer of the county, school district, or other tax-
levying municipality or to the general fund of the municipality in such amounts as belong to each
respectively, having due regard for what portion of such moneys, if any, represents tax
increments not allocated to the municipality and what portion thereof, if any, represents
voluntary deposits of the municipality into the fund.
Section 3. Authorization of Officers. The officers of the city shall take such action as is
necessary to carry out the intent of this resolution.
Passed and approved this 26th day of January, 2010.
Motion by ___________ seconded by _________________.
Aye:
Nay:
Abstained:
CITY OF BROOKINGS, SD
ATTEST: Tim Reed, Mayor
________________________
Shari Thornes, City Clerk
91
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
CONSENT AGENDA #4
D. Action to authorize the Mayor to sign documents regarding the
R&T Center Grant Amendment.
The City of Brookings was a recipient of an Economic Development Administration
grant (Award Number 05-01-02932) to assist in the construction of the Research and
Technology Center. The original purpose of the R&T Center was to serve as a
agriculture-based business and research incubator. The R&T Center had been operating
at full occupancy until July 2009, in which one of the original tenants vacated the facility.
Another tenant has notified the City of their intent to move to a permanent location
upon completion of a new facility.
The City has been working with the Brookings Economic Development Corporation,
the Enterprise Institute, and the Governor’s Office of Economic Development to fill the
vacancies in the R&T Center. Staff has been working with the Economic Development
Administration to amend the purpose of the facility in an attempt to expand the
potential tenant market. The Economic Development Administration has approved the
request to change the purpose of the facility from an agriculture-based business and
research incubator to a commercial facility. Staff will continue to market the R&T
Center to prospective tenants which fit the original purpose of the facility, as well as
prospective commercial tenants compatible with existing tenants.
A motion to approve will provide authorization for the Mayor to sign the grant
amendment.
93
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
CONSENT AGENDA #4
E. Action on appointments to the Brookings Health System Board
of Trustees.
Mayor Tim Reed has submitted the following appointments for council consideration
and action:
1. Zeno Wicks III
2. Teresa McKnight
3. Dr. Debra Johnston
Purpose
The Brookings Health System Board of Trustees is an administrative board responsible
for the planning, operation and evaluation of all hospital and nursing home programs,
services and related organizational activities consistent with the City Charter,
Ordinance and facility by laws. (Formerly called the “Brookings Hospital Board”.)
Membership
Membership: 8+ (3 County Commission appointed, 5 City Council appointed,
Practicing Physician Representatives)
•Practicing Physician Representatives - a practicing physician
representative from each clinic whose physicians are members of the
active medical staff of the Brookings Hospital and who have been
members of the active medical staff of the Brookings Hospital for at
least one (1) year are eligible for appointment by the mayor, with the
advice and consent of the City Council. Such physician representatives
shall have all of the voting privileges as other members of the board of
trustees.
Term: 3 years
Residency: Must be a resident of Brookings County
Appointment: January 1
Legal Reference: Brookings City Code of Ordinances Chapter 42, Article III,
Division 2, Section 42-91 thru 42-105, Ordinance No. 29-06,
Ordinance No. 27-05, Ordinance No. 15-04, Ordinance No. 06-
02, Ordinance No. 32-99, Ordinance No. 19-91, Ordinance No.
03-90 (Nov. 29, 1999 changed the board configuration from a 7-
member board to a 9-member board.), Ordinance No. 12-08
94
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
CONSENT AGENDA #4
F. Action on Resolution No. 09-10, a Resolution awarding contract
for the bids for the Bike Trail Project.
The City of Brookings received a grant to construct a new bike path east of I-29 which
will serve as an off-road transportation route to the industries on the east side of
Brookings, the business park, Swiftel Center and Larson Ice Center. The bike trail
project also included alternate bid prices for a bike trail in the McCrory Gardens
arboretum and for a connecting trail through McCrory Gardens between 20th Avenue
and 22nd Avenue. The City was awarded a grant with Transportation Enhancement
Funds for $499,000 and a grant using High Priority Project Funds for $100,000, of which
approximately $90,000 of the fund is available. The City match for this project is 20%,
approximately $141,000, which gives a total project budget of approximately $725,000.
The bike path project includes boardwalk, new retaining wall under the I-29 Overpass,
and hard surfaced bike path where the contractor could choose between asphalt and
concrete.
The bid letting for this project was held on Tuesday, January 12, 2010 and the following
bids were received:
Base Bid:
Engineer’s Estimate (Banners Associates): $535,906.25
Rounds Construction Co., Inc., Brookings, SD $607,765.57
Bowes Construction Co., Inc., Brookings, SD $629,458.83
Dakota Contracting Corp., Sioux Falls, SD $650,715.97
Sioux Falls Construction Co., Sioux Falls, SD $673,682.97
T&R Contracting, Inc., Sioux Falls, SD $712,167.82
Bid Alternate No. 1 (McCrory Gardens Loop):
Engineer’s Estimate( Banners Associates): $94,694.25
Rounds Construction Co., Inc., Brookings, SD $143,781.07
Bowes Construction Co., Inc., Brookings, SD $143,685.36
Dakota Contracting Corp., Sioux Falls, SD $145,487.37
Sioux Falls Construction Co., Sioux Falls, SD $150,328.70
T&R Contracting, Inc., Sioux Falls, SD $146,544.98
Bid Alternate No. 2 (20th Avenue to 22nd Avenue Connection):
Engineer’s Estimate( Banners Associates): $23,635.75
Rounds Construction Co., Inc., Brookings, SD $44,193.30
Bowes Construction Co., Inc., Brookings, SD $33,415.71
Dakota Contracting Corp., Sioux Falls, SD $43,362.21
Sioux Falls Construction Co., Sioux Falls, SD $53,593.98
T&R Contracting, Inc., Sioux Falls, SD $40,637.39
95
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
The City was hoping to accept Bid Alternates 1 and 2 to enhance the bike trail system
through McCrory Gardens, but unfortunately, the bid prices would bring our total costs
higher than the budget. The total project budget of $725,000 must also cover Banners
Associates engineering fees and project contingency, which unfortunately does not allow
enough financial leeway to accept the alternate bids. This resolution will accept the low
bid of Rounds Construction Co., Inc., in the amount of $607,765.57 for the Base Bid
Project.
Resolution No. 09-10
Resolution Awarding Bids on Brookings Recreation/Bike Path & Structure Project
POENH(147) PCN 00C2 and EM 8006(49) PCN 010A
Whereas, the City of Brookings opened bids for Brookings Recreation/Bike Path & Structure
Project POENH(147) PCN 00C2 and EM 8006(49) PCN 010A on Tuesday, January 12, 2010 at
1:30 pm at Brookings City Hall; and
Whereas, the City of Brookings has received the following bids for Brookings Recreation/Bike
Path & Structure Project POENH(147) PCN 00C2 and EM 8006(49) PCN 010A
Base Bid:
Engineer’s Estimate (Banners Associates): $535,906.25
Rounds Construction Co., Inc., Brookings, SD $607,765.57
Bowes Construction Co., Inc., Brookings, SD $629,458.83
Dakota Contracting Corp., Sioux Falls, SD $650,715.97
Sioux Falls Construction Co., Sioux Falls, SD $673,682.97
T&R Contracting, Inc., Sioux Falls, SD $712,167.82
Bid Alternate No. 1 (McCrory Gardens Loop):
Engineer’s Estimate (Banners Associates): $94,694.25
Rounds Construction Co., Inc., Brookings, SD $143,781.07
Bowes Construction Co., Inc., Brookings, SD $143,685.36
Dakota Contracting Corp., Sioux Falls, SD $145,487.37
Sioux Falls Construction Co., Sioux Falls, SD $150,328.70
T&R Contracting, Inc., Sioux Falls, SD $146,544.98
Bid Alternate No. 2 (20th Avenue to 22nd Avenue Connection):
Engineer’s Estimate (Banners Associates): $23,635.75
Rounds Construction Co., Inc., Brookings, SD $44,193.30
Bowes Construction Co., Inc., Brookings, SD $33,415.71
Dakota Contracting Corp., Sioux Falls, SD $43,362.21
Sioux Falls Construction Co., Sioux Falls, SD $53,593.98
T&R Contracting, Inc., Sioux Falls, SD $40,637.39
Now Therefore, Be It Resolved that the low bid of Rounds Construction Co., Inc., Brookings,
for the Base Bid of $607,765.57 with no bid alternates be accepted contingent upon the
concurrence of the South Dakota Department of Transportation in the award of the bid.
Passed and approved this 26th day of January 2010.
96
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
CONSENT AGENDA #4
G. Action on Resolution No. 10-10, a Resolution Directing
Preparation of Assessment Roll, Dividing Assessments into
Installments, and Providing for the Collection Thereof for
Sidewalk Assessment Project 2009-01SWR (2009 Sidewalk
Repairs).
This project entailed construction of miscellaneous concrete work in the 2009 sidewalk
area. This project included repair of curb and gutter, fillets, valley gutters, curb ramps and
homeowner trip hazard sidewalks. Also included with this project was curb repair on
4th Street and 5th Street between 3rd Avenue and 5th Avenue in preparation for the asphalt
overlay project and new sidewalk along the detention pond lots in Timberline Addition,
as well as accessible ramps and sidewalk improvements in Camelot Park.
This project has been closed out and this resolution will begin the assessment process
for the homeowner trip-hazard sidewalks, with the cost being billed to the homeowners.
Approval of this resolution will authorize City staff to prepare the assessment roll.
There will be two following resolutions, which will set the hearing date and hold the
public hearing to levy the assessment.
97
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
Resolution No. 10-10
Resolution Directing Preparation Of Assessment Roll, Dividing Assessments Into
Installments, And Providing For The Collection Thereof For Sidewalk Assessment, Project
2009-01SWR (2009 Sidewalk Repairs).
Be It Resolved by the City Council of the City of Brookings, South Dakota, as follows:
1. More than twenty days have elapsed since the adoption and publication of Resolution 68-09,
a Resolution Determining the Necessity of Repairing or Installing Sidewalks for Sidewalk Assessment
Project No. 2009-01SWR. The referendum has not been invoked, and no written protests against the
making of said improvement have been filed with the City Manager.
2. A contract for Sidewalk Assessment Project No. 2009-01SWR has been duly executed, and
the City Council is authorized to levy special assessments pursuant to the provisions of chapter 9-43,
SDCL 1967, as amended.
3. The City Engineer has caused an estimate of the expense of the work to be made and filed in
City Hall showing the total cost of said improvement as follows:
Contract price $61,821.70
Engineering, inspection, fiscal, legal expense, publication 166.62
Total Expense $561,988.32
4. The total cost of said improvement shall be paid as follows:
City Repair Costs $ 59,044.75
Assessable costs $ 2,776.95
5. There shall be made and filed in the office of the City Clerk an assessment roll for said
improvement. The assessments shall be on the basis of benefits upon each lot or tract of land
contiguous to the sidewalk constituting said improvement.
6. The assessment shall be divided into five (5) equal annual installments for all amounts over
$300.00. For amounts of $300.00 or less, the entire assessment shall be due.
7. Unless paid to the City in advance of maturity, the assessments shall be collected by the City
Manager in accordance with the procedure for Plan One in Chapter 9-43, SDCL 1967, as amended.
8. The interest rate to be borne by the unpaid installments of the special assessment is ten
percent (10%).
Passed and approved this 26th day of January 2010.
CITY OF BROOKINGS
Tim Reed, Mayor
ATTEST:
Shari Thornes, City Clerk
98
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
Presentations/Reports/Special Requests
5. Presentation of the Annual Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Day
Awards.
In celebration of Dr. King’s birthday, the Brookings Human Rights Committee sponsored a
poster contest for elementary students and an essay contest for middle school and high school
grades to help students reflect on Dr. King’s ideas and their impact on the community. This
year’s theme for the poster contest was “I Have a Dream” and the theme for the essay contest
was “The Time is Always Right to do the Right Thing.”
All poster entries and the winning essays are on display at the Brookings Public Library and on
the city website (www.cityofbrookings.org) through January 31st.
Grades K-1 - Poster Maggie Bedow – 1st Place - $25.00
Hillcrest Elementary – 1st Grade
Teacher – Mrs. Stadler
Parent – Karla Bedow
Micah Ardry – 2nd Place - $10.00
Hillcrest Elementary – Kindergarten
Teacher – Ms. Daniels
Parents – Brian and Sohee Ardry
Grades 2-3 - Poster Eleanor Abraham – 1st Place - $25.00
Hillcrest Elementary – 2nd Grade
Teacher – Mr. Hansen
Parents – Ross and Julie Abraham
Ellie Fitzpatrick – 2nd Place - $10.00
Hillcrest Elementary – 2nd Grade
Teacher – Mrs. Sigaty
Parents – Dan and Maria Fitzpatrick
Grades 4-5 - Poster Klara Beinhorn – 1st Place - $25.00
Camelot Intermediate School – 5th Grade
Teacher – Miss Hofer
Parents – Dan and Kelly Beinhorn
Jackie Lin – 2nd Place - $10.00
Camelot Intermediate School – 4th Grade
Teacher – Mr. Ayres
Parents – Dong He and Jun Lin
Middle School – Essay Zarin Rahman – 1st Place - $100.00
Michelson Middle School – 8th Grade
99
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
Teacher – Mrs. Dahl
Parents – Shafiqur and Moursheda Rahman
Sarah He– 2nd Place - $50.00
Mickelson Middle School – 8th Grade
Teacher – Mrs. Klein
Parents – Li Zhong and Hongshan He
High School – Essay Yuru Zhang – 1st Place - $100.00
High School – 9th Grade
Teacher – Mr. Ganci
Parents – Wang Ziuquing and Yun Zhang
Sarah Lanning – 2nd Place - $50.00
High School – 9th Grade
Teacher – Mr. Ganci
Parents – Tony and Jackie Lanning
Jesse Crosby – 3rd Place - $25.00
High School – 9th Grade
Teacher – Mr. Ganci
Parents – Steven Crosby and Carol Malone
Jaclyn Meyer – Honorable Mention
High School – 9th Grade
Teacher – Mr. Ganci
Parents – Kevin and Cheryl Meyer
Alex Wiemann – Honorable Mention
High School – 9th Grade
Teacher – Mr. Ganci
Parents – Brad and Michelle Wiemann
100
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
Zarin Rahman
Mickelson Middle School Essay – 1st Place
Teacher – Mrs. Dahl
Parents: Shafiqur and Moursheda Rahman
“The Time Is Always Right To Do The Right Thing.”
I believe most people know right from wrong as good parents teach their children right
from wrong from the beginning of their life. “Do the right thing”, is it really that simple? How
many people were doing the just in the 1960’s when African Americans were being treated
unfairly and with no respect? Though some responsible and kind-hearted Americans were
against that racial discrimination in their heart, they couldn’t put it in action thinking that the
time was not right. Only one wise man, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. wanted to change the way
the African Americans were being treated. He believed in, “The time is always right to do the
right thing.” The message in his words is so strong and clear, it made many Americans come to
realization that if we wanted to make a difference, we couldn’t do it tomorrow, next year or in
the next century. The time to do it is now.
The impact of his change is so deep; we still feel the vibrations of his passionate aura
today. His words were a wake-up call to America; to tell them what they were doing was
wrong. He didn’t just want the citizens to notice what was wrong; he wanted them to do
something about it. Of course, he couldn’t change their minds himself; the people could only
change their mind themselves. Avoiding reality and procrastinating was not going to help
anyone. If they were going to see change, and if they wanted to solve the problem, they would
have to start acting right at that moment. Otherwise, it would never be solved.
What Dr. King believed in at that time was not favorable, and he knew that many people
were angry when he was going to protest. He didn’t care what others thought. He continued to
fight for what was right and what was fair. When he was fighting to win, he needed to be
dedicated for his success, but he was much more than that. He jeopardized everything for his
cause. When it comes to treating people equally, everyone should have agreed. However, at
that time they didn’t. That didn’t matter to stop Dr. King from his ideology. He continued
fighting even when others tried to stop him. He knew his cause was righteous and pure, and
success would not be achieved if someone didn’t do the right thing at that particular time. He
also knew that he could not win on his own. He needed the support of other people and that if
107
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
they did not act now, they would lose. What was there to wait for? That is why he marched
thousands of miles and made many courageous speeches to make his point clear and spread his
messages throughout America. With lots of courage, eventually, he succeeded to make America
free of racial prejudices.
His message is still true today. What does the quote mean today? To me, it means
there doesn’t have to be a special time to do the right thing. Doing the right thing ranges from
picking trash off the ground to saving someone’s life. It also means sacrifices, like helping feed
the homeless, working in a nursing home, volunteering at hospitals, and just being there for the
people who need us. There is no special place or time to do the right thing. For example, if a
seriously ill old person needs help right now, but we don’t want to expand our helping hand at
that time because the weather is not favorable for us. We never know what will happen with
that person tomorrow and we don’t know if we will ever have another chance to help them.
Like Dr. King, we have to believe that the time is always right to respect the people around us,
to help the people around us and to love the people around us. These small actions of our life
may not be defined as amazing acts of achievement, but by our smile, doing small comforts and
helping at any time, we can win people’s hope that humanity does exist.
Dr. King was a leader, a pioneer struggling for freedom and rights. His powerful quote
shows and encourages us not to give up, no matter what obstacles lie before us. Like Dr. King,
if we strive for doing the right thing no matter what the time is, there will be less suffering,
because we are working to achieve a better life for our friends, families and communities. The
world will be a better place to live in if everyone would do the right thing all the time. Dr.
Martin Luther King’s saying could be taken in many different ways, but what’s important is that
the people know what he meant. For this reason, we have to carry out his dream, even though
we face the difficulties of today and tomorrow. We have to have faith and hope that one day,
everyone will know that “the time is always right to do the right thing” to make this
world full of peace and happiness.
108
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
Sarah He
Mickelson Middle School Essay – 2nd Place
Teacher – Mrs. Klein
Parents – Li Zhong and Hongshan He
“The Time is Always Right to do the Right Thing”
Martin Luther King once said, “The time is always right to do the right thing.” However, it’s
not as easy as it may seem; some people have an abundant amount of time but doesn’t have a
clue what the right thing is or when they should do the right thing, others however, know what
it is but just can’t seem to find the time to do it.
When Dr. King was a child, he received segregation that was mild but yet formative. The
white and the black students were not allowed to be in the same school and were also not
allowed to play with each other. This, no doubt, influenced Martin Luther King to make the
choice of protesting against segregation. He started to study furiously to show the whites that
blacks were just as good as them, he skipped 9th and 12th grade and went to college at the age
of 15. Dr. King led the Montgomery Bus Boycott, which lasted 385 days. Then, he became the
youngest person to win the Nobel Peace Prize. Dr. King did what he thought was right and
became a prominent leader in the African American civil rights movement.
The right things can be done by not only famous leaders like Dr. King, but also by ordinary
people. Mickey and Karen Middleton, a normal couple who lived in Arlington, Texas, after
watching a TV series about 8 parentless kids, couldn’t “fathom the idea of children from one
family without parents”. They decided to do the right thing: they went to the nearest adoption
center and asked to adopt those eight children. Mickey and Karen gave the kids a new home
and a family that they never had. They became the “perfect example of people doing the right
things” in 2005.
Dr. King did what he believed was right whenever he could, being in jail in 1963 did not
stop him. He used his pen to write the “Letters from Birmingham Jail” expressing his desire for
justice. Time is always there, and it always will be, it’s just a matter of how to find it. Dr. King
found time to do the right thing, and he changed the world. Can we?
109
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
Yuru Zhang
Brookings High School Essay – 1st Place
Teacher – Mr. Ganci
Parents – Wang Ziuquing and Yun Zhang
“The Time Is Always Right To Do The Right Thing”
Throughout a person’s life, he or she will be constantly pressured to make a certain
choice or decision. Sometimes, it becomes very difficult to ascertain the difference between
right and wrong, especially if there is prejudice or bias towards another person or thing. In Dr.
Martin Luther King, Jr.’s time, African Americans, despite being freed from slavery, were still
not tolerated in white society. Thus, the majority of white Americans were biased when
making their decisions in dealing with blacks.
Why are we inclined to be prejudiced when we try to do the right thing? A decision, no
matter how small, can only be given after enough facts are gathered. Making a choice with
simply a few facts will usually cause prejudice. For example, many people may not understand
the religion of Islam, and so, will falsely conclude that those who practice the religion are
terrorists. If people learned more about other people and their cultures, their judgment might
be less biased and more right.
Another reason why we are biased in our decisions is emotional stimulation. In the
1989 film, Do The Right Thing, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.’s quotes and ideas are used often to
support the moral theme. Some African Americans, in the film, are outraged by the racism
shown by the whites, and resort to violence and rioting to solve the problem. Was this the
right thing to do? Dr. Martin Luther King once said “Nonviolence is the answer to the crucial
political and moral questions of our time; the need for mankind to overcome oppression and violence
without resorting to oppression and violence. Mankind must evolve for all human conflict a method,
which rejects revenge, aggression, and retaliation. The foundation of such a method is love.” Dr. King
believed that violence was not the answer to the African Americans’ troubles, and rather, to
calmly argue and protest their rights was the best choice. Anger, depression, and similar
moods will affect a person’s judgment of what the right thing is.
Everyone, not only those who prejudge but also the prejudged, should remain calm and
learn enough about a situation before choosing a route. I think Dr. King would have wanted
people from all backgrounds to do the right thing, and not choose violence or hate. The world
110
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
is constantly struggling for world peace and equal rights. If we all could learn from Dr. King’s
words and be wiser before performing an action, the goal of world peace would practically be
achieved.
“Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.” These words from Dr. King really
summarize this paper. Whatever the right decision is, all people should graciously accept one
another as fellow human beings, and not allow prejudice, hate, or anger blind them. It has been
almost half a century since Dr. King has died, yet I believe his influence can still be felt. Many
changes have occurred in America since his time; racism and discrimination are much less
common. Still, there is a lot of room for improvement, and in some parts of the world,
inequality is frequently seen. As a global society, we must be prudent and always tolerant of
other people.
Quotes taken from: http://www.quotationspage.com/quotes/Martin_Luther_King_Jr.
111
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
Sarah Lanning
Brookings High School Essay – 2nd Place
Teacher – Mr. Ganci
Parents – Tony and Jackie Lanning
It is always the right time to do the right thing conveys the fact that you can at any time
choose to be a positive influence in the world. Martin Luther King Jr. stands for human’s rights,
and that means that all people are created equal, no matter what your race, gender, sexual
preference, social class, or religion. It’s the merit of a person that is what truly counts. Anyone
can do the right thing, even if they don’t necessarily agree with it.
In the movie Philadelphia, Andrew Beckett is a lawyer who is terminated from his
position at a prominent law firm supposedly because of an important piece of lost paperwork.
Andrew, though, is certain that he was fired because of the fact that he has AIDS and that he is
a homosexual. He enlists the help of a lawyer, Joe Miller, who is to some extent a homophobic.
Even though Joe doesn’t agree with Andrew’s lifestyle, he knows that the morally correct thing
to do is to take the case. In one instance in the movie, Andrew is researching HIV and AIDS in
a public library, and a librarian is quite pushy in insisting that he use a private research room,
most likely because Andrew was receiving some judgmental and disapproving looks from some
other people around him. Joe stood up for him and even went as far as to sit next to him and
talk to him, even though he was undoubtedly uncomfortable. Even this small gesture showed
demonstrated the righteousness that Martin Luther King Jr. embodied.
All throughout the movie, Joe Miller changed his perceptions of homosexuals and AIDS.
As he learned more of Andrew’s story and got deeper into the case, he realized that just
because someone is different than you doesn’t mean they are worse any lesser of a person than
you. By taking this case, Joe rediscovered what it meant to truly be just, and he also recognized
his own ignorance. As King once said, “Now is the time to make justice a reality for all of God's
children.” Joe Miller did just that by standing up against something unfair and doing the
honorable thing.
As shown in Philadelphia, you can always choose to do the righteous and just thing. Even
though the characters and situations are fictional, I think that they lesson they portray are very
real. Martin Luther King Jr. stood for equality for all and expressed that everyone should be
judged on their moral character, something that every human being should live by.
112
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
Jesse Crosby
Brookings High School Essay – 3rd Place
Teacher – Mr. Ganci
Parents – Steven Crosby and Carol Malone
In a 1964 speech at Oberlin College, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. said, “The time is always
right to do what’s right.” Dr. King spoke these sage words during a period of American history
marred by frustration, segregation, and uncertainty. Racism was the ever-pervasive blight that
afflicted every demographic in the United States; racial tensions spawned widespread
resentment, violence, and chaos. However, there existed a salvation, a beacon of light that
pierced the darkness pregnant with prejudice – hope, one personified by Dr. Martin Luther
King, Jr. Motivated by this hope, supporters of the Civil Rights Movement did what was right by
nonviolently protesting racial inequality. Despite the powerful, oppressive opposition, their
hope stood perennial, ultimately leading to reforms in government and a paradigm shift in how
racism is viewed in America. Dr. King’s values and words inspired a generation to take action,
even – or, perhaps more aptly, especially – in the darkest of times.
Decades later, the significance of always doing what is right has not diminished. Our
society still discriminates on the basis of race, sex, sexual orientation, religion, and social status.
As unfortunate as it may be, prejudice and bigotry are, to some degree, inherent to the human
condition. For as long as humanity has existed, so has egoism and intolerance. We, as people,
have always been narcissistic creatures, intent on glorifying and preserving our individuality,
sometimes to the extent that we do not acknowledge the individuality of others. Being so
greatly involved in our own qualities, in our own ideologies that we no longer respect and
appreciate the subtle nuances that define who we all are as individuals is the very definition of
discrimination. We need to act to stop this. Though we may never totally eliminate every one
of the negative isms, we must make the commitment as individuals to love one another and to
do what is right. If we wish to pre-empt further discrimination, we must make the effort – no
matter how difficult it may be – to treat all men and women as our brothers and sisters. We
must continue to fight for universal equality for all peoples, regardless of sex, race, or class.
Through this, we better society; we establish an America that is more conducive to the
enjoyment of life, the conservation of liberty, and the pursuit of happiness – an America that
Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. fought so hard to create.
113
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
Jaclyn Meyer
Brookings High School Essay – Honorable Mention
Teacher – Mr. Ganci
Parents – Kevin and Cheryl Meyer
“The Time Is Always Right To Do The Right Thing”
“The time is always right to do the right thing” is not only the theme of this essay but
the belief by which Martin Luther King lived by. In today’s society, there are many different
situations that someone will create. Although being the Good Samaritan is always the right
choice to make, many people will do some good in the world to make themselves look better
to other people. There are also many conflicting ideas being taught to children on what is the
right thing to do. People like teachers and humanitarians are showing people that doing the
right thing is good, but unfortunately, there are people such as professional athletes and
criminals that are teaching the exact opposite.
The Good Samaritan position is always a good position for one to be in. One of the
goals for humanity is for people to do things for others without thinking about how it will affect
their own life. If only the first question asked to oneself was how can I help?, rather than how
will this affect me?, the world would be a much more peaceful and loving society. People who
are always willing to help need to be the role models for children, as opposed to people of a
high social status. Most professional athletes, most of which make more than one million dollars
per season, are very self-centered and don’t care about helping people or donating even a
miniscule portion of their money. Many of their homes are located in the hearts of cities where
poverty and homelessness is a major issue, and these egotistical people who have the financial
means and the time to do something to help are refusing to and ignoring the opportunities. If
everyone wanted to be considered popular because they did good deeds, the world would be a
better place.
Dr. King’s ideas need to be taught because there is an entire generation that has been
taught to make the wrong choices, and the happiness of the world in the future is resting on
the shoulders of young people all around the globe. His visions of peace, love, and equality for
all mankind need to be realized by the millions of people lacking these things. King’s famous I
Have a Dream speech announced his plans for developing the lives of underprivileged people,
but unfortunately his death prevented him in carrying out his plans. Since he was unable to fulfill
114
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
his dreams, he left that task to the rest of mankind. It is our job to listen to our hearts and
always do the right thing, and in that we are accomplishing his dream. It will not only affect our
own community, but also every community in the world.
Dr. King once said, “An individual has not started living until he can rise above the
narrow confines of his individualistic concerns to the broader concerns of all humanity.” Martin
Luther King believed that you need to focus on more than yourself; you need to focus on
helping others and thinking outside the box of his personal concerns. I believe that the time is
always right to do the right thing, and although it is a challenge, everyone can overcome their
personal limits and gain this knowledge. With this knowledge, the world will be in harmony, and
eventually, the limits on love, equality, and peace are endless.
115
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
Alex Wiemann
Brookings High School Essay – Honorable Mention
Teacher – Mr. Ganci
Parents – Brad and Michelle Wiemann
“Right To Do The Right Thing”
Throughout history, there have been few people in this world who have had the guts to
stand between an innocent man and a confused society. Those few people were beaten, cursed,
and sometimes even killed… but if they held firmly to their beliefs, they always made the world
a better place. Martin Luther King, Jr. delivered his “I Have a Dream” speech almost 50 years
ago, but its influence was so great that it lives on today with as much heart as it had all that
time ago. The right decisions in life are the ones that live on forever. Just as MLK defended the
rights of all humans, teens can choose to do the right thing.
Teens are faced with many difficult situations every day. Friends, peer pressure, school,
and family all provide circumstances in which decisions must be made. Decision-making is easier
when one has core beliefs in place. For example, I believe that we should show respect towards
all people. When I am faced with a difficult decision, I can ask myself about my core belief, “Am
I showing respect in this situation?” Staying true to my belief helps me to do the right thing
every time.
Having the courage to take a stand for what you believe in can be difficult, especially for
teens, but we have to push ourselves to do the right thing. Every year during gym class, there is
a group dance unit that requires students to have a partner, and every year there is a less than
popular girl who is standing alone with no one to dance. A teenager with a core belief of
respect and the courage to stand up for what is right would ask the girl to dance. A simple act
of respect may seem small and unimportant, but it may have a positive impact on an individual.
This is how we can make the world a better a better place for those around us. The time is
always right to do the right thing.
Martin Luther King changed the world with his beliefs. He didn’t wait to make a move
until every person in America was following him. He became a leader by acting when only a
handful of others were willing to act too. The courage to stand up for what he believes in
allowed him to make a difference for all people. That’s how he succeeded, and that was doing
the right thing.
116
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
Teens can make a difference in the lives of others too. If we keep strong core values and
beliefs and we are willing to stand up for them, doing the right thing will be an easier act. We
may not change the world in a way like Martin Luther King, Jr., but we can positively impact the
lives of those around us, and influence the generations to come. It is always the right time to do
the right thing.
117
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
Presentations/Reports/Special Requests
6. Invitation for a Citizen to schedule time on the Council Agenda
for an issue not listed.
At this time, any member of the public may request time on the agenda for an item not
listed. Items are typically scheduled for the end of the meeting; however, very brief
announcements or invitations will be allowed at this time.
7. SDSU Student Senate Report.
President – Matt Tollefson
Vice-President – Michael Kendall
Administrative Assistant – Brandon Bausch
Finance Chair – Ashley Dumke
State & Local Chair – Catherine Grandorff
http://studentorgs.sdstate.org/studentsassociation/Default.htm
118
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
Contract Awards/Change Orders
8. Action on Resolution No. 11-10, A Resolution Authorizing
Change Order No. 2 Final (CCO#2 Final) for 2008-03STI
Downtown Streetscape Project, (Paving Contract), Bowes
Construction Company, Inc.
The 2008-03STI Downtown Streetscape Project entailed construction work on Main
Avenue from 6th Street to Front Street, which includes new water and sanitary sewer
mains and services, new sidewalk, light poles, trees, curb & gutter, pavement and other
streetscape amenities. This project was bid with two contracts; Winter Brothers
Underground, Inc. has the contract for the streetscape project and amenities, and
Bowes Construction Company, Inc. has the contract for finish gravel grading and asphalt
paving.
The contract deadline for this project was October 15, 2008. However, the 2008-03STI
Downtown Streetscape Project with Winter Brothers Underground was extended into
2009, which delayed the paving contract. The project was finally completed on August
28, 2009. This delay caused an extra expense to the project due to the asphalt prices
being higher for 2009 than they were in 2008, which was no fault of Bowes
Construction Co., Inc. The total increase to the contract was $10,426.83 which will
adjust the asphalt bid quantities to final as-built quantities and will adjust the 2008
asphalt prices to 2009 asphalt prices to close out the project. The summary is as
follows:
Original Contract Price: $174,925.00
Decrease from previously approved Change Orders: $5,247.00
Contract price prior to this Change Order: $169,678.00
Increase of this Change Order: $10,426.83
Contract Price incorporating this Change Order: $180,104.83
This resolution will approve Change Order No. 2 (Final) for an increase of $10,426.83
to the contract with Bowes Construction Company, Inc. and will adjust the final
completion date to August 28, 2009 to close out the project.
City Manager Introduction
ACTION: Motion to approve, Request Public Comment, Roll Call
CITY MANAGER RECOMMENDATION - Approve
119
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
Resolution No. 11-10
A Resolution Authorizing Change Order #2 (CCO#2 Final) for
2008-03STI Downtown Streetscape Project
Bowes Construction Company, Inc., Brookings, SD
Be It Resolved by the City Council that the following change order be allowed for 2008-03SSI,
Downtown Streetscape Project:
Construction Change Order Number 2 (final):
Adjust estimated bid quantities to final as-built quantities and adjust asphalt prices from 2008 to
2009 prices for a total increase of $10,426.83.
Adjust contract final completion date from October 15, 2008 to August 28, 2009.
Passed and approved this 26th day of January 2010.
CITY OF BROOKINGS
_________________________
Tim Reed, Mayor
ATTEST:
____________________________
Shari Thornes, City Clerk
120
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
Ordinance First Readings**
** No vote is taken on the first reading of ordinances. The title of the ordinance is read and the date
for the public hearing is announced.
9. Ordinance No. 01-10: An Ordinance Amending Article I. of
Chapter 6 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Brookings and
Pertaining to the Sale of Alcoholic Beverages on Sunday by the
Off-Sale Licensee in the City of Brookings.
Public Hearing: February 9th
Attached is the first reading of an ordinance which allows the liquor store to be open
on Sunday. Staff is recommending limited Sunday hours of operation to be available to
customers; hours on Sunday would be from Noon to 6:00 p.m. The ordinance does not
specify the hours of operation as some operational flexibility would need to be retained
for those rare situations, for example, when New Years Eve falls on a Sunday. The
Liquor Store would definitely not open before noon on Sunday.
The current State law authorizes the proposed amendment to our ordinances as
follows:
35-4-81.1. Alcohol sales - Times when off-sale service prohibited.
No off-sale licensee, licensed under subdivisions 35-4-2(3), (5) [local option off-sale—
Brookings], and (19), may sell, or allow to be sold, alcoholic beverages between the
hours of twelve midnight and seven a.m. of the following day, or sell, or allow to be sold,
distilled spirits or wine on Memorial Day or Christmas Day. In addition, no off-sale
licensee may sell, or allow to be sold, alcoholic beverages on Sunday unless
the municipality or the county by ordinance allows such sales on Sunday.
(emphasis in bold)
121
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
Ordinance No. 01-10
An Ordinance Amending Article I. of Chapter 6 of the Code of Ordinances of
the City of Brookings and Pertaining to the Sale of Alcoholic Beverages on Sunday
by the Off-Sale Licensee in the City of Brookings.
Be It Ordained and Enacted by the Council of the City of Brookings, State of South
Dakota, as follows:
I.
That Section 6-4 of Chapter 6 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Brookings and
pertaining to Sunday Sales is amended to include the following subsection:
Sec. 6-4. Sunday sales permitted by the holders of operating agreements and other licensees.
(f) Notwithstanding any other provisions of this chapter, the municipal off-sale
licensee may sell and allow to be sold alcoholic beverages on Sunday after 7:00 o’clock a.m. for
consumption off the premises where sold.
II.
Any or all ordinances in conflict herewith are hereby repealed.
First Reading: January 26, 2010
Second Reading:
Published:
CITY OF BROOKINGS, SD
Tim Reed, Mayor
ATTEST:
Shari Thornes, City Clerk
122
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
First Class Cities - - Municipal Liquor Stores - - Off-Sale - - Sunday Sales
Sioux Falls - YES
Came about as a repercussion of Sunday Wine Sales.
Aberdeen - NO
Go with what the State dictates.
Pierre - YES
Passed a little over a year ago. Fort Pierre allowed it, so Pierre changed Ordinance to reflect.
Thought of losing business.
Huron - NO
Tried around August 2009 – failed at the 1st Reading.
Spearfish - YES
Passed Ordinance over 10 years ago.
Sturgis - YES
Has been in effect for a number of years.
Rapid City - YES
Has been in effect for a number of years.
Watertown - NO
Mitchell - NO
Did try to pass Ordinance in summer 2009. Public petitioned. Will be voting on this in
November 2010.
Yankton - YES
Recently changed in 2009.
Vermillion – YES.
Changed within last 4-5 years. Started when New Years fell on a Sunday. Now allow from
Noon-5pm on Sunday.
Madison - NO
Brandon - YES
Changed 2008/2009. Driven by what Sioux Falls was doing.
123
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
Alcohol Licenses
10. Action on Resolution No. 12-10, a Resolution Authorizing the
City Manager to sign an On/Off Sale Wine Operating Agreement
for the Brookings Municipal Liquor Store.
The Brookings Municipal Liquor Store has applied for an On-Off Sale Wine License for
the store located at 780 22nd Avenue South. An operating agreement is required for
wine licenses. Resolution No. 12-10 would allow the City Manager to enter into the
first five years of the 10-year agreement effective through 2015. This license would be
subject to annual state renewal in December. If approved, the application would be
forwarded to the State Department of Revenue for final action and issuance of the
license.
Enclosed is a memo from Bill Purrington, Liquor Store Manager, regarding how the On-
Off Wine Sale License would benefit the Brookings Municipal Liquor Store.
Listed below is specific information related to a wine license request and other
procedures that are following with an application.
Criteria:
SD State Law Provisions:
35-1-9.2. Definition of terms used in § 35-1-9.1. Terms used in § 35-1-9.1 mean:
(4) "Wine," any liquid either commonly used, or reasonably adapted to use, for beverage
purposes, and obtained by the fermentation of the natural sugar content of fruits or
other agricultural products containing sugar and containing not less than one-half of one
percent of alcohol by weight but not more than twenty-four percent of alcohol by
volume.
City Ordinances:
Listed below is Chapter 5, Article 2, Section 5-20 of the City Code of Ordinances
pertaining to Application Review Procedure. The City Council shall review all
applications submitted to the City for available On-Sale Alcoholic Beverage Agreements
and for On-Sale Malt Beverage and Wine Licenses in accordance with SDCL 35-2 and in
accordance with the following factors:
(a) Type of business which applicant proposes to operate:
On-Sale Alcoholic Beverage Operating Agreements and On-Sale Malt Beverage
and Wine Licenses may not be issued to convenience grocery stores, gas
stations, or other stores where groceries or gasoline are sold unless it can be
established that minors do not regularly frequent the establishment.
(b) The manner in which the business is operated:
On-Sale Alcoholic Beverage Operating Agreements and On-Sale Malt Beverage
and Wine Licenses may not be issued to establishments which are operated in a
manner which results in minors regularly frequenting the establishment.
(c) The extent to which minors are employed in such a place of business:
124
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
On-Sale Alcoholic Beverage Operating Agreements and On-Sale Malt Beverage
and Wine Licenses may not be issued to convenience grocery stores, gas
stations, or other stores where groceries or gasoline are sold and which
regularly employ minors.
(d) The adequacy of the police facilities to properly police the proposed location:
The City Council shall inquire of the Police Chief whether the Police
Department can adequately police the proposed location.
(e) Other factors:
The hours that business is conducted shall be considered by the City Council in
its review of applications for on-sale alcoholic beverage operating agreements
and on-sale malt beverage and wine licenses
City Manager Introduction
ACTION: Motion to approve, Request Public Comment, Roll Cal
CITY MANAGER RECOMMENDATION - Approve
125
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
To: Jeff Weldon
From: Bill Purrington
Subject: On-Sale Wine License
Date: January 17, 2010
Presently we conduct wine tastings in our store by offering a limited number of wines to our
customers in one ounce servings. The wine samples are free to the customer and every time
we have done a sampling our sales of the particular wines sampled have increased. During a
tasting of Prairie Berry wines last summer, every single customer that came into our store
during a two-hour period left with at least one bottle of Prairie Berry wine. In total we sold five
cases of Prairie Berry wine during the tasting.
Our plan, in the beginning, is to start having in-store wine tasting events in our store. There is
ample room in our wine gallery for this. The participants at these events will pay a fee for the
event at which several wines plus hors d’oeuvres will be served. Supplier representatives will be
present at these events to explain the various wines in detail.
I anticipate having at least six of these events this year with the ultimate goal of having one wine
tasting event per month each year but we may suspend them during the summer (several other
businesses that do this don’t do them during the summer). I project that the profit from these
events will at minimum defray the license cost ($500) and the cost of additional insurance
($250).
Obviously, the main reason why we want this on-sale wine license is to enhance the sales of off-
sale wine. The more information a wine customer has about a particular wine the more likely
the customer will purchase that wine. If the customer can taste the wine(s) he/she is even
more likely to purchase that wine.
Another possibility available to us is to sell wine by the glass at times other than the wine
tasting events. For instance, we could pick a day and time such as Fridays between 4-7 pm, to
offer customers wine by the glass. If selling wine by the glass is well received by our customers
and it increases our wine sales we could certainly expand the number of days and hours that
we offer it.
126
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
Resolution No. 12-10
On-Off Sale Wine Operating Agreement
Brookings Municipal Liquor Store
Be It Resolved by the city of Brookings, South Dakota, that the City Council hereby approves a
Lease Agreement for a Wine Operating Management Agreement between the City of
Brookings and the Brookings Municipal Liquor Store, 780 22nd Avenue South, Bill Purrington,
Manager, for the purpose of a manager to operate the on-sale establishment or business for
and on behalf of the City of Brookings at the Brookings Municipal Liquor Store.
Be It Further Resolved that the City Manager be authorized to execute the Agreement on
behalf of the City, which shall be for a period of ten years with a renewal in five (5) years.
Passed and approved this 26th day of January 2010.
CITY OF BROOKINGS
Tim Reed, Mayor
ATTEST:
Shari Thornes, City Clerk
127
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
Second Readings / Public Hearings
11. Public Hearing and Action on Resolution No. 13-10, a Resolution
Levying Assessment for Street Assessment Project 2008-02STA
(15th Street South, Christine Avenue & Camelot Drive Utility,
Grading and Curb & Gutter Project).
The Brookings City Council approved Resolution of Necessity No. 32-07 on May 8,
2007, authorizing the City to proceed with bidding for this street assessment project.
This project included construction of water main, sanitary sewer main, storm sewer,
grading, gravel and curb and gutter for 15th Street South, approximately 700’ east of
Medary, Christine Avenue from 15th Street South to the north approximately 300’, and
Camelot Drive from 15th Street South to the north approximately 900’. These streets
are located adjacent to the new Camelot Intermediate School site. This project is an
assessment project with most of the project costs being assessed to the abutting
property owners. The City will pay for the extra width and thickness costs for 15th
Street South, as well as frontage along the west side of Camelot Drive adjacent to the
City park.
This project has been closed out and this is the final step of the assessment process.
Resolution No. 32-07 included the estimated front foot cost of $114.00 as well as
stipulating the assessment can be paid over a 10-year period at 10% interest. The actual
assessed front foot cost for this street project will be $85.38, which is the actual
construction costs plus a 6% engineering and administration fee. In addition to the front
foot cost, some property owners will have additional costs such as intersection costs
and the Brookings School District will pay for the extra costs to widen the streets for
the student drop-off zones.
The engineering office mailed a hearing notice and the actual cost of the street project
by first class mail to each owner on the project as required by State law and the hearing
notice was published in the Brookings Register. This resolution will approve the
assessment roll and levy the assessment. After approval, the City Finance Office will bill
each of the affected property owners.
City Manager Introduction
ACTION: Open & Close Public Hearing, Motion to approve, Roll Cal
CITY MANAGER RECOMMENDATION - Approve
128
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
Resolution No. 13-10
Levying Assessment for Street Assessment Project No. 2008-02STA
15th Street South, Christine Avenue and Camelot Drive Utility, Grading, and Curb
& Gutter Project
Whereas, the City Council has provided for the following work to be completed under Project
No. 2008-02STA, 15th Street South, Christine Avenue and Camelot Drive Utility, Grading and
Curb & Gutter Project.
Be It Resolved by the City Council of the City of Brookings, South Dakota, as follows:
1. The City Council has made all investigation which it deems necessary and has found
and determined that the amount which each lot or tract will be benefited by the
construction of the street improvement heretofore designated as Street Assessment
Project No. 2008-02STA is the amount stated in the proposed assessment roll.
2. The assessment for Street Assessment Project No. 2008-02STA is hereby approved
and the assessment thereby specified are levied against each and every lot, piece or
parcel of land thereby described.
3. The assessment shall be divided into ten (10) equal annual installments for streets.
4. Such assessments, unless paid within thirty (30) days after the date of mailing of a
statement of account by the City, shall be collected by the City in accordance with
the procedure for Plan One in Sections to 9-43-51, South Dakota Compiled Laws of
1967, as amended.
5. Interest of ten (10) percent per annum shall accrue on the unpaid balance of the
assessment.
Passed and approved this 26th day of January, 2010.
CITY OF BROOKINGS
___________________________
Mayor Tim Reed
ATTEST:
______________________________
Shari Thornes, City Clerk
129
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
Second Readings / Public Hearings
12. Public Hearing and Action on Resolution No. 14-10, a Resolution
Levying Assessment for Street Assessment Project 2009-02STA
(15th Street South, Christine Avenue & Camelot Drive Paving
Project).
This project is a street assessment project which entails minor gravel shaping and
asphalt paving for 15th Street South, approximately 700’ east of Medary, Christine
Avenue from 15th Street South to the north approximately 300’ and Camelot Drive
from 15th Street South to the north approximately 900’. These streets are located
adjacent to the new Camelot Intermediate School site. The City Council approved
Resolution No. 27-09, which authorized the City to proceed with the assessment
project. The majority of the project costs will be assessed and the City will also pay for
the extra width and thickness costs for 15th Street South, as well as an assessment cost
for City frontage abutting the City park on the west side of Camelot Drive.
This project has been closed out and is going through the assessment process. This
resolution will set the public hearing date for the project, which will be January 26, 2010.
Resolution No. 27-09 included the estimated front foot cost of $40.00 as well as
stipulating the assessment can be paid over a 10-year period at 10% interest. The actual
assessed front foot cost for this street project will be $24.23, which is the actual
construction costs plus the 6% engineering and administration fee. In addition to the
front foot cost, some property owners will have additional costs such as intersection
costs and the Brookings School District will pay for the extra costs to widen the streets
for the student drop-off zones.
The engineering office mailed a hearing notice and the actual cost of street project by
first class mail to each owner on the project as required by State law and the hearing
was published in the newspaper. This resolution will approve the assessment roll and
levy the assessment. After approval, the City Finance Office will bill each of the affected
property owners.
City Manager Introduction
ACTION: Open & Close Public Hearing, Motion to approve, Roll Cal
CITY MANAGER RECOMMENDATION - Approve
133
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
Resolution No. 14-10
Levying Assessment for Street Assessment Project No. 2009-02STA
15th St. South, Christine Ave. and Camelot Dr. Asphalt Paving Project
Whereas, the City Council has provided for the following work to be completed under Project
No. 2009-02STA, 15th Street South, Christine Avenue and Camelot Drive Asphalt Paving
Project.
Be It Resolved by the City Council of the City of Brookings, South Dakota, as follows:
1. The City Council has made all investigation which it deems necessary and has found
and determined that the amount which each lot or tract will be benefited by the
construction of the street improvement heretofore designated as Street Assessment
Project No. 2009-02STA is the amount stated in the proposed assessment roll.
2. The assessment for Street Assessment Project No. 2009-02STA is hereby approved
and the assessment thereby specified are levied against each and every lot, piece or
parcel of land thereby described.
3. The assessment shall be divided into ten (10) equal annual installments for streets.
4. Such assessments, unless paid within thirty (30) days after the date of mailing of a
statement of account by the City, shall be collected by the City in accordance with
the procedure for Plan One in Sections to 9-43-51, South Dakota Compiled Laws of
1967, as amended.
5. Interest of ten (10) percent per annum shall accrue on the unpaid balance of the
assessment.
Passed and approved this 26th day of January, 2010.
CITY OF BROOKINGS
___________________________
Tim Reed, Mayor
ATTEST:
______________________________
Shari Thornes, City Clerk
134
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
Other Business
13. Swiftel Center Public Education Discussion.
TO: Mayor and City Council Members
FROM: City Manager Jeff Weldon
RE: Public informational hearing on Swiftel Center
Pursuant to the Council’s previous direction, this item was placed on this agenda and intended
to be an opportunity for further discussion relative to the contemplated Swiftel Center
expansion project.
It was the general opinion of the Council the public did not have sufficient information about
the details of the project for any type of meaningful public opinion. Conversely, several Council
members were of the opinion that in the absence of such meaningful public opinion, the
Council did not have enough public reaction to take a position on the issue. As such, the status
of the project would remain in limbo; not having sufficient support to move the project to the
next step while also having garnered sufficient interest to retain the proposal for continued
consideration.
You will recall, staff did not believe we have been authorized to launch a comprehensive public
education program to actually attempt to provide more information and education to the public
about this issue which the Council seems to indicate was lacking. However, Executive Director
Tom Richter and I have been, when invited, available to answer questions about the project
from various audiences.
If the Council is concerned the public does not have enough information and wants staff to
undertake that, the Council must first authorize it.
That brings us to this juncture in the project. This would be an appropriate time for Council
members to raise issues, concerns, questions, about the project for the public; and to take
public comment and questions for further consideration.
Staff has no new information that has not already been provided to the Council; and all
information requested has been provided.
138
City Council Packet
January 26, 2010
139
14. Adjourn.