HomeMy WebLinkAbout2009_01_27 CC PKTCity Council Packet
January 27, 2009
1
Brookings City Council
Tuesday, January 27, 2009
City Hall Council Chambers
311 Third Avenue
4:00 p.m. ~~ Work Session (NOTE EARLY START TIME)
6:00 p.m. ~~ Council 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.
4:00 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. Snow Removal Fees and 72-Hour Parking Regulations.
2. Brookings Health Systems
3. Replacement Fire Station.
5:00 P.M. WORK SESSION
4. Storm Drainage Master Plan Update.
5. 6:00 p.m. Meeting Review.
6. Council Invites & Obligations.
7. City Council member introduction of topics for future discussion. *
*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 / Presentation of Colors by Wolf Den Pack 24.
3. City Clerk records council attendance.
4. Action to approve the following Consent Agenda Items *
A. Action to approve the agenda.
B. Action to award bids on surplus police car.
C. Action on Resolution No. 04-09, a resolution authorizing Change Order (CCO#1) for
2008-02STI Downtown Streetscape Project with Bowes Construction, Inc.
D. Action on Resolution No. 06-09, awarding bids for Agricultural Land Rent (City owned
property purchased from Nichols).
E. Action on Resolution No. 07-09, a resolution relating to emergency purchase of airport
snow plow.
Action: 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.
City Council Packet
January 27, 2009
2
Presentations/Reports/Special Requests:
5. Presentation of the Dr. Martin Luther King Day Contest Winners by the Human Rights
Committee.
6. Open Forum.
7. SDSU Report.
Ordinances – 1st 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.
8. Ordinance No. 01-09: A petition to rezone the East 60 feet of Lot G., Beale Addition
from a Residence R-2 District to a Planned Development District (1316 6th St.). Public
Hearing: February 10, 2009
9. Ordinance No. 02-09: A major amendment to a Planned Development District on Lot
5, Beale Addition pertaining to a change in land use from Residence R-1B District uses
to Residence R-3 and Business B-2 District uses (1300 block on 6th St.). Public Hearing:
February 10, 2009
10. Ordinance No. 03-09: A petition to rezone the North 115 feet of the East 50.1 feet of
Lot G, Block 3, First Addition from a Business B-2A District to a Business B-2 District
(506 3rd St.). Public Hearing: February 10, 2009
11. Ordinance No. 04-09: An application for a conditional use to establish a two-family
dwelling on the South ½ of Outlot 11 in the SW ¼ of Section 35-T110N-R50W (1812
Main Ave. So.). Public Hearing: February 10, 2009
Second Readings & Public Hearings:
12. Action on Resolution No. 05-09, Resolution of Intent to Lease Real Property (Lease to
Foundation Seed Stocks for Wiese and Freeland Addition farmland).
Other Business:
13. Update on Juvenile Justice Title V Grant by Dan Mielke.
Informational
14. Draft Restaurant Liquor Operating Agreement.
Informational
15. Executive Session for Legal Matters
Action: Motion to enter session – voice vote
Motion to leave executive session – voice vote
16. Adjourn.
City Council Packet
January 27, 2009
3
Brookings City Council
Scott Munsterman, Mayor
Tim Reed, Deputy Mayor
Mike Bartley, Council Member
Tom Bezdichek, Council Member
Ryan Brunner, Council Member
Mike McClemans, Council Member
Julie Whaley, Council Member
Council Staff:
Jeffrey W. Weldon, City Manager
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.
City Council Packet
January 27, 2009
4
4:00 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. Snow Removal Fees and 72-Hour Parking Regulations.
This agenda item is at the request of Council Member Whaley. At the
January 13th Council meeting, Council Member Whaley asked for a review
of the City’s snow removal fees and its policies on the 72 hour parking lot.
Staff has provided the following background information.
City of Brookings Police Dept. policy during a snow removal emergency:
Currently, the Police Dept. waits for the City and/or the Street Dept to announce that there is
going to declare a Snow Removal Emergency. According to Ordinance No. 82-465, the parking
ban goes into effect four (4) hours after the official announcement. When the Police Dept. has
been notified of when the ban itself goes into effect, the Officers on duty are assigned areas.
Officers try to work in an efficient and effective manner to ticket all vehicles that are in
violation, in as fair and equitable manner as possible. The fee amount of a Snow Ticket is
$25.00.
The Police Dept. does not have, currently, a standard towing policy in regards to snow removal
issues. The Street Dept. will, generally, contact the Police Dept. with the location of vehicles
that are preventing them from cleaning a street properly and completely. Those vehicles are
then towed from those locations to allow the Street Dept. to clean the street. However, the
Police Dept. does tow vehicles that have been sitting for more than 72 hours without moving
during a Snow Removal Emergency.
Snow Ticket Survey
• Sioux Falls - $25 fee. If not paid after 7 days, the fee raises to $70. They generally tow
all vehicles.
• Huron - $50 fee. If paid within 7 days, the fee drops to $35. At day 8 it raises to $50;
at day 14 it raises again to $75. They follow the plow for ticketing. 24 hours after the
ticket is issued, if the vehicle is still there, they will then tow.
• Watertown - $40 fee. If not paid within 72 hours, it raises to $80. The will start
towing the next day; not necessarily 24 hours after issuing the ticket.
• Aberdeen - $45 fee. The following day beginning at 8:00 p.m., they will start towing on
the North/South streets. The day after that they will start towing on the East/West
streets. They do no increase their fee after ‘x’ number of days.
• Rapid City – uncertain if the snow ordinance is enforced.
City Council Packet
January 27, 2009
5
4:00 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. Brookings Health Systems
This agenda item is at the request of Council Member Bartley.
City Council Packet
January 27, 2009
6
4:00 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. Replacement Fire Station
This agenda item is at the request of Council Member McClemans who
asked for updates on the proposed replacement fire station and current
ISO ratings for the Brookings Fire Department. Staff has provided the
following background information.
To: Jeff Weldon, Brookings City Manager
From: Darrell Hartmann, Brookings Fire Chief
Date: January 20, 2009
RE: Proposed South Main Station
I have enclosed information in regards to the ISO rating system and a proposed South
Main Fire Station to help with distribution of fire stations and coverage areas. The one
and one half mile response range for engine companies and their distribution, as set by
ISO, are as shown on the enclosed maps with the current station locations and the
proposed South Main Fire Station.
We would plan the continued utilization of the current station on 32nd Street South as a
training site.
City Council Packet
January 27, 2009
7
ISO (Insurance Services Office)
How the Public Protection Classification (PPCTM) Program Works
The PPCTM program provides important, up-to-date information about municipal fire-protection
services throughout the country. ISO's expert staff collects information about the quality of
public fire protection in more than 44,000 fire districts across the United States. In each of
those fire districts, ISO analyzes the relevant data and assigns a Public Protection Classification
— a number from 1 to 10. Class 1 generally represents superior property fire protection, and
Class 10 indicates that the area's fire-suppression program does not meet ISO's minimum
criteria.
Virtually all U.S. insurers of homes and business property use ISO's Public Protection
Classifications in calculating premiums. In general, the price of insurance in a community with a
good PPC is substantially lower than in a community with a poor PPC, assuming all other
factors are equal.
A community's PPC depends on:
• Fire alarm and communication systems, including telephone systems, telephone lines,
staffing, and dispatching systems.
• The fire department, including equipment, staffing, training, and geographic distribution
of fire companies.
• The water-supply system, including the condition and maintenance of hydrants, and a
careful evaluation of the amount of available water compared with the amount needed
to suppress fires.
Benefits of the PPCTM Program for Communities
The PPCTM program recognizes the efforts of communities to provide fire-protection services
for citizens and property owners. A community's investment in fire mitigation is a proven and
reliable predicator of future fire losses. Insurance companies use PPC information to help
establish fair premiums for fire insurance — generally offering lower premiums in communities
with better protection. By offering economic benefits for communities that invest in their
firefighting services, the program provides a real incentive for improving and maintaining public
fire protection.
The program also provides help for fire departments and other public officials as they plan for,
budget, and justify improvements.
But the most significant benefit of the PPC program is its effect on losses. Statistical data on
insurance losses bears out the relationship between excellent fire protection — as measured by
the PPC program — and low fire losses. By helping communities prepare to fight fires
effectively, ISO's PPC program saves lives.
Better fire protection – as a measure by the PPC Program – Leads to lower losses
On average, communities with superior fire-protection services — and therefore good Public
Protection Classifications — have lower fire losses than communities whose fire-protection
services are not as comprehensive.
City Council Packet
January 27, 2009
8
ISO reviewed the cost of fire claims per thousand dollars worth of insured property by PPC for
communities around the country. The two graphs below, based on five years of data for
homeowners and commercial property insurance, show that the communities with better
classifications experienced noticeably lower fire losses than the communities with poorer
classifications.
The dollar value of a better PPC varies by state. But on average across the country, the cost of
fire losses for homeowners policies in communities graded Class 9 is 65 percent higher than in
communities graded Class 5.* If a community improved from Class 9 to Class 5, homeowners
could expect their premiums for fire insurance to drop substantially.
*According to loss data collected by ISO from insurance companies for accident years 1994 to
1998.
COST OF FIRE CLAIMS PER $1,000 OF INSURED PROPERTY —
COMMERCIAL PROPERTY
On average, per $1,000 of insured property, communities in the worst classification had
commercial-property fire losses more than three times as high as communities in the best
classification.**
City Council Packet
January 27, 2009
9
COST OF FIRE CLAIMS PER $1,000 OF INSURED PROPERTY —
HOMEOWNERS
On average, per $1,000 of insured property, communities in the worst classification had
homeowners fire losses more than twice as high as communities in the best classification.**
**Based on premium and loss information that insurers reported to ISO. Excludes data from
statistically rated cities. Out of more than 45,000 fire districts in the United States, only 42
have achieved a PPC of 1. Therefore, the data sample for Class 1 is not statistically credible.
FIRE
It's the largest single cause of property loss in the United States. In the last decade, fires have
caused direct losses of more than $120 billion and countless billions more in related costs.
But that's not all. Every year, fires injure more than 20,000 people. And every year, more than
3,000 Americans die in building fires.
A community committed to saving lives and property needs trained firefighters, proper
equipment, and adequate supplies of water. Insurance companies consider it good public policy,
and good business, to promote and encourage the efforts of individual communities to improve
their fire-protection services. That's why, for almost a century, U.S. property insurance
companies have funded key initiatives aimed at fire prevention and fire mitigation.
In the battle against fire losses, one of the insurance industry's most important weapons is the
Public Protection Classification (PPCTM) program from ISO.
The PPC program provides important, up-to-date information about municipal fire-protection
services throughout the country. A community's investment in fire mitigation is a proven and
reliable predictor of future fire losses. Insurance companies use PPC information to help
establish fair premiums for fire insurance; generally offering lower premiums in communities
with better protection.
City Council Packet
January 27, 2009
10
By offering economic benefits for communities that invest in their firefighting services, the PPC
program provides a real incentive for improving and maintaining public fire protection. That
incentive produces results.
The program also provides help for fire departments and other public officials as they plan for,
budget, and justify improvements.
But the most significant benefit of the PPC program is its effect on losses. Statistical data on
insurance losses bears out the relationship between excellent fire protection, as measured by
the PPC program, and low fire losses.
And in a recent survey of fire chiefs, 97% of the respondents said that the PPC program is
important in helping the community save lives and property.
The PPCTM Evaluation Process
To determine a community's Public Protection Classification (PPCTM), ISO conducts a field
survey. Expert ISO staff visit the community to observe and evaluate features of the fire-
protection systems. Using a manual called the Fire Suppression Rating Schedule (FSRS), ISO
objectively evaluates three major areas:
• Fire Alarm and Communications Systems
A review of the fire alarm system accounts for 10% of the total classification. The
review focuses on the community's facilities and support for handling and dispatching
fire alarms.
• Fire Department
A review of the fire department accounts for 50% of the total classification. ISO focuses
on a fire department's first-alarm response and initial attack to minimize potential loss.
Here, ISO reviews such items as engine companies, ladder or service companies,
distribution of fire stations and fire companies, equipment carried on apparatus, pumping
capacity, reserve apparatus, department personnel, and training.
• Water Supply
A review of the water-supply system accounts for 40% of the total classification. ISO
reviews the water supply a community uses to determine the adequacy for fire-
suppression purposes. We also consider hydrant size, type, and installation, as well as
the inspection frequency and condition of fire hydrants.
After completing the field survey, ISO analyzes the data and calculates a PPC. The grading then
undergoes a quality review. The community will receive a notification letter identifying the new
PPC. ISO also provides a hydrant-flow summary sheet, along with the classification details and
improvement statements. The classification details summarize each subcategory and indicate
the total points the community earned. The improvement statements indicate the performance
needed to receive full credit for the specific item in the Schedule, as well as the quantity actually
provided.
Fire Alarm Survey
City Council Packet
January 27, 2009
11
During the fire alarm survey, an ISO field representative will interview the official responsible
for receiving and handling fire alarms and will visit the communications center and other
relevant facilities, such as 9-1-1 centers. Here's what you can expect:
Interview
The ISO field representative will request info on:
• alarm dispatch circuits
• radio and telephone facilities
• overall system operation
Communications center visit
The ISO field representative will review:
• operating procedures
• equipment for power supply
• alarm facilities
The representative will examine records of testing for emergency power facilities and call-detail
reports. The representative will verify alarm answering and dispatch times.
Other facilities
The ISO field representative will examine call-detail recording reports for the previous 12
months to verify the time between the initial phone ring and the operator answering the
emergency call. The representative will also review computer-aided dispatch (CAD) reports to
verify dispatch times.
Fire Department Survey
During the fire department survey, an ISO field representative will interview the fire chief or
other responsible official. The representative will also visit each fire station and other facilities,
such as training grounds, to review:
• fire station and apparatus
• pumper tests
• aerial ladder and elevating platform tests
• drills and training
In some situations, the representative will need to witness equipment tests. Here's what you
can expect:
Interview
The ISO field representative will request info on:
• tools
• equipment
• testing
• hose
• fire stations
• firefighter response
City Council Packet
January 27, 2009
12
• training
Fire Stations and Apparatus
The ISO field representative will review and verify info on fire stations, apparatus, and
equipment.
Pumper Tests
The ISO field representative will review and verify records of pumper service tests. We
recognize only tests conducted as described in NFPA 1911, Service Tests of Fire Pump Systems
on Fire Apparatus.
In some situations, we will need to witness a performance demonstration to determine the
general mechanical condition of a pumper.
Aerial Ladder and Elevating Platform Tests
The ISO field representative will review and verify records of aerial ladder and elevating
platform tests. We recognize only tests conducted as described in NFPA 1914, Testing Fire
Department Aerial Devices.
In some situations, we will need to witness an operational test on an in-service truck.
Drills and Training
The ISO field representative will visit your training facilities and examine records of drills and
training. We will focus on classroom and field training related to suppression of structure fires.
Water-Supply Survey
During the water-supply survey, an ISO field representative will interview the official
responsible for the water department, water utility, or private water companies that supply the
community. The representative will also:
• review various documents and records
• visit all pump facilities
• determine needed fire flows
• usually witness hydrant flow tests
• examine representative hydrants
Here's what you can expect:
Interview
The ISO field representative will review details and records of all water-supply facilities and
operations. The representative will examine a current water utility map to identify the
locations of:
• new supply or storage facilities
• mains
• pressure zones
• closed or check valves
• hydrants
City Council Packet
January 27, 2009
13
• new streets
Pump Facilities
The ISO field representative will visit all pump facilities to examine the water pumping
equipment and the power supplies.
Needed Fire Flow Requirements
ISO will select buildings of various sizes and hazard classifications throughout the community.
We will develop needed fire flows for those buildings and use the information to assess water
availability and delivery for your community.
Hydrant Flow Tests
To determine the adequacy of the water-supply, ISO normally witnesses hydrant flow tests at
selected locations. ISO will select the locations considering:
• geographic layout of the community
• topographical differences (elevation changes)
• the range of needed fire flows for the buildings in the community
Hydrants
The ISO field representative will evaluate the condition of each hydrant used during the flow
testing.
South Dakota Distribution of Communities by PPC Class
City Council Packet
January 27, 2009
14
Brookings
ISO Class Affects on Insurance Premiums
(1999)
Insurable Value of Brookings $1,900,000,000.00
Premium on Brookings at Class 10 $10,450,000.00
Current Premium for Brookings at Class 5 $6,583,000.00
Savings per Year $3,867,000.00
Premium on Brookings at Class 4 $6,270,000.00
Additional Savings per Year $313,000.00
Premium on Brookings at Class 3 $6,061,000.00
Additional Savings per Year $211,000.00
City Council Packet
January 27, 2009
17
5:00 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. Storm Drainage Master Plan Update.
This Council work session will entail discussion on the preliminary ranking
results for projects and public input. Interested parties were sent a notice
by first class mail regarding this work session. The attached is a suggested
general guideline for drainage project ranking.
Background:
The draft City of Brookings Master Drainage Plan was adopted by the City Council at their
September 23, 2008 meeting. The Master Drainage Plan includes thirteen specific study areas,
SWMM model data for the City of Brookings and future growth areas, and cost estimates for
projects. The Master Drainage Plan is not intended for maintenance and nuisance issues. The
Master Drainage Plan addresses two general issues, which are:
• Improvement of existing drainage conditions throughout the City of Brookings and
future growth areas.
• Technical SWMM model data which may be used by consultants for drainage
analysis of existing and future developments.
The City Council adopted the following schedule at their October 28, 2008 meeting:
No. Task
Date Description
1. Internal Staff Review November 2008 Engineering Dept. staff to review the
master plan document
2. City Council Work Session with
City Engineering Staff
December 2008
Discussion & Council input on study areas
Discussion & Council input on storm
event sizing philosophy
Discussion & Council input on ranking
criteria system for projects
3. City Council Work Session with
City Engineering Staff and Troy
Thompson, ERC
January 2009
(Public Invite for input)
Discussion on preliminary ranking results
for projects
Public Input
4.
City Council Work Session City
Engineering Staff (and Troy
Thompson, ERC if needed)
February 2009
(Public Invite for input)
Discussion on proposed prioritized list
Discussion on project funding
Public Input
5. City Council Work Session with
City Engineering Staff March 2009
Adoption of prioritized project list
Discussion of next steps for project
design and land acquisition
6.
City Council Work Session with
City Engineering Staff
April 2009
Discussion on Priority #1 project timeline
and funding
Budget discussion on prioritized list for
current and future year’s funding
City Council Packet
January 27, 2009
18
Drainage Project Ranking Guide for the
Brookings Master Drainage Plan
January 2009
Introduction:
A series of thirteen (13) drainage improvement projects have been set forth in the City of
Brookings, and defined in the Master Drainage Plan in 2008. The Master Drainage Plan defined
the problem areas which were selected on the basis of previous citizen input and engineering
observation. Each area was analyzed for its adequacy to accommodate both a 5 year and 100
year storm event. Improvements for each of the 13 areas were recommended, as well as an
approximate cost of each improvement.
The total cost of all the combined projects is beyond the short term budgeting capabilities of
the City; therefore, a system of drainage project prioritization needs to be developed. The
purpose of this document is to provide a technical basis for ranking each of the 13 projects.
This prioritization system can also be used for future drainage concerns as they arise.
Ranking Procedure:
The ranking of the projects will be based on a series of different criteria. The criteria are as
follows (in no particular order):
1. Potential Environmental Impact
2. Buildings Affected
3. Traffic Impact
4. Location in Basin
5. Cost Versus Budget
6. Reduced Maintenance Issues
7. Infrastructure Age
8. Citizen Safety
Each criterion will be discussed herein. Every project will be scored in each of the criteria
items above. The score will be based on a 0 to 5 scale with no fractional numbers.
Each of the criteria will also have a certain ‘weight’ assigned to it. The weighting of each
criterion is like ranking the importance of the ranking criteria itself. Some criteria are more
important than others. For instance, it would not make sense to budget moneys to improve a
specific area if the problem is actually the result of another problem upstream. Therefore,
location of the project within the basin has a higher weight than the cost of the project.
Determining the weight of each criterion is purely qualitative versus quantitative. In general,
the safety of the public should be the determining factor for rating each criterion. Even though
any amount of flooding is considered unsafe, the flooding which poses the most immediate
threat to public safety is weighted the highest with a 1.0. The exception is the cost/budget
criterion, which is also 1.0. It should be the City’s goal to accomplish as much protection as
possible with the limited amount of funds available.
City Council Packet
January 27, 2009
19
The weighting of each criterion will be on a scale from 0.1 to 1.0. The score of each project is
then multiplied by the weight for that particular criterion.
Recent Changes to the Project Ranking System
The “complaint basis” criterion, which was originally proposed, has been removed from the list.
This is because most complaints have a legitimate basis that already falls into one or more of
the criteria categories. When a drainage complaint is brought to the City, we investigate the
problem area and try to determine the cause. The cause can be infrastructure sizing,
maintenance, etc. Therefore, the “complaint” itself is not the basis for ranking the project;
rather, the “reason” for the complaint is the actual basis.
A new criterion was added to the project prioritization system called “Potential Environmental
Impact”. This was added to include potential environmental effects that a particular drainage
project may have within or downstream of the City of Brookings.
The “15th Street South and Christine Avenue Extension” project will likely be removed from
the list of drainage projects to be ranked. This is because the project is already in the works as
of 2008. Since this is new construction, the developers typically must comply with the
requirements of the City’s Storm Drainage Criteria Manual. In this particular situation, the
developer and the City of Brookings have reached an assurance agreement to combine the
storm drainage improvements of the 15th Street South, Camelot Drive, Christine Avenue
project; the Camelot Intermediate School project; and the adjacent developer’s platted lots and
construction of Pactola and Sylvan Drives into one project. The developer will cost share in
the project and the City’s portion of the cost has already been budgeted for 2009; therefore,
there is no need to rank the project for future funding.
Potential Environmental Impact
This ranking criterion takes into consideration potential environmental impacts as a result of a
drainage project; particularly its effect on wetlands. While wetlands are typically undesirable
for developers, they serve an important purpose in nature, not only because they provide
habitat for many species of plants and animals, but also because they can provide natural
stormwater detention. Since this category poses no immediate threat to human life and safety,
the weighting factor can be fairly low.
An important consideration when making any change in topography as a result of a drainage
project is its effect on ecology and the environment. While the proposed projects in Brookings
are on a relatively small scale, some consideration should be made as to how they will impact
the established ecology, regardless of whether the ecology was natural or manmade to begin
with. Even though past development within the City of Brookings created an excess amount of
runoff that would otherwise not have occurred, the downstream ecology has naturally adapted
to these changes over time. Some of these adaptations have taken several decades or a century
to occur, and could even be considered an asset to the community. When scoring this
category, it will be important to remember that ‘correcting’ what humans have already done
may not always be correct.
City Council Packet
January 27, 2009
20
While a full environmental impact study might not be necessary for this purpose; at minimum a
quick assessment of potential impact should be made based on observable, existing wetland,
habitat, and vegetation conditions.
Scoring for this category will be on a scale of 1 to 5. Those projects which would ‘appear’ to
have little or no potential environmental impact would receive a score of five (5), meaning
projects with less impact are preferred. Projects which have the potential for major impact
would receive a score of one (1). The premise for this is projects with a high potential
environmental impact could possibly drop down on the prioritization list; thereby allowing for
more time to complete a detailed environmental assessment, change the design or scope of the
project, and account any possible changes in the cost of the project.
Buildings Affected
This criterion refers to all buildings and structures directly affected by flooding which have the
potential to be improved by undertaking a specific project. This includes existing structures and
potential future structures based on the City’s Vision 2020 zoning plan. The number of
structures affected will depend on the actual storm event (5yr, 10yr, 100yr storm, etc).
Due to the lack of recorded flood elevations after significant rainfall events in Brookings, it is
important to note that the physical extent of flooding can only be predicted by theoretical
methods and hypothetical circumstances. On the other hand, history has shown that a 50 year
flood can occur from only a 2 year storm event if the conditions are right. Therefore,
reasonable assumptions need to be made before estimating the number of structures affected.
As previously described, the weight of a particular criterion is based on the immediate threat to
life and safety. Weighting of this criterion should be fairly high, but possibly less than 1.0
because the threat to life and safety is less than immediate. For example, a 100 yr flood event
may take a period of several minutes to several hours to occur from the time that a threat is
imminent. A catastrophic structural failure of a building is likely to take even longer. In such
events, it is most likely that occupants will have had some warning to evacuate a building prior
to the structure becoming an immediate threat to life and safety. This is in contrast to some
cities with rivers and streams running through the town center; where structural flood damage
can occur at a more rapid and dangerous rate. Nonetheless, a weight of at least 0.90 should be
assigned to this category.
The ranking score is based on the number of structures affected with consideration to the
number of occupants that may be displaced as the result of a flood event. A total score of zero
(0) means that no structures are directly affected, whether the drainage project is constructed
or not. The scoring is divided into two parts: A) the number of buildings directly affected; and
B) the number of occupants affected.
Part A:
Number of Buildings Affected Score
0 0
1 to 4 1
5 to 9 2
City Council Packet
January 27, 2009
21
10 or More 3
Part B:
Number of Occupants Score
0 0
1 to 19 1
40 or More 2
The total score for the project is obtained by adding Parts A & B and multiplying by the
weighting factor. The maximum score is 5, meaning that there are estimated to be 10 or more
buildings within which 40 or more occupants may be displaced during and immediately after a
flood event. It is important to understand that these numbers are nothing more than estimates.
A more extensive, hydrological modeling analysis and survey would need to be performed to
determine the actual number of buildings and occupants affected. This was beyond the scope of
the Master Drainage Plan. Even then, a hydrological analysis is still an estimate.
Traffic Impact
Traffic impact refers to blockage of streets due to localized flooding as a result of minor storm
events such as the 5 year storm and other more frequent events. There is a limitation to this
criterion. In extreme cases such as the 100 year storm event, certain streets in the City have
actually been designed to carry peak storm water flows within the roadway and boulevard,
making travel on these streets impossible. This will not change. A 100 year storm is a
dangerous event to be driving in regardless of the street design.
The weighting of the traffic impact criterion is also less than 1.0 because the flooding of streets
in Brookings generally occurs over a period of hours in minor storms and several minutes in
major storms. Motorists have ample time to decide whether or not to negotiate a certain
street and should already understand that they should never attempt to drive through a flooded
street.
The score of traffic impact will mostly be relative to the ‘inconvenience factor’ of flooded
streets. Considerations will be made to the traffic counts of the affected streets and the
availability of alternate routes. For example, a low traffic street will receive a lower score than
a high traffic street. However a low traffic street or streets which isolate residents or
occupants when flooded, could receive a higher score than a high traffic street that does not
isolate. Score will be as follows:
Situation Score
No traffic impact 0
Low traffic, no isolation, more than 1 alternate route 1
Low traffic, no isolation, 1 alternate route 2
Medium traffic, no isolation, 1 alternate route 3
High traffic, no isolation, more than 1 alternate route 4
High traffic with 1 alternate route, or any traffic with total isolation 5
City Council Packet
January 27, 2009
22
Location in Basin
The location within the basin refers to the logical progression of drainage improvements in a
local minor watershed (basin). In some cases, a drainage improvement can create additional
problems either upstream or downstream. In other cases, a drainage improvement can
completely eliminate the need for certain other improvements. An understanding of such
hydrological interactions is required to make these determinations.
The location of the drainage improvement within the basin can directly affect public safety
during a flood event. Some areas are more critical than others, especially if there is a potential
for increased flooding downstream. Therefore, the weighting of this criterion should be at or
near 1.0.
The scoring of the location of a project is based on the project’s position within a hydrological
basin. Detention ponds will score higher the closer they are to the populous center of the
City; and drainage conduit improvements (storm sewers, ditches, channels, etc) will score
higher the further away from the center of the City. Scoring will be on a scale of 0 to 5. A
score of zero (0) means the location of the project has no bearing on upstream or downstream
hydrology.
With respect to downstream drainage conduit improvement projects taking priority over
upstream improvements; it must be established that the downstream improvements will be
sized properly in order to handle all future upstream improvements. With respect to detention
ponds taking preference over downstream improvements; it is assumed that the discharge from
these ponds will reduce the peak flows in the existing downstream systems. Even though the
existing downstream system may still be undersized after the construction of a detention pond,
the alternative of upsizing the downstream system without the pond can be more costly and
risky.
Cost vs. Budget
Certain projects may be important from an engineering standpoint; but also may be well
beyond the City’s budgeting capabilities. Spending large sums of money on these projects up
front could jeopardize the ability to make other improvements in a timely manner. Careful
budget planning must be used. It should be the City’s goal to accomplish as many
improvements as possible in the least amount of time. This is why “cost vs. budget” should
have a weighting of 1.0.
In some cases, one large, expensive project may actually improve a vast area of the City and
reduce the urgency for other improvements. This could then receive a higher score.
Therefore it becomes a cost-versus-benefit analysis. On the other hand, a certain project may
cost very little and take very little time to accomplish. This would also receive a high score
because it can easily fit into the budget along with larger projects. This is the cost-versus-
budget analysis. Both budget and benefit are considered in scoring. The purpose of this
criterion is to move less expensive projects higher in rank because they are easy to budget
simultaneously with more expensive, high ranking projects. In other words, the City may
choose the number one project to be completed the first year, but also may look at the ranking
of less expensive projects to fill out any remaining budget left over in that year.
City Council Packet
January 27, 2009
23
The scoring is on a scale of 1 to 5 and does not simply reflect the cost of the project. A score
of one (1) means that the cost of the project is well beyond the City’s funding scenario in the
near future. A score of five (5) could either mean that the cost of the project is minimal with
respect to the available budget, or that the cost of the project improves larger sections of the
City and reduces the cost of other drainage improvements.
Reduced Maintenance Issues
This criterion refers to the maintenance of drainage channels, gutters, inlets, ponds, storm
sewer pipes, etc. Without continuous maintenance, the drainage capacity of these features can
be greatly reduced. The most significant maintenance issue is the clearing of drainage ditches
and swales. Some drainage swales are only carrying about 25% of their potential capacity
because of vegetation overgrowth. In many situations, vegetation is very difficult to control
because saturated soils make it nearly impossible to operate maintenance equipment. Concrete
valley gutters, box culverts, and other drainage conveyance structures would greatly reduce the
need and frequency of maintenance.
While unmaintained drainage features can exacerbate flooding issues, it is unlikely to cause an
immediate threat to life and safety. Therefore, the weighting factor for this criterion should be
fairly low.
Scoring (from 0 to 5) will be based upon whether or not the project will reduce any existing
maintenance issues or create new issues. A score of zero (0) means there will be no reduction
of maintenance. In some cases, an improvement may add certain new maintenance duties but
reduce other maintenance duties, as with a detention pond. Higher scores will be assigned to
projects which reduce the amount of maintenance that is currently required. Typically, higher
scores would be associated with the reduction or elimination of vegetated ditches. Mid level
scores would be assigned to projects that do not necessarily eliminate vegetated ditches, but
make them easier to maintain as is the case with the addition of concrete valley gutters.
Infrastructure Age
The “infrastructure age” criterion applies to drainage features that may be currently functioning
adequately, but nearing the end of their useful life or in danger of failing in the near future. This
could also apply to aging infrastructure that is adequate for smaller storms, but not larger ones.
The term ‘infrastructure’ generally refers to hard structures such as storm sewer pipes and
inlets, but could also refer to other topographic features such as basins and drainage swales.
However, the improvement of such topographic features could possibly fall under the
maintenance category and even the environmental impact category. When ranking topographic
features, consideration should be made as to what category the feature falls into.
In most cases, the age of the infrastructure does not pose an immediate threat to life and safety
due to the nature of these drainage features. However, certain features such as inlet design and
inlet protection may be obsolete. The weighting of the “infrastructure age” should be less than
1.0, but more than some of the other criteria used.
City Council Packet
January 27, 2009
24
The scoring (0 to 5) of this criterion should be based primarily on the need to replace aging
infrastructure. Consideration is given to structures that are obsolete in design and function.
When practical, existing structures should be upgraded to the City’s current design standard.
A score of zero (0) means that no aging infrastructure will be replaced. A score of five (5)
means there is imminent danger of structural failure. At this time, there does not appear to be
any infrastructure in the City of Brookings that would receive a score of 5.
Citizen Safety
This ranking criterion is directly related to the personal safety of pedestrians and bystanders in
the vicinity of the problem area. It refers to an immediate threat to life and safety; therefore,
the weighting should be a full 1.0.
Generally, an immediate threat means large quantities of fast moving water, capable of sweeping
a person downstream. In some cities, rivers and permanent streams constitute a greater threat
to safety than any of the drainage features in Brookings because they can completely engulf and
carry an entire vehicle downstream. Therefore, this criterion will be limited to non-vehicular
safety of citizens. Vehicular safety should be assessed in the “traffic impact” scoring criterion.
Scoring will reflect how immediate the threat of flooding is to life and safety. Standing water
and flowing water are unavoidable because they occur in nature. However, water that is
standing or slow flowing in areas that are unnatural will increase the threat because people do
not expect it to be there. These areas will have a lower score than areas that experience fast
moving waters during periods of flood. Higher scores will also be given to projects that
improve the safety of existing structures. For example, a project that replaces damaged or
unprotected inlets and culverts with newer, safer products will receive a higher score.
Higher scores will also be given to areas that see more pedestrians than others. For example, a
project that improves the safety near parks and walkways will receive a higher score than those
in remote or unpopulated areas. A project which does not change the immediate threat to life
and safety will receive a score of zero (0). This does not necessarily mean that a threat does
not exist; it simply means that there will be no change as a result of the project.
Ranking CriteriaEnvironment ImpactBuildings AffectedTraffic ImpactLocation in BasinCost vs. BudgetReduced Maint IssuesInfrastructure AgeCitizen SafetyWt =0.50Wt =0.90Wt =0.80Wt =1.00Wt =1.00Wt =0.40Wt =0.50Wt =1.00Drainage ImprovementsRankResultRankResultRankResultRankResultRankResultRankResultRankResultRankResultWest 2nd Street South & West Folsom Street: Xtra Space StorageHammond Avenue & Horner Avenue, North of Squire CourtLeFevre DriveGarden Square Apartment & Garden Village Townhouse Area6th Avenue Viaduct under DM&E RailroadMedary Avenue South & 20th Street SouthMedary Avenue & Intersections of 1st Street and 2nd Street15th Street South & 7th Avenue South (Detention Pond)Southland Lane & 12th Street South Detention17th Avenue South and Sawgrass Drive17th Avenue South and Pebble Beach DriveWest 20th Street South and Main Avenue South
City Council Packet
January 27, 2009
26
5:00 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.
5. 6:00 p.m. Meeting Review.
1. Call to order.
2. Pledge of Allegiance / Presentation of Colors by Wolf Den Pack 24.
3. City Clerk records council attendance.
4. Action to approve the following Consent Agenda Items *
A. Action to approve the agenda.
B. Action to award bids on surplus police car.
C. Action on Resolution No. 04-09, a resolution authorizing Change Order (CCO#1) for
2008-02STI Downtown Streetscape Project with Bowes Construction, Inc.
D. Action on Resolution No. 06-09, awarding bids for Agricultural Land Rent (City owned
property purchased from Nichols).
E. Action on Resolution No. 07-09, a resolution relating to emergency purchase of airport
snow plow.
Action: Motion to approve, request public comment, roll call
Presentations/Reports/Special Requests:
5. Presentation of the Dr. Martin Luther King Day Contest Winners by the Human Rights
Committee.
6. Open Forum.
7. SDSU Report.
Ordinances – 1st Readings **:
8. Ordinance No. 01-09: A petition to rezone the East 60 feet of Lot G., Beale Addition from a
Residence R-2 District to a Planned Development District (1316 6th St.). Public Hearing:
February 10, 2009
9. Ordinance No. 02-09: A major amendment to a Planned Development District on Lot 5,
Beale Addition pertaining to a change in land use from Residence R-1B District uses to
Residence R-3 and Business B-2 District uses (1300 block on 6th St.). Public Hearing: February
10, 2009
10. Ordinance No. 03-09: A petition to rezone the North 115 feet of the East 50.1 feet of Lot G,
Block 3, First Addition from a Business B-2A District to a Business B-2 District (506 3rd St.)
Public Hearing: February 10, 2009
11. Ordinance No. 04-09: An application for a conditional use to establish a two-family dwelling
on the South ½ of Outlot 11 in the SW ¼ of Section 35-T110N-R50W (1812 Main Ave. So.)
Public Hearing: February 10, 2009
Second Readings & Public Hearings:
12. Action on Resolution No. 05-09, Resolution of Intent to Lease Real Property (Lease to
Foundation Seed Stocks for Wiese and Freeland Addition farmland).
Action: Open & Close Public Hearing, Motion to approve, Roll Call
Other Business:
13. Update on Juvenile Justice Title V Grant by Dan Mielke.
14. Draft Restaurant Liquor Operating Agreement.
15. Executive Session for Legal Matters
Action: Motion to enter session – voice vote
Motion to leave executive session – voice vote
16. Adjourn.
City Council Packet
January 27, 2009
27
5:00 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.
6. Council Invites & Obligations
January 27th
City Council Meeting
5 & 6 pm
City Hall
January 30th
Earliest Date to Circulate & File
Petitions
February 3rd
SDML / Gov’t Day Dinner
Evening
Pierre
February 4th
SDML Gov’t Day in Legislature
All Day
Pierre
February 10th
City Council Meeting
5 & 6 pm
City Hall
February 16th
Holiday / President’s Day
City Hall Closed
February 19th
Annual Goal Setting Retreat
All Day
Brookings
February 24th
City Council Meeting
5 & 6 pm
City Hall
February 27th
Deadline to file petitions
5 pm
March 16-20
Board of Equalization Hearings
April 14th
Election
City Council Packet
January 27, 2009
28
5:00 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.
7. City Council member introduction of topics for future
discussion*.
*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.
City Council Packet
January 27, 2009
29
6:00 p.m. Council Meeting
6:00 P.M. REGULAR MEETING
1. Call to order.
2. Pledge of Allegiance / Presentation of Colors by Wolf Den Pack 24.
3. City Clerk records council attendance.
4. Action to approve the following Consent Agenda Items *
A. Action to approve the agenda.
B. Action to award bids on surplus police car.
C. Action on Resolution No. 04-09, a resolution authorizing Change Order (CCO#1) for
2008-02STI Downtown Streetscape Project with Bowes Construction, Inc.
D. Action on Resolution No. 06-09, awarding bids for Agricultural Land Rent (City owned
property purchased from Nichols).
E. Action on Resolution No. 07-09, a resolution relating to emergency purchase of airport
snow plow.
Action: Motion to approve, request public comment, roll call
Presentations/Reports/Special Requests:
5. Presentation of the Dr. Martin Luther King Day Contest Winners by the Human Rights
Committee.
6. Open Forum.
7. SDSU Report.
Ordinances – 1st Readings **:
8. Ordinance No. 01-09: A petition to rezone the East 60 feet of Lot G., Beale Addition
from a Residence R-2 District to a Planned Development District (1316 6th St.). Public
Hearing: February 10, 2009
9. Ordinance No. 02-09: A major amendment to a Planned Development District on Lot
5, Beale Addition pertaining to a change in land use from Residence R-1B District uses
to Residence R-3 and Business B-2 District uses (1300 block on 6th St.). Public Hearing:
February 10, 2009
10. Ordinance No. 03-09: A petition to rezone the North 115 feet of the East 50.1 feet of
Lot G, Block 3, First Addition from a Business B-2A District to a Business B-2 District
(506 3rd St.) Public Hearing: February 10, 2009
11. Ordinance No. 04-09: An application for a conditional use to establish a two-family
dwelling on the South ½ of Outlot 11 in the SW ¼ of Section 35-T110N-R50W (1812
Main Ave. So.) Public Hearing: February 10, 2009
Second Readings & Public Hearings:
12. Action on Resolution No. 05-09, Resolution of Intent to Lease Real Property (Lease to
Foundation Seed Stocks for Wiese and Freeland Addition farmland).
Action: Open & Close Public Hearing, Motion to approve, Roll Call
Other Business:
13. Update on Juvenile Justice Title V Grant by Dan Mielke.
14. Draft Restaurant Liquor Operating Agreement.
15. Executive Session for Legal Matters
Action: Motion to enter session – voice vote
Motion to leave executive session – voice vote
16. Adjourn.
City Council Packet
January 27, 2009
30
CONSENT AGENDA #4
4. Action to approve the following Consent Agenda Items *
A. Action to approve the agenda.
B. Action to award bids on surplus police car.
C. Action on Resolution No. 04-09, a resolution
authorizing Change Order (CCO#1) for 2008-02STI
Downtown Streetscape Project with Bowes
Construction, Inc.
D. Action on Resolution No. 06-09, awarding bids for
Agricultural Land Rent (City owned property
purchased from Nichols).
E. Action on Resolution No. 07-09, a resolution relating
to emergency purchase of airport snow plow.
Action: Motion to approve, request public comment, roll call
City Manager Recommendation: Approve
City Council Packet
January 27, 2009
31
CONSENT AGENDA #4
4B. Action to award bids on surplus police car.
Bids were opened on January 20, 2009. Four bids were received for the surplus 2006
Crown Victoria Police Car (VIN# 2FAFP71W46X155037). They were:
Bayridge Motors, Inc., Staten Island, NY $2,880.00
Cheyka Motors, Inc., Schofield, WI $3,511.00
Yousef Dabbagh, Island Lake, IL $3,659.00
Asia Motors, Inc., Chicago, IL $3,938.00
Staff recommends the City Council accept the high bid of $3,938.00 from Asia Motors
be accepted.
City Council Packet
January 27, 2009
32
CONSENT AGENDA #4
4C. Action on Resolution No. 04-09, a resolution authorizing
Change Order (CCO#1) for 2008-02STI Downtown
Streetscape Project with Bowes Construction, Inc.
The 2008-03STI Downtown Streetscape Project entails 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 Bowes
Construction Company, Inc. has the contract for gravel finish grading and asphalt
paving.
The asphalt cement specified in the project was PG64-28 asphalt cement for both the
bottom and top lift of asphalt. The City received a letter stating that the supply for
PG64-28 was being restricted and projects were encouraged to consider other asphalt
cement types to save on supply. The City Engineering staff consulted with SD
Department of Transportation and the Dakota Asphalt Pavement Association and it was
determined that there would be negligible effect to change to 64-22 asphalt cement for
the bottom lift of asphalt. This also allowed for a cost savings for the project, as PG64-
22 asphalt cement was $3.18 less per ton.
Total decrease of this change order: $5,247.00
Original Contract Price: $174,925.00
Decrease from previously approved Change Orders: $0.00
Contract price prior to this Change Order: $174,925.00
Decrease of this Change Order: $5,247.00
Contract Price incorporating this Change Order: $169,678.00
This resolution will approve Change Order No. 1 for a decrease of $5,247.00 to the
contract with Bowes Construction Company, Inc.
City Council Packet
January 27, 2009
33
Resolution No. 04-09
A Resolution Authorizing Change Order #1 (CCO#1) For
2008-03STI Downtown Streetscape Project
Bowes Construction Company, Inc., Brookings, 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 1:
Adjust estimated bid quantities to change the bottom lift of asphalt cement from PG64-28 to
PG64-22 at a decrease of $3.18 per ton for a total decrease of $5,247.00.
Passed and approved this 27th day of January 2009.
CITY OF BROOKINGS
_________________________
Scott D. Munsterman, Mayor
ATTEST:
____________________________
Shari Thornes, City Clerk
City Council Packet
January 27, 2009
34
CONSENT AGENDA #4
4D. Action on Resolution No. 06-09, awarding bids for
Agricultural Land Rent (City owned property purchased
from Nichols).
The City purchased a parcel of property of approximately 92 acres located in Section
21-T110-R50, which is west of the current airport site. Approximately 48 acres of this
parcel is available for hay/pasture use and the City advertised for rental bids for a one-
year lease. The City mailed specifications to several area farmers and held a bid letting
at 1:30 pm on Tuesday, January 20, 2009, and received the following bids:
Justin Thompson, Brookings, SD $51.00 per acre
Dennis Welbig, Brookings, SD $45.60 per acre
Jason Voss, Brookings, SD $45.00 per acre
Justin Thompson of Brookings, SD bid the highest rate of $51.00 per acre. The City has
received hay land bids in the past in the $40 to $50 range and this bid is higher than
average. This lease will be a one-year lease, which will allow this parcel to be bid with
the other airport land bids in the fall of 2009. Following this action, Staff will advertise a
Notice of Public Hearing with intent to lease to private person for the City Council’s
February meeting. This resolution will award the bids for this property in the amount of
$51.00 per acre to Justin Thompson of Brookings, SD.
Resolution No. 06–09
Resolution Awarding Bids on Agricultural Land Rent
Whereas, the City of Brookings opened bids for approximately 48 acres of
Agricultural Hay/Pasture Land Rent for City-owned parcel located in Section 21-T110-
R50 on Tuesday, January 20, 2009 at 1:30 pm at Brookings City Hall; and
Whereas, the City of Brookings has received the following bids for Agricultural
Hay/Pasture Land:
Justin Thompson, Brookings, SD $51.00 per acre
Dennis Welbig, Brookings, SD $45.60 per acre
Jason Voss, Brookings, SD $45.00 per acre
Now Therefore, Be It Resolved that the high bid of Justin Thompson,
Brookings, SD for the high bid of $51.00 per acre be accepted.
Passed and approved this 27th day of January 2009.
City Council Packet
January 27, 2009
35
CONSENT AGENDA #4
4E. Action on Resolution No. 07-09, a resolution relating to
emergency purchase of airport snow plow.
The engine recently went out on the airport plow truck and the cost for repair is more
than the value of the vehicle. This is the main snow plow that is utilized at the airport,
and the airport has borrowed a Street Department snow plow in the interim. In the
case of a large snow event, the airport will need to hire outside contractors since the
Street Department would not be able to loan out the plow during their snow removal
operations.
The airport’s five-year Capital Improvement Project list has snow removal equipment
purchases planned for 2012-2013. This purchase will utilize federal and state funds at
97% reimbursement. The City of Brookings will need to carry the note on the new
plow truck until there is an opening in airport projects so that the cost can be
reimbursed to the City. All steps that are required to purchase a federally funded piece
of equipment are being followed to ensure that the City is reimbursed for this
purchase. The purchase price is anticipated to be in the $150,000 - $200,000 range with
an ultimate City share of $4,500 - $6,000 (3% of the total). The Finance Department
has directed that funds from the 75% sales and use tax may be used for the temporary
financing of this emergency purchase, and this fund will be repaid after receipt of the
airport grant anticipated for 2012-2013. This purchase will be included in an upcoming
budget amendment for 2009.
City Council Packet
January 27, 2009
36
Resolution No. 07-09
RESOLUTION RELATING TO EMERGENCY PURCHASE
OF AIRPORT SNOW PLOW
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brookings, South Dakota (the City),
as follows:
WHEREAS, for the Brookings Regional Airport’s snow plow has unexpectedly required
repairs that are in excess of the value of the plow; and
WHEREAS, the Brookings Regional Airport has an emergency need for the purchase of
a snow plow to be utilized solely for Airport usage; and
WHEREAS, the specifications for the snow plow meet Federal guidelines for
reimbursement with FAA and SDDOT funds at a later date.
NOW THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Brookings, South Dakota, to authorize the City Manager proceed with the acquisition of an
Airport Snow Plow due to the emergency need pursuant to FAA procurement procedures and
policies.
Adopted this 27th day of January, 2009
CITY OF BROOKINGS:
Scott D. Munsterman, Mayor
ATTEST:
Shari Thornes, City Clerk
City Council Packet
January 27, 2009
37
Presentations/Reports/Special Requests:
5. Presentation of the Dr. Martin Luther King Day Contest
Winners by the Human Rights Committee.
Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Poster, Essay & Visual Art
Contest Winners
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 was “Greatness Through Service.”
Winning posters and essays can also be seen on the city's website - www.cityofbrookings.org.
Grades K-1 - Poster Jesus Arroyo – 1st Place - $25.00
Hillcrest Elementary – Kindergarten
Teacher – Ms. Daniels
Parents – Dalia Figueroa and Esteban Arroyo
Eleanor Abraham – 2nd Place - $10.00
Central Elementary – 1st Grade
Teacher – Ms. Kerlin
Parents – Ross and Julie Abraham
Grades 2-3 - Poster Lauren Simon – 1st Place - $25.00
Hillcrest Elementary – 3rd Grade
Teacher – Mrs. Sackmann
Parents – Jason and Denise Simon
Cain Lounsbery – 2nd Place - $10.00
Hillcrest Elementary – 3rd Grade
Teacher – Mr. Diercks
Parents – Matt and Nicole Lounsbery
Grades 4-5 - Poster Maggie Helgeland – 1st Place - $25.00
Hillcrest Elementary – 5th Grade
Teacher – Mrs. Newman
Parents – Dave and Patty Helgeland
James Choi – 2nd Place - $10.00
Hillcrest Elementary – 5th Grade
Teacher – Mrs. Newman
City Council Packet
January 27, 2009
38
Parents – Hyeong do Choi and Mi Ran Lee
Middle School – Essay Jackie Meyer – 1st Place - $100.00
Middle School – 8th Grade
Teacher – Mr. Hovey
Parents – Kevin and Cheryl Meyer
Damon Bayer– 2nd Place - $50.00
Middle School – 8th Grade
Teacher – Mr. Hovey
Parents – Steve and Shelly Bayer
Sarah He – 3rd Place Tie - $25.00
Middle School – 7th Grade
Teacher – Mr. Christie
Parents – Li Zhong and Hungshan He
Jenna Scarbrough – 3rd Place Tie - $25.00
Middle School – 8th Grade
Teacher – Mr. Springman
Parents – Steve and Mary Scarbrough
High School – Essay Jeff Zhang – 1st Place - $100.00
High School – Freshman
Teacher – Mr. Ganci
Parents – Weiping Zhang and Ying Fang
Cortlyn Hagman – 2nd Place - $50.00
High School – Junior
Teacher – Mr. Miller
Parents – Doug and Pam Hagman
Jesus Arroyo Poster Translation
Far right picture:
This is a house for children who sleep in the street (orphanage)
Middle picture:
This is a school with a city park
Main translation:
This is a story about children that sleep in the streets because their parents abandoned
them, abused them or got rid of them when they were born. This frequently happens in
many countries. The children that sleep or live in the streets consume drugs but many
people have a big heart to help these children.
Man with child:
This is a man gathering street children and taking them to a better place to have a better
life.
City Council Packet
January 27, 2009
46
Jackie Meyer
Middle School Essay – 1st Place
Teacher – Mr. Hovey
Parents – Kevin and Cheryl Meyer
Greatness Through Service
Greatness through service is not only the theme of this essay, but the belief by which Martin Luther King
lived by. In today’s society, we as American’s are more impressed by someone’s financial position, prestige, or
their social status than by the “content of their character”.
Wealth is an atrocious way to judge someone by. For example: Mother Teresa, Martin Luther King, and
Ghandi. What would this world be like if these people hadn’t done what they did because they were poor?
Without Mother Teresa, thousands more children would have been without homes. Without Ghandi and Martin
Luther King, racism and violence would still be a common practice, overlooked by most people.
Prestige is often attributed to movie stars or high political status. People like Britney Spears and Sarah
Palin are some of the most respected people in America, but not for a positive contribution to society. Britney
Spears makes millions of dollars per year, compared to Martin Luther King’s yearly profit of about 250 dollars. Just
imagine how 500,000 dollars, about 5% of Spears’ income, could make a difference for issues such as poverty,
climate change, or terrorism. If everyone wanted to be considered great because they did good things, the world
would be free from terrorism and hatred.
Social Status is also a contributor to ‘greatness’. All the way from Hollywood to elementary schools,
people are generally judged according to their social status. Martin Luther King was in some ways a popular man,
but more often than not he was a man to be hated. Caucasians in general were known to spit on him, threaten
him, or mock him. But did that bother Martin? Absolutely not.
So, as you can see, greatness is most often attributed to popularity or wealth. It is up to all of us to
change that. Imagine a world where the most popular and wealthy people were the ones that made a difference.
Martin Luther King said: “Everybody can be great... because anybody can serve. You don't have to
have a college degree to serve. You don't have to make your subject and verb agree to serve.
You only need a heart full of grace. A soul generated by love.” In my opinion, the only way to
greatness is through service. It is also greatness that any one of us can achieve.
City Council Packet
January 27, 2009
47
Damon Bayer
Middle School Essay – 2nd Place
Teacher – Mr. Hovey
Parents – Steve and Shelly Bayer
Greatness Through Service
Martin Luther King Jr. once said “Life’s most urgent question is: What are you doing for
others?” After reading this quote, it is apparent that Dr. King valued service, and knew that
greatness could be achieved through it.
Dr. King dedicated his life to serving those who were not treated rightfully. He led many
nonviolent demonstrations and protests, like the March on Washington to help victims of
racism and change America. He spoke for people who were discriminated against in his
numerous renowned speeches. He even gave his life for those affected by prejudice. For all of
this he was rewarded with greatness, represented by the day we celebrate each January that
has been named for him. Another tribute to Dr. King is his memorial in Atlanta, Georgia. He is
also honored by the remembrance of his “I Have a Dream” speech. If Martin Luther King hadn’t
started the Civil Rights Movement in the 1960’s, Barack Obama would not have had the chance
to become President of the United States of America this January. The impact Martin Luther
King Jr. made in the past is still making history today.
A prime example of world-changing greatness through service like Dr. King’s is teachers.
In a way, Dr. King was a teacher who taught about achieving equality through nonviolent means.
Teachers spend their careers serving society and building its future by educating young people.
In return they are respected, looked up to, and appreciated by their pupils and community. I
respect my teachers because I know that they are teaching to serve me and make my life
better. They improve my life by giving me an education, so that I might be able to obtain a well-
paying job and equipping me with a moral compass so that I may productively contribute to
society. Teachers don’t teach for the substantial income it brings them, but for the opportunity
to serve mankind and make our world better.
Life’s most urgent question, “What are you doing for others?”, is one confidently
answered by teachers. Greatness through service is an example set by Dr. King that teachers all
follow. A teacher’s greatness, like Dr. King’s, is shown through it’s infinite impact on society.
City Council Packet
January 27, 2009
48
Sarah He
Middle School Essay – 3rd Place Tie
Teacher – Mr. Christie
Parents – Li Zhong and Hungshan He
Greatness Through Service
Greatness is of being great, and it is very important to our society. We, the people, need greatness. Some of
us are born with greatness, some achieve greatness through their successes, but most of us obtain greatness
through service.
In a busy crossway, you see an old lady standing there; looking left, then right, anxious and scared of many
cars rushing past her. Cars whoosh by, never stopping. But suddenly, out of these million cars, one stop, and lets
the lady cross the street. This is kindness, but it is also service. Because of this service, the people of our world
becomes better, becomes a big family.
You look around again, this time, you’re at a grocery store. Many people go out and in. But you see one
women, carrying a three month old baby in one hand, and in the other hand, she carries two big bags of groceries.
You can tell that she is tired, with the long hot sweat running down her cheeks, yet nobody comes to help her.
She looks around, helpless, scared, frustrated. Just then, a man comes out and helps her. This is caring, another
kind of service, and it makes our world happy, it makes the world a better place to live.
Take another look, you see some poor beggars, where are we now? Well, we must be at a crowded street,
with many people walking around. Nobody cares for the beggars, and nobody pities them, for they all think that
the beggars are dirty and ugly, but deep down inside; they are just the same as you and me. People rush by,
hurrying to get home to meet there loved ones, but one man walks out of the crowd, and goes up to the beggars
and each give them five dollars. This kind man only says two words, “Good luck”, and he is gone, into the sea of
people again. This is love, it also a service. This service makes the poor and the rich become united, it makes
everyone feel important.
We’ll look at one more example. We’re back at the store again, and this time, we see a man standing in line,
waiting. The cashier is an old lady, very slow in her work, . But his man, he stays and waits, silently without
complain. This is patience, and it is a very important kind of service, it brings harmony to the world.
These services are everywhere in our lives, but many people don’t see it because they think it is impossible to
get greatness through these little services, but they are wrong. It is because of these services that we see
greatness- something that is big and strong, bigger and stronger than the universe. “Greatness through service”,
and that is what the world needs.
City Council Packet
January 27, 2009
49
Jenna Scarbrough
Middle School Essay – 3rd Place Tie
Teacher – Mr. Springman
Parents –Steve Scarbrough
“Everybody can be great because anybody can serve. You don’t have to have a college degree
to serve. You don’t have to make your subject and your verb agree to serve. You only need a heart full
of grace, a soul generated by love.”
-Martin Luther King Jr.
Serving for a Greater Cause
When most people think of service, they most likely think of the military. Many people think
that they’re too young or old or busy to serve. However, we can make a difference everyday in our
community by simply respecting one another and helping out.
For example, schools would be a lot less stressful if everyone acted kindly to each other. If
someone drops his or her books in the hallway, instead of laughing we can pick them up. We show
respect, and at the same time, show the person that somebody cares enough to help them out. Even if
they are not our best friends, it takes about the same amount of time to pick up someone’s books as it
takes to stand and laugh at them.
Also, many teachers will often get annoyed when students blurt out answers. Classmates would
get more learning done if students were polite enough to always raise their hands in class, and teachers
would enjoy teaching much more.
In local parks (and everywhere!) we can simply pick up any trash we see and throw it away. We
can also recycle bottles. Some states give 5 cents for every bottle recycled. By recycling we not only
reduce clutter and pollution, but we make our world look more beautiful, and help the animals.
We can volunteer at a local animal shelter or humane society, or even a domestic abuse shelter.
An easy way to contribute to those in other countries is to go to www.freerice.com, a website that will
ask the player questions from the category they have chosen (vocabulary, German, Spanish, math,
algebra, geography, etc.). for every correct answer they have, the website will donate 20 grains of rice
to people in Africa.
Of course, we need to recognize our troops and everything they have done for us, in the
current war and in past wars. Once the Americans got involved in WWII, the war ended much quickly
and saved many lives of innocent victims. Without the veteran’s help, millions more could have died in
extended war. By serving in the military, they have made our country more safe and secure.
We need to stop making excuses for not serving. Many people have it much worse than us, and
we as a world must care about the earth. Some people may think that they can’t make much of a
City Council Packet
January 27, 2009
50
difference, but they can in many people’s lives by doing simple acts of kindness. Even if they only help
one person in their lifetime, to that one person, they have made a great difference, and that’s what
makes everything worthwhile. Receiving money means nothing in the long run, because it will most
likely be spent eventually. But if we treat somebody with respect, they will most likely do the same in
return. Through service we can make a difference in people’s lives.
If everyone payed it forward, the world could have fewer famines and wars. People would be
much happier and feel better about themselves, all because one person decided to serve those around
them.
For someone who had many challenges to face, Martin Luther King, Jr. (1929-1968) proved what
a big difference service makes on our country. Without his courageous help, we might still be a
segregated country.
Another great heroic leader was Alice Paul (1885-1977). Alice Paul, a women’s rights activist in
the twentieth century, protested with other women, fighting for the right for women to vote. After
being put in jail and going on a hunger strike which lasted for 22 days, Alice Paul helped earn the right
for women to vote. Due to her wonderful service, women can express their views in politics just the
same as men.
There are many people who should be recognized as great servers for our world, but not all of
them are famous, even if what they have done is great. We need to take time to thank the people who
help us out everyday (or whenever) so that they realize how much their service means to us. A simple
thank you can make people feel better, and can brighten someone’s day.
Of course, with nobody serving we wouldn’t have any president to lead our country. In fact, we
wouldn’t even have a country. There would be no rules, and people would be committing crimes,
because nobody would be there to stop them.
As John F. Kennedy (1917-1963) would say, “Ask not what your country can do for you, but
what you can do for your country.”
City Council Packet
January 27, 2009
51
Jeff Zhang
High School Essay – 1st Place
Teacher – Mr. Ganci
Parents – Weiping Zhang and Ying Fang
Greatness Through Service
What is the meaning of life? In this matter, I agree with Albert Schweitzer when he says
that “The purpose of human life is to serve and to show the compassion and the will to help
others.” The evidence for this lies in our own lives. In youth, all of us have this ceaseless
compulsion to be adults, seeking this sort of fantastic freedom of selection and variance.
Perhaps it is the longing to start a life of our own, with our own families and with our own jobs,
which causes us to feel this way. In adolescence, our main concern becomes increasingly
oriented toward trying to decide which path to take in life, such as where to go and what to
do. This anxiety eventually affects the choice of classes that we take in high school or in what
type of extracurricular activities we participate, thus also influencing our choice of friends and
acquaintances. After the hard choices are made and we mature, and then eventually graduate
from our ideal institution, we finally have our dream realized. The whole world seems to lie
within our grasp. Possibilities seem endless and our beings indestructible. But in the end, the
long-sought freedom is found to be nothing but a myth. The mortgage, the utilities, the taxes;
these become the bane and the matter of life. However, after many years of work, looking in
retrospect, we find that a job, a family, a well-polished automobile; these were ultimately all
that mattered. Even as our line of work in due course becomes commonplace and mundane, we
go forward, though it may not be for ourselves, but for our children, and theirs. Such is the life
of many, but it leads us to ask the question, what truly is it that we do? Should our
consideration of life lead us only to see its futility? My answer is no. Existence is but for the
continuation of the race, and therefore what we do to aid humanity. This is similar to the
natural world; populations of flora and fauna for example; they adapt and evolve to their
surroundings to continue living, to continue to pass on the genes of life. I then imply with the
question, why else should we know of Einstein, or Edison, or Da Vinci, but for their discoveries
and work? We then realize, that all the fields of science, all of medicine, law, sale; these are all
for not but the benefit of society. In that, Schweitzer is correct, and Benjamin Franklin: though
we may be “dead and rotten”, our legacy lies in our actions for humanity and for our family.
City Council Packet
January 27, 2009
52
Though service is the essence of being, greatness seems always to be an ambition. The
appeal of the “good life”; the lifestyle of the rich and powerful, this can honestly be said to be
an allure to many people. But what is greatness? And what amount of service yields it? A more
progressive ideology could possibly be that greatness should not be measured in quantity, but in
the intent of the action. Let it be that no work ever go unappreciated! Especially today, with
such vast amounts of information being released and even vaster amounts of work and research
available with a single click; it would seem that any amount of endeavor could go on unnoticed.
Here, I wish to use the words of Dr. King himself, “If a man is called to be a streetsweeper, he
should sweep streets even as Michelangelo painted, or Beethoven composed music, or
Shakespeare wrote poetry. He should sweep streets so well that all the hosts of heaven and
earth will pause to say, here lived a great streetsweeper who did his job well.” So while one
may never be recognized, or drink the champagne valued in the thousands of dollars, to do
ones best should always be his or her aspiration even if, after so many years, society shall forget
and unappreciate. This is the mindset that will make a culture great.
Thus, we should view life not for its faults or inconsequentiality, but for the triumphs
and the contributions that are made by its individuals. Work is what gives life meaning, and to
do a service for others or for society as a whole is the definitive form of purpose. But with this
comes the realization that life is significant, but short, and to realize that for civilization to
advance there must be its pioneers. That is why today I write not to simply pass the time, but
to instead write to hopefully inspire the innovators of tomorrow, to encourage others to lead
the way and make the future that much brighter.
City Council Packet
January 27, 2009
53
Cortlyn Hagman
High School Essay – 2nd Place
Teacher – Mr. Miller
Parents – Doug and Pam Hagman
Powerful Opportunities
Martin Luther King, Jr., once said, “There is nothing wrong with power if power is used
correctly… Now power properly understood is nothing but the ability to achieve purpose. It is
the strength required to bring about social, political, and economic change.” Many people see
power in a negative sense. However, one must recognize the opportunity that accompanies it:
the opportunity to change society, perhaps even our world, for the better.
In Brookings, South Dakota, along with many other parts of our nation, power can be
seen in the form of money. A large amount bounds prestige to one’s name. In our community,
Dale Larson is regarded as a man of monetary wealth and prestige. He possesses a great deal of
power and has had a large impact on Brookings in the way of politics, societal change, and our
economy.
One must acknowledge the fact that politics are crucial to every citizen of our country.
Without an understanding for our political system our government could be hurt by
uneducated voters and those who simply do not have an interest for it. Dale Larson has
affected our “small town” politics here in Brookings. Without the contributions he has made to
political organizations and parties, our community would not see as much action or awareness
of political issues as we do.
It is not only the political side of our community that is affected by Dale Larson. There
has also been societal impact through his company, Larson Manufacturing. This manufacturing
company is unlike many others in the sense that it gives back to its community. There is a large
focus put on education. The latest project funded mostly by Larson Manufacturing is that of the
new children’s museum which is to be located near downtown Brookings. Beginning in 2010,
children of all ages will experience hands on exhibits and interactive activities while learning at
the same time. If it were not for Dale Larson, this project would have never been introduced to
the Brookings community.
Larson Manufacturing has also given attention to families throughout our nation that are
in need. Each year, 3,000 storm doors are donated to Habitat for Humanity International.
City Council Packet
January 27, 2009
54
Larson is also committed to funding the construction of homes in communities where the
company operates. The manufacturing company also makes donations and grants available to
local organizations such as the Boys and Girls Club, American Red Cross, city parks, and
recreational buildings such as the Larson Ice Arena.
Societal change and political support are not the only ways in which Dale Larson has
affected our community in a positive manner. He has also had an impact on the local economy.
Larson Manufacturing supplies grants towards economic development on an annual basis. His
company and his societal contributions are also connected to our economy. Without Dale
Larson, Brookings would be suffering even more from the economic issues facing our nation.
“What is needed is a realization that power without love is reckless and abusive…”
Martin Luther King, Jr., pointed out the positive and negative sides of power. It can be abused if
it is not used with love. Love combined with power, however, opens up the positive
opportunities that power has to offer. Dale Larson has shown a love for the community of
Brookings, South Dakota, as well as many other communities throughout our nation. With his
love, the power he has achieved has shown him many opportunities in which he can serve
society.
City Council Packet
January 27, 2009
55
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 REPORT.
City Council Packet
January 27, 2009
56
Ordinances – 1st 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.
8. Ordinance No. 01-09: A petition to rezone the East 60
feet of Lot G., Beale Addition from a Residence R-2
District to a Planned Development District (1316 6th St.).
Public Hearing: February 10, 2009
Applicant: Gatzke Family Enterprises LLC
Proposal: Establish an overlay district on a vacant lot on 6th Street
Background: A single-family dwelling was constructed on this parcel in 1948. Additions to the
house occurred over the years, and in September 2008, the house and garage were demolished.
Adjacent uses include a boardinghouse to the east, single-family houses to the south, and an
undeveloped lot to the west. The west lot is in the Planned Development District now.
Specifics: The parcel is currently in the Residence R-2 District, and due to its size, could only
accommodate a single-family dwelling as a permitted use. The Planned Development District
rezoning would offer greater flexibility in the use of the parcel especially since the petitioner
owns the land to the west. The total area in the PDD would then be 1.1 acres.
This parcel abuts R-2 District zoning to the east and south. The neighborhood has low to
medium-density residential uses.
Recommendation: The Planning Commission voted 8 yes and 0 no to recommend approval
of the rezoning.
City Council Packet
January 27, 2009
57
Ordinance No. 01-09
An Ordinance to Change the Zoning Within the City of Brookings
Be it ordained by the governing body of the City of Brookings, South Dakota,
Section 1. That the real estate situated in the City of Brookings, County of Brookings, State of
South Dakota, described as follows:
the East 60 feet of Lot G, Beale Addition
be and the same is hereby rezoned and reclassified from a Residence R-2 District to a Planned
Development District.
In accordance with Section 94.7 of Article I of Ordinance 25-02 of the Code of Ordinances of
Brookings, South Dakota, as said districts are more fully set forth and described in Articles III
and IV of Ordinance No. 25-02 of the City of Brookings, South Dakota.
Section 2. The permitted use of the property heretofore described be and the same is hereby
altered and changed in accordance herewith pursuant to said Ordinance No. 25-02 of the City
of Brookings, South Dakota.
Section 3. All sections and ordinances in conflict herewith are hereby repealed.
FIRST READING: January 27, 2009
SECOND READING: February 10, 2009
PUBLISHED:
CITY OF BROOKINGS
______________________________
Scott D. Munsterman, Mayor
ATTEST:
_________________________
Shari Thornes, City Clerk
City Council Packet
January 27, 2009
62
Sec. 94-163 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT
(a) Intent. It is the intent of this PDD planned development district to provide flexibility from
conventional zoning regulations with increased public review for Planned Development District
projects in order to:
(1) Encourage well-planned, efficient urban development.
(2) Allow a planned and coordinated mix of land uses which are compatible and harmonious, but
were previously discouraged by conventional zoning procedures.
(3) Encourage more creative, higher quality and more ecologically sensitive urban design with
special consideration given to projects which incorporate desirable design features such as
underground parking, orientation or design to take advantage of passive solar energy,
environmental preservation, historic preservation, handicapped accessible structures, unique
use of open spaces, or other desirable design features.
(4) Improve communication and cooperation among the City of Brookings land developers and
interested residents in the urbanization of new lands and the renewal of existing deteriorated
areas.
(b) Scope of section provisions. The regulations set forth in this section are the district
regulations in the Planned Development District, hereafter sometimes referred to as "PDD".
(c) Compliance with the Master Plan. The development within the Planned Development
Districts (PDD) shall comply with the policies and design standards of the existing city Master
Plan. Said developments and adjacent projected developments shall be mutually compatible.
(d) Planned Development District. Zoning: Applications for a change of zoning to a Planned
Development District shall be subject to the requirements of Section 94-7.
(e) Initial Development Plan. A request for a rezoning to a Planned Development District shall
be accompanied by an initial development plan. Said plan shall be submitted at least twenty
(20) days prior to the Planning Commission meeting in which it is to be heard. The Planning
Commission shall review the initial development plan and forward its recommendation, with
or without modifications, to the City Council. The following information shall be specified
on the initial development plan:
1. Project name and legal description.
2. A preliminary subdivision plan in compliance with all applicable subdivision regulations.
3. The proposed development scheme showing the following information:
a. The proposed land uses including the number and type of proposed residential
buildings, the proposed number of dwelling units per building, the number and type of
any proposed nonresidential buildings, and their square footage.
City Council Packet
January 27, 2009
63
b. The proposed maximum density of the development, which shall not exceed the
density allowed in the traditional zoning districts for similar uses. Where unique
physical, environmental or design characteristics exist or are proposed, lesser densities
may be desirable.
c. The proposed maximum height, which shall not be greater than those required in the
traditional zoning districts for similar uses. Where unique physical, environmental or
design characteristics exist or are proposed, lesser heights may be desirable.
d. Proposed design features illustrating compatibility with the surrounding environment
and neighborhood.
e. Anticipated sub-area development sequence.
(f) Final Development Plan. Prior to obtaining building permits for construction on any lots in
the PDD, a final development plan shall be submitted to the Planning Commission, which
shall have sole authority to approve, amend, or deny said plan. The final development plan
may be submitted in conjunction with the initial development plan for concurrent approval
on any sub-areas the developer is ready to commit to a final plan. All the information
required for both an initial and final development plan shall be shown for the areas submitted
for concurrent approval. The final development plan shall be a scaled, reproducible drawing
showing the following information:
1. The subdivision name, the legal description, and individual project name (if any).
2. Boundaries of any sub-area or sub-areas submitted for approval superimposed on the map
of the initial development plan.
3. A subdivision plan of the sub-area or sub-areas submitted for approval in compliance with
all applicable subdivision regulations.
4. The development standards for the area or sub-areas based on the requirements in one or
more of the traditional zoning districts.
5. The size, location and elevation of all proposed structures including height and number of
units.
6. The calculated floor area for each structure and each use within said structure.
7. Off-street parking lot arrangement designating all parking and stacking spaces, off-street
loading spaces, and any outdoor trash container space.
8. Any sidewalks, bikeways or other paths and any areas reserved for recreation activities
such as basketball and volleyball courts.
9. Any outdoor lighting type and location except for standard street lights provided by the
city.
10. A landscaping plan showing the type and location of any walls, fences or berms, the
placement, size, and species of any trees or shrubs, and areas that will be sod or seeded.
11. All existing and proposed utilities, drainage ways and watercourses.
12. All curb cuts and private drives.
13. Adjacent existing and proposed uses.
(g) Amendments. Requests for changes within a PDD shall be submitted as an overlay on
the initial or final development plan. Amendments shall be classified as follows:
1. Major Amendments: The following changes are considered major amendments:
City Council Packet
January 27, 2009
64
a. Any change in the proposed use(s) of land or buildings.
b. A major change in the street plan.
c. An increase of twenty percent (20%) or more in the total density of the development.
2. Minor Amendments: The following changes are considered minor amendments:
a. Any adjustment in the dimensions of a building (length, width or height).
b. Any change in the number or location of access drives.
c. Any decrease in required landscape areas, buffer zones or other open areas.
d. A minor change in the street plan.
e. Any increase of less than twenty percent (20%) in the density of any area or sub-area.
f. Any major change in the exterior design features of a building.
g. Any change in the size or location of signs.
3. Minimal amendments: The following changes are considered minimal amendments:
a. Any minor adjustment within a building which involves a more intensive use.
b. Any change in the location of outdoor lighting, sidewalks or bikeways, recreation areas
or loading docks.
(h) Procedure For Amendments. Amendments to the PDD shall be subject to the following
review procedures
1. Major amendments: Major amendments to the initial and/or final development plan shall
be required to be approved as an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance, requiring the
Planning Commission's review, the City Council’s approval, and public notice in
accordance with Section 94-7.
2. Minor amendments: Minor amendments to the initial and/or final development plan shall
be required to be approved by the Planning Commission at a hearing for which notice has
been published in a locally circulated newspaper at least one week prior to the Planning
Commission meeting. Minor amendments to the initial development plan may also be
made by the submission and approval of a final development plan which is changed from
the approved initial development plan.
3. Minimal amendments: Minimal amendments to the final development plan shall be
submitted to the zoning officer on a reproducible development plan showing the requested
changes. The zoning officer may then approve said changes in writing if they deem it
appropriate.
City Council Packet
January 27, 2009
65
Ordinances – 1st 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. 02-09: A major amendment to a Planned
Development District on Lot 5, Beale Addition pertaining
to a change in land use from Residence R-1B District uses
to Residence R-3 and Business B-2 District uses (1300
block on 6th St.).
Public Hearing: February 10, 2009
Applicant: Gatzke Family Enterprises LLC
Proposal: Establish a mixed use development on a 1.1 acre parcel
Background: This parcel originally contained two (2) lots with houses and detached garages. The land
was in the Residence R-2 District. The corner lot was occupied by a large two-story house that was
constructed in the early 1900s. The property fell into disrepair in the 1960s and was considered by
some to be ripe for urban renewal. A petition to rezone the property to a B-2A District was defeated in
1978 after considerable debate among the Planning Commission, City Commission, and neighborhood
residents. In 1991, a prospective buyer proposed to change the corner house into a bed and breakfast.
Subsequently, the city approved a PDD. The neighbors were agreeable with the PDD since they could
see the development plan and knew the property would be renovated. The bed and breakfast lasted for
about four (4) years and was then converted back to a single-family dwelling after a PDD amendment
was approved. The house has since been moved to Volga, SD.
Specifics: The Initial Development Plan submitted with this major amendment relates to Section 94-
163(e) of the attached zoning excerpt as follows:
1. Lot G, Beale Addition
2. Land recently platted into one lot
3. a. The proposed land use includes a mix of retail/office uses on the main level with two (2)
apartments on the upper level.
b. Density requirements generally pertain to residential PDDs. Therefore, this is not
applicable. However, the size of the commercial space and apartment space should be
judged against parking, landscaping, setbacks, etc.
c. The maximum height proposed is estimated to be about 25 feet which is below the
maximum. The projected height would be consistent with the neighborhood.
d. Parking is mostly on the street side of the building. Landscaping or fencing may be
appropriate on the east and south sides for screening purposes.
e. This would likely be a one-phase project.
Recommendation: The Planning Commission voted 8 yes and 0 no to recommend approval of the
major amendment and the initial development plan with the modifications listed in the ordinance.
City Council Packet
January 27, 2009
66
Ordinance No. 02-09
An ordinance to change the land use within a Planned Development District
and approve an initial development plan.
Be it ordained by the governing body of the City of Brookings, South Dakota,
Section 1. That the real estate situated in the City of Brookings, County of Brookings, State of
South Dakota, described as follows:
Lot G, Beale Addition be and the same is hereby amended to permit Residence R-1B
District and Business B-2 District uses and to approve the submitted initial development
plan with the following modifications:
• Additional landscaping shall be established along the north and west lot lines of
the property
• Detailed information on the various types of uses shall be submitted for
comparison to the minimum parking standards
• A “Drinking Establishment” use shall not be permitted in the Planned
Development District
In accordance with Section 94.7 of Article 1 of Ordinance 25-02 of the Code of Ordinances of
Brookings, South Dakota, as said districts are more fully set forth and described in Articles III
and IV of Ordinance No. 25-02 of the City of Brookings, South Dakota.
Section 2. The permitted use of the property heretofore described be and the same is hereby
altered and changed in accordance herewith pursuant to said Ordinance No. 25-02 of the City
of Brookings, South Dakota.
Section 3. All sections and ordinances in conflict herewith are hereby repealed.
FIRST READING: January 27, 2009
SECOND READING AND ADOPTION: February 10, 2009
PUBLISHED:
CITY OF BROOKINGS
______________________________
ATTEST: Scott D. Munsterman, Mayor
______________________________
Shari Thornes, City Clerk
City Council Packet
January 27, 2009
76
Ordinances – 1st 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.
10. Ordinance No. 03-09: A petition to rezone the North 115
feet of the East 50.1 feet of Lot G, Block 3, First Addition
from a Business B-2A District to a Business B-2 District
(506 3rd St.)
Public Hearing: February 10, 2009
Applicant: Gatzke Family Enterprises LLC
Proposal: Create a more intensive commercial zoning designation on a small parcel
Background: The house on this lot was built in 1887 and is a listed property in the Central
Residential Historic District. It is currently a single-family rental.
The block has multiple zoning districts and multiple uses. Several lots contain legal non-
conforming uses. Adjacent uses and zoning next to the subject lot are as follows:
A legal non-conforming single-family dwelling occupies the B-2A zoned lot to the east
A legal non-standard printing shop abuts the lot on the south and is in the B-2 District
A legal non-standard and non-conforming office/apartment mixed use are located west
of the lot and are in the B-2 District.
Other uses on the block include a large apartment building, a newer office building and several
residences.
Specifics: The rezoning would “square up” the B-2 District in the northwest corner of the
block. It would also create one zone for properties owned by the petitioner.
A B-2 District zoning allows for a much greater mix of commercial uses than the B-2A District.
However, the size of the lot is a severe limiting factor for most commercial uses. The petitioner
has submitted a conceptual plan that indicates an office type use covering all of Lot G, but
remember that any permitted use listed in the B-2 District would be allowed.
Recommendation: The Planning Commission voted 8 yes and 0 no to recommend approval of
the rezoning.
City Council Packet
January 27, 2009
77
Ordinance No. 03-09
An Ordinance to Change the Zoning Within the City of Brookings
Be it ordained by the governing body of the City of Brookings, South Dakota,
Section 1. That the real estate situated in the City of Brookings, County of Brookings, State of
South Dakota, described as follows:
the north 115 feet of the east 50.1 feet of Lot G, Block 3, First Addition
be and the same is hereby rezoned and reclassified from a Business B-2A District to a Business
B-2 District.
In accordance with Section 94.7 of Article I of Ordinance 25-02 of the Code of Ordinances of
Brookings, South Dakota, as said districts are more fully set forth and described in Articles III
and IV of Ordinance No. 25-02 of the City of Brookings, South Dakota.
Section 2. The permitted use of the property heretofore described be and the same is hereby
altered and changed in accordance herewith pursuant to said Ordinance No. 25-02 of the City
of Brookings, South Dakota.
Section 3. All sections and ordinances in conflict herewith are hereby repealed.
FIRST READING: January 27, 2009
SECOND READING: February 10, 2009
PUBLISHED:
CITY OF BROOKINGS
Scott D. Munsterman, Mayor
ATTEST:
Shari Thornes, City Clerk
City Council Packet
January 27, 2009
82
Section 94-132. Business B-2 district
(a) Intent. This district is intended to provide a moderate variety of retail and personal services.
This district will include commercial uses whose retail operation and outdoor display of retail
merchandise will be compatible with residential neighborhoods. No unscreened outdoor storage
is permitted.
(b) Scope of section regulations. The regulations set forth in this section or set forth elsewhere in
this title, when referred to in this section, are the district regulations of the Business B-2 District.
(c) Permitted Uses. Permitted uses in the B-2 district are as follows:
1. All permitted uses in the B-1 central ;
2. Grocery supermarket;
3. Drive-in food service;
4. Funeral home or mortuary;
5. Gas dispensing station;
6. Automobile sales;
7. Community Center.
(d) Permitted Special Uses. A building or premises in the B-2 district may be used for the following
purposes in conformance with the conditions prescribed in this subsection:
1. Car wash
a. The entire operation shall be within an enclosed structure.
b. Drainage shall be contained on the site.
2. Day care facility
a. A four-foot (4') high transparent fence shall be constructed between the play area and
the street.
b. An off-street pick-up and drop-off area shall be provided.
3. Seasonal roadside stand
a. The applicant shall furnish a written statement of permission from the property owner.
4. Mixed business/residential use
a. Provisions of Section 50.70.000, Nonconforming and Nonstandard Uses shall govern
all residential uses.
b. A site plan showing off-street parking for each use shall be submitted.
5. Citizen's drop-off for recyclables
a. Applicants shall furnish a statement guaranteeing supervision, maintenance and clean-
up of the site.
(e) Conditional Uses. Conditional uses in the B-2 district are as follows:
1. Wholesale trade
2. Automobile service station
3. Repair garage
4. Assembling and packaging
City Council Packet
January 27, 2009
83
5. Freight handling
6. Manufacturing, light
7. Domestic abuse shelter
8. Apartment
9. Small animal clinic (Ord 2-96, 1/23/96)
10. Church (Ord 8-96, 5/28/96)
(f) Density, area, yard and height regulations. The density, area, yard and height regulations in the B-2
district shall be as follows:
Min. Min. Min. Min. Min. Max.
Lot Lot Front Side Rear Height
Density Area Width Yard Yard Yard
Sq.Ft. Sq.Ft.
Commercial Uses 15,000 100' 25' -* 20'* 45'
Other Allowable
Uses 15,000 100' 25' 7'** 20' 45'
*A forty foot (40') landscaped area shall be required between an abutting residential district boundary line and any
structure, access drive, parking lot or other accessory use.
**The sideyard will be required to be increased to ten feet (10') when the building is three (3) or more stories in
height.
(g) Accessory Uses. Accessory uses and building permitted in the B-2 District are buildings and uses
customarily incidental to any of the permitted uses in the B-2 district.
(h) Parking Regulations. Parking, loading and stacking within the B-2 District shall be in
conformance with the regulations set forth in division 4 of article VI of this chapter.
(i) Sign Regulations. Signs within the B-2 District shall be in conformance with the regulations set
forth in division 5 of article VI of this section.
(j) Other Regulations. Development within the B-2 District shall be in conformance with the
regulations set forth in article II of this chapter.
City Council Packet
January 27, 2009
84
Ordinances – 1st 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.
11. Ordinance No. 04-09: An application for a conditional
use to establish a two-family dwelling on the South ½ of
Outlot 11 in the SW ¼ of Section 35-T110N-R50W (1812
Main Ave. So.)
Public Hearing: February 10, 2009
Applicant: Jack and Caryl Schmidt
Proposal: Establish a two-family dwelling in a low-density residential district
Background: The house on this parcel was moved onto the lot in 2004. The owner
subsequently sold the property to the petitioner in 2008.
A two-family dwelling in an R-1B District must have a minimum lot width of 90 feet and at least
12,400 square feet of area. Main Avenue South abuts the property and is a major arterial street.
Surrounding land uses include single-family dwellings to the north, south, and west. There are
no other two-family dwellings in the neighborhood on this side of Main Avenue South.
Specifics: The house would be converted to a main floor and basement unit. Access to the
basement unit would be through the garage to an entrance at the top of an existing stairway.
Existing parking on the lot is sufficient now, but the petitioner has indicated that additional
parking in the rear would be established. A privacy fence surrounding the rear yard is also
proposed.
Recommendation: The Planning Commission voted 0 yes and 8 no to recommend that this
application not be approved.
City Council Packet
January 27, 2009
85
Ordinance No. 04-09
An ordinance pertaining to an application for a Conditional Use for a two-family
dwelling in the Residence R-1B District.
Be it ordained by the governing body of the City of Brookings, South Dakota that said
Conditional Use shall be approved for a two-family dwelling on the S1/2 of Outlot 11 in the SW
1/4 of Section 35-T110N-R50W with the following conditions:
None
All sections and ordinances in conflict herewith are hereby repealed.
FIRST READING: January 27, 2009
SECOND READING: February 10, 2009
PUBLISHED:
CITY OF BROOKINGS
__________________________
Scott D. Munsterman, Mayor
ATTEST:
________________________________
Shari Thornes, City Clerk
City Council Packet
January 27, 2009
91
Sec. 94-125 RESIDENCE R-1B SINGLE-FAMILY
(a) Intent. This district is intended to provide for areas of residential use with a gross density of
approximately five dwelling units per acre or less. The district permits single-family dwellings and
supportive community facilities such as parks, playgrounds, schools, libraries and churches.
(b) Scope of Regulations. The regulations set forth in this section or set forth elsewhere in
this title, when referred to in this section, are the district regulations of the Residence R-1B Single-
Family District.
(c ) Permitted Uses. Single-family dwelling including accessory uses incidental thereto such as
private garages, parking areas, etc.
(d) Permitted Special Uses. A building or premises may be used for the following purposes in
conformance with conditions prescribed herein:
1. All permitted special uses and conditions as stated in Section 94-124(d)(R-1A).
2. Private school of general instruction.
a. One of the frontages of the premises shall abut upon an arterial or collector street.
3. Family day care.
a. Restricted to 12 or less children at any one time.
(e) Conditional Uses.
1. Vocational or trade school
2. Retirement or nursing home
3. Two family dwelling
4. Group home
5. Major home occupation
6. Public recreation facility
7. Non-municipal library, museum, art gallery,
8. Private lake
9. Bed and breakfast establishment
(f) Density, Area, Yard and Height Regulations.
The R-1B district regulations shall be as follows:
Per Min Min Min Min Min Max
Unit Lot Lot Front Side Rear Hgt
Density Area Width Yard Yard Yard
Sq.Ft. Sq.Ft.
Single-Family 10,000 10,000 75' 30' 8' 25' 35'
Two-Family 6,200 12,400 90' 30' 8' 25' 35'
City Council Packet
January 27, 2009
92
Other Allowable Uses 10,000 75' 30' 10' 25' 35'
Density per family requirements shall not apply to dormitories, fraternities, sororities,
nursing homes or other similar group quarters where no cooking facilities are provided in
individual rooms
(g) Accessory Uses. Accessory uses and building permitted in the R-1B District are buildings
and uses customarily incidental to any of the permitted uses in the district.
(h) Parking Regulations. Parking, loading and stacking within the R-1B District shall be in
conformance with the regulations set forth in division 4 of article VI of this chapter
(i) Sign Regulations. Signs within the R-1B District shall be in conformance with the
regulations set forth in division 5 of article VI of this chapter
(j) Other Regulations. Development within the R-1B District shall be in conformance with the
regulations set forth in article II of this chapter
City Council Packet
January 27, 2009
93
Second Readings & Public Hearings:
12. Action on Resolution No. 05-09, Resolution of Intent to
Lease Real Property (Lease to Foundation Seed Stocks
for Wiese and Freeland Addition farmland).
The City would like to lease the City-owned industrial property located in Freeland and
Wiese Additions for farming operations, which is shown on the enclosed map. In the
past, the City has leased industrial property for farming operations. This provides for
extra income for the City’s industrial fund as well as provides for weed control on City
property.
Last year, the City leased the industrial property to Foundation Seed Stocks. City
Attorney Britzman provided the following SDCL references:
9-12-5. Powers - Lease or transfer of property for public purposes.
Every municipality shall have power to lease or sell or give and convey any personal or real
property of the municipality or perform any work or render any services, to the state or any
public corporation thereof, to be used by such grantee for an authorized public purpose;
such lease or sale or gift and conveyance, or the performance of such work, to be authorized,
made or done on the terms and in the manner provided by resolution of the governing body.
9-12-5.1. Powers - Lease of property - Term and conditions.
Every municipality may lease its municipally-owned property. Any such lease shall be for a term
and upon the conditions provided by resolution of the governing body.
9-12-5.2. Powers - Lease to private person - Resolution - Notice - Hearing -
Authorization.
If the governing body decides to lease any municipally owned property to any private person for
a term exceeding one hundred twenty days and for an amount exceeding five hundred dollars
annual value it shall adopt a resolution of intent to enter into such lease and fix a time and place
for public hearing on the adoption of the resolution. Notice of the hearing shall be published in
the official newspaper once, at least ten days prior to the hearing. Following the hearing the
governing body may proceed to authorize the lease upon the terms and conditions it determines.
According to Attorney Britzman, this lease is not required to be bid, due to the fact the
entity is a public-private business entity, though it could be offered for bids if you so
desired. Since “Foundation Seed Stocks”, the proposed lessee, is not a “private person”
and is not technically the “State”-- it is a nonprofit corporation affiliated with SDSU, he
concluded we can lease without bidding provided it is not to a private person.
Foundation Seed Stocks proposes to lease this property at $105.00 per acre, which is
higher than our previous 2007 farming lease rate of $70.00 per acre. This lease will be a
one year lease, which will allow for acreage adjustments each year based on land sales.
The Notice of Public Hearing was advertised one time ten days prior to the hearing as
required. This resolution will allow the City to enter into a lease agreement with
Foundation Seed Stocks for one year for property in the Freeland and Wiese Additions.
Action: Open & Close Public Hearing, Motion to approve, Roll Call
City Manager Recommendation: Approve
City Council Packet
January 27, 2009
94
RESOLUTION NO. 05-09
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 Foundation Seed Stocks for a
period of one (1) year, commencing on March 1, 2009 and ending February 28, 2010 and
pertaining to the following described property:
The designated farmland in the Brookings Wiese Addition, thirty (30) acres more or
less in Section 30, T110N, R49W, and the designated farmland in the Brookings
Freeland Addition, forty (40) acres more or less in Section 18, T110N, R49W in the
City of Brookings, Brookings County, South Dakota.
The Lease will be an amount of One Hundred Five Dollars ($105.00) per acre for
farmland annually, 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
January 27, 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.
Passed and approved this 27th day of January 2009.
CITY OF BROOKINGS
____________________________________
Mayor Scott D. Munsterman
ATTEST:
__________________________
Shari Thornes, City Clerk
City Council Packet
January 27, 2009
97
Other Business
13. Update on Juvenile Justice Title V Grant by Dan Mielke.
Dan Mielke will give an annual report on progress with the “Brookings Area Early
Intervention Program”. This is a Juvenile Justice Grant of which the City’s matches 1/3
of the cost, as does the School District and the County.
Informational
City Council Packet
January 27, 2009
98
Other Business:
14. Draft Restaurant Liquor Operating Agreement.
At a previous work session, the City Council discussed making modifications to the
existing operating agreements that would apply to restaurants that would have the SB
126 provisions. Those requirements included: (1) a minimum size of establishment; (2)
point-of-sale requirements; and (3) audit requirements.
Attached is a draft of our current operating agreement in effect for traditional liquor
establishments, but amended as noted by the underlined language which is tailored to
the restaurant establishment. Such amendment provides for the three provisions cited
above.
It should be noted the SDCL statutory citations in Section XV refer to the laws from SB
126.
Informational
City Council Packet
January 27, 2009
99
LIQUOR OPERATING AGREEMENT FOR RESTAURANT ESTABLISHMENTS
Name of business
THIS AGREEMENT made and entered into by and between the CITY OF
BROOKINGS, a municipal corporation of the State of South Dakota, hereinafter referred to as
the “City” and ________________. (dba _________), _____________, owner, hereinafter
referred to as the “Manager”.
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, the City has been issued an on-sale alcoholic beverage license and is
engaged in the sale of alcoholic beverages, and
WHEREAS, the City desires to enter into an operating agreement on a limited basis
with the Manager for the purpose of operating an on-sale establishment or business for and on
behalf of the City pursuant to law, and
WHEREAS, the Manager has offered to have facilities in which to operate said on-sale
establishment solely upon the premises hereinafter described.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS MUTUALLY AGREED AS FOLLOWS:
I.
This Agreement is made and entered into on a limited basis between the parties hereto
to allow the Manager to operate a retail on-sale premises, pursuant to and in accordance with
all of the terms and conditions of this Agreement in accordance with all State laws and City
Ordinances now in effect and as may be enacted in the future.
II.
The Manager shall be individually responsible for all operating expenses of said on-sale
establishment, including but not limited to utilities, taxes, insurance and license fees, if any.
The Manager shall furnish all equipment and fixtures necessary to operate the
establishment.
III.
The on-sale establishment shall be located upon real estate in the City of Brookings,
South Dakota, described as:
(LEGAL DESCRIPTION), City of Brookings, Brookings County,
South Dakota
City Council Packet
January 27, 2009
100
The Manager warrants the establishment should have a minimum of 3,000 square feet of building
size.
IV.
The Manager shall dispense only alcoholic beverages supplied by the Municipal off-sale
establishment.
V.
This Agreement shall be in full force and effect for a period of five (5) years with the Manager
having the option and privilege of a five (5) year extension, subject to the approval of the
governing body of the City of Brookings.
VI.
Either the Manager or the City may terminate this Agreement without cause upon ninety (90)
days written notice served by either party upon the other. The City reserves the right to
immediately suspend or revoke this Agreement without ninety (90) days written notice for
alcohol related violations in accordance with the provisions of Resolution No. 25-88 or any
amendments thereto or for any late payments for alcoholic beverages supplied by the Municipal
off-sale establishment to be sold on the premises of Manager.
VII.
The Manager shall receive as full compensation for its services rendered, the net profit from the
on-sale establishment under its management, and the sole profit to be derived by the City shall be
the markup hereinafter set forth on alcoholic beverages furnished by the municipality to the
Manager for the purposes of resale on the premises as above described.
VIII.
The Manager shall pay to the City for all alcoholic beverages sold by the City to the Manager for
resale on the above-described premises, the actual cost of distilled spirits and wine supplied by
the City, plus eleven percent (11%) in excess of such cost; the Manager shall pay to the City for
all malt beverages sold by the City to the Manager for resale on the above-described premises,
the actual cost of malt beverages, plus ten percent (10%) in excess of such cost. The actual cost
shall include cost price and transportation charges. The markup percentages provided in this
Agreement are subject to change by the City of Brookings. In the event markup percentages are
changed by Ordinance, then the markup percentages provided by City Ordinance shall supercede
the markup percentages provided herein. The Manager further agrees that if either of the
markup percentages shall be increased at any time by the City, the Manager shall pay the markup
as so increased.
City Council Packet
January 27, 2009
101
IX.
A complete and detailed record shall be maintained by the City of all alcoholic beverages supplied
to the on-sale Manager and such alcoholic beverages so supplied shall be evidenced by
prenumbered invoices prepared in triplicate showing the date, quantity, brand, size and actual
cost of such item, and such invoice shall bear the signature of the authorized representative of
the on-sale Manager or its authorized representative. One copy thereof shall be retained by the
Municipal off-sale establishment, one copy shall be retained by the on-sale establishment, and one
copy shall be filed with the City Clerk. All copies shall be kept as permanent records and made
available for reference and audit purposes. The Manager also agrees to maintain a complete
record of all alcoholic beverages received from the City.
X.
In consideration of the covenants and agreements herein contained, the Manager agrees to pay
the CITY OF BROOKINGS, One Thousand Five Hundred and no/100 Dollars ($1,500.00),
constituting the Annual License Fee on or by January 1, _________, and on or by the first day of
each year thereafter as long as this agreement shall remain in force and effect. The Manager
further agrees that if the annual fee shall be increased at any time by the legislature, the Manager
shall pay the amount of any such increase. In addition, the Manager agrees to pay the federal
stamp fee.
XI.
The Manager agrees to keep the premises in a neat, clean and attractive appearance, and Manager
further agrees to operate said on-sale establishment only on such days and at such hours as
permitted by state law and city ordinances.
XII.
The Manager shall have the right to return, at any time, alcoholic beverages received from the
City and to receive in return any deposit made for such alcoholic beverages; in the event of
termination of the business, all unused alcoholic beverages, which may be resold without discount
may be returned to the City and the Manager shall be reimbursed for the cost of such alcoholic
beverages.
XIII.
The Manager agrees to abide by the credit policies of the City and acknowledges, by execution of
this Agreement, receipt of a copy of the credit policies of the City. The City reserves the right to
change or terminate its credit policies at any time, but shall be required to provide written notice
to Manager prior to the effective date of the change or termination date of the credit policies.
XIV.
The Manager agrees to furnish the City upon demand, evidence of payment of the following:
City Council Packet
January 27, 2009
102
A. All salaries of on-sale employees;
B. Social Security and withholding taxes on said employees;
C. Worker’s Compensation insurance premiums covering said employees;
D. Unemployment taxes on the payrolls of said employees;
E. General liability insurance protecting both the City and Manager against claims for
injury or damages to persons or property, said policy to have general liability limits of
at least Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($500,000.00) single limit, and One Million
Dollars ($1,000,000.00) aggregate, and a limitation of Fifty Thousand Dollars
($50,000.00) for damage to property. The general liability insurance limits are subject
to change and Manager agrees to change limits of insurance if required by the City;
F. Rent and utility bills;
G. Any and all miscellaneous expenses, including taxes.
XV.
The Manager agrees to observe all Federal and State laws and all ordinances of the City of
Brookings. The Manager further agrees to comply with SDCL § 35-4-2.10 and SDCL § 35-4-110
to 35-4-119 regarding restaurant liquor establishments.
XVI.
The City covenants and agrees to furnish the on-sale license to Manager pursuant to the terms
and conditions of this Operating Agreement and the terms and conditions of the on-sale license.
XVII.
The City shall have the right to make inspections and investigations of the premises during the
hours of operation, and make audits and examinations of the records of the Manager relating to
the on-sale establishment.
XVIII.
The Manager agrees to utilize an industry-standard point-of-sale cash register system as a means
of producing records meeting state and local audit requirements. The City shall have the right to
require, and the Manager the obligation to provide, applicable financial information as a means of
auditing compliance with state and applicable laws, in a format determined by the City, with 30
days written notice.
XIX.
City Council Packet
January 27, 2009
103
It is further specifically understood and agreed that the waiver of the rights of the City under this
Agreement shall not constitute a continuous waiver, and any violation or breach of the terms of
this agreement by the Manager shall constitute a separate and distinct offense and grounds for
immediate termination and revocation of this Agreement.
XX.
This agreement shall not be assignable to another person or location without the written consent
of the City.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this agreement this ____ day of
_____________, 20___.
CITY OF BROOKINGS, South Dakota
A Municipal Corporation
By:
Jeffrey W. Weldon, City Manager
ATTEST:
Shari Thornes, Brookings City Clerk
MANAGER
By: ___________________________________
Operating Agreement/Business Owner
City Council Packet
January 27, 2009
104
Other Business:
15. Executive Session for consulting with legal counsel or
reviewing communications from legal counsel about
proposed or pending litigation or contractual matters.
SDCL 1-25-2. Executive or closed meetings.
Executive or closed meetings may be held for the sole purpose of:
1. Discussing the qualifications, competence, performance, character or fitness
of any public officer or employee or prospective public officer or employee.
The term “employee” does not include any independent contractors;
2. Discussing the expulsion, suspension, discipline, assignment of or the
educational program of a student;
3. Consulting with legal counsel or reviewing communications from legal
counsel about proposed or pending litigation or contractual matters;
4. Discussing marketing or pricing strategies by a board or commission of a
business owned by the state or any of its political subdivisions, where public
discussions would be harmful to the competitive position of the business.
However, any official action concerning such matters shall be made at an open official
meeting. An executive or closed meeting shall be held only upon a majority vote of the
members of such body present and voting, and discussion during the closed meeting is
restricted to the purpose specified in the closure motion. Nothing in 1-25-1 or this
section may be construed to prevent an executive or closed meeting if the federal or
state Constitution or the federal or state statutes require or permit it. A violation of
this section is a Class 2 misdemeanor.
Action: Motion to enter executive session – voice vote
Motion to leave executive session – voice vote
City Council Packet
January 27, 2009
105
16. Adjourn.