HomeMy WebLinkAbout2025_06_24 CC PacketCity Council
City of Brookings
Meeting Agenda - Final
Brookings City Council
Brookings City & County
Government Center
520 3rd St., Suite 230
Brookings, SD 57006
Phone: (605) 692-6281
"We are an inclusive, diverse, connected community that fuels the creative class, embraces sustainability
and pursues a complete lifestyle. We are committed to building a bright future through dedication,
generosity and authenticity. Bring your dreams!"
Council Chambers6:00 PMTuesday, June 24, 2025
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.
6:00 PM REGULAR MEETING
1. Call to Order / Pledge of Allegiance.
2. Record of Council Attendance.
3. Action to approve the agenda.
4. Open Forum.
At this time, any member of the public may make a brief announcement or invitation, or
request time on the agenda for an item not listed. Items to be added to the agenda will
be scheduled at the end of the meeting. Individuals will state their name and city of
residence for the record. Public Comment is limited to a maximum of three minutes per
person. The comments and views expressed by the public are those of the speakers
and do not necessarily reflect the views or positions of the City of Brookings or City
Council.
5. Consent Agenda:
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. At the request of any one
Council Member or the City Manager, an item may be removed from the Consent Agenda
and placed on the regular agenda whenever additional discussion on an item is
necessary. Items removed from the Consent Agenda will be discussed at the beginning
of the formal items.
Action to approve City Council meeting minutes.ID 25-03065.A.
Page 1 City of Brookings
June 24, 2025City Council Meeting Agenda - Final
6/10/2025 Council MinutesAttachments:
Action on Resolution 25-059, a Resolution declaring surplus property for
the City of Brookings.
RES 25-0595.B.
Memo
Resolution
Attachments:
Action on Resolution 25-037, a Resolution adopting the Brookings County
Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan 2024-2030.
RES 25-0375.C.
Memo
Resolution
Brookings County Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan 2024-2030 - Final Draft
Attachments:
6. Presentations/Reports: NONE
7. Contracts/Change Orders: NONE
8. Ordinance First Readings:
No vote is required on the first reading of an Ordinance. The title of the Ordinance is
read. Public Comment and Council discussion is permitted. The date for the second
reading or public hearing is announced.
Introduction and First Reading on Ordinance 25-013, an Ordinance to
Change the Zoning within the City of Brookings (the East 1 Acre of
Rudebusch Addition Easterly 2 Acres of Lot 1 in NE1/4 of Sec 4, T109N,
R50W, also known as 1809 West 20th Street South, from Joint Jurisdiction
Agriculture District to Joint Jurisdiction Residence R-1A Single-Family
District). Public Hearing and Action: July 8, 2025.
ORD 25-0138.A.
Memo
Ordinance
Hearing Notice - City Council
Hearing Notice - Planning Commission
Planning Commission Minutes
Petition to Rezone
Location Map
Zoning Map
Future Land Use Map
Floodplain Map
Attachments:
Introduction and First Reading on Ordinance 25-014, an Ordinance
Amendment the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Brookings and Pertaining
to the Expiration of a Conditional Use Permit for the Purpose of
Administration of the Zoning Ordinance. Public Hearing and Action: July 8,
ORD 25-0148.B.
Page 2 City of Brookings
June 24, 2025City Council Meeting Agenda - Final
2025.
Memo
Ordinance - clean
Ordinance - marked
Hearing Notice - City Council
Hearing Notice - Planning Commission
Planning Commission Minutes
Attachments:
Introduction and First Reading on Ordinance 25-015, an Ordinance
Amending the Zoning Ordinance Pertaining to Concrete, Asphalt, and
Rock Crushing Facility for the Purposes of Administration of the Zoning
Ordinance. Public Hearing and Action: July 8, 2025.
ORD 25-0158.C.
Memo
Ordinance
Hearing Notice - City Council
Hearing Notice - Planning Commission
Planning Commission Minutes
Attachments:
Introduction and First Reading on Ordinance 25-021, an Ordinance
authorizing Budget Amendment No. 4 to the 2025 Budget. Second
Reading and Action: July 8, 2025.
ORD 25-0218.D.
Memo
Ordinance
Development Agreement
Attachments:
9. Public Hearings and Second Readings:
Public Hearing and Action on Resolution 25-047, a Resolution of Intent to
Lease Real Property at Brookings Regional Airport to Isaac Wilde.
RES 25-0479.A.
Memo
Resolution
Notice
Location Map
Attachments:
Action: Motion, Open & Close Public Hearing, Roll Call
Public Hearing and Action on Resolution 25-058, a Resolution to Amend
the 2040 Comprehensive Plan’s Future Land Use Map.
RES 25-0589.B.
Page 3 City of Brookings
June 24, 2025City Council Meeting Agenda - Final
Memo
Resolution
Hearing Notice - City Council
Hearing Notice - Planning Commission
Planning Commission Minutes
Request Letter
Location Map
Future Land Use Map
Zoning Map
Floodplain Map
Suitability Map
Attachments:
Action: Motion, Open & Close Public Hearing, Roll Call
10. Other Business:
Action on Resolution 25-057, a Resolution Transferring Capital
Improvement Plan Sinking Funds.
RES 25-05710.A.
Memo
Resolution
Attachments:
Action: Motion, Request Public Comment, Roll Call
City of Brookings Progress Report.ID 25-030711.
ReportAttachments:
12. City Council member introduction of topics for future discussion.
Any Council Member may request discussion of any topic at a future meeting. Items
cannot be added for action at this meeting. A motion and second is required which
states the topic, requested outcome, and time frame. A majority vote is required.
13. Executive Session
Executive Session, pursuant to SDCL 1-25-2.3, for the purpose of
consulting with legal counsel or reviewing communications from legal
counsel about proposed or pending litigation or contractual matters; and
SDCL 1-25-2.5, for the purpose of discussing marketing or pricing
strategies by a board or commission of a business owned by the state or
any of its political subdivisions, when public discussion may be harmful to
the competitive position of the business.
ID 25-028913.A.
Action: Motion to enter into Executive Session, Voice Vote
Action: Motion to exit Executive Session, Voice Vote
14. Adjourn.
Page 4 City of Brookings
June 24, 2025City Council Meeting Agenda - Final
Brookings City Council: Oepke G.Niemeyer, Mayor; Nick Wendell, Deputy Mayor
Council Members Wayne Avery, Holly Tilton Byrne, Bonny Specker, Brianna Doran, Lisa Hager
Brookings City Council Staff:
Paul M. Briseno, City Manager Bonnie Foster, City Clerk
J. Vincent Jones, Attorney-at-Law, Woods, Fuller, Shultz and Smith P.C.
Public Comment is limited to a maximum of three minutes per person. Individuals will give their name and city of
residence for the record. Public Comment may be submitted prior to the meeting by the following means: 1) Email
comments to the City Clerk (cityclerk@cityofbrookings-sd.gov), or 2) participate remotely. Comments provided will
become part of the official record and subject to review by all parties and the public. The comments and views
expressed by the public are those of the speakers and do not necessarily reflect the views or positions of the City
of Brookings or City Council.
Meetings are broadcast live and recorded. Go to www.cityofbrookings-sd.gov for more information. Government
Channel Rebroadcast Schedule: Wednesday 1:00 pm / Thursday 7:00 pm / Friday 9:00 pm / Saturday 1:00 pm
(Swiftel Channel 20 / MediaCom Channel 9)
Upon request, accommodations for meetings will be provided for persons with disabilities. Please contact the City
ADA Coordinator at (605) 692-6281 at least three (3) business days in advance of the meeting.
Page 5 City of Brookings
City of Brookings
Staff Report
Brookings City & County
Government Center, 520
Third Street
Brookings, SD 57006
(605) 692-6281 phone
(605) 692-6907 fax
File #:ID 25-0306,Version:1
Action to approve City Council meeting minutes.
Attachments:
06/10/2025 City Council Minutes
City of Brookings Printed on 6/18/2025Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™
BROOKINGS CITY COUNCIL
June 10, 2025 (unapproved)
The Brookings City Council held a meeting Tuesday, June 10, 2025 at 6:00 PM, at the
Brookings City & County Government Center, Chambers, with the following City Council
members present: Mayor Oepke Niemeyer, Council Members Wayne Avery, Brianna
Doran, Lisa Hager, Bonny Specker, and Holly Tilton Byrne. Absent: Council Member
Nick Wendell and City Manager Paul Briseno. Assistant City Attorney Susan
Rasmussen and City Clerk Bonnie Foster were also present.
Agenda. A motion was made by Council Member Specker, seconded by Council
Member Doran, that the agenda be approved. The motion carried by the following vote:
Yes: 6 - Avery, Doran, Hager, Niemeyer, Specker, Tilton Byrne; Absent: 1 - Wendell.
Open Forum. John Thompson, Public Works Director, provided an update on the
Slurry Seal Project. He appreciates the public's patience with this project, which will be
completed by the end of next week.
Consent Agenda. A motion was made by Council Member Tilton Byrne, seconded by
Council Member Doran, that the consent agenda be approved. The motion carried by
the following vote: Yes: 6 - Avery, Doran, Hager, Niemeyer, Specker, Tilton Byrne;
Absent: 1 - Wendell.
A. Action to approve the May 27, 2025 City Council Minutes.
B. Action on Temporary Alcohol / Special Event Alcoholic Beverage Licenses
from existing alcohol license holders: Sodexo Catering (License Holder RB-28249
and RW -28251): SDSU TL25-046; SDSU TL25-048; TL25-049; TL25-050; TL25-051;
TL25-052; SDSU TL25-053; TL25-054; TL25-055; TL25-056; TL25-057; SDSU TL25-
058; TL25-059; TL25-060; TL25-061; TL25-062; SDSU TL25-063; TL25-064; TL25-065;
TL25-066; and TL25-067.
Proclamation: LGBTQ2S+ Pride Month. Mayor Niemeyer presented a proclamation
declaring June 2025 as LGBTQ2S+ Month. Erin Lavender-Stott, Human Rights
Commission LGBTQ2S+ Liaison, accepted the Proclamation.
MAYORAL PROCLAMATION
WHEREAS, June is celebrated as Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer, and
Two Spirit (LGBTQ2S+) Pride Month across the USA; and
WHEREAS, Pride Month celebrates everyone’s right to live without fear of prejudice
based on sexual orientation or gender identity; and
WHEREAS, the LGBTQ2S+ community includes our neighbors, friends, and family
members; and
WHEREAS, the City of Brookings vision is to be a welcoming and inclusive community
where all can bring your dreams; and
WHEREAS, the City of Brookings has received a perfect score of 100 on the Human
Rights Campaign Municipal Equality Index, the largest LGBTQ2S+ civil rights
organization in the U.S. for seven years in a row; and
WHEREAS, these entities in Brookings have been working tirelessly for LGBTQ2S+
awareness and equality: Human Rights Commission, Brookings PFLAG, Brookings
Public Library, Brookings Arts Council, and Brookings Pride; and
WHEREAS, the Brookings community will be celebrating Pride on June 21 st at Pioneer
Park.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that I, Oepke G. Niemeyer, Mayor of the City
of Brookings, do hereby proclaim June 2025 as LGBTQ2S+ Pride Month.
Proclamation: Juneteenth. Mayor Niemeyer presented a Proclamation celebrating
June 19th as Juneteenth. Keely Eagleshield, Human Rights Commission Member,
accepted the proclamation.
MAYORAL PROCLAMATION
WHEREAS, the Declaration of Independence, written in 1776, states: “We hold these
truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their
Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the
pursuit of Happiness”; and
WHEREAS, in 1863, the contradiction between slavery and the Declaration of
Independence was addressed when President Lincoln issued the Emancipation
Proclamation, which set in motion the end of slavery; and
WHEREAS, slavery ended when the Confederate states surrendered on April 9, 1865;
and
WHEREAS, enslavers in Texas were able to hide their Civil War defeat until June 19,
1865, when the United States Military arrived to announce that the more than 250,000
enslaved people in Texas were free.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that I, Oepke G. Niemeyer, Mayor of the City
of Brookings, do hereby proclaim Thursday, June 19, 2025 as Juneteenth.
Reports: City Council Ex-Officio Reports. A Brookings Municipal Utility Board report
was given by Council Member Avery. A Brookings Health Systems Board of Trustees
report was not presented, due to no meeting being held.
Resolution 25-061. A motion was made by Council Member Tilton Byrne, seconded by
Council Member Doran, that Resolution 25-061, a Resolution Awarding Bids on 2025-
02SSI Arrowhead Park Trail and Drainage Improvements Project, be approved. The
motion carried by the following vote: Yes: 6 - Tilton Byrne, Specker, Hager, Avery,
Doran, and Niemeyer; Absent: 1 - Wendell.
RESOLUTION 25-061 - RESOLUTION AWARDING BIDS ON PROJECT 2025-02SSI
ARROWHEAD PARK TRAIL AND DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT
WHEREAS, the City of Brookings opened bids for 2025-02SSI Arrowhead Park Trail
and Drainage Improvements Project on Tuesday, June 3, 2025 at 1:30 pm at the
Brookings City & County Government Center; and
WHEREAS, the City of Brookings received the following total bid for the low bas e bid
plus bid alternate #1 for the 2025-02SSI Arrowhead Park Trail and Drainage
Improvements Project from Timmons Construction, in the amount of $201,253.34.
WHEREAS, the total low bid was approximately 19% lower than the Engineer’s
Estimate.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED as follows:
1. That the total low bid of $201,253.34 for Timmons Construction Inc., be
accepted.
2. The City Manager is authorized to sign the contract documents for this project
and any further contract documents and change orders which may be required.
Resolution 25-062. A motion was made by Council Member Tilton Byrne, seconded by
Council Member Doran, that Resolution 25-062, a Resolution Awarding Bids on 2025-
04STI 20th Street South Shared Use Path Project, be approved. The motion carried by
the following vote: Yes: 6 - Tilton Byrne, Specker, Hager, Avery, Doran, and Niemeyer;
Absent: 1 - Wendell.
RESOLUTION 25-062 - RESOLUTION AWARDING BIDS ON PROJECT 2025-04STI
20th STREET SOUTH SHARED USE PATH PROJECT
WHEREAS, the City of Brookings opened bids for 2025-04STI 20th Street South Shared
Use Path Project on Tuesday, June 3, 2025 at 1:30 pm at the Brookings City & County
Government Center; and
WHEREAS, the City of Brookings received the following low bid for the 2025-04STI 20th
Street South Shared Use Project from Timmons Construction, in the amount of
$461,336.63.
WHEREAS, the low bid was approximately 23% lower than the Engineer’s Estimate.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED as follows:
1. That the low bid of $461,336.63 for Timmons Construction, be accepted.
2. The City Manager is authorized to sign the contract documents for this project
and any further contract documents and change orders which may be required.
Ordinance 25-016.
A motion was made by Council Member Tilton Byrne, seconded by Council Member
Doran, that Ordinance 25-016, an Ordinance Authorizing Budget Amendment Number 2
to the 2025 Budget, be approved. The motion carried by the following vote: Yes: 6 -
Tilton Byrne, Specker, Hager, Avery, Doran, and Niemeyer; Absent: 1 - Wendell.
Ordinance 25-017. A motion was made by Council Member Tilton Byrne, seconded by
Council Member Specker, that Ordinance 25-017, an Ordinance Authorizing Budget
Amendment No. 3 to the 2025 Budget, be approved. The motion carried by the
following vote: Yes: 6 - Tilton Byrne, Specker, Hager, Avery, Doran, and Niemeyer;
Absent: 1 - Wendell.
Special Event Temporary Alcoholic Beverage Application. A public hearing was
held on a Special Event Temporary Alcoholic Beverage Application from the Brookings
Area Chamber for Downtown at Sundown. A motion was made by Council Member
Tilton Byrne, seconded by Council Member Specker, that the Special Event Temporary
Alcoholic Beverage Application be approved. Public Comment: Ainsley Bennett,
Chamber representative. The motion carried by the following vote: Yes: 6 - Tilton
Byrne, Specker, Hager, Avery, Doran, and Niemeyer; Absent: 1 - Wendell.
Ordinance 25-018.
A public hearing was held on Ordinance 25-018, an Ordinance to Change the Zoning
within the City of Brookings (Lot 1 in Clark Addition and Lot 2 in Clark Second Addition
from an Agriculture A District to a Business B-3 Heavy District). A motion was made by
Council Member Tilton Byrne, seconded by Council Member Doran, that Ordinance 25-
018 be approved. The motion carried by the following vote: Yes: 6 - Tilton Byrne,
Specker, Hager, Avery, Doran, and Niemeyer; Absent: 1 - Wendell.
Ordinance 25-019. A public hearing was held on Ordinance 25-019, an Ordinance
pertaining to an Application for a Conditional Use Permit to establish a Major Home
Occupation (Gunsmithing Business) in a Residence R-2 Two-Family District (2505
Larkspur Ridge Drive). A motion was made by Council Member Doran, seconded by
Council Member Specker, that Ordinance 25-019 be approved. Public Comment: Tyler
Brockel. The motion carried by the following vote: Yes: 4 - Specker, Hager, Doran, and
Niemeyer; No: 2 - Tilton Byrne and Avery; Absent: 1 - Wendell.
Ordinance 25-020. A public hearing was held on Ordinance 25-020, an Ordinance
Pertaining to an Application for a Conditional Use Permit to Establish a Major Home
Occupation (Hair Salon) in a Residence R-1A Single Family District (1214 Western
Avenue). A motion was made by Council Member Tilton Byrne, seconded by Counci l
Member Specker, that Ordinance 25-020 be approved. Public Comment: Andrew
Austreim. The motion carried by the following vote: Yes: 6 - Tilton Byrne, Specker,
Hager, Avery, Doran, and Niemeyer; Absent: 1 - Wendell.
Resolution 25-045. A motion was made by Council Member Tilton Byrne, seconded by
Council Member Doran, that Resolution 25-045, a Resolution Transferring Contingency
Funds, be approved. The motion carried by the following vote: Yes: 6 - Tilton Byrne,
Specker, Hager, Avery, Doran, and Niemeyer; Absent: 1 - Wendell.
RESOLUTION 25-045 – A RESOLUTION TRANSFERRING CONTINGENCY FUNDS
WHEREAS, the City of Brookings hereby transfers City Manager’s contingency funds to
fund unplanned operational obligations of the municipality. This resolution is fo r the
purpose of completing a transfer of contingency funds to the following accounts:
403 City Clerk
101-403-5-422-07 Contracted Services $20,000
Total Transfers $20,000
The Financing Source for this transfer is from the following accounts:
101-405-5-856-99 Contingency Fund $20,000
Total Source of Funding $20,000
WHEREAS, this resolution is deemed necessary for the immediate preservation of the
public peace, health, safety and support of the City, and shall become effective upon
publication.
Introduction of Topics for Future Discussion. Council Member Doran requested a
Study Session on the conditional use process with major home occupations. It was
conclusive to hold at a future City Council Study Session.
Adjourn. A motion was made by Council Member Tilton Byrne, seconded by Council
Member Doran, that this meeting be adjourned at 6:49 p.m. The motion carried by a
unanimous vote.
CITY OF BROOKINGS, SD
Oepke G. Niemeyer, Mayor
ATTEST:
Bonnie Foster, City Clerk
City of Brookings
Staff Report
Brookings City & County
Government Center, 520
Third Street
Brookings, SD 57006
(605) 692-6281 phone
(605) 692-6907 fax
File #:RES 25-059,Version:1
Action on Resolution 25-059, a Resolution declaring surplus property for the City of Brookings.
Summary and Recommended Action:
Staff recommends approval of this resolution declaring surplus property.
Attachments:
Memo
Resolution
City of Brookings Printed on 6/18/2025Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™
City Council Agenda Item Memo
From: Bonnie Foster, City Clerk
Council Meeting: May 24, 2024
Subject: Resolution 25-059: declaring surplus property
Presenter: Bonnie Foster, City Clerk
Summary and Recommended Action:
Staff recommends approval of the proposed Resolution declaring surplus property.
Item Details:
According to State Statute Chapter 6-13, the governing body of the City of Brookings
allows the following property, to be declared as surplus property:
Community Development: 2009 Dodge Dakota XST Ext Cab Pick UP; VIN
ID3HW32P69S783007
Legal Consideration:
None.
Strategic Plan Consideration:
Sustainability – The City of Brookings will meet environmental, community and
economic desires and needs without compromising future generations’ quality of life by
strategically planning, implementing and maintaining infrastructure and facilities.
Financial Consideration:
Revenues generated from the sale of surplus property, will be placed in the City’s
General Fund.
Supporting Documentation:
Resolution
RESOLUTION 25-059
DECLARING SURPLUS PROPERTY
WHEREAS, the City of Brookings is the owner of the following described equipment
formerly used at the City of Brookings:
Community Development: 2009 Dodge Dakota XST Ext Cab Pick UP; VIN
ID3HW32P69S783007
WHEREAS, in the best financial interest, it is the desire of the City of Brookings to
dispose of as surplus property; and
WHEREAS, the City Manager is hereby authorized to sell or dispose of said surplus
property.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the governing body of the City of Brookings,
SD, that this property be declared surplus property according to SDCL Chapter 6-13.
Passed and Approved this 24th day of June, 2025.
CITY OF BROOKINGS, SD
____________________________
ATTEST: Oepke G. Niemeyer, Mayor
___________________________
Bonnie Foster, City Clerk
City of Brookings
Staff Report
Brookings City & County
Government Center, 520
Third Street
Brookings, SD 57006
(605) 692-6281 phone
(605) 692-6907 fax
File #:RES 25-037,Version:1
Action on Resolution 25-037, a Resolution adopting the Brookings County Pre-Disaster Mitigation
Plan 2024-2030.
Summary and Recommended Action:
Staff recommends approval of the proposed Resolution adopting the Brookings County Pre-Disaster
Mitigation Plan 2024-2030 in order for Brooking County to maintain eligibility to receive Disaster
Mitigation Funds.
Attachments:
Memo
Resolution
Brookings County Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan 2024-2030 - Final Draft
City of Brookings Printed on 6/18/2025Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™
City Council Agenda Item Memo
From: Samantha Beckman, Assistant to the City Manager
Council Meeting: June 24, 2025
Subject: Resolution 25-037: Brookings County Pre-Disaster Mitigation
Plan 2024-2030
Presenter: Samantha Beckman, Assistant to the City Manager
Summary and Recommended Action:
Staff recommends approval of this resolution adopting the Brookings County Pre-
Disaster Mitigation Plan 2024-2030 in order for Brooking County to maintain eligibility to
receive disaster mitigation funds.
Item Details:
Brookings County received assistance in the preparation of the Brookings County Pre-
Disaster Mitigation Plan 2024-2030 from representatives of the First District Association
of Local Governments and received funding from the South Dakota Office of Emergency
Management and Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).
The Brookings County Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan was approved by FEMA in 2019.
For the purposes of this plan, municipalities within Brookings County are considered
participating units of government. Brookings County is required to update its Pre -
Disaster Mitigation Plan every five years in order to maintain eligibility for federal
funding for disaster mitigation projects and other federal funding/programs.
First District and Brookings County representatives attended a Development Review
Team meeting where City of Brookings and Brookings Municipal Utilities staff were
involved in identifying areas of vulnerability within City limits, current hazard mitigation
efforts, and compiling a critical infrastructure list.
Public meetings were held between January 2024 and January 2025 regarding the
development of the plan. First District presented at the August 27, 2024 City Council
meeting on the progress of the plan. A public hearing was held on December 30, 2024
by the Brookings County Pre-Disaster Mitigation Team to solicit public comment on the
updated plan.
The updated plan has been approved by FEMA. Each municipality within Brookings
County must approve the plan before it can be finalized. Staff recommends approval.
Legal Consideration:
None.
Strategic Plan Consideration:
Safe, Inclusive, Connected Community – The City of Brookings will create an
environment for inclusive programs, gathering places, and events where the
community can safely live, work and come together to participate in opportunities
for learning, recreation and enjoyment.
Sustainability – The City of Brookings will meet environmental, community and
economic desires and needs without compromising future generations’ quality of
life by strategically planning, implementing and maintaining infrastructure and
facilities.
Financial Consideration:
None.
Supporting Documentation:
Resolution
Brookings County Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan 2024-2030 Final Draft
RESOLUTION 25-037
RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE BROOKINGS COUNTY PRE-DISASTER
MITIGATION PLAN 2024-2030
WHEREAS, Brookings County received assistance in the preparation of the Brookings
County Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan 2024-2030 from representatives of the City of
Brookings and received funding from the South Dakota Office of Emergency Management
/ FEMA; and
WHEREAS, several public planning meetings were held between January of 2024 and
January of 2025 regarding the development and review of the Brookings County Pre-
Disaster Mitigation Plan 2024-2030; and
WHEREAS, the Brookings County Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan 2024-2030 contains
several potential future projects to mitigate hazard damage in the City of Brookings; and
WHEREAS, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) has rendered its
approval of the Brookings County Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan on April 15, 2025; and
WHEREAS, a duly-noticed public hearing was held by the Brookings County Pre-Disaster
Mitigation Team on December 30, 2024 to solicit public comment on the Brookings
County Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan 2024-2030; and
WHEREAS, a duly-noticed public meeting was held by the Brookings City Council on
June 24, 2025 to formally approve and adopt the final Brookings County Pre-Disaster
Mitigation Plan 2024-2030.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Brookings City Council adopts the
Brookings County Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan 2024-2030.
Passed and Approved this 24th day of June, 2025.
CITY OF BROOKINGS, SD
________________________________
Oepke G. Niemeyer, Mayor
ATTEST:
______________________________________
Bonnie Foster, City Clerk
BROOKINGS
2024 – 2030
COUNTY
Pre-Disaster
Mitigation Plan
i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER 1 – INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................. 1
• Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 1
• Authority for Pre-disaster Mitigation Plan ......................................................................................... 2
• Purpose ............................................................................................................................................ 2
• Use of Plan ....................................................................................................................................... 2
• Scope of Plan ................................................................................................................................... 3
• What is Hazard Mitigation? .............................................................................................................. 3
• Brookings County Profile.................................................................................................................. 4
o Population .................................................................................................................................. 4
o Social and Economic Description .............................................................................................. 7
o Physical Description and Climate .............................................................................................. 7
o Hydrology ................................................................................................................................... 9
o Transportation and Utility Infrastructure .................................................................................... 9
o Medical and Emergency Services ........................................................................................... 10
CHAPTER 2 – PREREQUISITES .............................................................................................................. 11
• Adoption by Local Governing Body ................................................................................................ 11
• Multi-jurisdictional Plan Participation ............................................................................................. 11
CHAPTER 3 – PLANNING PROCESS ...................................................................................................... 15
• Background .................................................................................................................................... 15
• Documentation of Planning Process .............................................................................................. 16
o Methodology ............................................................................................................................ 16
o Planning Framework ................................................................................................................ 16
o Opportunities for Public Comment .......................................................................................... 20
o Online Survey Results ............................................................................................................. 22
o PDM Plan Process Timeline .................................................................................................... 24
o Risk Identification & Assessment/Mitigation Strategy/Review of Plan .................................... 25
CHAPTER 4 – RISK ASSESSMENT ......................................................................................................... 33
• Identification of Hazards................................................................................................................. 33
• Types of Natural Hazards in the PDM Jurisdiction Area ................................................................ 35
• Hazard Profile ................................................................................................................................ 36
o Dam Failure ............................................................................................................................. 37
o Drought ................................................................................................................................... 39
o Extreme Heat ........................................................................................................................... 42
o Earthquake .............................................................................................................................. 44
o Landslide ................................................................................................................................. 45
o Subsidence .............................................................................................................................. 46
o Flood ........................................................................................................................................ 47
o Summer Storms ....................................................................................................................... 53
o Tornado ................................................................................................................................... 54
o Thunderstorm/Strong Wind ..................................................................................................... 57
o Hail ........................................................................................................................................... 61
o Lightning .................................................................................................................................. 64
o Winter Storms .......................................................................................................................... 65
o Extreme Cold ........................................................................................................................... 70
o Urban Fire/Wildfire ................................................................................................................... 73
• Assessing Vulnerability: Overview ................................................................................................. 77
o Regional Climate Change Trends ........................................................................................... 79
o Hazard Vulnerabilities .............................................................................................................. 79
▪ Flooding ............................................................................................................................ 79
▪ Severe Storms .................................................................................................................. 84
ii
▪ Winter Storms ................................................................................................................... 86
▪ Drought/Fires .................................................................................................................... 87
• Assessing Vulnerability: Current and Future Conditions ............................................................... 90
• Assessing Vulnerability: National Flood Insurance Program Compliance ................................... 104
• Assessing Vulnerability: Repetitive Loss Properties .................................................................... 106
• Assessing Vulnerability: Severe Repetitive Loss Properties ....................................................... 107
• Assessing Vulnerability: Identifying Structures ............................................................................ 107
• Assessing Vulnerability: Community Capabilities ........................................................................ 115
• Assessing Vulnerability: Estimating Potential Losses ................................................................. 119
• Assessing Vulnerability: Analyzing Development Trends ............................................................ 122
• Unique or Varied Risk Assessment ............................................................................................. 125
CHAPTER 5 – MITIGATION STRATEGY ................................................................................................ 136
• Mitigation Overview ...................................................................................................................... 136
• Implementation of Mitigation Actions ........................................................................................... 172
CHAPTER 6 – PLAN MAINTENANCE .................................................................................................... 173
• Monitoring, Evaluating, and Updating the Plan ............................................................................ 173
• Continued Public Participation/Involvement ................................................................................. 173
• Annual Reporting Procedures ...................................................................................................... 174
• Five-Year PDM Review ................................................................................................................ 174
• Plan Amendments ........................................................................................................................ 174
• Incorporation into Existing Planning Mechanisms ....................................................................... 175
• Potential Funding Sources ........................................................................................................... 175
• Federal ......................................................................................................................................... 175
• Local ............................................................................................................................................. 182
• Non-Governmental ....................................................................................................................... 182
LIST OF TABLES
• 1.1: Brookings County Municipalities ............................................................................................ 4
• 1.2: Brookings County Townships ................................................................................................. 5
• 2.1: Plan Participants ................................................................................................................... 11
• 2.2: Dates of Plan Adoption by Jurisdiction ................................................................................. 12
• 2.3: Record of Participation ......................................................................................................... 14
• 3.1: PDM Planning Team Members ............................................................................................ 17
• 3.2: Opportunities for Public Comment ....................................................................................... 20
• 3.3: Record of Review .................................................................................................................. 26
• 4.1: Hazard Occurrences 2014-2023 ........................................................................................... 33
• 4.2: Hazards Categorized by Likelihood of Occurrence within Brookings County ...................... 35
• 4.3: Presidential Disaster Declarations in South Dakota including Brookings County ............... 36
• 4.4: Dam Locations in Brookings County ..................................................................................... 38
• 4.5: Brookings County Ten Year Drought History ........................................................................ 40
• 4.6: Brookings County History of Extreme Heat .......................................................................... 43
• 4.7: Brookings County Ten Year Flood History ........................................................................... 50
• 4.8: Brookings County Ten Year Tornado History ...................................................................... 56
• 4.9: Brookings County Ten Year History for Thunderstorms/High Winds ................................... 57
• 4.10: Brookings County Ten Year Hail History ............................................................................. 63
• 4.11: Brookings County Ten Year History of Snow and Ice Storms .............................................. 66
• 4.12: Brookings County Ten Year Extreme Cold History ............................................................... 71
• 4.13: Brookings County Structural, Vehicle, and Outdoor (Wildfire) Dept. Resources .................. 75
• 4.14: Overall Summary of Vulnerability by Jurisdiction .................................................................. 78
iii
• 4.15: Brookings County Ten Year Flooding History ....................................................................... 80
• 4.16: Risks to Current and Future Assets by Community – Extreme Heat .................................... 91
• 4.17: Risks to Current and Future Assets by Community – Tornado ............................................ 92
• 4.18: Risks to Current and Future Assets by Community – Thunderstorm ................................... 93
• 4.19: Risks to Current and Future Assets by Community – Winter Storms ................................... 94
• 4.20: Risks to Current and Future Assets by Community – Flooding ............................................ 95
• 4.21: Risks to Current and Future Assets by Community – Extreme Heat .................................... 96
• 4.22: Risks to Current and Future Assets by Community – Tornado ............................................ 97
• 4.23: Risks to Current and Future Assets by Community – Thunderstorm ................................... 99
• 4.24: Risks to Current and Future Assets by Community – Winter Storms ................................. 101
• 4.25: Risks to Current and Future Assets by Community – Flooding .......................................... 103
• 4.26: Communities Participating in the National Flood Program ................................................. 105
• 4.27: Brookings County National Flood Insurance Program Statistics ........................................ 106
• 4.28: Critical Structures in Brookings County .............................................................................. 108
• 4.29: Administrative and Technical Capabilities .......................................................................... 116
• 4.30: Capabilities of Growth Guidance Instruments .................................................................... 117
• 4.31: Brookings County (Rural Area) Estimated Potential Dollar Losses
to Vulnerable Structures ..................................................................................................... 119
• 4.32: Aurora Estimated Potential Dollar Losses to Vulnerable Structures .................................. 120
• 4.33: Brookings Estimated Potential Dollar Losses to Vulnerable Structures ............................. 120
• 4.34: Bruce Estimated Potential Dollar Losses to Vulnerable Structures .................................... 120
• 4.35: Bushnell Estimated Potential Dollar Losses to Vulnerable Structures ............................... 120
• 4.36: Elkton Estimated Potential Dollar Losses to Vulnerable Structures ................................... 121
• 4.37: Sinai Estimated Potential Dollar Losses to Vulnerable Structures ..................................... 121
• 4.38: Volga Estimated Potential Dollar Losses to Vulnerable Structures .................................... 121
• 4.39: White Estimated Potential Dollar Losses to Vulnerable Structures .................................... 121
• 4.40: Brookings County (Total) Estimated Potential Dollar Losses to Vulnerable Structures ..... 122
• 4.41: Brookings County (Unincorporated Area) Potential Floodplain
• Development – By Land Use Type ..................................................................................... 123
• 4.42: Aurora Potential Floodplain Development – By Land Use Type ........................................ 123
• 4.43: Brookings Potential Floodplain Development – By Land Use Type Structures .................. 124
• 4.44: Elkton Potential Floodplain Development – By Land Use Type ......................................... 124
• 4.45: Volga Potential Floodplain Development – By Land Use Type .......................................... 124
• 4.46: White Potential Floodplain Development – By Land Use Type .......................................... 125
• 5.1: Actions/Projects to Reduce Flood Risk through Policy Implementation ............................. 139
• 5.2: Actions/Projects to Change the Characteristics or Impacts of Flood Hazards ................... 140
• 5.3: Actions/Projects to Reduce Loss Potential of Infrastructure to Flood Hazards .................. 141
• 5.4: Actions/Projects to Reduce Severe Weather Risk through Policy Implementation ............ 142
• 5.5: Actions/Projects to Change the Characteristics or Impacts of Severe Weather Hazards .. 142
• 5.6: Actions/Projects to Reduce Loss Potential of Infrastructure to Severe Weather
Hazards ................................................................................................................................ 143
• 5.7: Actions/Projects to Reduce Fire and Drought Risk Through Policy Implementation .......... 145
• 5.8: Actions/Projects to Reduce Loss Potential of Infrastructure to Fire and Drought
Hazards ............................................................................................................................... 145
• 5.9: Actions/Projects to Change the Characteristics or Impacts of Fire and Drought
Hazards ............................................................................................................................... 146
• 5.10: Technological Activities ....................................................................................................... 146
• 5.11: Planning Activities ............................................................................................................... 147
• 5.12: Administration/Coordination Activities ................................................................................. 148
• 5.13: Proposed Mitigation Activities ............................................................................................. 152
iv
LIST OF FIGURES
• 1.1: Political Map ........................................................................................................................... 6
• 4.1: South Dakota High and Significant Hazard Dams ................................................................ 38
• 4.2: South Dakota Landslide Incidence and Susceptibility .......................................................... 46
• 4.3: State of South Dakota Subsidence Risk ............................................................................... 47
• 4.4: Brookings County 100 Year Flood ........................................................................................ 49
• 4.5: Wind Zones in the United States .......................................................................................... 54
• 4.6: Enhanced Fujita Tornado Damage Scale ............................................................................. 55
• 4.7: SD Wildland-Urban Interface Map ........................................................................................ 76
• 4.8: Damaging Tornado Probability by County ............................................................................ 85
• 4.9: South Dakota Communities at Risk from Wildfire ................................................................. 88
• 4.10: Brookings County (Rural Areas) Hazard Vulnerability Map ................................................ 126
• 4.11: Brookings County Hazard Vulnerability Map ...................................................................... 127
• 4.12: Aurora Hazard Vulnerability Map ........................................................................................ 128
• 4.13: Brookings Hazard Vulnerability Map ................................................................................... 129
• 4.14: Bruce Hazard Vulnerability Map ......................................................................................... 130
• 4.15: Bushnell Hazard Vulnerability Map ..................................................................................... 131
• 4.16: Elkton Hazard Vulnerability Map ......................................................................................... 132
• 4.17: Sinai Hazard Vulnerability Map ........................................................................................... 133
• 4.18: Volga Hazard Vulnerability Map .......................................................................................... 134
• 4.19: White Hazard Vulnerability Map .......................................................................................... 135
• 5.1: Sample Newspaper Article by Emergency Manager ......................................................... 137
• 5.1a: Brookings County Potential Mitigation Map ..................................................................... 163
• 5.2: Aurora Potential Mitigation Project Map ............................................................................ 164
• 5.3: Brookings Potential Mitigation Project Map ....................................................................... 165
• 5.4: Bruce Potential Mitigation Project Map .............................................................................. 166
• 5.5: Bushnell Potential Mitigation Project Map .......................................................................... 167
• 5.6: Elkton Potential Mitigation Project Map ............................................................................. 168
• 5.7: Sinai Potential Mitigation Project Map ................................................................................ 169
• 5.8: Volga Potential Mitigation Project Map .............................................................................. 170
• 5.9: White Potential Mitigation Project Map ............................................................................... 171
APPENDIX ................................................................................................................................................ 183
• Appendix A - Resolution of Adoption by Jurisdiction ................................................................... 184
• Appendix B - PDM Planning Team Agendas, Sign-in Sheets ..................................................... 194
• Appendix C - Community Meeting and Sign in Sheets Jurisdiction ............................................. 207
• Appendix D - Hazard Identification/Vulnerability Worksheets...................................................... 262
• Appendix E - Township Vulnerable and Potential Mitigation Project Site Maps .......................... 282
• Appendix F - Online Survey Information ...................................................................................... 309
• Appendix G - Comprehensive Land Use Maps………………………………………………………3 19
• Appendix H - Review of 2014 PDM Mitigation Project Implementation ....................................... 326
• Appendix I - Worksheet 10: Plan Update Evaluation ................................................................... 327
• Appendix J - References .............................................................................................................. 330
v
1
CHAPTER 1 ꟾ
INTRODUCTION
INTRODUCTION
Brookings County (County) is vulnerable to natural hazards that have the possibility of causing
serious threat to the health, welfare, and security of our citizens. The cost of response and
recovery, in terms of potential loss of life or loss of property, from potential disasters can be
lessened when attention is turned to mitigating their impacts and effects before, they occur or re-
occur.
The Brookings County Board of Commissioners, in conjunction with the South Dakota Office of
Emergency Management (SD OEM) and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA),
has agreed to update this plan to assist all participating entities in the county in their mission to
mitigate losses from natural hazards throughout Brookings County, South Dakota, and the
communities located therein.
This plan is an update of the Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan (PDM) that was developed by the
County in 2007, updated in 2014, and once again in 2019. The document will serve as a strategic
planning tool for use by the county and its communities in its efforts to mitigate future disaster
events. The plan identifies and analyzes natural disasters that may occur in the County in order
to understand the county’s vulnerabilities and propose mitigation strategies that minimize future
damage caused by those hazards. This knowledge will help identify solutions that can significantly
reduce threat to life and property. The plan is based on the premise that hazard mitigation works.
With increased attention to mitigating natural hazards, communities can greatly reduce threats to
existing citizens and avoid creating new problems in the future. In addition, many mitigation
actions can be implemented at minimal cost.
To date, a total of 4,079 Major Presidential Disaster Declarations (all natural hazards) have been
proclaimed in the United States, of those declarations, 87 occurred fully or partially within the
state of South Dakota. Brookings County is no stranger to natural and man-made disasters. All
or portions of Brookings County have been included in 19 Presidential Disaster Declarations, four
of which occurred in the last 10 years. In order to prevent and reduce the cost that is incurred by
businesses, citizens, and property owners from these disasters, the Brookings County Pre-
Disaster Mitigation Plan was developed. This plan identifies hazards that occur throughout
Brookings County and mitigation projects that will aid in preventing and reducing the effects of
those disasters on the property and lives within. Special consideration has been given to critical
infrastructure throughout the county.
This is not an emergency response or emergency management plan. Certainly, the plan can be
used to identify weaknesses and refocus emergency response planning. Enhanced emergency
response planning is an important mitigation strategy. However, the focus of this plan is to support
better decision making directed toward avoidance of future risks and the implementation of
activities or projects that will eliminate or reduce the risk for those that may already have exposure
to a natural hazard threat.
2
AUTHORITY FOR PRE-DISASTER MITIGATION PLAN
Each year, disasters take the lives of hundreds of people and injure thousands more in the United
States. Across the nation, billions of taxpayer-funded dollars are spent annually to help
communities, organizations, businesses, and individuals recover from natural disasters. However,
these funds can never fully cover the true cost of the disasters.
In October of 2000, the Disaster Mitigation Act (DMA2K) was signed to amend the 1988 Robert
T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act. This amendment created the
framework for state, local, tribal, and other territorial governments to engage in hazard mitigation
planning to receive certain types of non-emergency disaster assistance. Section 322 (a-d)
requires that local governments, as a condition of receiving federal disaster mitigation funds, have
a multi-hazard mitigation plan in place that:
1. Identifies hazards and their associated risks and vulnerabilities;
2. Develops and prioritizes mitigation projects; and
3. Encourages cooperation and communication between all levels of government and the public.
The objective of this plan is to meet the hazard mitigation planning needs for the County and
participating entities. Consistent with the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s guidelines,
this plan will review all possible activities related to disasters to reach efficient solutions, link
hazard management policies to specific activities, educate and facilitate communication with the
public, build public and political support for mitigation activities, and develop implementation and
planning requirements for future hazard mitigation projects.
PURPOSE
The County PDM is a planning tool to be used by the County, as well as other local, state, and
federal units of government, in their efforts to fulfill federal, state, and local hazard mitigation
planning responsibilities; to promote pre- and post-disaster mitigation measures, short/long range
strategies that minimize suffering, loss of life, and damage to property resulting from hazardous
or potentially hazardous conditions to which citizens and institutions within the county are
exposed; and to eliminate or minimize conditions which would have an undesirable impact on our
citizens, economy, environment, or the well-being of the County. This plan will aid city, township,
and county agencies and officials in enhancing public awareness of the threat hazards have on
property and life, and what can be done to help prevent or reduce the vulnerability and risk of
each County jurisdiction.
USE OF PLAN
The plan will be used to help the county, communities, and their elected and appointed officials:
• Plan, design and implement programs and projects that will help reduce their community’s
vulnerability to natural hazards.
• Facilitate inter-jurisdictional coordination and collaboration related to natural hazard mitigation
planning and implementation.
• Develop or provide guidance for local emergency response planning.
• Be compliant with the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000.
3
SCOPE OF PLAN
• Provide opportunities for public input and encourage participation and involvement regarding
the mitigation plan.
• Identify hazards and vulnerabilities within the county and local jurisdictions.
• Combine risk assessments with public and emergency management ideas.
• Develop goals based on the identified hazards and risks.
• Review existing mitigation measures for gaps and establish projects to sufficiently fulfill the
goals.
• Prioritize and evaluate each strategy/objective.
• Review other plans for cohesion and incorporation with the PDM.
• Establish guidelines for updating and monitoring the plan.
• Present the plan to the Brookings County Commissioners and the participating communities
within the county for adoption.
WHAT IS HAZARD MITIGATION?
Hazard mitigation is defined as any cost-effective action(s) that has the effect of reducing, limiting,
or preventing vulnerability of people, property, and the environment to potentially damaging,
harmful, or costly hazards. Hazard mitigation measures, which can be used to eliminate or
minimize the risk to life and property, fall into three categories. First are those that keep the hazard
away from people, property, and structures. Second are those that keep people, property, and
structures away from the hazard. Third are those that do not address the hazard at all but rather
reduce the impact of the hazard on the victims such as insurance. This mitigation plan has
strategies that fall into all three categories.
Hazard mitigation measures must be practical, cost effective, environmental, and politically
acceptable. Actions taken to limit the vulnerability of society to hazards must not in themselves
be more costly than the value of anticipated damages.
The primary focus of hazard mitigation actions must be at the point at which capital investment
decisions are made and based on vulnerability. Capital investments, whether for homes, roads,
public utilities, pipelines, power plants, or public works, determine to a large extent the nature and
degree of hazard vulnerability of a community. Once a capital facility is in place, very few
opportunities will present themselves over the useful life of the facility to correct any errors in
location or construction with respect to hazard vulnerability. It is for these reasons that zoning and
other ordinances, which manage development in high vulnerability areas, and building codes,
which ensure that new buildings are built to withstand the damaging forces of hazards, are often
the most useful mitigation approaches a jurisdiction can implement.
Previously, mitigation measures have been the most neglected programs within emergency
management. Since the priority to implement mitigation activities is generally low in comparison
to the perceived threat, some important mitigation measures take time to implement. Mitigation
success can be achieved, however, if accurate information is portrayed through complete hazard
identification and impact studies, followed by effective mitigation management. Hazard mitigation
is the key to eliminating long-term risk to people and property in South Dakota from hazards and
their effects. Preparedness for all hazards includes response and recovery plans, training,
development, management of resources, and mitigation of each jurisdictional hazard.
4
This plan evaluates the impacts, risks, and vulnerabilities of natural hazards within the
jurisdictional area of the entire county. The plan supports, provides assistance, identifies, and
describes mitigation projects for each of the local jurisdictions who participated in the plan update.
The suggested actions and plan implementation for local governments could reduce the impact
of future natural hazard occurrences. Lessening the impact of natural hazards can prevent such
occurrences from becoming disastrous but will only be accomplished through coordinated
partnership with emergency managers, political entities, public works officials, community
planners, and other dedicated individuals working to implement this program.
BROOKINGS COUNTY PROFILE
Population
Brookings County is on the eastern edge of the South Dakota border. It shares a north border
with Hamlin and Deuel Counties, Lincoln County in Minnesota to the east, Moody and Lake
Counties to the south, and Kingsbury County to the west. The county has a geographic area of
792 square miles and its Census 2020 population was 34,375, which averages 43.4 persons per
square mile, which is a small increase since 2010. According to 2020 Census data, 14.0% of the
population is older than age 65. Education levels of persons twenty-five and older include 96.2%
high school graduates and 42.4% with college degrees. The number of high school and college
graduates has remained steady since 2010, which is a positive trend for the County.
The county seat is Brookings, which is situated at the intersection of Interstate 29 and US Highway
14. Table 1.1 shows the population and number of housing units located in each of the county’s
municipalities. It should be noted that a small portion of the City of Arlington is located within
Brookings County, but only two housing units (8 individuals) and no municipally provided
infrastructure is located in Brookings County. Most of the City of Arlington is located in Kingsbury
County, and is therefore not included in this plan. Table 1.2 lists the twenty-three County
Townships by population. The County has continued to experience population growth since 1960.
This is due primarily to the growth of the City of Brookings, which serves as the governmental,
employment and trade center for the county and region. South Dakota State University in
Brookings has also seen an increase in enrollment.
Table 1.1: Brookings County Municipalities
Name 2020
Population
2010
Population Location Elevation Housing
Units
Aurora 1,047 532 44 17'03'' N
96 41'08'' W 1,624’ 474
Brookings 23,377 22,056 44 18'41'' N
96 47'54'' W 1,621’ 10,031
Bruce 210 204 44 26'17'' N
96 53'23'' W 1,627’ 117
Bushnell 71 65 44 19'43'' N
96 38'33'' W 1,690’ 33
Elkton 755 736 44 14'04'' N
96 28'48'' W 1,752’ 328
Sinai 99 120 44 14'40'' N
97 02'27'' W 1,781’ 57
5
Volga 2,113 1,768 44 19'24'' N
96 55'22'' W 1,634’ 938
White 537 485 44 26'00'' N
96 38'45'' W 1,798’ 252
Unincorporated Areas 6,703 5,991 2,871
Brookings County 34,375 31,965 44 18'30'' N
96 49'01'' W 1,611’ 14,849
Source : 2020 & 2010 Census, www.Lat-Long.com, www.usbeacon.com
Table 1.2: Brookings County Townships
Township Population
Afton 212
Alton 265
Argo 227
Aurora 257
Bangor 181
Brookings 409
Elkton 102
Eureka 206
Lake Hendricks 239
Lake Sinai 169
Laketon 163
Medary 1,421
Oak Lake 84
Oakwood 202
Oslo 212
Parnell 179
Preston 136
Richland 134
Sherman 268
Sterling 414
Trenton 188
Volga 363
Winsor 126
SOURCE : 2020 Census
6
Figure 1.1 Political Map
7
Social and Economic Description
Brookings County according to the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and the University of
Wisconsin Population Health Institute ranks among the healthiest counties in South Dakota.
The County’s economy is dependent upon its agricultural and manufacturing sectors, but the
largest industry sector is made up of non-agricultural employment such as, education, health care,
and social service industries. Some notable employers in the City of Brookings are South Dakota
State University, Larson’s Manufacturing, Daktronics, Solventum, and Bel Brands.
The City of Brookings is by far the largest community in Brookings County and serves as the
county seat and governmental, employment, and retail hub for the county and greater region. The
remaining rural communities in the County serve as bedroom communities to Brookings and
provide “small town” atmosphere to those residents. A large majority of the residents within these
community’s commute to Brookings or other employment centers. Most of those communities
have limited retail and service sectors that provide basic needs to their residents.
Fishing and hunting, events held at the college, camping and lake use recreation, and numerous
nature parks in Brookings create a base for tourism opportunities.
Overall unemployment rates in South Dakota have remained under 3.5% over the last 5 years
with the exception of an 8.9% spike that resulted from the start of the Coronavirus pandemic in
April of 2020. Since that date, unemployment rates across the state quickly declined back to
around 3.5% by fall of 2020. The state unemployment rates continued to steadily decrease until
plateauing and remaining at 2% (±0.1%) since. According to the US Bureau of Labor Statistics,
Brookings County followed a similar pattern with unemployment hovering around 2.5% then
spiking to 7.3% in April of 2020 but fell back to about 3.0% by fall of that year. The Brookings
County unemployment rate experienced an uneven but consistent decrease with an average
around 2.0% through 2022 to present day. According to the 2022 American Community Survey,
12.5% of the population of Brookings County is at or falls below the poverty line.
Brookings County issues approximately 145 building permits for all new buildings, including
commercial and housing development. Very little development has occurred in the last five years
that would alter the PDM plan from its planned update.
Physical Description and Climate
Brookings County is located in the central eastern South Dakota bordering the state of Minnesota
and the counties of Deuel, Hamlin, Kingsbury, Lake, and Moody. Brookings County is located
within the region generally classified as mild and dry continental or Steppe with four well-defined
seasons. The weather can be quite changeable with large day to day temperature variations,
particularly from the fall to the spring. Days with severe winter cold and summer heat are typical.
Normally, the temperature is moderate until the beginning of July, after which short, hot periods
are experienced until the end of August. The freeze-free period is the number of days between
the average last occurrence of freezing temperatures in the spring and the average first
occurrence of 32 degrees F or lower in the fall. The length of the freeze-free period approximates
the length of the growing season which ranges from 130 days or more between May 21 st and
September 21st. Topography and local weather conditions can produce subfreezing temperatures
8
at the ground surface while the air temperature a few feet above the ground remains above 32
degrees F.
Annual average precipitation is 24.31 inches, with over 69% of the precipitation falling from May
through September. Precipitation can vary significantly from year to year, and location to location
within a given year. The heaviest most intense precipitation often occurs with localized downpours
associated with thunderstorms in June through August. Significant flash flooding can result from
these downpours with over 3 inches of precipitation reported in a few events. Widespread heavy
precipitation events of 1 to 2 inches can occur every few years and is most common from April
through June and September through early November.
Average winter snowfall ranges up to 33 inches. The heaviest snowstorms often occur from late
March through May or mid-October to mid-December. These storms can produce more than 12
inches of snow and are often made more severe as temperatures are warmer, and therefore the
snow is heavier and more difficult to travel in and remove. These storms are often accompanied
by high winds resulting in blizzard conditions. In spring these storms can coincide with the calving
season resulting in livestock loss. Mid-winter snowstorms in general produce less than 6 inches
of snow, but heavier amounts up to 19 inches or more have occurred. Despite the generally lighter
amounts and drier snow, high winds can result in blizzard conditions. Even without falling snow,
in the colder conditions of mid-winter, high winds can pick up loose snow, resulting in local ground
blizzards.
Above normal snowfall can lead to exceptionally deep snowpack levels. Unusually cold late spring
temperatures will allow the deep snowpack to persist until early April. Unpredictable weather
patterns can shift to abnormally warm conditions with temperatures from the 40s to the 70s. These
abnormally high temperatures can cause rapid snowmelt which may result in overland flooding in
the region. With ever changing weather patterns and associated climate change related severe
storms, it is important to understand a new normal higher level of precipitation is expected across
the county and state.
Severe thunderstorms are common from June into early September. Typically, the greatest
hazards associated with these thunderstorms are very high winds and large hail. Damage to
structures and crops occurs every summer from these storms. Tornadoes have been reported but
are relatively rare.
An important and unavoidable element of the climate in Brookings County is the often-windy
conditions. Average wind speeds in Brookings County are 20.18 mph. The average and peak
sustained winds tend to be stronger over higher more exposed terrain. The highest sustained
winds tend to occur in the spring and fall, with sustained winds over 40 mph or greater occurring
most years. Brookings County reached straight line wind speeds of 80 mph more than once every
ten years.
For the purposes of this hazard assessment and mitigation plan, weather is of interest when it
threatens property or life and thus becomes a hazard. The National Weather Service (NWS)
provides short-term forecasts of hazardous weather to the public. In addition to issuing tornado
and severe thunderstorm watches, the NWS also produces regularly scheduled severe weather
outlooks and updates on various forms of hazardous weather including heavy rain and winter
storms.
9
Hydrology
The majority of Brookings County is located within the Big Sioux River watershed. This
watershed conveys water south to the Missouri River then on to the Mississippi River and the
Gulf of Mexico. Additionally, the entirety of the County is located on the Coteau des Prairie. The
Coteau is a plateau area from the ND/SD border that traverses southeasterly toward the State
of Iowa. Drainage patterns on the Coteau de Prairie are generally characterized by poorly
defined drainage channels and slow absorbing soils.
The principal surface water resources in Brookings County are the Big Sioux River, North Deer
Creek, and Six Mile Creek, numerous wetlands, and natural lakes in the County.
Transportation and Utility Infrastructure
The County’s road network is composed of a total of 1,323 miles including a mixture of state and
federal highways, railroads, county roads, municipal road systems, township roads, and private
roads. The rural road system performs two basic functions: (1) providing general mobility for the
residents in rural areas, and (2) accommodating the movements of agricultural products to
market. The rural transportation system was not designed to accommodate large volumes of
traffic on a daily basis.
The major transportation infrastructure in the county includes roads, railroads, and an airfield.
South Dakota Highways 14 is the main east-west route through the county with Highway 81 and
Interstate 29 being the main north-south routes. Total State highway and interstate mileage in is
approximately 273 miles. The bulk of the transportation infrastructure includes county highways
and township roads that are used for rural transportation involving residents, agricultural products,
and other commodities.
The County Highway Department maintains 394-miles. That road system includes 133 gravel
road miles (976 miles in entire County), 261 hard surface rural road miles, and 220 bridges. In
Brookings County, the transportation choices are limited to mostly private vehicles traveling over
state and federal highways and county roads. The Brookings Area Transit Authority (BATA)
provides bus service to the county, as well as two private taxicab/pick-up companies.
The Rapid City, Pierre, and Eastern Railroad runs east and west through the entire County,
providing local companies the ability, in conjunction with the interstate, to ship bulk loads of
agricultural and manufactured commodities to national and international destinations. Brookings
County has one small airport located in the City of Brookings. The airport is used primarily by local
pilots, crop sprayers, and students in South Dakota State University’s aviation program.
Brookings-Deuel and Kingbrook Rural Water Systems serve the majority of rural residences in
the County, as well as residents in the communities of Bushnell, White, Elkton, Bruce, and Sinai.
The communities of Castlewood, Estelline and Lake Norden operate municipal water systems.
The cities of Brookings and Volga have their own water systems. The City of Aurora uses water
from the Brookings Municipal System, which is aquifer fed.
Regarding wastewater disposal, all of the municipalities, with the exception of Bushnell, within the
County have municipal wastewater collection and treatment systems. Rural residences and those
in Bushnell rely on individual septic tanks and drain-fields. The density of septic systems and their
10
potential to cause water contamination is an environmental concern. As the County’s population
continues to grow, new developments need to be controlled through planning and development
guidelines.
Electric power is provided to rural county residents and people in the communities by the Sioux
Valley Energy, H-D Electric, and Otter Tail Power. Brookings, Volga, White and Aurora operate
their own municipal power system.
The primary telephone companies serving the County’s rural population are Interstate Telephone
Company (ITC) and Century Link. Cellular phone service is available in most parts of the county,
but there are still places in the county where signals are weak.
Medical and Emergency Services
Brookings Health System operates four modern Type III ambulances and one Type II Special
Operations Vehicle in Brookings County. They provide emergency 911 Advanced Life Support
(ALS) services for the City of Brookings, much of the county of Brookings and the communities of
Aurora, Bruce, Bushnell, Sinai, and Volga. Brookings Ambulance also assists area ambulance
services from Arlington, Clear Lake, Elkton, Estelline, White and Lake Preston when requested.
Avera Medical Group and Brookings Health System serve the needs of Brookings and
surrounding communities, including Arlington, Badger, Hetland, Lake Preston, Sinai, Nunda,
Rutland, Estelline, Dempster, Bruce, Toronto, Astoria, White, Bushnell, Aurora, Elkton, Ward, and
Volga. The health system houses a 49-bed hospital with three operating rooms; a 79-bed nursing
home, Neighborhoods at Brookview; congregate living apartments for seniors, Brookhaven
Estates; Arlington Medical Center; Volga Medical Clinic, White Medical Clinic, and Yorkshire Eye
Clinic.
The City of Brookings is also home to the Sanford Health Clinic which has been providing medical
care for the Brookings community since 2005.
The Brookings Emergency 9-1-1 Center continues to serve the Brookings Police Department and
other area agencies as well. Those agencies include:
• Brookings Ambulance Service
• Brookings County Emergency Management
• Brookings County Sheriff’s Office
• Brookings Fire Department
• Four county ambulance services
• Nine county fire departments
• South Dakota Highway Patrol (Brookings Squad)
11
CHAPTER 2 ꟾ
PREREQUISITES
ADOPTION BY LOCAL GOVERNING BODY
The local governing body that oversees the update of the Brookings County Pre-Disaster
Mitigation Plan is the Brookings County Board of Commissioners. The Commission has tasked
the Brookings County Emergency Management Office with the responsibility of ensuring that the
PDM is compliant with Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Guidelines and
corresponding regulations.
MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL PLAN PARTICIPATION
Requirement 201.6(c)(1). Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool – A1(b).
This plan is a multi-jurisdictional plan which serves the entire geographical area located within the
boundaries of Brookings County, South Dakota. The County has eight incorporated municipalities.
All of the incorporated municipalities located entirely within the County elected to participate in
the planning process and the update of the existing PDM. Emergency Management Directors of
the adjoining counties were also included on the December 2023 invitation correspondence to
participate in the Brookings County PDM Plan update process. Others invited to participate in the
County PDM plan update process include local law enforcement providers, emergency services
providers, area utility providers, area health providers, and county school superintendents. Table
2.1 shows the participating local jurisdictions including the following municipalities:
Table 2.1: Plan Participants
Continuing Participants Do Not Participate*
Aurora All 23 Townships
Brookings
Bruce
Bushnell
Elkton
Sinai
Volga
White
Brookings County
* Non-participating communities are still eligible for hazard mitigation funding, however, may not
directly apply for assistance. Instead, any assistance would need to be applied for on behalf of
the non-participating communities by Brookings County. While none of the townships directly
participated in the PDM update, they were represented by their local Township Officials.
12
Unincorporated villages and townships are not direct participating entities in the plan because
these entities are too small, both in population and in resources, to be capable of handling disaster
needs on their own. The villages are governed by the township boards and are served by the
County whenever necessary. The townships were invited to participate in the PDM update. Each
township was asked to identify hazard risks, vulnerability, critical infrastructure and potential
projects on maps they received via mail and return the information to the First District Association
of Local Governments (First District) for incorporation in the plan. All twenty-three townships
responded to the request.
Some of the rural utility providers attended planning meetings and provided system information
for the updated plan.
The Brookings County Commission and each of the listed participating municipalities will pass
resolutions to adopt the updated PDM. The dates of adoption by resolution for each of the
jurisdictions are summarized in Table 2.2.
Table 2.2: Dates of Plan Adoption by Jurisdiction
Jurisdiction Date of Adoption
City of Aurora
City of Brookings
Bruce
Bushnell
City of Elkton
Sinai
City of Volga
City of White
Brookings County Commission
All the participating jurisdictions were involved in the plan update. Representatives from each
municipality and the County, adjacent county Emergency Managers, law enforcement providers,
rural utilities providers, emergency services, townships, school district superintendents, and local
health providers were invited to the planning meetings. Those in attendance provided valuable
perspective on the changes required for the plan. All representatives attending took part in the
risk assessment exercise at the January 23, 2024 kickoff meeting.
Representatives in attendance took information from the PDM planning meetings back to their
respective boards/agencies and presented the progress of the plan update. First District staff also
presented progress reports when meeting individually with communities. The local jurisdictions
reviewed and commented (via email or telephone) on updated information placed in the 2024
plan. The local jurisdictions have also presented the Resolution of Adoption to their councils and
will pass the resolutions upon FEMA approval of the PDM update. The Resolutions are included
in Appendix A.
13
Table 2.3 was derived to help define “participation” for the local jurisdictions who intend on
adopting the plan. To be considered “participating”, each jurisdiction must have at least seven of
the ten participation requirements fulfilled.
14
Table 2.3: Record of Participation
Nature of Participation Aurora Brookings Bruce Bushnell Elkton Sinai Volga White
Attended Meetings or work sessions (a
minimum of 1 meeting will be considered
satisfactory).
◼
◼
◼
◼
◼
◼
◼
◼
Submitted inventory and summary of
reports and plans relevant to hazard
mitigation.
◼ ◼ ◼ ◼ ◼ ◼ ◼ ◼
Submitted the Risk Assessment
Worksheet. ◼ ◼ ◼ ◼ ◼ ◼ ◼ ◼
Submitted description of what is at risk
(including critical facilities and
infrastructure at risk from specific Hazards
worksheet).
◼ ◼ ◼ ◼ ◼ ◼ ◼ ◼
Submitted a description or map of land-use
patterns (current and proposed/expected). ◼ ◼ ◼ ◼ ◼ ◼ ◼ ◼
Developed goals for the community. ◼ ◼ ◼ ◼ ◼ ◼ ◼ ◼
Developed mitigation actions with an
analysis of why those actions were
selected.
◼ ◼ ◼ ◼ ◼ ◼ ◼ ◼
Prioritized actions emphasizing relative
cost-effectiveness. ◼ ◼ ◼ ◼ ◼ ◼ ◼ ◼
Reviewed and commented on the draft
plan. ◼ ◼ ◼ ◼ ◼ ◼ ◼ ◼
Hosted opportunities for public involvement
(allowed time for public comment at a
minimum of 1 city council meetings after
giving a status report on the progress of
the PDM update).
◼ ◼ ◼ ◼ ◼ ◼ ◼ ◼
◼ Requirement Met
15
CHAPTER 3 ꟾ
PLANNING PROCESS
BACKGROUND
The effort that led to the development of this plan is part of the larger, integrated approach to
hazard mitigation planning in South Dakota that is led by the South Dakota Office of Emergency
Management. Production of the plan was the ultimate responsibility of the Brookings County
Emergency Management Director, who served as the county’s point of contact for all activities
associated with this plan. Input was received from the PDM Planning Team that was put together
by the Emergency Management Director. All invited Planning Team members are listed below in
Table 3.1.
The plan itself was written by an outside contractor, First District Association of Local
Governments (First District) of Watertown, South Dakota, one of the state’s six regional planning
entities. The office has an extensive amount of experience in producing various kinds of planning
documents, including municipal ordinances, land use plans, and zoning ordinances, and is an
acknowledged leader in geographic information systems (GIS) technology throughout South
Dakota. First District assisted the County in the development of the county’s original PDM in 2003
in addition to the 2012 and 2018 PDM plan updates. The following staff members of the First
District Association of Local Governments were involved in the 2024 plan update process: Todd
Kays, Director; Luke Muller, Senior Planner; Amy Arnold, Geographic Information System
Analyst; Kelli Henricks, Geographic Information System Specialist, and Greg Maag, Planner. Staff
attended the PDM Planning Team and community meetings as the plan was being developed.
Additional research and information gathering was provided by Payton Carda, an independent
technical writing specialist. Carda complied and formatted all data, information, forms, and maps
into the draft and final PDM plan. Arnold assisted by producing many of the maps for the plan and
Muller directed the floodplain risk analysis (see next section) and completed the county land cover
analysis discussed in the previous chapter. Several other individuals at the state level provided
additional support and information that was quite useful. They include:
• James Poppen, CFM Mitigation Branch Chief/State Hazard Mitigation Officer, SD OEM –
provided guidance and direction as the plan was being developed.
• Blaire Jonas, State of South Dakota NFIP/Mitigation Specialist, SD OEM – provided
guidance and direction as the plan was being developed.
• Kyle Kafka, State of South Dakota Hazard Mitigation Specialist, SD OEM – provided
guidance and direction as the plan was being developed.
• Diana Herrera, FEMA Regional Flood Insurance Liaison – supplied classification and
information regarding the value and number of flood insurance policies and claims.
• Doug Hinkle, State of South Dakota Fire Marshall Office – provided information on fires
events throughout the County.
16
• Whitney Kilts, SD DANR, Water Rights Program – provided information on dams located
in the County.
• Greg Pollreisz, SD Department of Transportation – provided bridges and road mileage
information within the County’s Road system.
• Marc Macy, South Dakota National Flood Insurance Program Coordinator – provided
classification and information regarding value and number of flood insurance policies and
claims, as well as guidance and direction as the plan was being developed.
DOCUMENTATION OF THE PLANNING PROCESS
Requirement 44 CFR § 201.6(c)(1). Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool – A1(a-b)
Requirement 44 CFR § 201.6(b)(2). Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool – A2
Requirement 44 CFR § 201.6(b)(1). Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool – A3
Methodology
Mitigation planning is a process that communities use to identify policies, activities, and tools to
implement mitigation actions. The process that was used to develop this plan consisted of the
following steps:
1. Planning Framework
2. Risk Identification and Assessment
3. Mitigation Strategy
4. Review of Plan
5. Plan Adoption and Maintenance
Planning Framework
The planning framework component identified five objectives:
• Develop Plan to Plan;
• Identify Governmental Entities/Stakeholders;
• Establish PDM Planning Team;
• Define Scope of the Plan;
• Generate public participation component
• Establish schedule for planning process
Prior to receiving funding, public meetings were held at the Brookings County Courthouse to
inform the public about the required PDM update. Funding from FEMA and the South Dakota
Office of Emergency Management to prepare the mitigation plan was received by the county on
9/12/2023. Once funding was secured, the Brookings County Emergency Management Director
and the First District acted as the PDM Planning Team and began to discuss the strategy to be
used to develop the plan. The first task was to identify those entities/stakeholders that would have
direct and indirect interests in the update of the PDM.
17
Prior to the first public informational meeting, the Brookings County Emergency Management
Director wrote letters to all potential stakeholders, community organizations, municipalities,
townships, utility providers, emergency responders, and concerned residents who might wish to
volunteer their time and serve on a committee, and to those who would act as a resource for the
PDM Planning Team. The letters included a brief description of the PDM. The same
correspondence was sent to the Emergency Management Directors in the adjoining counties
inviting them to participate in the Brookings County PDM Plan update process. Public input was
solicited via notices regarding the PDM planning process in local media outlets and via the
Internet.
Each individual who was contacted for the PDM Planning Team had at least one of the following
attributes to contribute to the planning process:
• Significant understanding of how hazards affect the county and participating jurisdictions.
• Substantial knowledge of the county’s infrastructure system.
• Resources at their disposal to assist in the planning effort, such as maps or data on past
hazard events.
Table 3.1 lists all parties that were invited to participate as a PDM Planning Team member and
records their attendance at the planning meetings, all of which were open to the public and held
during the drafting of the plan. Agendas were distributed to the PDM Planning Team prior to each
meeting, and the meeting minutes were shared afterward to keep everyone was informed of the
discussions and decisions that took place.
Table 3.1: PDM Planning Team Members
Invited Meeting Attendance
Last Name First Name Entity Represented Meeting 1 Meeting 2 Meeting 3
Alberts Chris Elkton fire Chief
Anderson Jeff Bruce Mayor
Behlings Cody Bruce Maintenance
Bolzer Pete Brookings City FD
Briseno Paul Brookings City Manager
Doll Nathan Brookings Economic
Development ◼
Drake Michael Brookings City PD ◼
Drietz Thad Brookings City ◼ ◼
Jacobson David Volga Fire Department ◼
Muller Luke First District ◼ ◼ ◼
Frederiksen Mike Elkton School ◼
Gilbertson Jay East Dakota Water
Development District
Gladis Scott White Mayor
Gustad Brian Brookings County Highway
Superintendent
Wire Jerae East River Electric Coop ◼
Haugen Richard Brookings County EM ◼ ◼ ◼
18
Invited Meeting Attendance
Last Name First Name Entity Represented Meeting 1 Meeting 2 Meeting 3
Hill Robert Brookings County EM Director ◼ ◼ ◼
Jaacks Brian Bushnell Mayor
Jandahl Brian Elkton School District
Jarrett Martin Big Sioux Community Water
System
Jencks Randy Kingbrook RWS
Jensen Larry Brookings County Commission ◼ ◼
Jensen Steve Elkton Public Works
Johnson Doyle Sinai Mayor
Jones Josh Aurora Mayor ◼
Kludt Kimberly Deubrook School District
Kneip Collin Aurora Public Works
Kretsch Heidi Brookings Health ◼
Dekkenga Gordon Brookings Health ◼ ◼
Landmark Chad White Public Works
MacFarlane Charles Otter Tail Electric
Marfield Kevin Brookings Sheriff’s Office ◼
McCarthy Tim Sioux Valley Electric
Merkley Jason Brookings Health System
Meyer Steve Brookings Utilities
Nelson Jeff East River Electric
Pottast Mark Aurora Fire Chief ◼
Reed Tim Brookings Economic
Development Corporation
Remund Charles Elkton Mayor
Richter Charlie Brookings City Engineer ◼ ◼ ◼
Russell Jamie Volga Fire Chief
Schulte Michael Volga City Manager ◼
Schultz Summer Brookings School District
Schuster Laura Sioux Valley School District
Schwartz Dylan White Fire Department ◼
Schuurman Arend Elkton Fire
Department/Ambulance ◼
Scott Jeremy Brookings Fire Department ◼
Stanwick Marty Brookings County Sheriff ◼
Steen Kevin Volga Public Works
Stokes Richard Bruce Fire Chief
Stuefen Scott Elkton City ◼
Trygstad Jayme SDSU ◼
Wilts Gene Brookings-Deuel RWS
Wosje Jeremy Sinai Fire Chief
Vukovich Jacob Brookings Police Department ◼ ◼
19
Leadership and guidance in the planning effort and at the planning meetings was provided by the
First District staff and the Brookings County Emergency Management Director. An agenda was
distributed to each PDM Planning Team member prior to each meeting, but free-flowing
discussion was always encouraged. When PDM Planning Team members had questions about
a topic of discussion, either First District staff or the Emergency Management Director would step
in.
Generally speaking, the planning process associated with the plan’s development was relaxed
and informal. No subcommittees were formed, and all decisions were made by mutual consensus
of the PDM Planning Team members - no votes were taken, or motions made. Everyone’s opinion
was respected, nobody was discouraged from voicing their opinion, and no one was made to feel
any less important than anyone else.
As the PDM Planning Team was being assembled, arrangements were made for the first PDM
Planning Team meeting, which took place in the county Brookings Government Center in
Brookings on January 23, 2024. An agenda was distributed to prospective PDM Planning Team
members. Appendix B includes a copy of each meeting notice, agenda, attendance sheet, and
minutes.
Those who attended the January 23rd meeting for the PDM update were asked to volunteer to
serve on the PDM Planning Team. The PDM Planning Team was tasked with fostering
coordination between the various entities involved; reviewing the drafts and providing comments
after First District Association of Local Governments staff initiated changes to the existing plan.
Each of the local jurisdictions had a member of their respective boards/councils represent the
municipalities in the plan.
The representatives from the municipalities/entities were asked to share the progress of the plan
at their own meetings and to ensure that those attending the board/council meetings were aware
that they are invited to make comments on and participate in the process of updating the new
plan. Comments provided by residents at the local town and PDM Planning Team meetings were
collected and incorporated into the plan.
The first meeting of the PDM Planning Team served to introduce the participants to the concept
of mitigation planning, why the plan was being updated, and a tentative timeline of how the
process would proceed in the months to come (scheduling, assigning responsibilities, etc.). The
meeting also included a review of the existing plan, which led to several important decisions. First,
it was the consensus opinion of the PDM Planning Team that a rewrite of the plan would be
needed. The PDM Planning Team decided that:
• The 2019 PDM plan did not include all the necessary requirements found in the Local Hazard
Plan Review Tool (2023). To ensure that the updated plan included everything required by
the plan review tool, the PDM Planning Team and community meetings used the plan review
tool to guide the discussions.
• Updated information and data regarding the risk assessment was needed, more informative
tables and maps would be helpful, and the mitigation strategy needed to be reviewed. FEMA
comments received during the approval of the 2019 PDM plan will also be included in the
updated plan.
20
• The risk identification and assessment as well as the identification of critical infrastructure and
local municipal goals and objectives should be completed by the First District prior to the next
meeting of the PDM Planning Team.
Opportunities for Public Comment
The public was provided several opportunities to comment on the plan during the drafting stages
at the PDM Planning Team meetings, Hamlin County Annual Townships’ meeting, and local
community meetings. There were several work sessions and public hearings held to keep the
public updated and involved in the plan.
Additionally, the County utilized an online survey to provide individuals that were unable to attend
any community meetings, work sessions, or public hearings an option to participate in the PDM
planning process. Information collected through the survey was analyzed and included in the plan
when appropriate. Notices for the survey were published in the county newspapers, placed on
the County website, and posted at most County/community offices to encourage local residents
to provide information and participate in the planning process. Primarily, public input included the
involvement in hazard assessment and mitigation projects. Those who were most involved were
the representatives PDM Planning Team and representatives from the municipalities. The
municipalities put the PDM update on the agenda at their regular meetings and allowed people to
comment at the meetings. Table 3.2 identifies the location and date of each that was provided for
the public to comment and how it was advertised.
Table 3.2: Opportunities for Public Comment
Location of
Opportunity Date
Type of Participation How Was Meeting
Advertised
City Council or
County
Commission
Meeting
PDM
Meeting
City
Staff/Township
Annual
Mtg/Survey
Public
Notice Website
Aurora
08/12/2024 ◼ ◼ ◼
Reserved for
adoption meeting
Brookings
08/22/24 ◼
08/27/2024 ◼ ◼ ◼
Reserved for
adoption meeting
Bruce
02/13/2024 ◼ ◼
Reserved for
adoption meeting
Bushnell
03/04/2024 ◼ ◼
Reserved for
adoption meeting
Elkton
03/06/2024 ◼ ◼ ◼
Reserved for
adoption meeting
21
Location of
Opportunity Date
Type of Participation How Was Meeting
Advertised
City Council or
County
Commission
Meeting
PDM
Meeting
City
Staff/Township
Annual
Mtg/Survey
Public
Notice Website
Sinai
04/01/2024 ◼ ◼
Reserved for
adoption meeting
Volga
01/16/2024 ◼ ◼ ◼
Reserved for
adoption meeting
White
04/01/2024 ◼ ◼
Reserved for
adoption meeting
Brookings
County
PDM Grant
Application
12/01/2022
◼ ◼ ◼
01/23/2024 ◼ ◼ ◼
02/29/2024 ◼ ◼
09/15/2024 ◼ ◼ ◼
December 10,
2024 ◼ ◼ ◼
December 30,
2024 ◼ ◼ ◼
Adoption Date ◼ ◼ ◼
The PDM Planning Team discussed the importance of making the planning process available to
vulnerable and disadvantaged populations within the community. While managers of some
facilities that provide care and assistance to vulnerable populations (populations to protect) were
part of the PDM Planning Team, it was determined that the Emergency Management Director
should notify those vulnerable populations with information on how to participate in the planning
process. The Emergency Management Director provided information to known places of
employment of non-English speakers, and elderly care facilities regarding meetings of the PDM
Planning Team, the PDM Draft, the location of the online survey, and other opportunities manners
to comment.
At the community meetings elected officials discussed vulnerable populations within their
communities. Each community identified where, if at all, elderly individuals; visitors to the
community; individuals with developmental, physical, or sensory disabilities; hospitals; mobile
home parks; temporary shelters; and non-English speakers live or would be best met to solicit
comment. Each community identified those locations (primarily campgrounds, manufactured
home courts, elderly/assisted living, schools, and day cares) within their communities. Board
members and/or staff volunteered to informally inform individuals and managers of such facilities
of the ongoing meetings and opportunities for comment, including directing those individuals to
the online survey.
Aside from the inclusion on the PDM Planning Team of some managers of facilities involved in
the care or other services to vulnerable populations; most attempts to include such vulnerable
populations was passive. It was determined that prior to the next plan update, the list of
22
“populations to protect” should be updated to include places housing or primarily engaged in the
service of elderly individuals; visitors to the community; individuals with developmental, physical,
or sensory disabilities; hospitals; mobile home parks; temporary shelters; and non-English
speakers. A mitigation activity has been added for all communities to include notification regarding
the planning process and opportunities to provide comment directly to the list of populations to
protect at the beginning of the planning process.
Online Survey Results
Brookings County and First District staff conducted an online survey regarding natural hazards
identification and vulnerabilities. The online survey began on January 10, 2024 and ended on
April 1, 2024. Public notices for the survey were posted in several offices of the county courthouse
and at the finance offices of the participating communities. Some of the communities posted the
notice in their local post offices to encourage participation by the public. Samples of posted notices
can be found in Appendix F.
The County received 17 completed responses from citizens/locals, community organizations,
companies, and non-profit organizations. A summary of the responses can be found in Appendix
F. Of all the respondents, 75% percent indicated they had experienced or been impacted by a
natural hazard. Additionally, a slightly higher percentage of respondents (81.3%) were somewhat
concerned about the possibility of natural disasters impacting their community. All remaining
responses were very concerned, showing that potential fallout from a natural disaster are a high
concern.
When asked about the most effective way to receive information, social media and email were
the top two answers, followed by TV and radio. It is evident that smart devices are heavily relied
on in this day and age due to the speed and ease of communication. The County and its local
jurisdictions must provide weather safety messaging on platforms where members of the
population are already spending the majority of their time.
The respondents also reviewed the twelve main natural hazards that affect the County and ranked
them from greatest to least great threat. The top three threats were tornado, severe winter
weather, and thunderstorm (including lighting/hail). This answer is not entirely surprising
considering the nearby community of Castlewood was impacted by a devasting tornado in the
early summer of 2022. The least threatening hazards were considered to be ice jams, dam failure,
and earthquake. This is likely due to their lack of history and unlikelihood of occurring within
Brookings County. Respondents did not identify any other hazards that were not listed on the
survey.
Lastly, respondents were asked to provide potential mitigation projects to address hazards in the
county. Most respondent answers were related to drought, flooding, tornado, high wind, and
severe winter weather. Respondents listed water conservation practices and policies as best
mitigation activities for drought. Participants suggested storm sewer improvements as the best
manner of mitigating flood risks. Mitigation activities for tornadoes, high wind, and severe winter
storms included the recommendation for storm shelters/safe rooms, better emergency alert
systems, and public information regarding the location and procedures for shelters and safe
rooms. Some respondents cited the planting of shelterbelts near population centers as viable
options to mitigate high wind. While most recommendations for winter weather were focused on
recovery and maintenance of streets after a storm.
23
Most of the responses on the completed surveys reflect the same hazard identification,
vulnerabilities, and mitigation activity information from the PDM team, County, and the
communities that is included in the 2024 PDM plan. With regards to the suggested mitigation
activities proposed by respondents, the County and communities have already accomplished
many activities and projects that relate to the local citizens’ concerns. The County and
communities are proposing to undertake mitigation activities that will address additional
respondents’ suggestions. Local citizens are encouraged to work with their local governments to
alleviate any specific matters they have.
24
PDM Plan Process Timeline
September 2023
•Brookings County receives FEMA/SD OEM funding to update county PDM plan
October -December 2023
•Develop PDM Team list
•Invite persons listed for the PDM Team to January 2024 PDM Team meeting
•Invite adjacent county EM Directors to the January 2024 PDM Team meeting
•Public notices published in local newspapers regarding January 2024 PDM Team meeting
January 2024
•Hold PDM Team kickoff meeting
•Establish the PDM Team
•Review the existing 2019 PDM plan
•Develop PDM Template and planning update process
February -October 2024
•Risk Assessment/Project Identification/Prioritization
•Notices published
•First District Staff attend community/township meetings
•Conduct online hazard mitigation survey
•First District research data/information for PDM plan
•First District completes draft PDM plan preparation
November 2024
•Review draft PDM plan
•Notice published draft PDM plan public comment period
•Provide adjacent county EM Directors PDM draft for their review (45 day comment period)
•PDM Team meeting #2 notice published
•Draft plan submitted to SD OEM for pre-review
December 2024
•Hold PDM Team meeting #2
•Review/approve final draft PDM plan
•Plan updated based on any comments received
•PDM Team meeting #3 notice published
•Hold PDM Team meeting #3
•Draft plan submitted to FEMA
December -January 2024
•FEMA plan approval received
January 2025
•Approved PDM plan adopted by County and participating communities
25
Risk Identification & Assessment/Mitigation Strategy/Review of Plan
Requirement 201.6(b)(3). Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool – A4-a.
Requirement 201.6(c)(3). Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool – C1-a-b.
Requirement 201.6(c)(3). Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool – C2-a.
The Risk Identification and Assessment component identified three strategies: Collect and
Organize Data, Develop GIS Data, and Analyze Data. The Mitigation Strategy component
identified five objectives: Review Existing PDM and other plans, Formation of Goals/Objectives,
Compile existing resources to accomplish goals/objectives, Public review of Goals/Objectives,
and PDM Planning Team Review of goals/objectives. The Review of PDM component identified
three strategies: Writing of PDM, Public Review of PDM, and PDM Planning Team Review of
PDM.
Based upon the discussions and information provided at the first meeting, it was determined that
the existing PDM Risk Assessment and Mitigation Strategies needed to be updated. Before the
second meeting, First District Staff updated the Introduction, Pre-requisites, Risk Assessment,
Mitigation Strategy, and Plan Implementation components of the PDM.
Prior to the second PDM Planning Team meeting, First District Staff met with the participating
municipalities and the Brookings County Townships at public noticed meetings to identify hazards
and critical facilities, assess vulnerability, discuss development trends, and develop mitigation
goals. First District also met with each participating jurisdiction to review proposed mitigation
actions, including estimated costs, responsibility and priority. Meeting dates are referenced in
Table 3.2. Staff members from Brookings County, Brookings County Townships, and rural utility
providers were asked to identify hazards and critical facilities, assess vulnerability, discuss
development trends, and develop mitigation goals and review these items with each respective
governing body (if applicable). First District staff also conducted research regarding the history of
disaster events in the county, including events that had occurred since the 2019 updated plan
was developed.
During the 2019 PDM Plan update, First District conducted a technical review of existing
documents. This review incorporated existing plans, studies, reports, technical information,
zoning, and flood damage prevention ordinances into the PDM Update. It should be noted that
most planning documents from each of the communities were previously developed by the First
District. However, some of the smaller communities do not have such planning documents.
Additionally, the 2019 PDM was used as a resource for the new plan because most of the natural
hazard profile research had already been completed when it was drafted. In addition to the 2019
PDM, the First District reviewed several other existing documents including but not limited to the
2019 State of South Dakota Hazard Mitigation Plan and Flood Insurance Rate Maps for all
applicable local jurisdictions. A summary of the technical review and incorporation of existing
plans is included in Table 3.3.
26
Table 3.3: Record of Review
Technical
Documents
Jurisdiction Referenced
in Plan Aurora Brookings Bruce Bushnell Elkton Sinai Volga White Brookings
County
Aquifer
Protection
Ordinance
The aquifer protection ordinance
was reviewed & not determined to
be significantly impacted by any
natural hazards. (Existing water
services have been able to handle
demand in drought conditions with
established policies.)
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
The aquifer
protection
ordinance was
reviewed & not
determined to
be significantly
impacted by any
natural hazards.
(Existing water
services have
been able to
handle demand
in drought
conditions with
established
policies.)
N/A
Building Code
(IBC 2023) N/A**
Reviewed
existing
building codes
and limitations
on
development
due to
perceived or
objectively
probable
natural
hazards. The
goal was to
maximize
efficacy of
mitigation
strategies/
projects and
align them with
development
strategies.
N/A** N/A** N/A** N/A**
Reviewed
existing building
codes and
limitations on
development
due to
perceived or
objectively
probable natural
hazards. The
goal was to
maximize
efficacy of
mitigation
strategies/
projects and
align them with
development
strategies.
N/A**
Reviewed
existing building
codes and
limitations on
development
due to
perceived or
objectively
probable natural
hazards. The
goal was to
maximize
efficacy of
mitigation
strategies/
projects and
align them with
development
strategies.
NA
27
Comprehensive
Plan and
Existing Land
Use Maps
Reviewed existing and future land
use maps, master street plan, and
limitations on development due to
perceived or objectively probable
natural hazards; The goal was to
maximize efficacy of mitigation
strategies/ projects and align them
with development strategies.
N/A N/A
Reviewed
existing and
future land use
maps, master
street plan, and
limitations on
development
due to perceived
or objectively
probable natural
hazards; The
goal was to
maximize
efficacy of
mitigation
strategies/
projects and
align them with
development
strategies.
N/A
Reviewed existing and future land use maps, master
street plan, and limitations on development due to
perceived or objectively probable natural hazards;
The goal was to maximize efficacy of mitigation
strategies/ projects and align them with development
strategies.
Chapters 1,3,
4, 6 &
Appendix F
Capital
Improvement
Plan
Reviewed capital improvement plan
to review recommended projects
and the community’s monetary
capacity to implement each project.
This information assisted in
prioritizing all mitigation strategies.
N/A N/A
Reviewed capital improvement plan to review recommended projects and the community’s
monetary capacity to implement each project. This information assisted in prioritizing all
mitigation strategies.
N/A
Drainage
Ordinance N/A
Stormwater
regulations
were reviewed
with specific
attention to
watershed &
water runoff
requirements.
This
information
assisted in
prioritizing
flood-related
projects.
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Drainage
regulations
were reviewed
with specific
attention to
watershed &
water runoff
requirements.
This information
assisted in
prioritizing
flood-related
projects.
N/A
Flood Damage
Prevention
Ordinance
Reviewed effective flood maps to determine vulnerable
private and public structures; their assessed values; &
anticipated number of displaced individuals. This
information assisted in prioritizing flood-related projects.
N/A
Reviewed
effective flood
maps to
determine
vulnerable
private and
public structures;
their assessed
values; &
N/A
Reviewed
effective flood
maps to
determine
vulnerable
private and
public
structures; their
assessed
N/A
Reviewed
effective flood
maps to
determine
vulnerable
private and
public
structures; their
assessed
Chapters 4,
5, 6 &
Appendices
D & E
28
anticipated
number of
displaced
individuals. This
information
assisted in
prioritizing flood-
related projects.
values; &
anticipated
number of
displaced
individuals. This
information
assisted in
prioritizing flood-
related projects.
values; &
anticipated
number of
displaced
individuals. This
information
assisted in
prioritizing
flood-related
projects.
Economic
Development
Plan
N/A
Reviewed
economic
development
plan to review
strengths,
challenges, and
opportunities
with the
community.
This
information
assisted in
prioritizing all
mitigation
strategies.
N/A N/A
Reviewed
economic
development
plan to review
strengths,
challenges, and
opportunities
with the
community. This
information
assisted in
prioritizing all
mitigation
strategies.
N/A
Reviewed
economic
development
plan to review
strengths,
challenges, and
opportunities
with the
community. This
information
assisted in
prioritizing all
mitigation
strategies.
N/A N/A N/A
Emergency
Operations
Plan
The County Emergency Manager reviewed the County’s Emergency Operations Plan with the LEOP at regular meetings. Since this has been done during every update of
the PDM over the last 12 years, no changes were necessary to the PDM to account for this plan unless specified by the given j urisdiction in Chapter 5. Chapter 4
Flood
Insurance
Studies or
Engineering
Studies for
Streams
Reviewed effective flood maps to determine vulnerable
private and public structures; their assessed values;
anticipated number of displaced individuals. This
information was used to assist in prioritizing flood related
projects.
N/A
Reviewed effective flood maps to
determine vulnerable private and
public structures; their assessed
values; anticipated number of
displaced individuals. This
information was used to assist in
prioritizing flood related projects.
N/A
Reviewed effective flood maps to
determine vulnerable private and
public structures; their assessed
values; anticipated number of
displaced individuals. This
information was used to assist in
prioritizing flood related projects.
Chapters 4,
5, 6 &
Appendices
D & E
Hazard
Vulnerability
Analysis (by
the local
Emergency
Management
Office)
While not directly referenced in this document, Brookings County maintains a Hazardous Materials Plan. This plan identifies f acilities that store hazardous materials across
all jurisdictions within the county and outlines strategies/policies for mitigating & responding to spill events (which may or may not occur due to natural events).
During each community and Planning Team meeting, members were reminded that discussions about hazardous materials should be addressed within the HAZMAT plan.
Additionally, all discussions regarding the major street plan considered evacuation routes in the event of such incidents.
Chapters 1,
3, 4, & 5
Land Use
Regulation
Near Pipelines
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
State Hazard
Mitigation Plan
The State Hazard Mitigation Plan served as a valuable resource, providing examples and background data.
Relevant objective data from the state’s plan was considered for inclusion and in some instances, reiterated in this plan. All Chapters
29
Stormwater
Management/
Drainage Plan
N/A
Drainage plans
were reviewed
with specific
attention to
watershed &
water runoff
requirements.
This
information
assisted in
prioritizing
flood-related
projects.
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Subdivision
Ordinance
Subdivision regulations were
reviewed with specific attention to
installation of infrastructure to an
ability to meet fire flows and for
streets to meet IFC requirements.
Though not reflected here, the
community will review IFC
requirements to determine whether
minimum requirements should be
placed in ordinance or standard
operating procedures.
N/A N/A N/A N/A
Subdivision regulations were reviewed with specific
attention to installation of infrastructure to an ability to
meet fire flows and for streets to meet IFC
requirements. Though not reflected here, the
community will review IFC requirements to determine
whether minimum requirements should be placed in
ordinance or standard operating procedures.
NA
Transportation
Plan N/A
Reviewed
master street
plan to identify
which, if any,
roads were
more/less
vulnerable to
hazards OR
more essential
to travel during
natural
hazards.
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Reviewed
master street
plan to identify
which, if any,
roads were
more/less
vulnerable to
hazards OR
more essential
to travel during
natural hazards.
Chapters 1,
3, 4, & 5
30
Zoning
Ordinance
and Site Plan
Review
Zoning Ordinance restrictions on setbacks, densities;
availability of infrastructure and public facilities to more
intensive uses; and Brookings County FIS were
discussed. It was determined that safety/mitigation
related requirements were adequate in the present
ordinance. Further, undeveloped lots appropriately
zoned for construction within SFHA were reviewed.
N/A
Zoning
Ordinance
restrictions on
setbacks,
densities;
availability of
infrastructure
and public
facilities to more
intensive uses;
and Brookings
County FIS were
discussed. It was
determined that
safety/mitigation
related
requirements
were adequate
in the present
ordinance.
Further,
undeveloped lots
appropriately
zoned for
construction
within SFHA
were reviewed.
N/A
Zoning Ordinance restrictions on setbacks, densities;
availability of infrastructure and public facilities to
more intensive uses; and Brookings County FIS were
discussed. It was determined that safety/mitigation
related requirements were adequate in the present
ordinance. Further, undeveloped lots appropriately
zoned for construction within SFHA were reviewed.
Chapters 3,
4, 5, & 6
* Document was reviewed in reference to the described section. Portions of the technical document may be included, but often ti mes were merely
considered/incorporated with no specific reference to the document.
** South Dakota Codified Law 11-10-6 establishes the most recent version of the International Building Code for all structures, excluding agricultural structure s
and single-family residential structures, within jurisdictions that have not adopted a building code. SDCL 11 -10-6 does not provide for enforcement of this
statute.
N/A The jurisdiction does not have this program/policy/regulation/technical document.
31
All jurisdictions within Brookings County possess the legislative authority to establish and/or
modify the technical documents referenced in Table 3.3. Brookings County communities are
adopting and enforcing regulations and plans that they determine to provide direct benefit to the
respective community without significantly increasing administrative costs. Before adopting
regulations and policies, these communities are carefully weighing the measurable benefit (or
decrease in expense) with the cost (including social cost) of administration. As a result, very few
of the policies/documents/etc. in Table 3.3 above have been significantly updated since 2019.
The City of Brookings was in the process of adopting a major update to its Comprehensive Land
Use Plan during the previous update of this plan. As a result, this is the first PDM to utilize that
updated document. Since the last PDM Plan, the City of Brookings and Brookings County
adopted a comprehensive update to its joint jurisdiction zoning ordinance for the first time since
1980. Further, Brookings County completed a six-year process to update its zoning ordinance in
2024. The only other community to update its land use plan and zoning ordinance since the last
plan is the City of Elkton. All jurisdictions reviewed rules regarding bulk, height, and density of
development to determine whether consistent, not only with the established planning principles
of the community but also to ensure those regulations practicably employed the goals of the pre-
disaster mitigation plan with reference to protection from fire, drought (impacts on water supply),
limitation of density in flood prone areas and review of regulations for areas determined to be in
a 100-year floodplain.
While reviewing those ordinances and changes at publicly noticed meetings, both entities chose
to prioritize the adoption of updated special flood hazard areas as soon as possible. The
communities await final authorization to adopt the newly updated maps, pending remaining
appeals. Each of the communities intend to consider adding a requirement to add free-board or
additional requirements above the minimum requirements to remain compliant.
In addition to the public technical documents, applicable members of the PDM Planning Team
utilized internal related plans such as Brookings Healthcare’s Threat/Hazard Assessment Model,
which is referenced in regard to moderate or higher hazards identified by that model. Utility
providers offered a variety of information regarding ability to serve and plans for future expansion
or mitigation activity. Also the South Dakota State University Emergency Management Specialist
offered insight into the university’s similar mitigation plans and reports such as the Annual Security
and Fire Safety Report which is referenced later. Such integration with the 2012 Pre-Disaster
Mitigation Plan is partially credited with initiating and underscoring the urgency of addressing all
buildings at South Dakota State University for the purposes of assigning emergency addresses
for better emergency response throughout campus. Chapter 4 presents a comprehensive list of
potential hazards that could affect Brookings County. During the initial meeting, the Planning
Team initiated the development of a detailed profile for each hazard. These profiles incorporated
insights from all participating jurisdictions highlighting the specific impacts each hazard can have
on their community. Discussion also occurred regarding the existing hazard mitigation strategies,
with a particular focus on protecting the critical and essential facilities in each community.
To streamline their efforts, the Planning Team prioritized and reduced the number of hazards to
focus on to those that occur more frequently or pose the greatest risk of significantly higher
damages. This more targeted approach allows the team to allocate the County’s resources more
effectively and enhance the resilience of its communities.
Upon completion of the draft plan, Brookings County Emergency Management and First District
posted the draft plan on their websites. Correspondence regarding the posting of the PDM plan
were sent to all the participants and to the emergency managers in the neighboring counties of:
32
Deuel, Hamlin, Kingsbury, Lake, and Moody. The County published a notice in the newspapers
to notify the public regarding availability of the draft PDM plan for their review and comment.
Everyone who received the correspondence regarding the plan was allowed forty-five days to
comment on the draft.
At the second meeting, in December of 2024, Risk Identification/Assessment was discussed. The
PDM Planning Team reviewed the updates prepared by the First District. This included first a
review of the hazards identified in the State of South Dakota Hazard Mitigation Plan and that risk
assessment portion of the existing PDM. First District staff also provided an overview of the
information regarding Critical Facilities, Risk Identification, Hazard Vulnerability, and mitigation
projects identified by the County’s municipalities.
The PDM Planning Team also dealt with the Mitigation Strategy at the August 2024 meeting.
Formation of the strategy began with a review of the results of the risk assessment, which led to
discussion about the goals to be achieved with the mitigation plan. The list of goals is included in
Chapter 5.
The PDM Planning Team reviewed the goals and objectives identified in the 2019 PDM. After
review, the Team determined the 2019 goals and objectives were still appropriate and should be
included in the updated PDM plan. One minor change was made to add fire prevention
educational activities to Goal #1 of the Mitigation Activities for Fire and Drought Hazards. In
addition, the PDM Planning Team reviewed the list of proposed actions included in the previous
mitigation plan and discussion followed about the progress that had been made on implementing
the actions. Specific mitigation actions recently identified by the participating jurisdictions were
also discussed.
The rest of the meeting was spent prioritizing the mitigation actions and discussing how the plan
would be implemented. It was emphasized that cooperation between the county and the
participating jurisdictions was especially important, and discussion occurred about how this could
best be achieved. Representatives from the jurisdictions were made aware of the critical role they
needed to play to ensure the success of the mitigation strategy, such as implementing specific
mitigation actions. The Emergency Management Director emphasized the importance of ensuring
that no local decisions are made, or actions taken contrary to the goals of this plan. Also,
responsible parties were identified for reporting on progress being made to implement the
proposed mitigation actions, for evaluating the plan’s overall effectiveness, and for getting the
public more involved in the planning process.
At the end of the meeting the First District was instructed to conduct update the plan based on
comments received. Then return for the final review and submission of the plan,
The final meeting of the PDM Planning Team was subsequently held in December of 2024 to
review and discuss final draft as amended based upon comments from the planning team,
communities, and the public. At the meeting, the PDM Planning Team recommended that the plan
be submitted to SD OEM and FEMA. The final draft of the plan was again posted on the First
District Association of Local Governments and Brookings County websites.
33
CHAPTER 4 ꟾ
RISK ASSESSMENT
IDENTIFICATION OF HAZARDS
Requirement 201.6(c)(2)(i). Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool – B1-a;
Requirement 201.6(c)(2)(i). Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool – B1-b;
Requirement 201.6(c)(2)(i). Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool – B1-f.
In this chapter, the hazards that were identified by the PDM Planning Team as having the most
significance for the County are analyzed. As part of the analysis, various maps and tables were
produced and are included within this chapter. The planning participants began the risk
assessment process by reviewing the State of South Dakota Hazard Mitigation Plan (SD SHMP).
The PDM Planning Team also reviewed records of hazard events that have occurred in the county
since 2000, relying primarily on the Spatial Hazard Events and Losses Database for the United
States (SHELDUS), compiled by the University of South Carolina’s Hazards and Vulnerability
Research Institute and data from the NCDC Storm Events Database. A summary of the findings
for hazard occurrences from the past ten years is provided below in Table 4.1: The PDM Planning
Team also identified potential hazards by observing development patterns, interviews from towns
and townships, public meetings, PDM work sessions, previous disaster declarations and research
of the history of hazard occurrences located within the County.
Table 4.1: Hazard Occurrences 2014-2023
Type of Hazard # of Occurrences
Since 2013 Source
Dam Failure 0 SD SHMP
Drought 10+ NOAA/UNL
Earthquake 0 SDGS
Extreme Cold 25 NOAA
Extreme Heat 9 NOAA
Fire (Urban and Wildfire) 371 NOAA & State Fire Marshall's
Office
Flood 69 NOAA
Hail 36 NOAA
Heavy Rain 0 NOAA
Heavy Snow 5 NOAA
Ice Jams 0 SD SHMP
Ice Storm 1 NOAA
Landslide 0 SD SHMP
34
Type of Hazard # of Occurrences
Since 2013 Source
Lightning 0 NOAA
Subsidence 0 SD SHMP
Thunderstorm and High Wind 67 NOAA
Tornado 8 NOAA
Winter Storm and Blizzards 81 NOAA
Hazards were analyzed in terms of the hazard’s probability of occurrence in Brookings County.
Representatives from each participating jurisdiction and the PDM Planning Team were asked to
complete worksheets that categorized hazards by the likelihood of occurrence within the county.
Every hazard or disaster that has occurred since 2014 was evaluated and placed into one of two
separate columns depending on the likelihood of the disaster occurring in the PDM jurisdiction.
Hazards that occur at least once a year or more were placed in the High Probability column;
hazards that may have occurred in the past or could occur in the future but do not occur on a
yearly basis were placed in the low probability column.
Due to the topographical features of the County and the nature of the natural hazards that affect
the geographical area covered by this PDM, most areas of the county have similar likelihood of
being affected by the natural hazards identified. Only the natural hazards from the High Probability
and Low Probability Columns will be further evaluated throughout this plan, with an emphasis on
the High Probability hazards. All hazards in the Unlikely to Occur column will not be further
evaluated in the plan. Table 4.2 is an adjusted list of hazards produced from the FEMA worksheets
completed by each participating jurisdiction and the PDM Planning Team.
35
Table 4.2: Hazards Categorized by Likelihood of Occurrence within Brookings County
Hazards or disasters for which there is no record of past occurrence in the area before and are
unlikely to occur in the PDM jurisdiction any time in the future were not identified for planning
purposes, however are included in the disaster profile for reference should the Brookings County
PDM Planning Team’s intent change in the future. Specifically, those hazards for which there is
no record of past occurrence such as: landslides, subsidence, dam failures, ice jams, and
earthquakes are profiled but are not identified for planning purposes. None of the municipalities
have assets that are vulnerable to wildfires. Planning for wildfires within municipalities is limited
to response and recovery activities rather than mitigation. All activities to improve response and
recovery to urban fires should be considered activities to improve response and recovery to
wildfires. Therefore, wildfires are only intended for planning purposes outside of municipalities.
Finally, several types of natural hazards that occur in other portions of the country were not
included in the PDM plan hazard assessment due to the zero probability of them occurring in
Brookings County. The hazards included avalanches, coastal storms, hurricanes, and volcanic
activity.
TYPES OF NATURAL HAZARDS IN THE PDM JURISDICTION AREA
Most descriptions of the natural hazards likely to occur in the County were taken directly from the
2019 Brookings County PDM. For the purpose of consistency throughout the plan, additional
definitions were included to reflect all the hazards that have a chance of occurring in the area. For
all of the hazards identified, the probability of future occurrence is expected to be the same for all
of the jurisdictions covered in the PDM.
High Probability Low Probability
Blizzard Drought
Extreme Cold Urban Fire
Extreme Heat
Flood
Freezing Rain/Sleet/Ice
Hail
Heavy Rain
Heavy Snow
Lightning
Rapid Snow Melt
Strong Winds
Thunderstorm
Tornado
36
HAZARD PROFILE
Requirement 201.6(c)(2)(i). Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool – B1-a-f;
Requirement 201.6(c)(2)(ii). Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool – B2a-b.
It should be stated that most of the hazards identified in this section have the potential of occurring
anywhere in the County. A brief section about the history of each hazard’s occurrence in the
county is provided. Table 4.3 below shows all of the Presidential Disaster Declarations that have
involved the county. Information on previous occurrences – the location, the extent (i.e.,
magnitude or severity) of each hazard, and probability of future events (i.e., chance or occurrence)
are listed individually by the type of hazard in the following tables.
Table 4.3: Presidential Disaster Declarations in South Dakota Including Clark County
Date Disaster
Dec # Type Total
Damage
Public
Assistance
Cost
Hazard
Mitigation
Assistance
4/18/1969 257 Flooding $4,599,306
05/03/1986 764 Severe Storms and Flooding $5,158,130
7/2/1992 948 Flooding, Severe Storms, and
Tornadoes
07/19/1993 999 Severe Storms, Tornadoes and
Flooding $53,068,748
06/21/1994 1031 Severe Storms and Flooding $8,187,938
05/26/1995 1052 Flooding $35,649,349
01/05/1996 1075 Severe Winter Storm $13,085,649
01/10/1997 1156 Severe Winter Storm and Blizzard $19,455,263
04/07/1997 1173 Severe Winter Storm and Severe
Flooding $87,069,429
05/17/2001 1375 Severe Winter Storm and Flooding $10,441,684 $5,097,819
12/20/2005 1620 Severe Winter Storm $28,071,441 $24,647,040
11/2/2010 1947 Severe Storms and Flooding $1,079,973
05/13/2011 1984 Flooding $52,090,678
06/07/2019 4440 Severe Winter Storm, Snowstorm,
and Flooding $60,762,752 $9,432,655
11/18/2019 4469 Severe Storms, Tornadoes, and
Flooding 18,594,268 2,988,996
06/29/2022 4656 Severe Storm, Straight-line Winds,
Tornadoes, and Flooding $6,733,541 $223,607
02/27/2023 4689 Severe Winter Storms and
Snowstorm $2,413,949
SOURCE : www.fema.gov/disaster/declarations
While the PDM Planning Team reviewed all hazard occurrences that have been reported in the
last 50 years, the list for some of the hazards was extremely long. The information provided in the
tables is not a complete history report, but rather an overview of the hazard events. The PDM
Planning Team felt the hazard trend for the last ten years could be summarized in this section
and decided to include any new occurrence that have taken place since the previous PDM was
drafted.
37
DAM FAILURE
The risk of dam breach or failure poses a lesser concern to the citizens of the County compared
to the threat of flooding. Brookings County is home to numerous structures designed to control or
regulate flow of water between bodies. The South Dakota Department of Agricultural and Natural
Resources (SD DANR) identifies eight dams within the County, as listed below in Table 4.4.
According to the SD DANR database, all eight dams located in Brookings County are rated as
having low downstream hazard potential. A map (Figure 4.1) illustrating high and significant
hazard dams throughout South Dakota can be found below. Additionally, the chart below depicts
the dam safety and hazard potential classification rating system. Based on the dam data provided
for Brookings County, the likelihood of a dam failure resulting in the loss of human life, economic
impact, environmental damage, or disruption of essential services is unlikely to occur.
SOURCE : FEMA, Federal Guidelines for Dam Safety -- Hazard Potential Classification System for Dams, April 2004
38
Figure 4.1 South Dakota High and Significant Hazard Dams
Table 4.4 Dam Locations in Brookings County
Dam Name Owner Location Water Body
Upper Deer Creek-
Lake Hendricks
Watershed (UDCLH)
1-C
UDCLH Watershed
District (Local Govt)
SW1/4 of SW1/4 of
Section 31-112N-47W Upper Deer Creek
Bullis Wetland Dam USFWS (Federal) NE1/4 of SW1/4 of
Section 3-110N-52W Big Sioux Tributary
Bolstad WPA USFWS (Federal) NE1/4 of NW1/4 of
Section15-109N-52W Big Sioux Tributary
Gibbons Dam William Gibbons
(Private)
NE1/4 of SW1/4 of
Section 27-111N-48W Deer Creek Tributary
Dry Lake WPA USFWS (Federal) NW1/4 of NW1/4 of
Section 11-110N-52W Big Sioux Tributary
Winter Dam Robert Winter (Private) NW1/4 of SE1/4 of
Section 27-111N-52W Big Sioux Tributary
Gibbons No. 3 William Gibbons
(Private)
NW1/4 of SW1/4 of
Section 27-111N-48W Deer Creek Tributary
Gibbons No. 4 William Gibbons
(Private)
SE1/4 of SW1/4 of
Section 22-111N-48W Deer Creek Tributary
SOURCE : SD DANR-Office of Water - Water Rights Program
39
Climate Change Considerations
There is no comprehensive assessment of how climate change might affect flooding in South
Dakota. The TNCA, EPA-Climate Impacts on the Great Plains study plus other studies proposed
climate change projections show that future precipitation patterns will vary across the Great
Plains. Winter/spring precipitation and very heavy precipitation events are both projected to
increase in the northern portions of the Great Plains, leading to increased runoff and potential
flooding. Increased snowfall, rapid spring warming, and intense rainfall can combine to produce
significant flooding.
Since 1990, South Dakota has averaged 22% more 2-inch rain events compared to the long-term
average. Some historic rain and flooding events have occurred in recent years. Climate
projections for the Great Plains indicate that 1-day, 20-year return events will increase in
frequency by 8-16% in the coming decades. Brookings County is confident that existing dam
capacity will be able to accommodate an increase of one flood, every 12 to 25 years (according
to data elsewhere in this report, Brookings County currently experiences flooding at a frequence
slightly more often than twice annually.
DROUGHT
South Dakota's climate is characterized by cold winters and warm to hot summers. There is
usually light moisture in the winter and marginal to adequate moisture for the growing season for
crops in the eastern portion of the state. Semi-arid conditions prevail in the western portion. This
combination of hot summers and limited precipitation in a semi-arid climatic region places South
Dakota present a potential position of suffering a drought in any given year. The climatic
conditions are such that a small departure in the normal precipitation during the hot peak growing
period of July and August could produce a partial or total crop failure.
The fact South Dakota's economy is closely tied to agriculture only magnifies the potential loss
which could be suffered by the state's economy during drought conditions. The Keetch-Byron and
Palmer Drought Indexes measure drought impact. The SD SHMP states that based on historical
records, notable droughts have occurred somewhere in the state on average about every 12
years, which is equivalent of an 8% chance any given year. The FEMA National Risk Index (FEMA
NRI) states Brookings County has an annualized frequency of 8 drought events per year.
The following chart depicts the intensity of dry conditions and is used on the U.S. Drought Monitor
maps and in reports to show potential drought conditions in the country. This chart also correlates
to the maps below representing the severity of drought conditions across Brookings County at the
severest extent referenced in Table 4.5 identifying the ten-year drought history for the County.
40
SOURCE : http://droughtmonitor.unl.edu/archive.html - (This chart is used as the legend for the following maps).
Table 4.5: Brookings County Ten Year Drought History
SOURCE : http://droughtmonitor.unl.edu/archive.html
Major Drought Occurrences:
• 1880s-1890s: The years 1887, 1894-1896, 1898-1901 were very dry years. The National
Weather Service (NWS) has several fire danger informational items located on their
website.
• 1930s: During the infamous dust bowl years, Brookings County was not spared a fair share
of problems. Particularly dry summers were in 1934 and 1936.
Severest Extent (by
Week – See Map
for Date Below)
Date Start Date End Type Crop Damage
05/05/15 03/31/2015 06/09/2015 Moderate Drought
08/03/21 06/08/2021 09/21/2021 Severe to Extreme
Drought 3.027M
12/13/22 11/08/2022 04/04/2023 Moderate Drought
10/03/23 06/06/2023 01/09/2024 Moderate to Severe
Drought 3.620M
41
• 1987-1990: An abnormally low amount of precipitation in the summer of 1987 combined
with a hot and dry summer during 1988, left South Dakota in dire straits. Agricultural
income was down 0.8% and wheat price per bushel decreased significantly.
42
EXTREME HEAT
Extreme Heat, often referred to as a Heat Wave, is a prolonged period of excessively hot weather
that may also be accompanied by high humidity. In the County, temperatures typically range from
0 to 100 degrees Fahrenheit. Therefore, any temperature outside of this range can be considered
extreme. This term is applied to both routine weather variations and extraordinary heat spells that
might occur only once a century. Extreme heat poses significant risks to people, livestock, and
critical infrastructure when certain conditions are present.
The Heat Index, which is detailed below, measures the impact of extreme heat on humans and
livestock. According to the FEMA National Risk Index (NRI), Brookings County experiences heat
waves at an annualized frequency of 0.5 events per year. Table 4.6, located below, outlines the
history of extreme heat events in Brookings County. This information is sourced from the National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) National Centers for Environmental Information
(NCDC) Storm Events Database.
SOURCE : NWS/NOAA
Extreme Heat Occurrences:
July 2011 – A significant upper-level, high-pressure system developed over the region bringing
very hot and humid conditions. This was the worst heat wave to hit the region since July 2006.
Beginning on Friday July 15, 2011 and persisting through Wednesday July 20th, many locations
experienced high temperatures in the 90s to lower 100s, with low temperatures in the 70s at night.
In addition, humidity levels rose to extreme levels at times. Surface dew point temperatures in the
70s and lower 80s brought extreme heat index values of up to 110 to 125 degrees. The dewpoints
were some of the highest ever recorded in the region. The dewpoint at Aberdeen tied the previous
record with 82 degrees. Sisseton also tied their record with 83 degrees. Watertown came a degree
43
shy of tying their record with 80 degrees. The prolonged heat took its toll on livestock with fifteen
hundred cattle perishing during the heat. Numerous sports and outdoor activities were cancelled.
Some of the highest heat index values included; 110 degrees at Mobridge; 111 degrees at
Watertown; 113 degrees at Miller and Gettysburg; 114 degrees at Wheaton and Faulkton; 116
degrees at Pierre; 118 degrees at Sisseton; and 121 degrees at Aberdeen. The highest heat index
value occurred at Leola with a temperature of 98 degrees and a dewpoint of 82 degrees, the heat
index hit 125 degrees.
July 2016 - A very warm and abnormally large upper-level high pressure area along with high
dew points brought high heat indices to central and northeast South Dakota on July 20, 2016.
High temperatures were in the upper 80s to the 100s with overnight lows in the upper 60s to the
mid-70s. A few of the highest heat index values include: 105 degrees at Britton, 106 degrees at
Sisseton and Watertown, 107 degrees at Pierre, 108 degrees at Aberdeen and Clark, 109
degrees at Mobridge, 110 degrees at Eureka and Miller, and 111 degrees at Clear Lake. This
event and the two listed below were located throughout regions which include all of Brookings
County and between fifteen (15) and twenty-five (25) other counties.
Table 4.6: Brookings County History of Extreme Heat
Location Date Time Type
Brookings County 06/10/2016 11:00 Excessive Heat
Brookings County 07/20/2016 12:00 Excessive Heat
Brookings County 07/11/2018 11:00 Heat
Brookings County 06/29/2019 12:00 Heat
Brookings County 06/30/2019 12:00 Heat
Brookings County 07/27/2023 10:00 Excessive Heat
Brookings County 08/19/2023 13:00 Excessive Heat
Brookings County 08/21/2023 11:00 Excessive Heat
Brookings County 09/03/2023 12:00 Heat
SOURCE : https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/stormevents/
Climate Change Considerations
According to the Fifth National Climate Assessment, (FNCA) the line of demarcation between the
arid west and humid east is moving eastward, beyond the traditional border at the 100th Meridian.
Since it is known that dryer air, resulting from decreased snowpack in the west/northwest, leads
to wider temperature fluctuations it is reasonable to expect increased frequency of extreme
temperatures, such as extreme heat and cold. Though stream flow data runs contrary to the
prediction of an arid Brookings County, it is expected the increased water levels are the result of
more frequent extreme moisture events (summer and winter storms) and rapid snow melt.
Furthermore, the FNCA states, since 2000, the winter season is warming at a faster rate than any
other season in the Northern Plains region, and this is also true for South Dakota. Higher average
low temperatures in winter will shorten the time snow spends on the ground, and in turn lead to
earlier Spring temperatures and drier air reaching farther east earlier in the year than in the past.
While it is true that the warmer air will converge with moist air to the east, resulting in large rain
44
events, it is expected that warm air will be more likely to increase the frequency of prolonged
heat/dry events.
As discussed elsewhere in this plan, climate change is fueling more extreme weather events,
such as summer storms and extreme weather variability. Given the increased likelihood of both
storms and extreme heat, the importance of temporary emergency shelter with back-up
generators for the facility and water/sewer services for that facility in the event of loss of
service/shelter due to storms leads to displacement of residents for prolonged period of times
during extreme heat events.
EARTHQUAKE
An earthquake results from the sudden release of energy due to an adjustment in the earth’s
crust. This adjustment causes the ground to tremble and generates vibrations that radiate out
from the quake’s focus. Earthquakes primarily occur along fault zones, which are fractures in the
Earth’s crust where stress builds until one side slips. In South Dakota, the likely causes of
earthquakes stem from underlying plate movements underlying and ongoing isostatic (glacial)
rebound. Severe earthquakes can cause significant damage to infrastructure and result in injury
or loss of life. However, earthquakes in South Dakota are generally minor, typically resulting in
low rumbles with no damage. According to the South Dakota Geological Survey, one earthquake
was recorded as occurring in Brookings County on May 25, 1986 with a recorded magnitude of
less than 3.0.
Although the Midwest is often referred to by geologists as the “stable midcontinent”, earthquake
shock waves can travel farther and faster from the epicenter due to the older, cooler, and denser
geological makeup. However, because earthquakes in South Dakota tend to be mild causing little
to no damage other than rattling dishes, cracked windows, or stuck doors, this hazard poses a
low risk to the County. The Richter Scale measures earthquake intensity, and according to
FEMA’s National Risk Index (NRI), the annual probability of an earthquake to occur in the County
is 0.013% annually. Earthquakes are not a risk in Brookings County.
45
Climate Change Considerations
Climate change leads to increased frequency in extreme weather events and increased
meltwater. Therefore, increased pressure resulting from additional surface or ocean water may
result in increased seismic pressure at faults and over volcanic areas. Further, increased
frequency in drought conditions is hypothesized to increase seismic activity in seismically active
areas. This hypothesis is based upon Jet Propulsion Laboratories’ research indicating that
mountains increase and decrease in size based upon fluctuations in drought/wet conditions. With
no known fault lines in or near eastern South Dakota, earthquakes which occur are statistical
anomalies. Though they have occurred in the past, there is no data which would predict future
occurrences in a county, such as Brookings, which has only experienced one minor earthquake
originating within the county.
LANDSLIDE
Landslides are a geological phenomenon that encompass a wide range of ground movements,
such as rock falls, deep slope failures, and shallow debris flows. All of these movements can
occur in offshore, coastal, and onshore environments. While gravity is the primary driving force
behind landslides, other contributing factors can build up specific subsurface conditions that make
the area or slope prone to failure. However, an actual landslide often requires a trigger to be
initiated. The following map from the SD SHMP illustrates landslide incidence and susceptibility
across South Dakota, including Brookings County. Landslides are not a risk in the County. The
FEMA NRI indicates that zero events per year are expected.
46
Figure 4.2 South Dakota Landslide Incidence and Susceptibility
SOURCE : U.S. Geological Survey, map generated by https://nationalmap.gov/ www.nationalatlas.gov
SUBSIDENCE
Subsidence refers to the downward movement of a surface relative to a reference point, while its
opposite, uplift, results in an increase in elevation Various factors can cause subsidence, including
the dissolution of limestone, mining activities, fault movements, isostatic rebound, extraction of
natural gas, ground water depletion, and seasonal effects. The accompanying map from the State
of South Dakota Hazard Mitigation Plan (SD SHMP) illustrates the subsidence risks across South
Dakota, including Brookings County. The map indicates that subsidence risks in Brookings
County are not a concern.
47
Figure 4.3 State of South Dakota Subsidence Risk
SOURCE : The National Karst Map kttp://www.nckri.org/map/maps/engineering_aspects/davies_map_PDF.pdf
FLOOD
Flooding is a temporary overflow of water onto normally dry land, resulting in measurable property
damage or necessitating the evacuation of people and resources. Floods can cause injuries and
even loss of life, especially when swiftly moving water is involved. As little as six inches of moving
water is enough to sweep a vehicle off a road. Floods can develop slowly due to prolonged rainfall
causing rivers to swell, or rapidly during a warming trend following a heavy snowfall. Both heavy
rains and rapid snowmelt can lead to flooding or flash flooding, both of which are included under
48
this hazard profile. Even small streams or dry creek beds can overflow and create flooding. Two
types of flooding hazards are present within the County.
1. Inundation flooding occurs most often in the spring. The greatest risks are realized
typically during a rapid snowmelt before ice is completely off all of the rivers. Ice jams
occur when warm temperatures and heavy rain cause snow to melt rapidly. Snow melting
combined with heavy rains can cause frozen rivers to swell, which breaks the ice layer on
top of the river. The ice layer often breaks into large chunks, which float downstream and
often pile up near narrow passages and other obstructions, such as bridges and dams
causing localized flooding.
2. Flash flooding is more typically realized during the summer months. This flooding is
primarily localized, though enough rain can be produced to cause inundation flooding.
Heavy, slow moving thunderstorms often produce large amounts of rain. The threat of
flooding would be increased during times of high soil moisture.
Disruption of communication, transportation, electric service, and community services, along with
contamination of water supplies and transportation accidents are very possible. Brookings
Healthcare System, in its Threat/Hazard Assessment Module (THAM) rates flooding as one of
four hazards in this plan for which there is a “moderate” risk to its facilities and normal operation.
National Flood Insurance Rate maps designate 100 year and 500 year floodplain zones. Areas
subject to inundation by the 1-percent-annual-chance flood event are designated 100 year
floodplain. Moderate risk areas within the 0.2-percent-annual-chance floodplain are designated
500 year floodplain. See attached Brookings County 100 year flood plain map (Figure 4.4) below.
The County should anticipate having at least two flood events each year. According to the FEMA
NRI, Brookings County has the potential for 2.7 riverine flooding events to occur annually. Table
4.7 contains the County’s flood history for the last ten years.
49
Figure 4.4 Brookings County 100 Year Flood
50
Table 4.7: Brookings County Ten Year Flood History
Location Type Date Time Property
Damage
Crop
Damage
White Flash Flood 06/01/2014 18:00
White Flash Flood 06/05/2014 09:16
Brookings Muni
Airport Flash Flood 06/17/2016 06:00 50.00K
Bruce Flood 03/22/2018 05:00
Medary Flood 03/24/2018 08:00
Bruce Flood 04/13/2018 06:00
Bruce Flood 04/20/2018 07:00;
22:00
White Flood 04/21/2018 04:00
Bruce Flood 04/23/2018 02:00
Medary Flood 04/23/2018 10:00
Bruce Flood 05/01/2018 00:00
Brookings Muni
Airport Flash Flood 07/19/2018 02:00
Brookings Flash Flood 07/19/2018 03:50;
04:00
Bushnell Flash Flood 07/19/2018 04:45
Medary Flood 07/19/2018 19:00
Medary Flood 03/13/2019 12:00 170.00K
White Flood 03/15/2019 03:00
Medary Flood 03/18/2019 20:00
Bruce Flood 03/21/2019 03:30
Bruce Flood 03/22/2019 13:00
Bruce Flood 04/01/2019 00:00
White Flood 04/17/2019 13:00
Bruce Flood 05/01/2019 00:00
Brookings Muni
Airport Flash Flood 05/17/2019 19:52;
22:00
White Flood 05/18/2019 07:00
Sinai Flood 06/01/2019 00:00 21.540M
Bruce Flood 06/01/2019 00:00
Bruce Flood 06/27/2019 08:00;
22:00
Bruce Flood 07/01/2019 03:00
White Flood 07/09/2019 22:00
Bruce Flood 07/10/2019 21:00
Bruce Flood 08/01/2019 00:00
51
Location Type Date Time Property
Damage
Crop
Damage
Bruce Flood 08/19/2019 16:00;
22:30
Brookings Muni
Airport Flash Flood 09/10/2019 22:51 10.00K
Brookings Flash Flood 09/10/2019 23:15 10.00K
Medary Flood 09/11/2019 19:30 25.00K
Sinai Flood 09/12/2019 00:00 244.00K 204.00K
White Flood 09/12/2019 03:00 50.00K
Bruce Flood 09/12/2019 05:00 25.00K
Bruce Flood 09/12/2019 12:30 10.00K
Bruce Flood 10/23/2019 07:00 2.50K
Bruce Flood 11/12/2019 11:30
Bruce Flood 21/11/2019 11:00
Storla Flood 03/08/2020 20:00
Bruce Flood 03/11/2020 04:00
Bruce Flood 03/13/2020 17:00
Bruce Flood 03/22/2020 04:00
Bruce Flood 03/29/2020 08:00
Bruce Flood 04/01/2020 00:00
Bruce Flood 05/13/2022 02:00;
19:00
Bruce Flood 05/31/2022 12:00
Bruce Flood 06/01/2022 00:00
White Flood 04/08/2023 18:00
Bruce Flood 04/10/2023 05:00
Medary Flood 04/10/2023 07:00
Bruce Flood 04/11/2023 01:00
SOURCE : https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/stormevents/
Major Flood Occurrences:
• Spring 1951 - Big Sioux River—Heavy flooding originated in the Brookings area. An
accumulation of snow throughout February and an additional six to fourteen inches during
March served as the flood source. High temperatures in late March brought about rapid
melting and the flood condition. The Big Sioux was ½ mile wide in Moody County, 1 ½ miles
wide around Baltic and Sioux Falls, and 2 miles wide below the Rock River. The area from
Brookings to below the falls of Sioux Falls had about 73,400 acres of land flooded and damage
of nearly $2.25 million. The area from Sioux Falls to Sioux City, Iowa, had an estimated 29,000
acres flooded and $600,000 in damage.
52
• March 1960 - Big Sioux River—Flooding occurred from the Brookings area south to the
junction with the Missouri. Deer Creek and Medary Creek caused flooding in Aurora. Bruce
and Sioux Falls also experienced flooding. Damage was heavy and estimated at $2.3 million.
Approximately half of this was incurred in the lower basin. About 86,000 acres of land were
flooded, and 41,000 of these were between Sioux Falls and Sioux City.
• April 1997 - Near record to record snowmelt runoff and heavy rains of 1 to 2 inches on April
5th combined to bring Lake Poinsett to a record 6 feet overfull on April 18th. Over 100 cabins,
homes, and businesses around the lake became inundated with extensive damage done to
most. Extensive sandbagging was done to save property. Periods of strong winds through the
end of April combined with debris in the Lake, railroad ties, propane takes, etc, resulted in
broken windows and doors on some of the cabins on the Lake.
• April 2001 - Beadle, Brookings, Brown, Buffalo, Clark, Codington, Day, Deuel, Edmunds,
Grant, Gregory, Hamlin, Hanson, Jerauld, Kingsbury, Marshall, Mellette, Moody, Roberts,
Sanborn, Spink, Todd, Turner, and Tripp counties were included in the disaster declaration.
The major impact was to public infrastructure. Due to ice and wind damage to utility poles and
lines, electrical services to some areas were interrupted. Numerous bridges and roads were
impacted as well. There was damage to county and township roads in the eastern and
northeastern portion of the state that had previously not been affected by floodwater. Some
of the damaged roads included school bus, mail, and farm-to-market routes. Travel on these
roadways involved significant risk. Several roads were temporarily impassable, requiring
residents to travel greater distances because of detours. Many farmers were unable to access
their fields to begin spring planting. In Mellette County, ice is fluctuations substantially
damaged a bridge, which caused the county to close the bridge to through traffic, resulting in
a 40-mile detour for residents needing to cross the White River. This disaster also heavily
impacted South Dakota’s agricultural and livestock community.
• March to April 2011 - Major flooding of the Big Sioux River, other streams, lakes, and general
flooding, which began with a rapid March snowmelt, continued through April. Many roads
remained flooded with heavy road damage being reported in some areas. High water and
groundwater levels resulting from record precipitation in the previous year was the main
reason that improvement was so slow. Flooding around the south end of Lake Pointsett in the
northwest part of the county continued in particular to be damaging. The Big Sioux River
crested at 3 feet above flood stage near Brookings on April 6th. Some roads remained closed
by the flooding for part of the month. Water was running over other roads, from flooded
lowlands, lakes, and the Big Sioux River. Some roads were heavily damaged. Some homes
and businesses were still flooded and damages were estimated at $500,000.
• April 2019 - The continuation of snowmelt from an above normal snowfall combined with a
historic heavy snow/blizzard in mid-April, resulted in widespread flooding across central and
northeast South Dakota. Countless roads along with thousands of acres of cropland were
flooded throughout April. Impacts include damaged roads, culverts, and bridges, and
livestock, homes, and businesses were affected. Delayed planting resulted across all of the
region as well. Cattle and calves were stressed by the cold and wet pattern, as the mud and
cold caused some sickness with the livestock. Flooded roads made it difficult for many farmers
or ranchers to get to their fields or livestock. The wet pattern along with the flooding continued
into May, further delaying planting across the region.
53
South Dakota's governor declared a disaster for the state in March. This declaration was
followed by a disaster declaration by the President of the United States. As a result, 24 of the
26 counties across central and northeast SD had access to public property damage
assistance. Overall, damage estimates from the blizzards and floods for the state were 43
million dollars.
• June 2019 - Spring snowmelt and heavy rain flooding from March, April, and May continued
into June. This combined with above normal June rainfall resulted in hundreds of thousands
of acres of crops damaged or unplanted across central and northeast South Dakota. For th e
entire state of South Dakota, nearly 4 million acres of crops were left unplanted as a result of
the flooding. Total damaged or unplanted crop loss estimates for central and northeast South
Dakota were near 307 million dollars.
• September 2019 - After upstream rainfall during September 10-12 of 3.12 inches 4 miles
southwest of Toronto and 2.35 inches near Castlewood, the Big Sioux River near Estelline
(gage site BSES2) reached a crest of 1.04 feet above flood stage on September 13. Flooding
resulted in damage to public infrastructure including county and township roads and culverts.
Flooding also resulted in crop losses across the area. High water resulted in widespread
flooding of agricultural lands. Crop loss estimates provided by the United States Department
of Agriculture.
• April 2023 – Above normal seasonal snowfall and unusually cold late spring conditions
resulted in a persistent and unusually deep snowpack into early April. In the second week of
April temperatures became abnormally warm, surging to the 70s and 80s. This resulted in a
period of very rapid snowmelt and both river and overland flooding. As a result of the flooding,
many roads were not suitable for travel. Ten counties and one reservation suffered severe
impacts to public infrastructure. An estimated $2,305,362 in qualifying costs were incurred
during the flooding in those counties.
SUMMER STORMS
Summer Storms are generally defined as atmospheric hazards resulting from changes in
temperature and air pressure which cause thunderstorms that may cause hail, lightning, strong
winds, and tornados.
According to an article by Emily Greenhalgh featured on the NOAA/Climate.gov website, history
says mid-to-late June brings a higher probability of severe weather across much of the contiguous
United States. As we move from spring to summer, the predominant way severe weather forms
across the U.S. changes. Once the jet stream moves north, severe weather occurs mainly due to
mesoscale processes as larger areas of the country experience warm, humid conditions. These
conditions are, historically, prime ingredients for severe weather events. “Severe weather” is
defined as tornadoes, thunderstorm winds over 58 miles per hour, or hail larger than a quarter
(one inch in diameter) and lightning.
54
TORNADO
Tornados are violent windstorms that may occur singularly or in multiples as a result of severe
thunderstorms. They develop when cool air overrides warm air, causing the warm air to rapidly
rise. Many of these resulting vortices stay in the atmosphere, though a touchdown can occur. See
Figure 4.5 Wind Zones in the United States Map below.
Figure 4.5 Wind Zones in the United States
The Enhanced Fujita Tornado Damage Scale categorizes tornadoes based on their wind speed,
see following chart Figure 4.6.
55
Figure 4.6 Enhanced Fujita Tornado Damage Scale
The annual risk for intense summer storms is high. The entire County is susceptible to summer
storms. Warning time for summer storms is normally several hours, sufficient for relocation and
evacuation, if necessary. Between the years of 1950 and 2023, the County confirmed twenty-
56
three tornadoes/funnel clouds. However, tornadoes may occur with little or no warning. The table
below denotes the tornado history in the County over the past ten years. Throughout these events,
most tornadoes caused only minor damages. Brookings County has an annualized tornado
frequency of 0.5 events per year based on FEMA NRI.
Table 4.8: Brookings County Ten Year Tornado History
Location Date Time Type Magnitude Property
Damage
Crop
Damage
Volga 08/06/2015 17:33 Tornado EF 0
Brookings Muni
Airport 08/06/2015 18:00 Tornado EF 0 80.00K
Bruce 07/16/2016 21:21 Funnel Cloud
Medary 06/15/2019 17:15 Funnel Cloud
Sinai 05/30/2022 13:15 Tornado EFU
Volga 05/30/2022 13:23 Tornado EF1
Volga 05/30/2022 13:24 Funnel Cloud
Bruce 09/23/2023 14:54 Tornado EFU
Bruce 09/23/2023 15:04 Tornado EFU
Bruce 09/23/2023 15:16 Tornado EFU
White 09/23/2023 15:50 Tornado EFU
SOURCE : https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/stormevents/
Major Tornado Occurrences:
• August 3, 1944 -The center of this storm struck south of the City of Brookings. A funnel was
sighted and it left a swath of destruction for five miles. Twenty-two barns were destroyed, 14
between the towns of Sinai and Volga. All telephone poles south of the City of Brookings
were destroyed and one third of the hangar roof was torn off at the airport.
• June 1992 - This marked the date of one of the largest tornado outbreaks on record,
affecting portions of Central United States. From June 14 – June 18 170 tornados were
confirmed to have touched down with three F4 and one F5 tornados. The damages in 1992
from this outbreak were estimated at 242 million dollars with one life lost.
• August 1996- A tornado in Aurora heavily damaged a farm. The house and adjacent garage
and some contents were damaged, hay barn and dog kennels were destroyed, and damage
occurred to other farm buildings and to trees. Overall, the damages were estimated at
$200,000.
• August 2015 - Thunderstorms produced damaging winds in southeast South Dakota during
the afternoon and early evening of August 6th. The storms affected mostly Brookings County,
but the first report was some distance away in Gregory County, and there were reports in
Moody County also. There were also two tornadoes and one report of large hail. A tornado
damaged the roof, gutters, and siding of three houses, damaged the roof, patio deck, chimney,
and garage of another house, and damaged a fence.
57
Each year, many storms and a few tornadoes affect the county. Summer storms in the County
usually produce a wide range of damage making damage estimates difficult. A complete listing of
all summer storms having occurred within the county is not possible due to inaccurate reporting.
The NOAA NCDC Storm Events online database was the primary source for this information.
THUNDERSTORM/STRONG WIND
Thunderstorms and high wind occurrences in the County are very common. Strong winds can be
detrimental to the area. According to the SD SHMP, these winds are the most common type of
severe weather in South Dakota. They can exceed 100 mph and are responsible for most wind
damage related to thunderstorms. Since thunderstorms do not have narrow tracks like tornadoes,
the associated wind damage can be extensive and affect entire (and multiple) counties. Trees,
poles, power lines, and any weak structures are susceptible to damage from strong winds. In
addition to the damage, when strong winds knock down trees, poles, power lines, and structures,
additional traffic hazards are created for travelers and commuters. Brookings Healthcare System,
in its (THAM) rates strong winds associated with these storms as one of four hazards in this plan
for which there is a “moderate” risk to its facilities and normal operation
Strong winds are defined as winds over forty miles per hour (34.76 knots), are not uncommon in
the area. Winds over fifty miles per hour (43.45 knots) can be expected twice each summer.
Strong winds can cause destruction of property and create safety hazards resulting from flying
debris. Strong winds also include severe localized wind blasting down from thunderstorms. These
downward blasts of air are categorized as either microbursts or macrobursts depending on the
amount geographical area they cover. Microbursts cover an area less than 2.5 miles in diameter
and macrobursts cover an area greater than 2.5 miles in diameter. Based on past records, multiple
strong wind events will occur in the County annually. The FEMA NRI suggests the County will
experience 3.3 strong wind events per year.
According to the NCDC Storm Events Database, the County experienced 67 wind events from
2014-2023. Table 4.9 denotes the extent and severity of such hazards occurring in the last ten
years. The County continues to educate residents of the dangers of such storms through public
service announcements and other printed media.
Table 4.9: Brookings County Ten Year History for Thunderstorms/High Winds
Location Date Time Type Magnitude Property
Damage
Crop
Damage
Brookings
County 06/22/2015 04:35;
04:55 High Wind 56 kts. MG;
51 kts. MG
Volga 07/28/2015 01:58 Thunderstorm Wind 52 kts. EG
Volga 08/06/2015 17:55 Thunderstorm Wind 55 kts. MG
Brookings
Muni Airport 08/06/2015
18:02;
18:05;
18:10;
18:12;
18:13;
18:13
Thunderstorm Wind
60 kts. MG;
61 kts. EG;
74 kts. EG;
74 kts. EG;
60 kts. MG;
65 kts. EG
20.00K
58
Location Date Time Type Magnitude Property
Damage
Crop
Damage
Medary 08/06/2015
18:04;
18:05;
18:12;
18:12
Thunderstorm
Wind
61 kts. EG;
61kts. EG;
70 kts. EG
74 kts. EG
Brookings 02/19/2016 04:30 High Wind 36 kts. ES
Volga 06/03/2016 15:57 Thunderstorm
Wind 56 kts. EG
Medary 06/19/2016 20:45 Thunderstorm
Wind 52 kts. EG
Volga 07/16/2016 21:55 Thunderstorm
Wind 52 kts. EG
Volga 08/04/2016 03:40 Thunderstorm
Wind 52 kts. EG
Aurora 08/11/2016 23:27 Thunderstorm
Wind 52 kts. EG
Brookings
County 12/25/2016 23:00 High Wind 35 kts. MS
Sinai 05/28/2017
17:26;
17:26;
17:26
Thunderstorm
Wind
56 kts. EG;
61 kts. EG;
61 kts. EG
Ahnberg 05/28/2017 17:26 Thunderstorm
Wind 52 kts. EG
Bruce 07/11/2017 21:10;
21:40
Thunderstorm
Wind
52 kts. EG;
56 kts. EG
White 07/11/2017 21:40 Thunderstorm
Wind 56 kts. EG
Bushnell 07/11/2017 21:57;
21:57
Thunderstorm
Wind
56 kts. EG;
56 kts. EG
Brookings 07/19/2017 12:05;
12:30
Thunderstorm
Wind
64 kts. MG;
70 kts. EG
White 07/25/2017 15:45 Thunderstorm
Wind 52 kts. EG
Brookings
Muni Airport 07/19/2018 02:38 Thunderstorm
Wind 79 kts. EG 10.00K
Aurora 05/17/2019 19:23 Thunderstorm
Wind 50 kts. EG
Brookings
Muni Airport 07/20/2019 06:33 Thunderstorm
Wind 65 kts. MG
Brookings
County 10/21/2019 18:00 High Wind 50 kts. MG
White 06/04/2020 20:36;
20:39
Thunderstorm
Wind
52 kts. MG;
72kts. MG 13.00K
59
Location Date Time Type Magnitude Property
Damage
Crop
Damage
Bruce 07/18/2020 00:40 Thunderstorm
Wind 52 kts. EG 5.00K
Elkton 07/20/2020 20:49 Thunderstorm
Wind 52 kts. MG
Ahnberg 08/28/2020 00:55 Thunderstorm
Wind 61 kts. EG 5.00K
Bruce 08/28/2020 01:03 Thunderstorm
Wind 56 kts. EG 3.00K
White 08/28/2020 01:21 Thunderstorm
Wind 51 kts. MG
Sinai 08/26/2021 09:22 Thunderstorm
Wind 56 kts. EG
Aurora 08/26/2021 09:37 Thunderstorm
Wind 56 kts. EG 3.00K
Brookings 09/16/2021 23:08 Thunderstorm
Wind 51 kts. MG 33.00K
Brookings
County 12/15/2021 21:20 High Wind 37 kts. MS
Brookings
County 03/25/2022 09:00 Strong Wind 45 kts. MG
Brookings
County 04/14/2022 04:30 High Wind 38 kts. MS
Brookings
County 04/23/2022 11:40 High Wind 38 kts. MS
Volga 05/12/2022 16:24;
16:24
Thunderstorm
Wind
63 kts. MG;
65 kts. EG
Brookings 05/12/2022 16:24;
16:26
Thunderstorm
Wind
78 kts. EG;
80 kts. EG
Ahnberg 05/12/2022 16:25 Thunderstorm
Wind 78 kts. EG
Brookings
Muni Airport 05/12/2022 16:26;
16:26
Thunderstorm
Wind
69 kts. MG;
78 kts. EG
Aurora 05/12/2022 16:26 Thunderstorm
Wind 78 kts. EG
Volga 05/12/2022 16:28 Thunderstorm
Wind 64 kts. MG
White 05/12/2022 16:40 Thunderstorm
Wind 63 kts. MG 35.00K
Brookings
Muni Airport 05/30/2022 13:36 Thunderstorm
Wind 68 kts. MG
White 05/30/2022 13:55 Thunderstorm
Wind 56 kts. MG
Bruce 08/02/2022 20:03 Thunderstorm
Wind 52 kts. EG 18.00K
60
Location Date Time Type Magnitude Property
Damage
Crop
Damage
Brookings
County 04/30/2023 08:00 Strong Wind 42 kts. MG
Brookings
County 10/12/2023 15:00 Strong Wind 46 kts. MG
Brookings
County 12/09/2023 08:00 Strong Wind 39 kts. MG
SOURCE : https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/stormevents/
Major Wind Occurrences:
• July 1, 1928 - Traveling from southwest of Sinai to northeast of White the winds tore down
large trees, wrecked telephone phones and broke many large windows in downtown
businesses. The roof of a hangar at the Brookings airport was carried nearly 300 feet from its
original location, and two planes were damaged. The schoolhouse 3.5 miles northwest of
Volga was completely destroyed.
• May 7, 1993 - Very strong winds, likely the result of a downburst in a severe thunderstorm,
destroyed an apartment building, five mobile homes, 15 garages, and 16 vehicles, and
damaged many other homes and vehicles. 12 people were treated for minor injuries from the
storm. The storm also caused considerable damage to some area farms and the roof of a
motel. Estimated damage was $5,000,000.00 dollars.
• July 28, 2002 - Beginning at the town of Sinai and ending 5 miles east south east of the town
of Sinai a thunderstorm winds caused widespread structural, tree, and power line damage in
and near Sinai. The roof was ripped off a mobile home, a well drilling business was destroyed,
the siding from another business was ripped off, part of a grain elevator was smashed, several
garages were destroyed or heavily damaged, several trees were blown down and widespread
tree debris littered the area, and power lines and poles were blown down. Power outages
lasted until the next day. At a farm just east of Sinai, five grain bins, a machine shed, and
several small shacks were destroyed, and the farmhouse was damaged, with about 300
thousand dollars in damage estimated at this farm alone. Other small farm structures in the
area were reported to be destroyed or damaged. Crops in the area were heavily damaged by
the wind and accompanying hail, with one witness watching as a bean field "just disappeared."
The crop damage was widespread, but the amount of crop damage could not be determined.
Starting three miles west of Sinai and ending two miles west North West of Sinai, length 1
mile width 50 yards tornado caused no reported damage. The City of Elkton had thunderstorm
winds that caused tree damage, and damage to buildings such as shingles blown off and
broken windows from tree debris. The winds caused severe crop damage in the area,
especially to corn crops. South of Brookings thunderstorm winds damaged a barn, a silo, and
tore the roof off a mobile home. The winds also caused tree damage, including fifty to sixty
trees blown down on a golf course. The City of Brookings reported large hail, driven by severe
winds, damaged vehicles and crops. Total estimated damage was $3,250,000.00 with one life
lost during cleanup operations.
• June 2017 - A large upper-level low pressure trough lifting northeast over the region along
with a surface cold front interacting with a warm and very humid air mass brought severe
thunderstorms to the region. During the mid-afternoon hours, storms rapidly developed over
61
central and eastern South Dakota, between Pierre and Aberdeen. These storms quickly
strengthened and produced large hail, damaging winds, and eventually tornadoes. The storms
evolved into mainly a wind and tornado event around 7 pm CDT. Widespread wind damage
occurred across northeast South Dakota as the storms formed a line and moved northeast.
Many tornadoes occurred across the region, causing EF-0 and EF-1 damage.
• May 2022 - A derecho developed in south central South Dakota and traveled northeast into
eastern and northeastern South Dakota. A broad swath of winds from 70 to 100 mph
devastated much of southeast South Dakota, and portions of southwest Minnesota, northeast
Nebraska and northwest Iowa, causing extensive tree and structural damage and scores of
injuries. This thunderstorm complex generated 14 total tornadoes across northeastern South
Dakota in addition to a broad area of straight-line wind damage with measured speeds up to
102 mph in Gary, SD.
In addition, vehicles and high-profile vehicles were blown off several roads, shutting down
traffic on Interstates 29 and 90. Two (direct) fatalities occurred in vehicles impacted by debris
as the storms moved into the Sioux Falls area. Power was disrupted in a widespread area,
with estimates of over 45,000 customers impacted at one time. Many schools were closed
due to damage and power issues. The most impactful tornado was an EF-2 which damaged
numerous homes in the town of Castlewood and drew national media attention. Governor
Kristi Noem requested a Presidential Disaster Declaration, which was later granted, and
signed Executive Order 2022-06 to help residents recover from related storm damage.
Estimated statewide damage to public infrastructure is assessed at 6.7 million dollars across
20 counties and two reservations. South Dakota National Guard activated personnel to help
with clear debris and provide security for the town of Castlewood during cleanup.
HAIL
Hail is a form of precipitation consisting of solid ice that forms inside thunderstorm updrafts. The
raindrops reach extremely cold areas which causes them to freeze. The semi-frozen droplets
grow in size as they come into contact with each other forming the hailstone. Once the updraft
can no longer support the weight of the hail, it falls to Earth. Hailstones usually consist mostly of
water ice and measure between 5 and 150 millimeters in diameter, with the larger stones coming
from severe and dangerous thunderstorms. The largest hailstone recorded in the United States
occurred in 2010 in Vivian, South Dakota. The hailstone measured eight inches in diameter.
However, even dime sized hail can cause significant damage to vehicles, buildings, livestock, and
crops. When viewed from the air, it is evident that hail falls in paths known as hail swaths. These
occur as storms move while the hail is falling out. They can range in size from a few acres to an
area 10 miles wide and 100 miles long.
The County has a 100% potential for hail occurring each year. Most thunderstorms will produce
varying sizes of hail. The FEMA NRI states 5.4 hail events per year. Brookings Healthcare
System, in its THAM rates hail as one of four hazards in this plan for which there is a “moderate”
risk to its facilities and normal operation. The following charts shows the hail size comparisons.
62
SOURCE : NWS/NOAA
63
The table below indicates hail occurrences throughout the County over the last ten years.
However, the information provided by the NOAA website is incomplete due to inconsistent
reporting after such hazards occur. Because hail can occur in a high number of occurrences, it is
reasonable to expect that at least some property or crop damage was sustained during the events
listed, even though the damage may not have been reported or recorded. It is possible that such
damage was not reported because it was believed to be insignificant at the time or because those
responsible for reporting such information did not report to the proper agencies.
Table 4.10: Brookings County Ten Year Hail History
Location Date Time Type Magnitude Crop
Damage
White 03/31/2014 14:33 Hail 0.75 in.
Bruce 03/31/2014 14:40 Hail 0.88 in.
Sinai 05/08/2014 11:32 Hail 1.75 in.
Ahnberg 05/08/2014 11:40 Hail 1.50 in.
Volga 08/06/2015 17:55 Hail 1.75 in.
Ahnberg 06/03/2016 15:55 Hail 0.88 in.
Brookings 06/17/2016 17:49 Hail 1.50 in.
Medary 06/19/2016 20:45 Hail 0.75 in.
Ahnberg 07/05/2016 15:53 Hail 0.75 in.
Brookings 07/05/2016 16:31 Hail 1.75 in.
Bruce 07/16/2016 21:50 Hail 1.00 in.
White 07/11/2017 10:30;
21:08 Hail 1.50 in;
1.00 in.
Bruce 07/11/2017 10:55 Hail 1.00 in.
White 07/25/2017 15:28 Hail 1.50 in.
White 04/13/2018 23:33 Hail 0.75 in.
Bushnell 05/17/2019 19:18 Hail 1.00 in.
Elkton 07/20/2020 20:49 Hail 0.75 in. 100.00K
Volga 09/05/2020 22:03;
22:03 Hail 0.88 in;
1.25 in. 18.00K
Elkton 08/05/2021
18:25;
18:26;
18:35
Hail
1.50 in;
1.00 in;
1.00 in.
Volga 04/12/2022 18:15 Hail 1.00 in.
Bushnell 04/28/2022 17:22 Hail 1.00 in.
White 05/09/2022 05:29 Hail 0.88 in. 8.00K
Volga 06/20/2022 17:15;
17:23 1.25 in;
0.88 in. 6.00K
Brookings Muni
Airport 06/20/2022 17:29 1.00 in.
64
Location Date Time Type Magnitude Crop
Damage
Brookings 06/20/2022 17:30;
17:33 1.00 in;
1.50 in.
Sinai 07/13/2023 16:30;
16:35 1.50 in;
1.75 in. 60.00K
Bruce 07/19/2023 13:50 1.00 in.
White 07/19/2023 14:15 1.25 in.
Elkton 09/29/2023 15:19 1.00 in.
SOURCE : https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/stormevents/
LIGHTNING
Lightning results from a buildup of electrical charges that happens during the formation of a
thunderstorm. The rapidly rising air within the cloud, combined with precipitation movement within
the cloud, results in these charges. Giant sparks of electricity occur between the positive and
negative charges both within the atmosphere and between the cloud and the ground. When the
potential between the positive and negative charges becomes too great, there is a discharge of
electricity, known as lightning. Lightning bolts reach temperatures near 50,000˚ F in a split second.
The rapid heating and expansion, and cooling of air near the lightning bolt causes thunder. There
is a 100% chance of lightning occurring in Brookings County each year. The FEMA NRI shows
31.5 lightning events per year. Brookings Healthcare System, in its THAM rates lighting as the
only hazard in this plan for which there is a “high” risk to its facilities and normal operation.
The extent or severity of lightning can range from significant to insignificant depending on where
it strikes and what structures are hit. Water towers, cell phone towers, power lines, trees, and
common buildings all have the possibility of being struck by lightning.
Lightning strikes can also start wildfires, structure fires, or damage electrical systems. Most
people are struck by lightning before it starts raining or after it stops raining. People who leave
shelter during thunderstorms to watch or follow lightning also have the possibility of being struck
by lightning. According to the NWS, an average of 49 people a year are killed by lightning strikes.
The following chart shows the lightning activity levels that are used.
SOURCE : NWS
65
The NCEI (National Center for Environmental Information) Storm Events Database indicated no
lightning occurrences were reported over the past ten years where damage was reported.
However, the possibility exists that the information reported is incomplete. It is also important to
note that while no damage was reported, lightning strikes are common in all South Dakota
counties.
Climate Change Considerations
See “URBAN FIRE/WILDFIRES.”
WINTER STORMS
Winter storms deposit four or more inches of snow in a twelve-hour period or six inches of snow
during a twenty-four-hour period. Such storms are generally classified into four categories with
some taking the characteristics of several categories during distinct phases of the storm. These
categories include freezing rain, sleet, snow, and blizzard. Generally winter storms can range
from moderate snow to blizzard conditions and can occur between October and April. The months
of May, June, July, August, and September could possibly see snow, though the chances of a
storm is very minimal. Blizzard, freezing rain/sleet/ice, and heavy snow are components of winter
storms and included under this profile. The FEMA NRI states the County should anticipate 7.1
winter weather events per year.
Blizzards are a snow storm that lasts at least three hours with sustained wind speeds of thirty-
five miles per hour (mph) or greater, visibility of less than one-quarter mile, temperatures lower
than 20°F and white out conditions. Snow accumulations vary, but another contributing factor
is loose snow existing on the ground which can get whipped up and aggravate the white out
conditions. When such conditions arise, blizzard warnings or severe blizzard warnings are
issued. Severe blizzard conditions exist when winds obtain speeds of at least forty-five mph
plus a great density of falling or blowing snow and a temperature of 10°F or lower. At least
one blizzard should occur each year in the County.
Freezing Rain/Ice occurs when temperatures drop below thirty degrees Fahrenheit, and rain
starts to fall. Freezing rain coats objects with ice, creating dangerous conditions due to
slippery surfaces, sidewalks, roads, and highways. Sometimes ice is unnoticeable, and is then
referred to as black ice. Black ice creates dangerous conditions, especially for traffic.
Additionally, a quarter inch of frozen rain can significantly damage trees, electrical wires, weak
structures, and other objects due to the additional weight bearing down on them. The potential
for ice storms in Brookings County annually is minimal, but can cause significant damages
when they occur. The FEMA NRI indicates 0.6 ice storm events per year.
Sleet does not generally cling to objects like freezing rain, but it does make the ground very
slippery. This also increases the number of traffic accidents and personal injuries due to falls.
Sleet can severely slow down operations within a community. Not only is there a danger of
slipping, but with wind, sleet pellets become powerful projectiles that may damage structures,
vehicles, or other objects. Sleet normally occurs several times each year.
Heavy Snow is a common occurrence throughout the County during the months from October
to April. Average annual snowfall for the county can range up to thirty-four inches.
Accumulations in dry years can be as little as five to ten inches, while wet years can see yearly
totals up to eighty inches. Snow is a major contributing factor to flooding, primarily during the
66
spring months of melting. The County should expect approximately several heavy snow
events each year.
Table 4.11 shows just how common blizzards, snow and ice storms are in the County. While such
storms would be considered extreme in many parts of the State, the consistent nature of such
weather hazards are expected in this area. Thus, planning and response mechanisms for snow
and ice storms are vital to the County and are routine procedures in the County due to the
common nature of such storms. Winter storms in South Dakota are known to cover large
geographical areas, often an entire county or multiple counties can be affected by a single storm.
All of the storms identified in Table 4.11 were considered to have occurred countywide. Due to
the multiple occurrences of storms each year, an exhaustive compilation is not possible.
Table 4.11 Brookings County Ten Year History of Snow and Ice Storms
Location Date Time Type Snowfall Summary Property
Damage
Brookings County 01/16/2014 10:00 Blizzard 0” – 2” across 9 counties
Brookings County 03/04/2014 16:00 Heavy Snow 5” – 8” across 2 counties
Brookings County 03/18/2014 09:00 Heavy Snow 4” – 10” across 11 counties
Brookings County 12/15/2014 08:00 Winter Storm 1” – 2” across multiple
counties
Brookings County 01/05/2015 11:00 Winter Storm 3” – 7” across multiple
counties
Brookings County 01/08/2015 13:20 Blizzard
Specifics not available –
blowing snow & reduced
visibility
Brookings County 11/30/2018 02:00 Winter Storm 5” – 11” across multiple
counties with freezing rain
Brookings County 12/01/2015 00:00 Winter Storm Carryover from day before
Brookings County 12/15/2015 16:00 Heavy snow 0” – 9” across multiple
counties with blowing snow
Brookings County 12/25/2015 20:00 Winter Storm 6” – 9” across multiple
counties with blowing snow
Brookings County 11/18/2016 04:00 Blizzard 4” – 9.5” across multiple
counties
Brookings County 12/10/2016 10:00 Heavy Snow 3” – 8” across 13 counties
Brookings County 12/16/2016 11:00 Winter Storm 4” – 9” across 21 counties
with blowing snow
Brookings County 03/12/2017 17:00 Heavy Snow 4” – 8” across 11 counties
Brookings County 02/22/2018 13:00 Winter Storm 5” – 8” across 6 counties
Brookings County 03/23/2018 20:00 Winter Storm 6” – 9” across 2 counties
Brookings County 04/08/2018 07:00 Winter Storm 9.5” around Brookings
Brookings County 04/13/2018 12:00 Blizzard 8” – 20” across multiple
counties
Brookings County 12/26/2018 15:00 Winter Storm 7” – 8” across multiple
counties
67
Location Date Time Type Magnitude Crop
Damage
Brookings County 03/09/2019 04:00 Winter Storm 2” – 6” across multiple
counties
Brookings County 04/11/2019 03:00 Blizzard
7” – 18” across multiple
counties with freezing rain
and sleet
Brookings County 12/28/2019 01:00 Winter Storm
1” – 11.5” across multiple
counties with blowing &
drifting snow
Brookings County 01/17/2020 07:30 Blizzard 2” – 6” across multiple
counties with freezing rain
Brookings County 02/08/2020 21:00 Winter Storm Specifics not available
Brookings County 02/12/2020 11:00 Blizzard Specifics not available
Brookings County 10/20/2020 04:00 Winter Storm 3” – 7” across multiple
counties
Brookings County 12/23/2020 09:00 Blizzard Specifics not available
Brookings County 01/14/2021 15:00 Blizzard 2” – 3” across multiple
counties
Brookings County 02/27/2021 22:00 Winter Storm 2” – 7” across 11 counties
Brookings County 03/14/2021 21:00 Winter Storm
Brookings County 01/14/2022 02:00 Winter Storm 5” – 11” across 6 counties
Brookings County 12/12/2022 18:00 Ice Storm Specifics not available
Brookings County 12/15/2022 05:00 Winter Storm 3” – 17” across multiple
counties
Brookings County 12/22/2022 10:00 Blizzard
1” – 3” across multiple
counties with drifts up to 5” –
10”
Brookings County 01/03/2023 09:00 Winter Storm 2” – 3” inches per hour with
up to 9” near Volga
Brookings County 02/21/2023 10:00 Blizzard 3” – 17” across multiple
counties
SOURCE : https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/stormevents/
The above data was obtained from the storm events database, compiled by the National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). Specific references to accumulations at communities
within Brookings County were included above. Where regional accumulations were listed, those
were included, otherwise “specifics not available” was listed where no region-wide
snowfall/rain/ice was listed. “Blizzard” conditions are based upon wind and temperature, as
described above. Many events did not list snowfall for the county or region, but described
widespread general effects of wind. The peak wind gust listed specifically for Brookings County
associated with Blizzard conditions was 56 mph.
68
Major Winter Storm Occurrences:
• January 1888 – According to an article on the SDSU website for National History Day in SD,
an extreme blizzard in January 1888 led to 170 deaths in South Dakota alone. Many of those
who passed away were school children trying to walk home, giving this blizzard its name. This
blizzard is also sometimes referred to as the Schoolhouse/Children’s Blizzard of 1888.
• March 1966 – One of the worst blizzards in South Dakota history occurred in the northern
Great Plains in March 1966. The blizzard dumped several feet of snow and brought winds of
40-55 MPH with gusts as high as 100 MPH. The storm caused several fatalities, killed
numerous livestock and caused structural damages. Roads were blocked and schools and
businesses were closed.
• October 1995 - a severe autumn snow and ice storm caused widespread damage in South
Dakota. Winds associated with the storm caused lines to slap together and poles to fail,
producing widespread power outages to large portions of rural South Dakota. Tree damage
also led to significant damage to electrical utilities. Thirteen rural electric cooperatives reported
damage from this storm. The cooperatives lost nearly 9,500 poles and 170 transmission lines.
Damage was estimated at $10 to $10.3 million to rural electric infrast ructure only.
Approximately 30,290 households were affected by the power outages. The power outages
also caused several rural water systems’ pumping stations to go off line, causing a loss of
water utilities to members of rural water systems. The National Guard provided generators to
power these pumping stations to restore water service. This storm also forced major
transportation delays as portions of Interstates 90 and 29 had to be closed because of the
snow accumulation on the roadway and poor visibility. Twenty-eight counties including
Brookings County were included in the disaster declaration.
• March 2002- Widespread heavy snow was preceded by freezing rain. Precipitation from the
Chamberlain to Huron areas and east to Brookings was mainly snow, with accumulations
ranging from 8 inches in several areas to 19 inches at Huron. The heavy snow on top of the
ice made travel difficult, and in places impossible, as some roads were blocked. Cattle losses
were suspected from the heavy wet snow occurring during calving season, but in most cases
specific numbers were not available. Over the Southeast part of the affected area, including
near and just south of Sioux Falls, damage to power lines due to icing was reported, with
several power outages in Sioux Falls. Three to six inches of snow fell on top of the ice in this
area. Damages were estimated at $210,000.
• November 2005 - Snowfall varying from 4 to 15 inches combined with winds gusting over 50
mph to produce blizzard conditions. The heaviest snowfalls were mostly near and west of the
James River, in the area where a severe ice storm immediately preceded the blizzard. Several
reports of 6-to-8-foot drifts were received from this area. Visibilities were lowered frequently
to zero and travel was made impossible in many areas. Roads, including Interstate Highways
90 and 29 were closed for extended periods of time. Most schools and businesses that were
not already closed because of the ice storm were forced to close. The winds during the
blizzard continued to bring down power lines and poles, most of which had been coated and
weighted down by ice in the area hit by the ice storm. In addition, minor damage was caused
to homes and vehicles by the strong winds and by windblown debris, mainly from trees.
Damages were estimated at $1,900,000.
69
• December 2016 - This storm was unusually warm for the region for late December and
produced record breaking heavy rain along with flooding in some cases. Significant icing
occurred across areas at or just below the freezing point, which resulted in widespread tree
and power pole and line damage to the area. Some downed branches and trees fell onto
homes across the region. This storm also brought high winds along with snow and blizzard
conditions to the region. This significant storm resulted in massive power outages, stranded
motorists and closed roads. Roads and walkways became treacherous ice rinks and remained
as such for many days. There were numerous injuries from slips on the ice, as well as several
vehicular accidents and flight cancellations. Livestock was also affected, though most made
it through the storm. Dairy operations dealt with frozen drinking water tanks.
High winds gusting to over 70 mph impacted the entire region on the 25th and 26th. The
combination of snow and ice and high winds snapped or otherwise damaged hundreds of
power poles, downed several thousand miles of power lines, damaged several hundred
transmission structures and brought many substations down. Many roads were blocked by
power lines. Overall, more than one hundred linemen worked to bring the power back. Twenty-
one counties encompassing 30 communities and 3 Indian reservations were impacted. Entire
communities, thousands of homes and businesses, and ultimately over 12,000 people went
without power. For some, power was not restored for 10 days despite tireless efforts. All power
was restored by January 4th, 2017. Water and sewer systems shut down for several days for
some communities and emergency shelters were necessary. County and city governments
were overwhelmed by ice accumulations and blizzard conditions and struggled with
maintaining accessibility even for emergency traffic. Road conditions deteriorated to the point
where it took up to several hours for emergency officials to respond to 911 calls. The total
estimated damage was near 8 million dollars for central and northeast South Dakota.
• March 2018 - An intense surface low pressure area brought scattered showers and
thunderstorms along with heavy snow to much of north central and northeast South Dakota
from the 5th to the 6th. The scattered showers and thunderstorms moved across the region
during the early morning hours of the 5th while heavy snow developed from the mid-morning
to the early afternoon. There were several reports of thundersnow across the region. Snowfall
amounts ranged from 6 to as much as 18 inches before it ended on the 6th. The very heavy
snow resulted in closed businesses, schools, government offices, difficult travel conditions
with several accidents reported, along with closed highways and Insterstate-29. Many
activities and events were also postponed or cancelled.
• December 2022 - A strong low-pressure system produced snow and heavy snow prior to the
onset of strong northwesterly winds and periods of additional snow, which resulted in blizzard
or ground blizzard conditions across much of central and northeastern South Dakota for
extended periods of time from the morning of December 14th through the afternoon of
December 16th. Heavy snow of at least 6 inches in 12 hours was recorded from December
15th into the 16th in conjunction with the blizzard conditions. Winds gusted generally between
45 and 60 mph.
The South Dakota Department of Transportation placed nearly the entire state under No
Travel Advised or had road closures by Thursday, as numerous roads had become
impassable. I90 closed from Chamberlain to Rapid City from 10am CST on Tue Dec 13th
through mid-day Sat Dec 17th (from Kadoka to Chamberlain), and I29 closed from Watertown
to the ND border from 7pm Wed Dec 14th through 9am Sat Dec 17th. Several dozens of semi
drivers were stranded for consecutive days and nights at the Coffee Cup Fuel Stop in Vivian,
and numerous other vehicle accidents and rescues occurred as well. Additionally, power
70
outages were reported across the area, and school was cancelled at numerous locations for
multiple consecutive days.
The blizzard was just one component of a highly impactful, major winter storm. This storm
was severe, widespread and prolonged in nature, and produced freezing rain, heavy snow
and/or blizzard conditions from December 12th through 16th across the region. A Major
Disaster Declaration was declared on February 27th by Governor Noem for several counties
across central and northeastern South Dakota for winter weather from December 12-25th.
EXTREME COLD
What constitutes extreme cold, and its effects can vary across different areas of the country. In
regions relatively unaccustomed to winter weather, near freezing temperatures are considered
“extreme cold,” however, Eastern South Dakota is prone to much more extreme temperatures
than other areas in the country. Temperatures typically range between zero degrees Fahrenheit
and 100 degrees Fahrenheit, so extreme cold could be defined in the Brookings County PDM
jurisdiction area as temperatures below zero. The Wind Chill Chart is used to measure extreme
cold. The NWS/NOAA Wind Chill Chart can be found below. At least one extreme cold event
should occur each year. The FEMA NRI suggests 2.7 cold wave events per year.
Extreme Cold temperatures often accompany a winter storm, so you may have to cope with power
failures and icy roads. Whenever temperatures drop decidedly below normal and as wind speed
increases, heat can leave your body more rapidly. These weather-related conditions may lead to
serious health problems. Extreme cold is a dangerous situation that can bring on health
emergencies in susceptible people, such as those without shelter or who are stranded, or who
71
live in a home that is poorly insulated or without heat. Exposure is the biggest threat/vulnerability
to human life; however, incidences of exposure are isolated and thus unlikely to happen in
masses. The following information was found on the NOAA website. Table 4.12 identifies dates
and times of the temperature extremes. The location in table 4.12 is not specifically identified in
the table by jurisdiction due to the vast area across the State of South Dakota affected by extreme
temperatures. Brookings Healthcare System, in its THAM rates extreme cold as one of four
hazards in this plan for which there is a “moderate” risk to its facilities and normal operation
Table 4.12: Brookings County Ten Year History of Extreme Cold Temperatures
Location Date Time Type
Brookings County 01/23/2014 5:00 Extreme Cold/Wind Chill
Brookings County 03/02/2014 2:00 Extreme Cold/Wind Chill
Brookings County 01/16/2016 21:00 Extreme Cold/Wind Chill
Brookings County 06/10/2016 11:00 Excessive Heat
Brookings County 07/20/2016 12:00 Excessive Heat
Brookings County 12/30/2017 8:00 Extreme Cold/Wind Chill
Brookings County 01/01/2018 00:00 Extreme Cold/Wind Chill
Brookings County 01/15/2018 00:00 Extreme Cold/Wind Chill
Brookings County 03/03/2019 02:00 Extreme Cold/Wind Chill
Brookings County 02/12/2020 20:00 Extreme Cold/Wind Chill
Brookings County 02/13/2021 22:00 Extreme Cold/Wind Chill
Brookings County 12/31/2021 22:00 Extreme Cold/Wind Chill
Brookings County 01/01/2022 00:00 Extreme Cold/Wind Chill
Brookings County 01/06/2022 04:00 Extreme Cold/Wind Chill
Brookings County 12/21/2022 21:00 Extreme Cold/Wind Chill
Brookings County 07/27/2023 10:00 Excessive Heat
Brookings County 08/19/2023 13:00 Excessive Heat
Brookings County 08/21/2023 11:00 Excessive Heat
SOURCE : https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/stormevents/
• January 2009 - After a clipper system dropped from one to four inches of snow, Arctic air and
blustery north winds pushed into the area. The coldest air and the lowest wind chills of the
season spread across much of central and northeast South Dakota. Wind chills fell to thirty-
five to fifty degrees below zero late in the evening of the thirteenth and remained through the
fourteenth. By the morning of January 15, 2009, the Arctic high-pressure area settled in across
northeast South Dakota, bringing wind chills as low as sixty degrees below zero. Many
vehicles did not start because of the extreme cold and several schools had delayed starts.
Daytime highs remained well below zero across the area. This was one of the coldest days
that most areas experienced since the early 1970s.
72
• January 2014 - The combination of sub-zero temperatures with north winds produced
dangerously cold wind chills from 40 below to around 55 degrees below zero. Winds gusted
to over 40 mph at times. Several area activities were cancelled, as well as many schools on
Monday the 6th. Some of the coldest wind chills included 50 below in Hayti. With these types
of temperature extremes, the biggest concern for people is exposure because prolonged
exposure means almost certain death.
• December 2017 - Extreme wind chills of 35 to near 55 degrees below zero occurred off and
on during this time. Record lows set on the morning of January 1st were in the 30s below zero
with even some 40s below zero. Temperatures did not respond well for daytime highs on
January 1st as several record low highs in the single digits below zero occurred.
• February 2021 – A potent and persistent outbreak of Arctic air affected the entire region. The
coldest days of the outbreak for many occurred Valentine's Day weekend, when high
temperatures averaged around ten below zero, in northeastern South Dakota, to the single
digits above zero, in central South Dakota. On February 14th, low temperatures dropped into
the 20s to the 30s degrees below zero range. Extreme wind chills of 35 degrees to 55 degrees
below zero also occurred on several days during the outbreak. The magnitude of the cold
during this outbreak was fairly rare compared to the past 50 years, at least in terms of the
persistence of the Arctic air. This was especially impressive considering the lack of deep,
fresh snow cover across most of the area. If there had been widespread deep, fresh snowpack
ahead of this Arctic outbreak, low temperatures would have been more severe and more often
approaching record territory. Impacts from this extreme and persistent cold included many
frozen and/or broken water pipes (the limited snow depth did not help in this regard) and froze-
over home sewer vents, dead vehicle batteries, school delays, and church cancellations. The
prolonged cold caused significant strains to the power grid as demand spiked both locally and
across several other states. Thousands of customers were at least briefly without power
locally, particularly during the morning of Tue, Feb 16th. Concerns for rolling blackouts
lingered for several days in this regard due to the continued extreme demand/strain, and
people were repeatedly asked to conserve energy however possible.
Climate Change Considerations
According to the Fifth National Climate Assessment, the line of demarcation between the arid
west and humid east is moving eastward, beyond the traditional border at the 100th Meridian.
Since it is known that dryer air, resulting from decreased snowpack in the west/northwest, leads
to wider temperature fluctuations it is reasonable to expect increased frequency of extreme
temperatures, such as extreme heat and cold. Though stream flow data runs contrary to the
prediction of an arid Brookings County, it is expected the increased water levels are the result of
more frequent extreme moisture events (summer and winter storms) and rapid snow melt. The
winter season is warming at a faster rate than any other season in the Northern Plains region,
and this is also true for South Dakota. Winter storms and blizzards, however, will continue to be
a severe weather hazard in the state. Overall snow cover has decreased in the Northern
Hemisphere, due in part to higher temperatures that shorten the time snow spends on the ground.
Warmer winter temperatures could mean more ice and freezing rain events, which often impact
electrical utilities and communication systems, but can also affect agricultural livestock and roads
and transportation. The increased frequency of ice and freezing rain events increases the
likelihood that those events will occur in tandem with extreme cold events. Thereby increasing
the importance of temporary emergency shelter with back-up generators for the facility; and water
and sewer services for that facility.
73
URBAN FIRE/WILDFIRE
According to a United Nations Office of Disaster Risk Reduction (UNODRR) Urban Fire article,
all fires regardless of trigger, need three elements to sustain themselves: fuel, oxygen, and heat.
The heat thermally decomposes the fuel into a hot gas which mixes with the oxygen which then
creates a combustible gas namely the flame, the edge of which is where the combustion reaction
happens.
UNODRR urban fire article further states urban fires are fire involving buildings or structures in
cities or towns with potential to spread to adjoining structures. Triggers of urban fires are
numerous, from human actions (e.g., knocking over a candle, arson) and technological triggers
(e.g., power surge overloading appliances), to natural triggers (e.g., wildland fires interacting with
urban areas).
Urban fires are linked to density of structures and type of construction. Highly dense settlements
are likely to have large areas of structures that are in close proximity to one another which will
facilitate fire spread. This, when combined with combustible construction can lead to large-scale
fire events.
Wildfires are uncontrolled conflagrations that spread freely through the environment. Other names
such as brush fire, bushfire, forest fire, grass fire, hill fire, peat fire, vegetation fire, and wildfire
may be used to describe the same phenomenon. A wildfire differs from the other fires by its
extensive size; the speed at which it can spread out from its original source; its ability to change
direction unexpectedly; and to jump gaps, such as roads, rivers and fire breaks.
Fires start when an ignition source is brought into contact with a combustible material that is
subjected to sufficient heat and has an adequate supply of oxygen from the ambient air. Ignition
may be triggered by natural sources such as a lightning strike, or may be attributed to a human
source such as “discarded cigarettes, sparks from equipment, and arched power lines.
According to the SD Drought Mitigation Plan (SD DMP), lightning fires burn more acreage than
human-caused fires, in part, because 1) multiple lightning fire ignitions often occur at the same
time; 2) lightning fires can occur throughout the protection area, while most human-caused fires
occur in accessible areas; 3) people often detect and report human-caused fires quickly due to
their proximity to inhabited areas; and 4) lightning producing thunderstorms typically occur during
the hottest portion of the fire season, while many human-caused fires start during spring or fall.
When combined with drought, these conditions can create devastating wildfires.
According to Drought.gov and the Wildland Fire Assessment System, the Keetch-Byram Drought
Index assesses the risk of fire due to drought. The Keetch-Byram Drought Index (KBDI) assesses
the risk of fire by representing the net effect of evapotranspiration and precipitation in producing
cumulative moisture deficiency in deep duff and upper soil layers.
The KBDI attempts to measure the amount of precipitation necessary to return the soil to full field
capacity. The index ranges from zero, the point of no moisture deficiency, to 800, the maximum
drought that is possible, and represents a moisture regime from 0 to 8 inches of water through
the soil layer. At 8 inches of water, the KBDI assumes saturation. At any point along the scale,
the index number indicates the amount of net rainfall that is required to reduce the index to zero,
or saturation.
74
• KBDI = 0 - 200: Soil moisture and large class fuel moistures are high and do not
contribute much to fire intensity. Typical spring dormant season following winter
precipitation.
• KBDI = 200 - 400: Typical of late spring, early growing season. Lower litter and duff
layers are drying and beginning to contribute to fire intensity.
• KBDI = 400 - 600: Typical of late summer, early fall. Lower litter and duff layers
actively contribute to fire intensity and will burn actively.
• KBDI = 600 - 800: Often associated with more severe drought with increased wildfire
occurrence. Intense, deep burning fires with significant downwind spotting can be
expected. Live fuels can also be expected to burn actively at these levels.
A sample KBDI can be found below.
A strong possibility exists for simultaneous emergencies during droughts. Wildfires are the most
common. While researching the hazard occurrences that have taken place in the County, it
became evident that the information found on the NCDC Storm Events Database website was
incomplete. Therefore, other sources were contacted whenever possible. Specifically, NCDC
Storm Events Database had zero occurrences listed for wildfires in the County, but the State Fire
Marshal’s Office (SFMO) was contacted to verify that information.
75
The information from the SFMO is derived from the reports submitted by local fire departments
who respond to the fires. According to SFMO representatives, many of the fire departments in the
County are volunteer-based, which often leads to wildfires being extinguished without reports
being filed with the State. As a result, the SFMO data is not entirely complete either. For the
purpose of this PDM, we have used the numbers provided by the SFMO as a point of reference
to assess the likelihood of a wildfire hazard occurring within the jurisdiction.
The information provided by the SFMO identifies 247 structure fire responses, 136 vehicle fire
responses, and 371 outdoor fire responses reported from 2014 to 2023. The cause of the outdoor
fires is not listed, so it is not known for certain whether all or some of these fires resulted due to
a natural hazard occurrence or as a result of human behavior. Additionally, the SFMO provided
information about the number of injuries and fatalities reported as a result of these fires. According
to the information provided, 7 civilian and 2 firefighter injuries or and 2 civilian and 0 firefighter
fatalities were reported during that time period.
The table below identifies the number of fire department responses to structural, vehicle and
outdoor fires that have been experienced within the county. It should be noted that the number of
responses does not necessarily mean that there were 247 outdoor (wildfire) fires as some events
required multiple departments to respond.
Table 4.13: Brookings County Structural, Vehicular, and Outdoor (Wildfire)
Department Responses
Year Structural
Fires
Vehicle
Fires
Outdoor
Fires
2014 24 17 43
2015 19 7 34
2016 28 18 38
2017 26 13 41
2018 18 11 16
2019 19 12 14
2020 34 20 48
2021 26 16 57
2022 33 14 49
2023 20 8 31
Total 247 136 371
SOURCE : State of South Dakota Fire Marshall Office
The data compiled by the SMFO is not discriminate enough to determine whether a fire can be
classified as an urban or rural. The map from the SD SHMP displayed on the following page
shows the South Dakota Wildland Urban Interface areas that can experience wildfires. This shows
very little chance of a wildfire occurrence broadly over the entire Brookings County jurisdiction.
The FEMA NRI shows a 0.053% chance of wildfire per year.
The PDM Planning Team reviewed the incidence of fire at South Dakota State University.
According to its annual 2024 report, a total of three (3) fires occurred on campus (all in 2021) from
2021 – 2023.
76
Figure 4.7: SD Wildland-Urban Interface Map
Climate Change Considerations
Driven by increased temperature and decreased relative humidity, fire potential in this region is
projected to increase under future climate change, especially in summer and autumn, with fire
seasons becoming longer, according to the Fifth National Climate Assessment. Increased
evapotranspiration and drought risk raise the probability of large fire occurrence. The number of
large grassland wildfires in the four semiarid ecoregional grasslands of the Northern Great Plains
increased by 213%, from 128 between 1985 and 1995 to 273 between 2005 and 2014, with total
area burned increasing in the western ecoregions of the region by 350% but decreasing in eastern
ecoregions by 75% or more. Wildfire numbers and fire-season length increased from the 1970s
77
to the 2000s by 889% and 85 days, respectively, in western Montana and Wyoming forests, with
most ignited by lightning strikes rather than humans. Historically, snow cover prevented winter
wildfires and increased fuel moisture conditions during snowmelt followed by spring precipitation.
However, early spring snowmelt has been correlated with increased fire activity. From 1950 to
2010, the number of snow-cover days declined within the region.
Though urban fires are not expected to be significantly impacted by climate change, wildfires in
Brookings County may increase. The data for increased frequency of wildfire is based largely
west of this County. However, with the creep of earlier warm Spring temperatures will come higher
likelihood of existing pasture land being dry enough to ignite in lightning storms. As previously
noted elsewhere in this plan, more intense summer storms can be expected which is expected to
lead to a higher risk for lightning; and, in turn, lighting ignited grassland fires.
ASSESSING VULNERABILITY: OVERVIEW
Requirement 201.6(c)(2)(i). Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool – B1-d&f.
Requirement 201.6(c)(2)(i). Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool – B2-a-b.
Hazards were also analyzed in terms of the level of the community or county’s perceived
vulnerability to the hazard. Vulnerability to the hazard is the susceptibility of life, property, and the
environment to injury or damage if a hazard occurs.
Representatives from each participating jurisdiction and the PDM Planning Team were asked to
complete worksheets that rated their perception to vulnerability of hazards for either their specific
geographical location, or for county-wide risks. A low vulnerability hazard is one that has very low
damage potential to either life or property (minor damage to less than 5% of the jurisdiction). A
“medium” vulnerability hazard is unlikely to threaten human life, although some people may be at
risk, but may pose moderate damage potential (causing partial damage to 5% to 10% of the
jurisdiction, on an irregular occurrence). A “high” vulnerability hazard may threaten human life,
and more than ten percent of the jurisdiction may be at risk on a regular occurrence. Tabl e 4.14
below is an overall summary of perceived vulnerability by jurisdiction produced from the FEMA
worksheets completed by each participating jurisdiction and PDM Planning Team.
78
Table 4.14: Overall Summary of Vulnerability by Jurisdiction
Type of
Disaster
Brookings
County Aurora Brookings Bruce Bushnell Elkton Sinai Volga White Avg.
Rating
Drought L M L L M N L L M L
Earthquake M N M N N H N N N N
Extreme Cold M M L L M H L M M M
Extreme Heat M M L L L H L M L L
Flood M L M H N N L L N L
Freezing
Rain/Sleet/Ice M L M L H H H M H M
Hail M M M M M M M M M M
Heavy Rain M L H L L M L M L L
Heavy Snow M L L L H M L M H M
Lightning M M L L L L L L L L
Rapid Snow
Melt M L H L N L L L N L
Strong Winds M H M M H H H M H H
Thunderstorm M M M L N M L L L L
Tornado M H L H H H H H H H
Urban Fire M M M L H L H L H M
N : Not applicable; not a hazard to the jurisdiction
L : Low risk/vulnerability; little damage potential (minor damage to less than 5% of the jurisdiction)
M : Medium risk/vulnerability; moderate damage potential (causing partial damage to 5-10% of the jurisdiction, and irregular occurrence)
H : High risk/vulnerability; significant risk/major damage potential (for example, destructive, damage
to more than 10% of the jurisdiction and/or regular occurrence)
79
After identifying and assessing the natural hazards that may affect Brookings County and
discussing their perceived vulnerabilities, the Team decided to concentrate on the following
natural hazards: flooding, severe summer storms, severe winter storms, and drought/fire. The
remaining natural hazards: earthquakes, dam failure, ice jams, landslides, and subsidence had a
low/no probability of occurrence and a low/no vulnerability in most of the County. These hazards
will no longer be considered by this plan.
It should be noted that Elkton, Brookings City and the County reported vulnerability to earthquakes
due to unfamiliarity with standards for earthquakes. Due to the fact that no earthquake has ever
been reported within Brookings County, and there is no reason to expect that to change the
communities determined earthquakes to be akin to meteor strikes which can occur but the risk is
historically insignificant. For future plans, Brookings County will adopt a vulnerability score which
will account for probability of these hazards that the communities are unfamiliar with and better
justify that being historically insignificant led to the community finding it unnecessary to establish
mitigation actions for the given hazard.
Regional Climate Change Trends
FEMA requires PDM plans to include climate change projections as a part of the hazard
assessment and vulnerability analysis. The Third National Climate Assessment (TNCA),
published in 2014, addresses the current and future impacts of climate-related impacts on various
sectors and regions throughout the United States. This report was reviewed and its findings were
incorporated into this plan.
The TNCA indicates increasing mean temperatures in the northern Great Plains region, where
South Dakota is located, and winter temperatures warming faster than summer temperatures.
This trend may lead to greater evaporation and more frequent droughts, necessitating new
agricultural practices to adapt to changing conditions. Additionally, South Dakota has experienced
a long-term trend of increasing annual precipitation, with the majority occurring in spring and fall.
The report suggests precipitation extremes will become more frequent and intense, potentially
exacerbating flooding, especially in the spring.
The Fourth National Climate Assessment, released in 2018, reaffirms the findings within the
TNCA. Other studies reviewed for this plan include the State of South Dakota Multi-Jurisdictional
Hazard Mitigation Plan, the US Environmental Protection Agency’s report on Climate Impacts in
the Great Plains, and the NOAA NCDC-State Climate Summaries 2022 for South Dakota, which
provide similar information as the third and fourth climate assessments.
HAZARD VULNERABILITIES
The following paragraphs summarize the description of the jurisdiction’s vulnerability to each
hazard and the impact of each hazard on the jurisdiction.
Flooding
Inundation flooding occurs most often in the spring. The greatest risks are realized typically during
a rapid snowmelt before ice is completely off all of the rivers or ice jams that occur when warm
temperatures and heavy rain cause snow to melt rapidly. Snow melting combined with heavy
rains can cause frozen rivers to swell, which breaks the ice layer on top of the river. The ice layer
often breaks into large chunks, which float downstream and often pile up near narrow passages
80
and other obstructions, such as bridges and dams causing localized flooding. Flash flooding is
more typically realized during the summer months. This flooding is primarily localized when
enough rain can be produced to cause inundation flooding. Flooding can result in injuries and
even loss of life when quickly moving water is involved. Six inches of moving water is enough to
sweep a vehicle off a road. Disruption of communication, transportation, electric service, and
community services, along with contamination of water supplies and transportation accidents are
very possible.
Brookings County has experienced severe damages to roads and culverts periodically from
flooding. Conditions, at times, make emergency response and evacuation operations difficult,
adversely affecting the safety of residents. The flooding of township roads is a concern for the
entire county. Township officials have identified areas that are either vulnerable or have
experienced recurring damages. These areas are identified in maps contained in the Appendix E.
Flooding, especially county-wide flooding, causes significant damages and disrupts travel on
roads in the county. According to the FEMA NRI, Brookings County can expect 2.7 riverine
flooding events per year. These are mostly localized events. FEMA flood studies provide mapping
and detailed flood information for floodplains where the water body has a one percent chance of
occurrence in any given year in identified special flood hazard areas. Below data indicates specific
reports of flooding. Brookings County residents and emergency responders have adjusted to life
with dozens of feet of water over former collector streets (county roads) and local streets
(township roads) for three decades, in some cases. Flood events listed below were compiled from
data available through NOAA. These refer to events where waters subsided over time. It should
be noted that, except for flash flooding, the “location” of flooding is considered regional rather than
site specific.
Table 4.15: Brookings County Ten Year Flooding History
Location Date Time Type Rainfall/Event
Summary
Property
Damage
Crop
Damage
White 06/01/2014 18:25 Flash
Flood
Heavy rain caused flash flooding of area
roads & cut channels in farm fields.
White 06/05/2014 09:16 Flash
Flood
Heavy rain caused water to run over some
roads.
Brookings
Muni Airport 06/17/2016 18:00 Flash
Flood
Heavy rain caused flash flooding of
numerous streets, making some
impassable & stranding several vehicles.
50.00K
Bruce 03/22/2018 05:00 Flood
Runoff from rainfall, snow melt, and ice
breakup caused minor flooding of lowland
agricultural areas.
Medary 03/24/2018 08:00 Flood Continuation of snow and rain.
Bruce 04/13/2018 06:00 Flood Rapid snow melt led to flooded cropland
and roads.
Bruce 04/20/2018 07:00;
22:00 Flood
Snow melt and runoff from heavier rainfall
produced moderate flooding – large impact
to lowland agricultural areas.
White 04/21/2018 04:00 Flood Continuation of snow melt & rain runoff.
Bruce 04/23/2018 02:00 Flood Continuation of snow melt & rain runoff.
Medary 04/23/2018 22:00 Flood Continuation of snow melt & rain runoff.
Bruce 05/01/2018 00:00 Flood Continuation of snow melt & rainfall runoff.
81
Location Date Time Type Rainfall/Event
Summary
Property
Damage
Crop
Damage
Brookings
Muni Airport 07/19/2018 02:00 Flash
Flood
3rd Street in Brookings was under water due
to torrential rainfall.
Brookings 07/19/2018 03:50;
04:00
Flash
Flood
6.8: - 9” of rain resulted in multiple streets
flooded in Brookings.
Bushnell 07/19/2018 04:45 Flash
Flood Water over US Hwy 14.
Medary 07/19/2018 19:00 Flood 3” – 9” of rain caused river levels to rise
above 2.5’ above flood stage.
Medary 03/13/2019 12:00 Flood Flooding resulted in damage to public
infrastructure. 170.00K
White 03/15/2019 03:00 Flood
Snow melt & heavy rainfall resulted in
flooding of ag lands and numerous
city/township roads.
Medary 03/18/2019 20:00 Flood Medary Creek reached 2nd highest crest on
record of 1.71’ above flood stage.
Bruce 03/21/2019 03:30 Flood
Big Sioux River near Bruce reached 2nd
highest crest on record of 2.86’ above flood
stage.
Bruce 03/22/2019 13:00 Flood Continued snow melt and heavy rainfall.
Bruce 04/01/2019 00:00 Flood
Runoff from precipitation which totaled 2” –
4” in. resulting in flooding along the Big
Sioux River.
White 04/17/2019 07:00 Flood 2” – 3” of precipitation.
Bruce 05/01/2019 00:00 Flood 3rd month of constant flooding due to
continued snow melt and precipitation.
Brookings
Muni Airport 05/17/2019 19:52;
22:00
Flash
Flood
Water reach 2’ depth at many city
intersections.
White 05/18/2019 07:00 Flood
Widespread rainfall 1” – 2” caused flooding
to agricultural land & township roads and
spring planting.
Sinai 06/01/2019 00:00 Flood Prolonged flooding led to loss of or inability
to plant crops. 21.540M
Bruce 06/01/2019 00:00 Flood Continuation of flooding from May & further
impeded spring planting.
Bruce 06/27/2019 08:00;
22:00 Flood Runoff from 1” – 2” of rainfall renewed
minor flooding.
Bruce 07/01/2019 03:00 Flood 6” – 10” of rainfall resulted in flooding along
the Big Sioux River.
White 07/09/2019 22:00 Flood Flooding of city & rural roads and
agricultural lands.
Bruce 07/10/2019 21:00 Flood Continued flooding.
Bruce 08/01/2019 00:00 Flood Continued flooding.
Bruce 08/19/2019 16:00;
22:30 Flood Rainfall of 2” – 3” flooded agricultural land.
Brookings
Muni Airport 09/10/2019 22:51 Flash
Flood
Vehicles became stranded in flood waters
after intense rainfall. 10.00K
82
Location Date Time Type Rainfall/Event
Summary
Property
Damage
Crop
Damage
Brookings 09/10/2019 23:15 Flash
Flood
Several streets around town remained
flooded, with the underpass on 6th Ave in
Brookings pooled to several feet.
10.00K
Medary 09/11/2019 19:30 Flood 5” – 10” of rainfall. Numerous county &
township roads were inundated with water. 25.00K
Sinai 09/12/2019 00:00 Flood
Flooding resulted in damage to public
infrastructure including county & township
roads and culverts, along with crop losses.
244.00K 204.00K
White 09/12/2019 03:00 Flood Continued excessive rainfall. 50.00K
Bruce 09/12/2019 05:00;
12:30 Flood Continued excessive rainfall. 35.00K
Bruce 10/23/2019 07:00 Flood
Big Sioux River near Bruce crested above
flood stage resulted in minor flooding of ag
land & property damage.
2.50K
Bruce 11/12/2019 11:30 Flood
Ice development on the Big Sioux River
piled up on several bridges causing lowland
flooding.
Bruce 12/11/2019 11:00 Flood Snow melt & ice jams resulted in minor
flooding.
Storla 03/08/2020 20:00 Flood 1” – 4” of precipitation residing in snowpack
& flooding.
Bruce 03/11/2020 04:00 Flood 4” – 6” of snowpack melt.
Bruce 03/13/2020 17:00 Flood Continued snow melt.
Bruce 03/22/2020 04:00 Flood Continued snow melt. Big Sioux River
remained at minor flood stage.
Bruce 03/29/2020 08:00 Flood Minor rainfall, less than 1”, caused ag land
flooding.
Bruce 04/01/2020 00:00 Flood Continuation of flooding from March.
Bruce 05/13/2022 02:00;
19:00 Flood Runoff from 2” – 3” of rainfall left small
tracts of ag land with minor flooding.
Bruce 05/31/2022 12:00 Flood 1” -1.5” of rainfall resulted in minor flooding
of ag land.
Bruce 06/01/2022 00:00 Flood Significant rural land was flooded.
White 04/08/2023 18:00 Flood Rapid snowmelt between 2” – 5”
Bruce 04/10/2023 05:00 Flood
Due to snowmelt, Big Sioux River was
above minor flood stage for 16 days and
above moderate stage for 6 days.
22.00K
Medary 04/10/2023 07:00 Flood Rapid snowmelt from above normal
temperatures.
Bruce 04/11/2023 01:00 Flood Big Sioux River continued to rise above
flood stage due to rapid snowmelt.
SOURCE : https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/stormevents/
83
Climate Change Considerations
There is no comprehensive assessment of how climate change might affect flooding in South
Dakota. The TNCA, EPA-Climate Impacts on the Great Plains study, and other studies proposed
climate change projections that show future precipitation patterns will vary across the Great
Plains. Winter/spring precipitation and very heavy precipitation events are both projected to
increase in the northern portions of the Great Plains, leading to increased runoff and potential
flooding. Increased snowfall, rapid spring warming, and intense rainfall can combine to produce
significant flooding.
Since 1990, South Dakota has averaged 22% more 2-inch rain events compared to the long-term
average. Some historic rain and flooding events have occurred in recent years. Climate
projections for the Great Plains indicate that 1-day, 20-year return events will increase in
frequency by 8-16% in the coming decades.
Vulnerability
There is no comprehensive assessment of how climate change might affect flooding in South
Dakota. The TNCA, EPA-Climate Impacts on the Great Plains study plus other studies proposed
climate change projections show that future precipitation patterns will vary across the Great
Plains. Winter/spring precipitation and very heavy precipitation events are both projected to
increase in the northern portions of the Great Plains, leading to increased runoff and potential
flooding. Increased snowfall, rapid spring warming, and intense rainfall can combine to produce
significant flooding. Since 1990, South Dakota has averaged 22% more 2-inch rain events
compared to the long-term average. Some historic rain and flooding events have occurred in
recent years. Climate projections for the Great Plains indicate that 1-day, 20-year return events
will increase in frequency by 8% to 16% in the coming decades.
Severe Storms
Summer Storms
Summer storms can develop anywhere in the County and historically occur from early spring to
early fall. Summer storms can quickly progress into thunderstorms that include strong winds,
heavy rains and flooding, lightning, and hail. These storms can also spur the development of
funnel clouds and tornadoes. Summer storms range from mild to severe, posing risks of injury or
death, destroying property, and killing livestock. This section covers five types of hazards caused
by summer storms, particularly thunderstorms: hail, heavy rains, lightning, strong winds, and
tornadoes. Flooding was discussed in a precious section.
Hail can cause damage to property such as crops, vehicles, windows, roofs, and structures. The
County and its local jurisdictions are vulnerable to hail, like most other areas in the State due to
the nature of the hazard. The average hail stone size for these incidents was a little over 1-inch
in diameter. Mitigating hail is difficult and is usually found in the form of insurance policies for
structures, vehicles, and crops. The County can expect hail several times each year.
84
Heavy Rain causes damage to public and private property, such as roads and homes. Roads,
culverts, and bridges can be washed out, causing traffic hazards for travelers and commuters.
Many times the roads have to be closed causing rural traffic to have to take alternate routes which
can sometimes be an additional five to ten miles out of the way. All areas of the County are
vulnerable when heavy rains occur. Storm sewers are built for the typical storm and therefore do
not accommodate excessive or heavy rains. When heavy rains occur in the County, it may cause
sewers to back up in homes due to excess water entering the wastewater collection lines. The
excess water sometimes has no place to go and thus basements fill up with water which results
in damage to water heaters, furnaces, and damage to living quarters for people who live in
basement apartments.
Lightning often strikes the tallest objects within the area. In city limits, trees and poles often receive
the most strikes. In rural areas, shorter objects are more vulnerable to being struck. Electrical
lines and poles are also vulnerable because of their height and charge. Tall trees located near
electrical lines can be broken in wind or by lightning strikes and land on electrical lines, severing
connections. Limited loss of power is common on an annual basis. Typical power interruptions
last around one to three hours. Most residents are prepared to deal with this.
Cloud-to-ground lightning can kill or injure people by direct or indirect means. Objects can be
struck directly, which may result in an explosion, burn, or total destruction. Damage may also be
indirect, when the current passes through or near an object, which generally results in less
damage. Most injuries from lightning occur before rain begins or near the end of thunderstorms.
Individuals who sought shelter leave those areas prior to the entire completion of the
thunderstorm. Believing it is safe to freely move around, lightning strikes catch them off guard.
One of lightning’s most dangerous attributes includes its ability to cause fires. Since the entire
county is vulnerable to lightning strikes and subsequent fires, these fires will be treated under the
fire section of this PDM.
Strong Winds can be detrimental to the County. Trees, poles, power lines, and weak structures
are all susceptible and vulnerable to strong winds. When strong winds knock down trees, poles,
power lines, and structures it creates additional traffic hazards for travelers and commuters.
Strong winds are a common occurrence in all parts of the County. The farming community tends
to be vulnerable because many old farm sites have weak, dilapidated, or crumbling structures or
structures such as grain bins which can easily be blown over. Another area of particular
vulnerability would be those areas with dense tree growth where dead or decaying trees lose their
stability and can be blown over or knocked down easily. High voltage electrical transmission lines
run the length of the County. These lines are susceptible to breaking during high winds and hail.
Tornadoes present significant danger and occur most often in South Dakota during the months of
May, June, and July. The greatest period of tornado activity (about 82 percent of occurrence) is
from eleven a.m. to midnight. Within this time frame, most tornadoes occur between four p.m. and
six p.m.
According to the NCEI, there were 1,885 tornadoes, of which 692 were F1 or higher, in South
Dakota between 1950 and 2023 (73 years). Based on this information, the probability that at least
one tornado will occur in South Dakota is 100%. Annualized losses are estimated at nearly $11
million. Figure 4.8 depicts the probability of a damaging tornado occurring in each county based
on the historical data. FEMA NRI projects the potential for 0.5 tornado events per year.
Figure 4.8 Damaging Tornado Probability by County
85
Climate Change Considerations
The annual risk for intense summer storms is very high and will increase. Climate projections are
that the frequency and severity of heavy rainfall events will increase. Often associated with
summer storms are hail, lightning and strong winds. It is expected that as summer/thunder storms
increase, in conjunction with more of the associated hail, lightning, and strong wind events.
The Fourth National Climate Assessment report states, “since the 1970s, the United States has
experienced a decrease in the number of days per year on which tornadoes occur, but an increase
in the number of tornadoes that form on such days.”
According to the SD SHMP, there is a lot of uncertainty with the influence of climate change on
severe summer storms and tornadoes, future updates to the mitigation plan should include the
latest research on how the hazards frequency and severity could change.
Winter Storms
Winter Storms have a high risk of occurrence in the County. Several snowstorms each resulting
in five to ten inches of snow occur in the County area annually. High winds, heavy and blowing
snow, freezing rain/ice, and cold temperatures can impair/immobilize transportation, down power
lines and trees, cause the collapsing of weaker structures, and potentially cause flooding.
Livestock and wildlife are also very vulnerable during periods of heavy snow. Most winter storms
can be considered to have occurred countywide.
Blizzards are characterized by high winds, heavy and blowing snow, cold temperatures, and low
visibility. Blizzards subsequently create conditions such as icy roads, closed roads, downed power
86
lines and trees. The County’s population is especially vulnerable to these conditions because
people tend to leave their homes to get to places such as work, school, and stores rather than
staying inside. Traffic is one of the biggest hazards in the County during a blizzard because people
often get stuck, stranded, and lost when driving their vehicles which usually prompts others such
as family and or emergency responders to go out in the adverse conditions to rescue them.
Freezing rain/ice causes adverse conditions such as slippery surfaces and extra weight buildup
on power lines, poles, trees, and structures. The additional weight can often cause weak
structures to cave in and cause tree branches and power lines to break and fall. Electric
transmission/distribution lines run the length of the County. These lines are susceptible to
breaking under freezing rain and icy conditions and severing during high blizzard winds. Loss of
power can cause the loss of residential heating and utilities usage. Limited loss of power is not
uncommon on an annual basis. A typical power interruption lasts from one to three hours. Most
residents are prepared to deal with this type of inconvenience. The elderly and families with
children potentially may suffer from a long duration loss of power during winter storms. Traffic on
the roads and highways tend to be another hazard during freezing rain and icy conditions because
vehicles often slide off the road which prompts emergency responders and others to have to go
out on rescue missions in the adverse conditions.
Extreme cold temperatures in the County are common occurrences. It is expected that at least
three times each year there will be extreme cold in the area. It is possible that people in the area
have adapted to this type of extreme temperatures and thus such weather events are not reported
as often as they occur. Extreme cold and a long duration power outage has the potential to cause
harm to vulnerable populations, damage structures that are poorly insulated or without heat and
disrupt/impair communication facilities. Many communities have designated emergency shelters
with generators to provide a location for persons in need of shelter. In South Dakota, most
neighbors and relatives will check on vulnerable persons to ensure their safety during these types
of events.
Flooding was previously covered in this section.
While winter storms would be considered extreme in many parts of the State, the consistent nature
of such weather hazards are expected in this area. Thus, planning and response mechanisms for
snow and ice storms are vital to the County and are routine procedures in the County due to the
common nature of such storms.
Climate Change Considerations
According to climate reports, there is evidence for the entire Northern Hemisphere of an increase
in both storm frequency and intensity during the cold season since 1950, with storm tracks having
shifted slightly towards the poles. South Dakota’s northern location and proximity to the typical
U.S. winter storm track make it highly susceptible to heavy snows, high winds, and low wind chill
temperatures. Extremely heavy snowstorms increased in number during the last century in
northern and eastern parts of the United States, but have been less frequent since 2000. Total
seasonal snowfall has generally increased in the northern Great Plains.
The winter season is warming at a faster rate than any other season in the Northern Plains region,
and this is also true for South Dakota. Winter storms and blizzards, however, will continue to be
a severe weather hazard in the state. Overall snow cover has decreased in the Northern
Hemisphere, due in part to higher temperatures that shorten the time snow spends on the ground.
87
Warmer winter temperatures could mean more ice and freezing rain events, which often impact
electrical utilities and communication systems, but can also affect agricultural livestock and roads
and transportation. There remains some uncertainty in projections for the coming decades, but
the rising trend of extreme precipitation events in general (including winter season) will continue
to be a hazard.
Drought/Fires
Drought can be defined as a period of prolonged lack of moisture. High temperatures, high winds,
and low relative humidity all result from droughts and are caused by droughts. Precipitation,
streams, rivers, lakes, reservoirs and groundwater are used to meet a diverse set of water
resource needs within the State including drinking water. Each of these water sources can be
adversely impacted during drought periods. Crops and other vegetation are harmed when
moisture is not present within the soil. Roughly every fifty years a significant drought is
experienced within the county, while less severe droughts have occurred as often as every three
years. The FEMA NRI states Brookings County has an annualized frequency of 8 drought events
per year.
Severe heat waves, a component of drought, have caused catastrophic crop damage, deaths
from hyperthermia, and widespread power failures due to increased use of air conditioning. Loss
of power and crop damage is the largest vulnerabilities to the county during extreme heat. Both
have an effect on quality of life, however, neither are detrimental to the existence of the population
of the County.
Wildfires occur primarily during drought conditions. Wildfires can cause extensive damage, both
to property and human life, and can occur anywhere in the county. Even though wildfires can
have various beneficial effects on wilderness areas for plant species that are dependent on the
effects of fire for growth and reproduction, large wildfires often have detrimental atmospheric
consequences, and too frequent wildfires may cause other negative ecological effects. Current
techniques may permit and even encourage fires in some regions as a means of minimizing or
removing sources of fuel from any wildfire that might develop.
Moisture amounts have the biggest impact on fire situations. During wet years, fire danger is low.
More controlled burns are conducted, and fewer mishaps occur. During dry years, severe
restrictions are placed on any types of burns. For information on dealing with open/controlled
burning within the county, see SDCL 34-29B and SDCL 34-35. The FEMA NRI states Brookings
County has a 0.053% chance of wildfire per year.
Since there are no remote forested regions in Brookings County, wildfires can be easily spotted
and are capable of being maintained. The County does not have any areas that are considered
wildland-urban interface. All communities and the golf course receive fire protection from local fire
departments. The following map shows the SD communities at risk from wildfire including
Brookings County.
4.9: SD Communities at Risk from Wildfire
88
In addition, fire interference with traffic on highways is not a major concern. The most important
factor in mitigating wildfires continues to be common sense and adherence to local burning
regulations and suggestions disseminated by the area officials.
Urban fires are a potential threat to the County and its communities. According to the US Fire
Administration, many urban fires are caused by human related activities such as cooking,
smoking, seasonal activities (candles and X-mas tree lights) or intentionally set. Other causes
include home appliances, electrical systems and heating systems. The probability of an urban fire
increases with population growth. This is due to human error and carelessness, which are other
factors contributing to fires. Urban fires can cause extensive losses of property, lives, injuries and
livelihood. The urban poor are the persons who are at greatest risk from urban fire. Generally,
they have little means of protection against losses. In addition, those at greatest risk of death and
injury are the old and the young due to lack of knowledge in how to respond and lack of m obility
when trying to respond.
Inadequate planning, infrastructure, and construction practices related to fire prevention and
mitigation significantly increase the potential for fire ignition and spread. Fire risk reduction
requires established firefighting capabilities, education and training. Many of the communities
have a volunteer fire department for fire suppression or are covered by a neighboring department.
Most of the communities in Brookings County have smaller populations. The City of Brookings is
the largest and the city has its own fire department.
Larger communities may implement building and fire regulations, but smaller communities lack
personnel for inspections and therefore do not enact building and fire regulations. The State of
89
South Dakota adopted the 2021 International Building Codes (IBC). South Dakota state law
requires all commercial and public building to be built to the 2021 IBC standards in the state.
Many communities adopt zoning regulations and ordinances to help with development and reduce
building densities to reduce fire spread and for fire access. According to the USFA, the number
of urban fires, fire casualties, and economic losses has continued to decline over the last several
years.
Climate Change Considerations
In the Fourth National Climate Assessment, climate model projections paint a clear picture of a
warmer future in the Northern Great Plains, with conditions becoming consistently warmer in two
to three decades and temperatures rising steadily towards the middle of the century. Overall,
climate models project an increase in the number of heavy precipitation events for much of the
region. Most precipitation events are projected to occur during the winter and spring seasons.
Rising temperatures will lead to increased evaporation and increasing drought frequency and
intensity. The probability for more very hot days (days with maximum temperatures above 90°F)
is expected to increase during the summer months, with potential impacts on agriculture, energy
production, human health, stream flows, snowmelt, and fires. Less precipitation and warmer
temperatures during the summer growing season, potentially causing drought conditions, may
adversely affect agriculture (no irrigation), human health and fires.
According to the SD DMP and SD SHMP, wildfire conditions across South Dakota and the western
United States in general are likely to worsen in the future due to climate change. The increase in
moisture can provide favorable conditions for fuel (vegetation) growth. Longer, hotter summers
deplete moisture in soils and vegetation potentially promoting drought conditions. The increase in
temperatures can dry out fuels more rapidly allowing them to burn more easily. Hotter
temperatures and drought conditions may adversely affect water supplies by decreasing their
availability for fire suppression. Climate change is also believed to increase the severity of
thunderstorms, leading to more lightning strikes that can ignite fires.
It appears that climate change will not have a major impact on urban fires, except when a wildfire
crosses into a community. According to the USFA, the changing climate will create more fire
hazard areas because of the increase in dry vegetation and wildland-urban interfaces will continue
to grow.
ASSESSING VULNERABILITY: CURRENT AND FUTURE CONDITIONS
Requirement 201.6(c)(2)(i). Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool – B1-e
Requirement 201.6(c)(2)(i). Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool – B2-a&b
Requirement 201.6(d)(3). Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool – E2
The Planning Team determined that each respective community should be tasked with identifying
its assets needing protection from hazards. Those assets are listed as “critical infrastructure” in
Table 4.28. As a part of the asset/infrastructure listing, each community was asked to identify
vulnerable or socially disadvantaged populations within its respective community. Those
populations are listed as “populations to protected” in Table 4.28.
The planning team determined that dam failures, subsidence, earthquakes, and ice jams had no
record of occurrence. Further, they determined that the primary effect of wildfires to municipalities
90
was that of response and recovery. Therefore, those hazards were not included for planning
purposes, despite being included in the Hazard Profile of this plan. Though wildfires were
identified as hazards for the rural portions of the county, rural fires are limited to grassland,
pasture, (post-harvest) crop ground which catches fire and spreads to another property.
It is expected that climate change will lead to more incidence of grassland fire (wildfire) in
Brookings County in the future due to more periods of drought, extreme heat, wind, and frequency
of lightning strikes. No residences, whether communal or single family, are at a higher risk of
wildfire occurring today than any other. Rather crops, pasture, grassland, and other personal
property are primarily the vulnerable assets to wildfire. Changes in population and land use are
not expected to be significantly impacted by the increase in incidence of wildfire expected from
climate change. An increasingly sporadic development of residences in the rural portions of the
county, and aging population are unlikely to be affected by the increase in wildfire in any
appreciable manner.
A review of all other hazards in relation to the general and unique risks to current and future assets
by jurisdiction is included in Tables 4.14a – 4.14e. A review of the expected future impacts on
each respective community in relation to expected changes in population and land use are
included in Tables 4.14f - 4.14j. It should be noted that the risks and impacts of many hazards
were determined by the PDM Planning Team to be similar. The below tables, as with mitigation
activities later in this plan, are grouped into like categories.
Table 4.16: Risks to Current and Future Assets by Community – Extreme Heat
Community Current Assets Future Assets Extreme Heat
General Risks Unique Risks
Brookings
(County)
See Table 1.1
[Population]; Table
4.28 Critical
Structures in
Brookings County
Population increase:
less than or equal to
1.1% annually (Table
1.1)
Prolonged
exposure of
residents to
extreme
temperatures
during utility
outage or
following other
natural disaster.
Redevelopment and replacement
of older houses results in more
energy efficient houses, and less
likelihood of utility (air
conditioning) failure as utilities are
expanded and improved in
growing / redeveloped areas.
More demand for water as
seasonal dwellings are also
generally occupied in the summer.
91
Aurora
Population increase:
less than or equal to
2.5% annually (Table
1.1)
Increased utility (water/electric)
burden on existing (aging)
infrastructure will lead it increased
risk for loss of utility service
throughout town without upgrades.
Brookings
Population increase:
less than or equal to
1.5% annually (Table
1.1)
Continued increase in SDSU
enrollment increases risk of mass
shelter need in extreme heat;
increased residents = increased
demand for service at Brookings
Health System makes it critical
that BHS keep utility service in
extreme heat.
Bruce
Population increase:
2.5% annually (Table
1.1)
Increased utility (water/electric)
burden on existing (aging)
infrastructure.
Bushnell
Population increase:
less than or equal to
2.5% annually (Table
1.1)
Increased utility (water/electric)
burden on existing (aging)
infrastructure.
Elkton
Population increase:
less than or equal to
2.5% annually (Table
1.1)
Public School and campground
run higher risk of single event
affecting more people.
Sinai Population to remain
stable (Table 1.1)
Aging population more susceptible
to health risks from extreme heat
in utility failure
Volga
Population increase:
less than or equal to
2.0% annually (Table
1.1)
Public School, day cares, assisted
living, run higher risk of single
event affecting more people.
White
Population increase:
less than or equal to
1.0% annually (Table
1.1)
Public School, campground, clinic,
and daycares run higher risk of
single event affecting more
people.
92
Table 4.17: Risks to Current and Future Assets by Community – Tornado
Community Current
Assets Future Assets: Tornado
General Risks Unique Risks
Brookings
(County)
See Table 1.1
[Population];
Table 4.28
Critical
Structures in
Brookings
County
Population
increase: less
than or equal to
1.1% annually
(Table 1.1)
Injury, loss of
life, loss
of/damage to
property, loss of
essential utility
services.
Campgrounds, schools, and numerous slab-on-grade or
manufactured homes near lakes are significantly
vulnerable to catastrophic damage during tornado events.
Insufficient tornado safe rooms and warning systems exist
around the lakes for seasonal and permanent residents.
Aurora
Population
increase: less
than or equal to
2.5% annually
(Table 1.1)
Day care, campground, ball park, and numerous
apartments without storm shelter will continue to be at risk
with no tornado safe room.
Brookings
Population
increase: less
than or equal to
1.5% annually
(Table 1.1)
More residents that do not know tornado procedures;
increased challenge in disseminating information relating
to emergency shelter to non-English speaking residents;
numerous trailer courts with no tornado safe room are at
risk.
Bruce
Population
increase: 2.5%
annually (Table
1.1)
Community Club, campground, ball park without storm
shelter will continue to be at risk with no tornado safe
room. Overhead electricity lines within and supplying town
are at risk of going down in tornado.
Bushnell
Population
increase: less
than or equal to
2.5% annually
(Table 1.1)
Park and old homes run risk of destruction, with no
tornado safe room. Overhead electricity lines within and
supplying town are at risk of going down in tornado.
Elkton
Population
increase: less
than or equal to
2.5% annually
(Table 1.1)
Public school, campground, and ballfields with no tornado
safe room. Overhead electricity lines within and supplying
town are at risk of going down in tornado.
Sinai
Population to
remain stable
(Table 1.1)
Park and old homes run risk of destruction, with no
tornado safe room. Overhead electricity lines within and
supplying town are at risk of going down in tornado
Volga
Population
increase: less
than or equal to
2.0% annually
(Table 1.1)
Public school, day cares, assisted living, manufactured
home courts, ball park, and apartments with no tornado
safe room require shelter. Overhead electricity lines within
and supplying town are at risk of going down in tornado.
White
Population
increase: less
than or equal to
1.0% annually
(Table 1.1)
Public School, campground, clinic, and daycares run
higher risk of tornado injuring more people. Overhead
electricity lines within and supplying town are at risk of
going down in tornado.
93
Table 4.18: Risks to Current and Future Assets by Community – Thunderstorm
Community Current
Assets Future Assets: Thunderstorm (Including hail, lightning, high wind)
General Risks Unique Risks
Brookings
(County)
See Table 1.1
[Population];
Table 4.28
Critical
Structures in
Brookings
County
Population
increase: less
than or equal to
1.1% annually
(Table 1.1)
Injury, loss of
life, loss of
property, loss of
essential utility
services, loss of
function of city
operations.
Campgrounds, schools, and numerous slab-on-grade or
manufactured homes near lakes are significantly
vulnerable to catastrophic damage during thunderstorm
events. Insufficient storm shelters and warning systems
exist around the lakes for seasonal and permanent
residents.
Aurora
Population
increase: less
than or equal to
2.5% annually
(Table 1.1)
Day care, campground, ball park, and numerous
apartments without storm shelter will continue to be at risk
with no storm shelter.
Brookings
Population
increase: less
than or equal to
1.5% annually
(Table 1.1)
More residents that do not know thunderstorm procedures;
increased challenge in disseminating information relating
to emergency shelter to non-English speaking residents;
numerous trailer courts with no storm shelter are at risk.
Bruce
Population
increase: 2.5%
annually (Table
1.1)
Community Club, campground, ball park without storm
shelter will continue to be at risk with no storm shelter.
Overhead electricity lines within and supplying town are at
risk of going down in thunderstorm.
Bushnell
Population
increase: less
than or equal to
2.5% annually
(Table 1.1)
Park and old homes run risk of destruction, with no storm
shelter. Overhead electricity lines within and supplying
town are at risk of going down in thunderstorm.
Elkton
Population
increase: less
than or equal to
2.5% annually
(Table 1.1)
Public school, campground, and ballfields with no storm
shelter. Overhead electricity lines within and supplying
town are at risk of going down in thunderstorm.
Sinai
Population to
remain stable
(Table 1.1)
Park and old homes run risk of destruction, with no storm
shelter. Overhead electricity lines within and supplying
town are at risk of going down in thunderstorm
Volga
Population
increase: less
than or equal to
2.0% annually
(Table 1.1)
Public school, day cares, assisted living, manufactured
home courts, ball park, and apartments with no storm
shelter require shelter. Overhead electricity lines within
and supplying town are at risk of going down in
thunderstorm.
White
Population
increase: less
than or equal to
1.0% annually
(Table 1.1)
Public School, campground, clinic, and daycares run
higher risk of thunderstorm injuring more people.
Overhead electricity lines within and supplying town are at
risk of going down in thunderstorm.
94
Table 4.19: Risks to Current and Future Assets by Community – Winter Storms
Community Current
Assets Future Assets: Winter Storms (Extreme Cold, Blizzard, Freezing Rain, Heavy Snow)
General Risks Unique Risks
Brookings
(County)
See Table 1.1
[Population];
Table 4.28
Critical
Structures in
Brookings
County
Population
increase: less
than or equal to
1.1% annually
(Table 1.1)
Injury and loss
of life due to
extreme cold
and blowing
snow, loss of
essential utility
services, loss of
function of
roadways.
Redevelopment and replacement of older houses results
in more energy efficient houses, and less likelihood of
utility (air conditioning) failure as utilities are expanded and
improved in growing / redeveloped areas. More demand
for water as seasonal dwellings are also generally
occupied in the summer. Emergency services becoming
difficult to impossible due to roads become impassible due
to visibility and snowpack.
Aurora
Population
increase: less
than or equal to
2.5% annually
(Table 1.1)
Overhead electricity lines within and supplying town are at
risk of going down in with freezing rain. Emergency
services becoming difficult to impossible due to roads
become impassible due to visibility and snowpack.
Brookings
Population
increase: less
than or equal to
1.5% annually
(Table 1.1)
Continued increase in SDSU enrollment increases risk of
mass shelter need in winter storms; increased residents =
increased demand for service at Brookings Health System
makes it critical that BHS keep utility service and clear
transportation in storm events.
Bruce
Population
increase: 2.5%
annually (Table
1.1)
Overhead electricity lines within and supplying town are at
risk of going down in with freezing rain. Emergency
services becoming difficult to impossible due to roads
become impassible due to visibility and snowpack.
Bushnell
Population
increase: less
than or equal to
2.5% annually
(Table 1.1)
Overhead electricity lines within and supplying town are at
risk of going down in with freezing rain. Emergency
services becoming difficult to impossible due to roads
become impassible due to visibility and snowpack.
Elkton
Population
increase: less
than or equal to
2.5% annually
(Table 1.1)
Overhead electricity lines within and supplying town are at
risk of going down in with freezing rain. Emergency
services becoming difficult to impossible due to roads
become impassible due to visibility and snowpack.
Sinai
Population to
remain stable
(Table 1.1)
Overhead electricity lines within and supplying town are at
risk of going down in with freezing rain. Emergency
services becoming difficult to impossible due to roads
become impassible due to visibility and snowpack.
Volga
Population
increase: less
than or equal to
2.0% annually
(Table 1.1)
Overhead electricity lines within and supplying town are at
risk of going down in with freezing rain. Emergency
services becoming difficult to impossible due to roads
become impassible due to visibility and snowpack.
White
Population
increase: less
than or equal to
1.0% annually
(Table 1.1)
Overhead electricity lines within and supplying town are at
risk of going down in with freezing rain. Emergency
services becoming difficult to impossible due to roads
become impassible due to visibility and snowpack.
95
Table 4.20: Risks to Current and Future Assets by Community – Flooding
Community Current
Assets Future Assets: Flooding (Heavy Rain, Rapid Snow Melt, Ice Jam)
General Risks Unique Risks
Brookings
(County)
See Table 1.1
[Population];
Table 4.28
Critical
Structures in
Brookings
County
Population
increase: less
than or equal to
1.1% annually
(Table 1.1)
Loss of
property, loss of
essential utility
services, loss of
function of
roadways.
Residents in existing structures constructed prior to
adoption of floodplain regulations at significant risk of
flooding near Oakwood, Poinsett, and Lake Hendricks.
Crops at risk of flooding or not being able to be planted.
Roadways under water semi-permanently or seasonal; or
roadways inundated for varying periods. (See also Table
4.31)
Aurora
Population
increase: less
than or equal to
2.5% annually
(Table 1.1)
Only mapped floodplain in areas which may be filled prior
to development. 214th Street leading to I-29 is succeptible
to flooding and damage. (See also Table 4.32)
Brookings
Population
increase: less
than or equal to
1.5% annually
(Table 1.1)
Unless mitigated, existing property susceptible to flooding
will be increasingly used for student or low-income
housing. (See also Table 4.33)
Bruce
Population
increase: 2.5%
annually (Table
1.1)
Flooding poses a significant threat to a significant number
of residences and limits future growth / redevelopment of
the city. Water collects in ditches along roadways,
deteriorating roads. Flooding threatens to deteriorate the
existing sanitary sewer treatment facility. (See also Table
4.34)
Bushnell
Population
increase: less
than or equal to
2.5% annually
(Table 1.1)
No mapped floodplain. Roadways leading to and from
town may be inundated for varying periods. (See also
Table 4.35)
Elkton
Population
increase: less
than or equal to
2.5% annually
(Table 1.1)
No mapped floodplain. Roadways leading to and from
town may be inundated for varying periods. (See also
Table 4.36)
Sinai
Population to
remain stable
(Table 1.1)
Floodplain is primarily limited to lands which will remain
inundated in the foreseeable future. Roadways leading to
and from town may be inundated for varying periods. (See
also Table 4.37)
Volga
Population
increase: less
than or equal to
2.0% annually
(Table 1.1)
Floodplain confines growth in the west. Water collects in
ditches along roadways, deteriorating roads. Flooding
limits the expansion of sanitary sewer treatment facility.
(See also Table 4.38)
White
Population
increase: less
than or equal to
1.0% annually
(Table 1.1)
Some roadways leading to and from town may be
inundated for varying periods. (See also Table 4.39)
96
Table 4.21: Risks to Current and Future Assets by Community – Extreme Heat
Community
Extreme Heat
Effects of
Climate
Change
Impacts
Current
Assets:
Future
Assets:
Expected Changes
in Population
Patterns
Expected Changes
in Land Use and
Development
Changes in Population
Patterns
Change in Land Use and
Development
Brookings
(County)
See Table 1.1
[Population];
Table 4.28
Critical
Structures in
Brookings
County.
Description of
effects on
current assets
are included in
Tables 5.1 -
5.13 as part of
description of
mitigation
activities to
address
specified
hazards.
Population
increase: less
than or equal
to 1.1%
annually
(Table 1.1)
Continued
development on
fringes of Brookings
(southwest) and
redevelopment near
lakes (primarily
retired or seasonal.)
Continued dependence
upon agricultural land
uses in exurban areas.
Increased development
density near
municipalities and
expanded development
is expected near
developed lakes.
Increasing
Frequency
of Extreme
Heat
Increased development/
demand for seasonal
residence near lakes
require expansion of
services and increased
efficiency of service. May
require cooperative
agreements with other
jurisdictions/ special
districts to provide utilities.
Increased stress on
livestock and crops. Crops
will more regularly
experience flood and heat
stress in same year.
Continued emphasis on
rural water provision to
communities and rural
residents.
Aurora
Population
increase: less
than or equal
to 2.5%
annually
(Table 1.1)
Continued
dependence upon
agricultural land
uses in exurban
areas. Increased
development density
near municipalities
and expanded
development is
expected near
developed lakes.
Continued dependence
upon agricultural land
uses in exurban areas.
Increased development
density near
municipalities and
expanded development
is expected near
developed lakes.
Increased demand on
aging infrastructure and
services. Development
has significantly outpaced
the ability to upgrade
infrastructure and services
due to lack of revenue
sources for the community
(sales tax).
Development will result in
higher urgency to
upgrade/maintain existing
infrastructure. Expansion
will not be significantly
affected by more hot days.
Brookings
Population
increase: less
than or equal
to 1.5%
annually
(Table 1.1)
SDSU and local
industry continues to
drive population
increase. The
population increase
is of varying ethnicity
and age range,
however college
age/ young adults
will continue to make
up a larger
proportion of
population than most
communities
Residential development
will expand westward
and southward until
floodplain limits such
development. The city is
bookended on the north
by SDSU which would
require approx 1 mile of
main line to connect new
development to existing
development.
Commercial dev. will infill
along US HWY 14 and
expand E/W with
Industrial growth.
Congregational style living
(dorms, nursing/ assisted
living, group homes, etc.)
will need back-up power or
identified locations for
shelter/service during
extreme heat if power
goes out.
Infill will result in higher
urgency to
upgrade/maintain existing
infrastructure. Expansion
will not be significantly by
more hot days. Care
facilities will have more
days when utility service on
hot days may result in need
for emergency care.
Bruce
Population
increase:
2.5%
annually
(Table 1.1)
Decrease or stabile
population; but
average age will
increase (residents
will be less mobile.)
No adopted land use
plan
Increased demand on
aging infrastructure and
services.
No adopted land use plan
Bushnell
Population
increase: less
than or equal
to 2.5%
annually
(Table 1.1)
Decrease or stabile
population; but
average age will
increase (residents
will be less mobile.)
No adopted land use
plan
Increased demand on
aging infrastructure and
services.
No adopted land use plan
Elkton
Population
increase: less
than or equal
to 2.5%
annually
(Table 1.1)
Population will
continue to increase.
Primarily
continuation of a
young families and
work-force aged
residents
New residential
development on the
northwest, southwest,
and southern edge of
existing development.
Short term growth
expected to be infill and
extending south to city
limits boundary.
Commercial
development will be infill
and along the highway.
Industrial development
along (north of) the
railroad
Increased demand on
aging infrastructure and
services.
Development will result in
higher urgency to
upgrade/maintain existing
infrastructure. Expansion
will not be significantly
affected by more hot days.
Sinai
Population to
remain stable
(Table 1.1)
Decrease or stabile
population; but
average age will
increase (residents
will be less mobile.)
No adopted land use
plan
Less people needing
emergency service/shelter. No adopted land use plan
97
Table 4.21: Risks to Current and Future Assets by Community – Extreme Heat (cont.)
Community
Extreme Heat
Effects of
Climate
Change
Impacts
Current
Assets:
Future
Assets:
Expected Changes
in Population
Patterns
Expected Changes
in Land Use and
Development
Changes in Population
Patterns
Change in Land Use and
Development
Volga
See Table 1.1
[Population];
Table 4.28
Critical
Structures in
Brookings
County.
Description of
effects on
current assets
are included in
Tables 5.1 -
5.13 as part of
description of
mitigation
activities to
address
specified
hazards.
Population
increase: less
than or equal
to 2.0%
annually
(Table 1.1)
Population will
continue to increase.
Primarily
continuation of a
young families with
increased
development of
families transitioning
to second
residences.
Residential development
will continue to expand
westward in the short
term and on the
northeast in the long
term. Nodal commercial
development and infill
redevelopment is
expected. Industrial
growth will continue in
the east.
Increasing
Frequency
of Extreme
Heat
Increased demand on
aging infrastructure and
services. Need for
redundancy of
water/electrical service is
critical as population
expands
Development will result in
higher urgency to
upgrade/maintain existing
infrastructure. Expansion
will not be significantly
affected by more hot days.
White
Population
increase: less
than or equal
to 1.0%
annually
(Table 1.1)
Continued
construction of
residences for
families and workers
at local industry.
Residential growth will
continue east and west,
with lower density
development near the
golf course on the north.
Commercial
development/
redevelopment is
expected along arterials,
and industrial growth will
occur in the northwest
Increased demand on
aging infrastructure and
services. Need for
redundancy of
water/electrical service is
critical as population
expands
Development will result in
higher urgency to
upgrade/maintain existing
infrastructure. Expansion
will not be significantly
affected by more hot days.
Table 4.22: Risks to Current and Future Assets by Community – Tornado
Community
Tornado
Effects of
Climate
Change
Impacts
Current Assets: Future
Assets:
Expected Changes
in Population
Patterns
Expected Changes
in Land Use and
Development
Changes in Population
Patterns
Change in Land Use and
Development
Brookings
(County)
See Table 1.1
[Population];
Table 4.28
Critical
Structures in
Brookings
County.
Description of
effects on
current assets
are included in
Tables 5.1 -
5.13 as part of
description of
mitigation
activities to
address
specified
hazards.
Population
increase:
less than or
equal to
1.1%
annually
(Table 1.1)
Continued
development on
fringes of Brookings
(southwest) and
redevelopment near
lakes (primarily
retired or seasonal.)
Continued dependence
upon agricultural land
uses in exurban areas.
Increased development
density near
municipalities and
expanded development
is expected near
developed lakes.
Increasing
Frequency
and
Severity of
Tornadoes
Scattered residential
development and
expansion of seasonal
development increase
likelihood that loss of life
and injury may occur
again.
Demand has increased for
permanent, seasonal, and
transient housing near lakes
increased likelihood of that
population cluster (highest
concentration in the
summer) experiencing
catastrophe.
Aurora
Population
increase:
less than or
equal to
2.5%
annually
(Table 1.1)
Continued
dependence upon
agricultural land
uses in exurban
areas. Increased
development density
near municipalities
and expanded
development is
expected near
developed lakes.
Continued dependence
upon agricultural land
uses in exurban areas.
Increased development
density near
municipalities and
expanded development
is expected near
developed lakes.
Increased population
increases likelihood of
tornado causing property
or personal damage.
Compact, orderly
development decreases the
chances of isolated tornado
damage. Lack of tornado
safe room poses a risk for
increased multi-family
residential uses and
recreational amenities.
Brookings
Population
increase:
less than or
equal to
1.5%
annually
(Table 1.1)
SDSU and local
industry continues to
drive population
increase. The
population increase
is of varying ethnicity
and age range,
however college
age/ young adults
will continue to make
up a larger
proportion of
population than most
communities
Residential development
will expand westward
and southward until
floodplain limits such
development. The city is
bookended on the north
by SDSU which would
require approx 1 mile of
main line to connect new
development to existing
development.
Commercial dev. will infill
along US HWY 14 and
expand E/W with
Industrial growth.
Rental and congregate
living increases need for
tornado safe rooms and
communication of when
they are open, and where
they are located.
New or expanded
manufactured home courts
should require tornado safe
rooms/ storm shelters as
part of permitting.
98
Table 4.22: Risks to Current and Future Assets by Community – Tornado (cont.)
Community
Tornado
Effects of
Climate
Change
Impacts
Current Assets: Future
Assets:
Expected Changes
in Population
Patterns
Expected Changes
in Land Use and
Development
Changes in Population
Patterns
Change in Land Use and
Development
Bruce
See Table 1.1
[Population];
Table 4.28
Critical
Structures in
Brookings
County.
Description of
effects on
current assets
are included in
Tables 5.1 -
5.13 as part of
description of
mitigation
activities to
address
specified
hazards.
Population
increase:
2.5%
annually
(Table 1.1)
Decrease or stabile
population; but
average age will
increase (residents
will be less mobile.)
No adopted land use
plan
Increased population
increases likelihood of
tornado causing property
or personal damage.
No adopted land use plan
Bushnell
Population
increase:
less than or
equal to
2.5%
annually
(Table 1.1)
Decrease or stabile
population; but
average age will
increase (residents
will be less mobile.)
No adopted land use
plan
Increasing
Frequency
and
Severity of
Tornadoes
Increased population
increases likelihood of
tornado causing property
or personal damage.
No adopted land use plan
Elkton
Population
increase:
less than or
equal to
2.5%
annually
(Table 1.1)
Population will
continue to increase.
Primarily
continuation of a
young families and
work-force aged
residents
New residential
development on the
northwest, southwest,
and southern edge of
existing development.
Short term growth
expected to be infill and
extending south to city
limits boundary.
Commercial
development will be infill
and along the highway.
Industrial development
along (north of) the
railroad
Parks, campgrounds,
multi-family structures,
schools, and care facilities
will rely more frequently on
tornado safe rooms
Compact, orderly
development decreases the
chances of isolated tornado
damage. Lack of tornado
safe room poses a risk for
increased multi-family
residential uses and
recreational amenities.
Sinai
Population
to remain
stable
(Table 1.1)
Decrease or stabile
population; but
average age will
increase (residents
will be less mobile.)
No adopted land use
plan
Decreased population will
result in less likelihood of
residents being affected by
tornado, however aging
housing stock and average
age of residents increases
likelihood of severe
property and phisical
damage/ harm.
No adopted land use plan
Volga
Population
increase:
less than or
equal to
2.0%
annually
(Table 1.1)
Population will
continue to increase.
Primarily
continuation of a
young families with
increased
development of
families transitioning
to second
residences.
Residential development
will continue to expand
westward in the short
term and on the
northeast in the long
term. Nodal commercial
development and infill
redevelopment is
expected. Industrial
growth will continue in
the east.
Rental and congregate
living increases need for
tornado safe rooms and
communication of when
they are open, and where
they are located.
New or expanded
manufactured home courts,
campgrounds and multi-
family structures and
recreational facilities should
incorporate tornado safe
rooms/ storm shelters as
part of planning.
White
Population
increase:
less than or
equal to
1.0%
annually
(Table 1.1)
Continued
construction of
residences for
families and workers
at local industry.
Residential growth will
continue east and west,
with lower density
development near the
golf course on the north.
Commercial
development/
redevelopment is
expected along arterials,
and industrial growth will
occur in the northwest
Parks, campgrounds,
multi-family structures,
schools, and care facilities
will rely more frequently on
tornado safe rooms
Compact, orderly
development decreases the
chances of isolated tornado
damage. Lack of tornado
safe room poses a risk for
increased multi-family
residential uses and
recreational amenities.
99
Table 4.23: Risks to Current and Future Assets by Community – Thunderstorm
Community
Thunderstorm (Including hail, lightning, high wind)
Effects of
Climate
Change
Impacts
Current Assets: Future
Assets:
Expected Changes
in Population
Patterns
Expected Changes
in Land Use and
Development
Changes in Population
Patterns
Change in Land Use and
Development
Brookings
(County)
See Table 1.1
[Population];
Table 4.28
Critical
Structures in
Brookings
County.
Description of
effects on
current assets
are included in
Tables 5.1 -
5.13 as part of
description of
mitigation
activities to
address
specified
hazards.
Population
increase:
less than or
equal to
1.1%
annually
(Table 1.1)
Continued
development on
fringes of Brookings
(southwest) and
redevelopment near
lakes (primarily
retired or seasonal.)
Continued dependence
upon agricultural land
uses in exurban areas.
Increased development
density near
municipalities and
expanded development
is expected near
developed lakes.
Increasing
Frequency
and Severity
of
thunderstorm
lightning, and
stronger
winds.
Many residents are re-
developing sites or
building in new
subdivisions. These
residences are following
building code, and
removing older, non-
compliant structures.
Increased population
increases load on utilities
which may not have been
designed to handle
expanded population.
Demand has increased for
permanent, seasonal, and
transient housing near lakes
increased likelihood of
physical harm or property
damage.
Aurora
Population
increase:
less than or
equal to
2.5%
annually
(Table 1.1)
Continued
dependence upon
agricultural land
uses in exurban
areas. Increased
development density
near municipalities
and expanded
development is
expected near
developed lakes.
Continued dependence
upon agricultural land
uses in exurban areas.
Increased development
density near
municipalities and
expanded development
is expected near
developed lakes.
Increased population
increases likelihood of
storm causing property or
personal damage.
New structures are less
vulnerable to summer
storms; however existing,
aging structures in addition
to overhead utilities in and
outside town are vulnerable
to storms.
Brookings
Population
increase:
less than or
equal to
1.5%
annually
(Table 1.1)
SDSU and local
industry continues to
drive population
increase. The
population increase
is of varying ethnicity
and age range,
however college
age/ young adults
will continue to make
up a larger
proportion of
population than most
communities
Residential
development will
expand westward and
southward until
floodplain limits such
development. The city
is bookended on the
north by SDSU which
would require approx 1
mile of main line to
connect new
development to existing
development.
Commercial dev. will
infill along US HWY 14
and expand E/W with
Industrial growth.
Rental and congregate
living increases need for
storm shelters and
communication of when
they are open, and where
they are located.
New/replacement/
refinished structures are
less vulnerable to summer
storms; however existing,
aging structures in addition
to overhead utilities in and
outside town are vulnerable
to storms.
Bruce
Population
increase:
2.5%
annually
(Table 1.1)
Decrease or stabile
population; but
average age will
increase (residents
will be less mobile.)
No adopted land use
plan
Increased population
increases likelihood of
storm causing property or
personal damage.
No adopted land use plan
Bushnell
Population
increase:
less than or
equal to
2.5%
annually
(Table 1.1)
Decrease or stabile
population; but
average age will
increase (residents
will be less mobile.)
No adopted land use
plan
Increased population
increases likelihood of
storm causing property or
personal damage.
No adopted land use plan
Elkton
Population
increase:
less than or
equal to
2.5%
annually
(Table 1.1)
Population will
continue to increase.
Primarily
continuation of a
young families and
work-force aged
residents
New residential
development on the
northwest, southwest,
and southern edge of
existing development.
Short term growth
expected to be infill and
extending south to city
limits boundary.
Commercial
development will be
infill and along the
highway. Industrial
development along
(north of) the railroad
Increased population
increases likelihood of
storm causing property or
personal damage.
New structures are less
vulnerable to summer
storms; however existing,
aging structures in addition
to overhead utilities in and
outside town are vulnerable
to storms.
100
Table 4.23: Risks to Current and Future Assets by Community – Thunderstorm (cont.)
Community
Thunderstorm (Including hail, lightning, high wind)
Effects of
Climate
Change
Impacts
Current Assets: Future
Assets:
Expected Changes
in Population
Patterns
Expected Changes
in Land Use and
Development
Changes in Population
Patterns
Change in Land Use and
Development
Sinai
See Table 1.1
[Population];
Table 4.28
Critical
Structures in
Brookings
County.
Description of
effects on
current assets
are included in
Tables 5.1 -
5.13 as part of
description of
mitigation
activities to
address
specified
hazards.
Population
to remain
stable
(Table 1.1)
Decrease or stabile
population; but
average age will
increase (residents
will be less mobile.)
No adopted land use
plan
Increasing
Frequency
and Severity
of
thunderstorm
lightning, and
stronger
winds.
Decreased population will
result in less likelihood of
residents being affected by
storm, however aging
housing stock and average
age of residents increases
likelihood of severe
property and phisical
damage/ harm.
No adopted land use plan
Volga
Population
increase:
less than or
equal to
2.0%
annually
(Table 1.1)
Population will
continue to increase.
Primarily
continuation of a
young families with
increased
development of
families transitioning
to second
residences.
Residential
development will
continue to expand
westward in the short
term and on the
northeast in the long
term. Nodal
commercial
development and infill
redevelopment is
expected. Industrial
growth will continue in
the east.
Rental and congregate
living increases need for
storm shelters and
communication of when
they are open, and where
they are located.
New/replacement/
refinished structures are
less vulnerable to summer
storms; however existing,
aging structures in addition
to overhead utilities in and
outside town are vulnerable
to storms.
White
Population
increase:
less than or
equal to
1.0%
annually
(Table 1.1)
Continued
construction of
residences for
families and workers
at local industry.
Residential growth will
continue east and west,
with lower density
development near the
golf course on the
north. Commercial
development/
redevelopment is
expected along
arterials, and industrial
growth will occur in the
northwest
Increased population
increases likelihood of
storm causing property or
personal damage.
New/replacement/
refinished structures are
less vulnerable to summer
storms; however existing,
aging structures in addition
to overhead utilities in and
outside town are vulnerable
to storms.
101
Table 4.24: Risks to Current and Future Assets by Community – Winter Storm
Community
Winter Storms (Extreme Cold, Blizzard, Freezing Rain, Heavy Snow)
Effects of
Climate
Change
Impacts
Current Assets: Future
Assets:
Expected Changes
in Population
Patterns
Expected Changes
in Land Use and
Development
Changes in Population
Patterns
Change in Land Use and
Development
Brookings
(County)
See Table 1.1
[Population];
Table 4.28
Critical
Structures in
Brookings
County.
Description of
effects on
current assets
are included in
Tables 5.1 -
5.13 as part of
description of
mitigation
activities to
address
specified
hazards.
Population
increase:
less than or
equal to
1.1%
annually
(Table 1.1)
Continued
development on
fringes of Brookings
(southwest) and
redevelopment near
lakes (primarily
retired or seasonal.)
Continued dependence
upon agricultural land
uses in exurban areas.
Increased development
density near
municipalities and
expanded development
is expected near
developed lakes.
Increasing
Frequency
and Severity
of Winter
Storms:
including
freezing rain,
extreme
cold,
Blizzard, and
heavy snow.
Increased development/
demand for seasonal
residence near lakes
require expansion of
services and increased
efficiency of service. May
require cooperative
agreements with other
jurisdictions/ special
districts to provide utilities.
Increased residential
development near fringes of
towns and lakes will
increase demand for "high
density" services, however
expense to provide those
services will outpace
revenue generated in taxes.
Lake development will
increase urgency in clearing
collector streets leading to
clusters, however roughly
half of those residences are
unoccupied through winter.
Aurora
Population
increase:
less than or
equal to
2.5%
annually
(Table 1.1)
Continued
dependence upon
agricultural land
uses in exurban
areas. Increased
development density
near municipalities
and expanded
development is
expected near
developed lakes.
Continued dependence
upon agricultural land
uses in exurban areas.
Increased development
density near
municipalities and
expanded development
is expected near
developed lakes.
Increased population
increases likelihood of
need for emergency
services/ care during
winter storms, therefore
increased urgency for
clearing evacuation routes
and collectors. Higher
proportion of families
result in higher utility
consumption / demand
during likely more
prolonged winter weather
events.
Exposed/above ground
utilities are at risk of
damage with increased
frequency. Increased
population will be relying on
aging infrastructure in the
core of town.
Brookings
Population
increase:
less than or
equal to
1.5%
annually
(Table 1.1)
SDSU and local
industry continues to
drive population
increase. The
population increase
is of varying ethnicity
and age range,
however college
age/ young adults
will continue to make
up a larger
proportion of
population than most
communities
Residential
development will
expand westward and
southward until
floodplain limits such
development. The city
is bookended on the
north by SDSU which
would require approx 1
mile of main line to
connect new
development to existing
development.
Commercial dev. will
infill along US HWY 14
and expand E/W with
Industrial growth.
Increased population
increases likelihood of
need for emergency
services/ care during
winter storms, therefore
increased urgency for
clearing evacuation routes
and collectors. Higher
proportion of families
result in higher utility
consumption / demand
during likely more
prolonged winter weather
events.
Exposed/above ground
utilities are at risk of
damage with increased
frequency. Overhead
utilities in and outside town
are vulnerable to storms.
Bruce
Population
increase:
2.5%
annually
(Table 1.1)
Decrease or stabile
population; but
average age will
increase (residents
will be less mobile.)
No adopted land use
plan
Aging population may
need help with
care/recovery following
storms; more severe
events increase difficulty
of emergency service
provision.
No adopted land use plan
Bushnell
Population
increase:
less than or
equal to
2.5%
annually
(Table 1.1)
Decrease or stabile
population; but
average age will
increase (residents
will be less mobile.)
No adopted land use
plan
Aging population may
need help with
care/recovery following
storms; more severe
events increase difficulty
of emergency service
provision.
No adopted land use plan
102
Table 4.24: Risks to Current and Future Assets by Community – Winter Storm (cont.)
Community
Winter Storms (Extreme Cold, Blizzard, Freezing Rain, Heavy Snow)
Effects of
Climate
Change
Impacts
Current Assets: Future
Assets:
Expected Changes
in Population
Patterns
Expected Changes
in Land Use and
Development
Changes in Population
Patterns
Change in Land Use and
Development
Elkton
See Table 1.1
[Population];
Table 4.28
Critical
Structures in
Brookings
County.
Description of
effects on
current assets
are included in
Tables 5.1 -
5.13 as part of
description of
mitigation
activities to
address
specified
hazards.
Population
increase:
less than or
equal to
2.5%
annually
(Table 1.1)
Population will
continue to increase.
Primarily
continuation of a
young families and
work-force aged
residents
New residential
development on the
northwest, southwest,
and southern edge of
existing development.
Short term growth
expected to be infill and
extending south to city
limits boundary.
Commercial
development will be
infill and along the
highway. Industrial
development along
(north of) the railroad
Increasing
Frequency
and Severity
of Winter
Storms:
including
freezing rain,
extreme
cold,
Blizzard, and
heavy snow.
Increased population
increases likelihood of
need for emergency
services/ care during
winter storms. Higher
proportion of families
result in higher utility
consumption / demand
during likely more
prolonged winter weather
events.
Exposed/above ground
utilities are at risk of
damage with increased
frequency. Increased
population will be relying on
aging infrastructure in the
core of town, and services
providing utilities to the
community itself.
Sinai
Population
to remain
stable
(Table 1.1)
Decrease or stabile
population; but
average age will
increase (residents
will be less mobile.)
No adopted land use
plan
Aging population may
need help with
care/recovery following
storms; more severe
events increase difficulty
of emergency service
provision.
No adopted land use plan
Volga
Population
increase:
less than or
equal to
2.0%
annually
(Table 1.1)
Population will
continue to increase.
Primarily
continuation of a
young families with
increased
development of
families transitioning
to second
residences.
Residential
development will
continue to expand
westward in the short
term and on the
northeast in the long
term. Nodal
commercial
development and infill
redevelopment is
expected. Industrial
growth will continue in
the east.
Increased population
increases likelihood of
need for emergency
services/ care during
winter storms. Higher
proportion of families
result in higher utility
consumption / demand
during likely more
prolonged winter weather
events.
Exposed/above ground
utilities are at risk of
damage with increased
frequency. Overhead
utilities in and outside town
are vulnerable to storms.
White
Population
increase:
less than or
equal to
1.0%
annually
(Table 1.1)
Continued
construction of
residences for
families and workers
at local industry.
Residential growth will
continue east and west,
with lower density
development near the
golf course on the
north. Commercial
development/
redevelopment is
expected along
arterials, and industrial
growth will occur in the
northwest
Increased population
increases likelihood of
need for emergency
services/ care during
winter storms, therefore
increased urgency for
clearing evacuation routes
and collectors.
Exposed/above ground
utilities are at risk of
damage with increased
frequency. New
development will account
for those risks but is at
mercy of existing/aging/
exposed infrastructure.
103
Table 4.25: Risks to Current and Future Assets by Community – Flooding
Community
Flooding (Heavy Rain, Rapid Snow Melt, Ice Jam)
Effects of
Climate
Change
Impacts
Current Assets: Future
Assets:
Expected Changes
in Population
Patterns
Expected Changes
in Land Use and
Development
Changes in Population
Patterns
Change in Land Use and
Development
Brookings
(County)
See Table 1.1
[Population];
Table 4.28
Critical
Structures in
Brookings
County.
Description of
effects on
current assets
are included in
Tables 5.1 -
5.13 as part of
description of
mitigation
activities to
address
specified
hazards.
Population
increase:
less than or
equal to
1.1%
annually
(Table 1.1)
Continued
development on
fringes of Brookings
(southwest) and
redevelopment near
lakes (primarily
retired or seasonal.)
Continued dependence
upon agricultural land
uses in exurban areas.
Increased development
density near
municipalities and
expanded development
is expected near
developed lakes.
Increasing
frequency of
heavy rain
and rapid
snow melt.
Ice may
continue to
temporarily
block
culverts for
short
periods.
Increased demand for
residences in flood prone/
flood prone - adjacent
areas. Incidence of
isolation of residences due
to water over roads, are
expected to become more
regular. More frequent
occurrences of residents
being able to leave the
house, but primary
transportation routes are
impassible.
With existing regulations
and policies, development is
not anticipated within
floodplains unless elevated
above Base flood elevation.
(See also Table 4.41)
Aurora
Population
increase:
less than or
equal to
2.5%
annually
(Table 1.1)
Continued
dependence upon
agricultural land
uses in exurban
areas. Increased
development density
near municipalities
and expanded
development is
expected near
developed lakes.
Continued dependence
upon agricultural land
uses in exurban areas.
Increased development
density near
municipalities and
expanded development
is expected near
developed lakes.
Multi-family residential
structures are expected to
be constructed, after fill is
placed in the small area
shown in the floodplain.
With existing regulations
and policies, development is
not anticipated within
floodplains unless elevated
above Base flood elevation.
(See also Table 4.42)
Brookings
Population
increase:
less than or
equal to
1.5%
annually
(Table 1.1)
SDSU and local
industry continues to
drive population
increase. The
population increase
is of varying ethnicity
and age range,
however college
age/ young adults
will continue to make
up a larger
proportion of
population than most
communities
Residential
development will
expand westward and
southward until
floodplain limits such
development. The city
is bookended on the
north by SDSU which
would require approx 1
mile of main line to
connect new
development to existing
development.
Commercial dev. will
infill along US HWY 14
and expand E/W with
Industrial growth.
Occupancy of structures
within mapped floodplain
will become tenant
occupied due to increased
flood frequency. May
result in more
disadvantaged populations
residing in these
structures.
With existing regulations
and policies, development is
not anticipated within
floodplains unless elevated
above Base flood elevation.
(See also Table 4.43)
Bruce
Population
increase:
2.5%
annually
(Table 1.1)
Decrease or stabile
population; but
average age will
increase (residents
will be less mobile.)
No adopted land use
plan
Occupancy of structures
within mapped floodplain
will become tenant
occupied or abandoned
with increased flood
frequency. May result in
more disadvantaged
populations residing in
these structures.
No adopted land use plan
Bushnell
Population
increase:
less than or
equal to
2.5%
annually
(Table 1.1)
Decrease or stabile
population; but
average age will
increase (residents
will be less mobile.)
No adopted land use
plan No mapped floodplain. No adopted land use plan
104
Table 4.25: Risks to Current and Future Assets by Community – Flooding (cont.)
Community
Flooding (Heavy Rain, Rapid Snow Melt, Ice Jam)
Effects of
Climate
Change
Impacts
Current Assets: Future
Assets:
Expected Changes
in Population
Patterns
Expected Changes
in Land Use and
Development
Changes in Population
Patterns
Change in Land Use and
Development
Elkton
See Table 1.1
[Population];
Table 4.28
Critical
Structures in
Brookings
County.
Description of
effects on
current assets
are included in
Tables 5.1 -
5.13 as part of
description of
mitigation
activities to
address
specified
hazards.
Population
increase:
less than or
equal to
2.5%
annually
(Table 1.1)
Population will
continue to increase.
Primarily
continuation of a
young families and
work-force aged
residents
New residential
development on the
northwest, southwest,
and southern edge of
existing development.
Short term growth
expected to be infill and
extending south to city
limits boundary.
Commercial
development will be
infill and along the
highway. Industrial
development along
(north of) the railroad
Increasing
frequency of
heavy rain
and rapid
snow melt.
Ice may
continue to
temporarily
block
culverts for
short
periods.
No mapped floodplain. No mapped floodplain.
(See also Table 4.44)
Sinai
Population
to remain
stable
(Table 1.1)
Decrease or stabile
population; but
average age will
increase (residents
will be less mobile.)
No adopted land use
plan
Floodplain does not affect
residences or structures
within city limits however
arterial/ evacuation routes
are at risk of inundation
during flooding. (This has
occurred in the past.)
No adopted land use plan
Volga
Population
increase:
less than or
equal to
2.0%
annually
(Table 1.1)
Population will
continue to increase.
Primarily
continuation of a
young families with
increased
development of
families transitioning
to second
residences.
Residential
development will
continue to expand
westward in the short
term and on the
northeast in the long
term. Nodal
commercial
development and infill
redevelopment is
expected. Industrial
growth will continue in
the east.
Floodplain and low lying
areas make west and
southerly expansion
difficult, but possible.
Eastward expansion for
more than one-half mile is
nearly impossible due to
Big Sioux floodplain.
Population growth will
occur in areas requiring
floodproofed utility
services. Care should be
taken to minimize the
effect flood has on
construction of residences
on the other side of
drainage areas from
existing development.
With existing regulations
and policies, development is
not anticipated within
floodplains unless elevated
above Base flood elevation.
(See also Table 4.45)
White
Population
increase:
less than or
equal to
1.0%
annually
(Table 1.1)
Continued
construction of
residences for
families and workers
at local industry.
Residential growth will
continue east and west,
with lower density
development near the
golf course on the
north. Commercial
development/
redevelopment is
expected along
arterials, and industrial
growth will occur in the
northwest
Population growth will
occur in areas requiring
floodproofed utility
services. Care should be
taken to minimize the
effect flood has on
construction of residences
on the other side of
drainage areas from
existing development.
With existing regulations
and policies, development is
not anticipated within
floodplains unless elevated
above Base flood elevation.
(See also Table 4.46)
ASSESSING VULNERABILITY: NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM COMPLIANCE
Requirement 201.6(c)(2)(ii). Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool – B2-c.
Requirement 201.6(c)(3)(ii). Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool – C2/C2-a.
Brookings County and all of its municipalities, with the exception of Bushnell, participate in the
National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). Table 4.15 below shows the entities that participate in
the NFIP. FEMA is in the process of updating the county’s flood hazard boundary map for areas
near the Big Sioux River and Lake Poinsett. The County and the communities of Aurora,
Brookings, Bruce, Elkton, Sinai, Volga, and White will continue to participate and ensure
compliance of the participating local jurisdictions located within the floodplain.
105
Table 4.26: Communities Participating in the National Flood Program
Community
Name
Community
ID
Current Map
Effective
Date
Brookings County 460253 07/16/08(M)
Aurora 460051 07/16/08
Brookings 460004 07/16/08
Bruce 460005 07/16/08(M)
Bushnell Not Participating
Elkton 460172 07/16/08
Sinai 460098 07/16/08
Volga 460223 07/16/08
White 460148 07/16/08
In order to remain in good standing with FEMA/NFIP, each participating community has
implemented and continues to enforce the local floodplain management regulations to regulate
and permit development in SFHAs in accordance with the model ordinance provided by FEMA.
The Brookings County Auditor maintains the flood zone maps and the Director of Equalization
utilizes DFIRMS for all planning mechanisms occurring in the unincorporated areas of the county;
specifically, development of new structures. Brookings County’s flood zone maps available at the
Community Development Office; the City of Brookings’ are available with the City Engineer, all
others are available at the Finance Office. Further they are all available via interactive map at:
https://brookingscountysd.gov/197/Interactive-Maps.
Further, each individual community has appointed a designated floodplain administrator that
requires elevation certificates and issues floodplain development permits for structures
constructed within Zone A of the identified flood hazard areas, including those repairs or
replacements on structures requiring permits due to substantial damage for substantial
improvement in accordance with adopted floodplain regulations. The DFIRMS are used to
determine where the natural drainage occurs and ensures that new development will not interrupt
the natural drainage.
For all entities, with the exception of Bushnell, any application for building permit, use permit,
subdivision, and public project is reviewed by the floodplain administrator of each respective
community (See Table 4.18 for floodplain administrator). During the review for compliance with
other terms of the zoning ordinance, the administrator (same as zoning officer in all cases) the
floodplain administrator/zoning officer determines whether the proposed development is located
within the Floodplain Protection District.
The floodplain administrators use the interactive map at
https://brookingscountysd.gov/197/Interactive-Maps, which includes the effective flood hazard
areas from the most recent Flood Insurance Study to determine whether proposed development
is within the Floodplain Protection District. If further assistance is needed in the review, staff
consults with First District Association of Local Government Staff, representatives of the applicant,
state NFIP coordinator, and/or applicable representatives from FEMA Region 8. If it is determined
the proposed development will be within the 100-year floodplain, the applicant is required to
106
contact a surveyor or engineer to complete an elevation certificate. The applicant may choose to
add fill to the property, then use the surveyor or engineer to assist in submitting for a Letter of
Map Change; or the applicant may choose to use the elevation certificate to complete a floodplain
development application. The vast majority of projects completed within the floodplain utilize fill
to raise the property above the base flood elevation before construction or are completing projects
in which water can freely flow through (such as pillars of a deck.)
Bushnell does not require building permits, so in those cases the finance officer contacts the
owner of property whenever a project commences within the identified floodplain to ensure that
the same process is followed as is described above for the other towns and county.
All of the jurisdictions which are participating in the NFIP require the lowest floor of structures to
be constructed above base flood elevation. Requiring any additional free-board was not palatable
to the residents, nor elected officials of any of the jurisdictions within Brookings County. However,
all communities included substantial damage and substantial improvement provisions in
accordance with the template provided to communities in South Dakota by FEMA. In all, neither
the emergency management director, nor any other staff members are aware of any cases of
damage to 50% of the total value of any residence or structure in Brookings County. Historically,
when damages do occur to structures staff follows up to find out whether the owner intends to
replace or remodel. Typically structures within the floodplain either have minor modifications or
are entirely replaced.
ADDRESSING VULNERABILTY: REPETITIVE LOSS PROPERTIES
Requirement 201.6(c)(2)(ii). Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool – B2-c.
Requirement 201.6(c)(3). Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool – C2/C2-a.
Due to various geomorphologic and topographical conditions, periodic flooding affects numerous
areas in both incorporated and unincorporated areas of the County. Property adjacent to Lake
Poinsett, Lake Oakwood, and Lake Campbell are most prone to flooding in Brookings County.
Residential development occurred adjacent to numerous lakes in Brookings County, particularly
Lake Poinsett, long before the initial flood hazard boundaries being identified in December of
1977. As a result, numerous structures already existed at the time of adoption of the first map and
continue to be lived in today. Numerous structures, primarily residentially used are located within
Flood Hazard Areas currently identified as Zone A. Many structures located within the County
have experienced flooding or are required to be insured against flood due to their proximity to
special flood hazard areas. The County has a total of nine hundred five (905) flood insurance
policy holders. The vast majority of those policies insure residents adjacent to the numerous lakes
in Brookings County.
Table 4.27: Brookings County National Flood Insurance Program Statistics
Community
Name
Current
NFIP
Policies
Number of
Claims Paid
Since 1978
Total Value of
Claims Paid
Flood Insurance
Coverage
Repetitive
Loss
Properties
City of Aurora 1 0 $0.00 0 0
City of Brookings 69 17 $182,329.00 47 1
City of Bruce 13 11 $33,852.00 12 0
Unincorporated areas
of Brookings County 119 52 $587,014.00 87 5
Totals 202 80 $803,195.00 146 6
SOURCE : FEMA Region 8 Flood Insurance Liaison
107
The PDM Planning Team focused attention particularly on flood related issues. An issue of
primary concern is the number of times specific properties and structures on those properties
flood. The City of Brookings and rural Brookings County combine to have six (6) total repetitive
loss properties. All six (6) are single family residences. Repetitive loss properties are those for
which two or more losses of at least $1,000 each have been paid under the National Flood
Insurance Program (NFIP) within any ten-year period. A goal of the County is to protect specific
areas in the county from flooding. This goal aims to protect properties prone to flood losses but
does not discount the possibility that in some cases structures located in the floodplain may need
to be removed.
ADDRESSING VULNERABILTY: SEVERE REPETITIVE LOSS PROPERTIES
Requirement 201.6(c)(2)(ii). Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool – B2-c.
Requirement 201.6(c)(3). Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool – C2/C2-a.
The Flood Insurance Reform Act of 2004 identified another category of repetitive loss: severe
repetitive loss, which is defined as “a single-family property (consisting of one to four residences)
covered by the NFIP flood insurance that has incurred flood-related damage leading to either:
1. Four or more separate claims payments (paid under flood insurance coverage) exceeding
$5,000 per claim, with a cumulative total exceeding $20,000; or
2. At least two separate claims payments where the cumulative amount exceeds the reported
value of the property.
Currently, Brookings County does not have any properties classified “severe repetitive loss.”
ASSESSING VULNERABILITY: IDENTIFYING STRUCTURES
Requirement 201.6(c)(2)(ii). Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool – B2-a-c.
One of the primary purposes of this PDM is to identify and equip critical facilities, emergency
shelters, and summer storm shelters with the ability to provide essential energy for continued
access to sanitation and maintain vital functions during a natural hazard occurrence. In the event
of a disaster resulting from severe summer or winter storms, terrorist attacks, or hazardous
materials incidents, the County and participating entities will have the ability to prevent further
loss of life with generator-powered shelters. The communities throughout the County have many
structures that are vital to emergency operations.
Each jurisdiction was responsible for listing critical infrastructure within their communities. Table
4.28 is a list of critical facilities that would cause the greatest distress in the county if destruction
occurred. The information provided in the table below was compiled via survey of the participating
communities.
108
Table 4.28: Critical Infrastructure in Brookings County
Jurisdiction/
Entity Location Address Sector Sub sector Name Owner Type
Sioux Valley
Energy
Rural Brookings
County Not Specified Non-Emergency
Response Facility
Electrical
Substations (8)
Sioux Valley
Energy Private
Brookings County Brookings County 315 7th Avenue Government
Facility Building
Sheriff’s Office
and Detention
Center
Public
Brookings County Brookings County 314 6th Avenue Government
Facility Building Courthouse Public
Brookings County Brookings County 40th St S and
County 77
Population to
Protect
Manufactured
Home Court
Manufactured
Home Court Private
Brookings County Brookings County 215th St and
470th Ave
Population to
Protect
Manufactured
Home Court
Manufactured
Home Court Private
Brookings County
City of Bruce Co. Road 6 Transportation Evacuation Route Co. Road 6 Public
Brookings County City of White Co. Road 25 Transportation Evacuation Route Co. Road 25 Public
Brookings County Town of Sinai Co. Road 11 Transportation Evacuation Route Co. Road 11 Public
Brookings County City of Elkton Co. Road 30 & 33 Transportation Evacuation Route Co. Road 30 & 33 Public
Aurora City of Aurora 101 Nicolett St Emergency
Services Building Fire Department Public
Aurora City of Aurora Population to
Protect
Manufactured
Homes Trailer Court Public
Aurora City of Aurora Government
Facility Building
City Shop -
Generator/ City
Offices
Public
Aurora City of Aurora 206 Lilac Ave Population to
Protect Day Care Jessica Waldner
Day Care Private
Aurora City of Aurora Telecommunicati
ons Telephone Cell Tower Private
Aurora City of Aurora Telecommunicati
ons Switch/Router Interstate
Telecom (ITC) Private
Aurora City of Aurora Non-Emergency
Response Facility Sanitary Sewer Lift Station (3) Public
Aurora City of Aurora Non-Emergency
Response Facility Sanitary Sewer Lagoons Public
Aurora City of Aurora Population to
Protect Building Apartments Private
Aurora City of Aurora Population to
Protect Park Campground Public
Aurora City of Aurora Population to
Protect Buildings Manufactured
Home Court Private
Aurora City of Aurora 304 Broadway St Population to
Protect
Emergency
Shelter
St. William Abbot
Catholic Church Private
109
Jurisdiction/
Entity Location Address Sector Sub sector Name Owner Type
Aurora City of Aurora 201 E Pine St Population to
Protect
Emergency
Shelter
First Impact
Church Private
Aurora City of Aurora Non-Emergency
Response Facility
Water Supply –
Tower
New City Water
Tower Public
Brookings City of Brookings Non-Emergency
Response
Bridge on
Evacuation Route
US 14B Bridge
(Big Sioux River) Public
Brookings City of Brookings Non-Emergency
Response
Bridge on
Evacuation Route
US 14 Bridge (Big
Sioux River) Public
Brookings City of Brookings 422 Western Ave. Government
Facility
Emergency Fuel
Facility
Brookings County
Highway
Department
Public
Brookings City of Brookings 520 3rd Street Government
Facility Building City Hall Public
Brookings City of Brookings 311 3rd Avenue Emergency
Services Building Police Station Public
Brookings City of Brookings 311 3rd Avenue Emergency
Services Building Fire Station #1 Public
Brookings City of Brookings 607 20th Avenue Emergency
Services Building Fire Station #2 Public
Brookings City of Brookings 530 22nd Avenue Emergency
Services Building Fire Station #3 Public
Brookings City of Brookings 32nd Street Emergency
Services Building Fire Station #4 Public
Brookings City of Brookings Western Avenue Emergency
Services Building Fire Station -
Airport Public
Brookings City of Brookings 824 32nd Avenue Government
Facility
Emergency
Shelter
Dacotah Bank
Center/Storm
Shelter
Public
Brookings City of Brookings Non-Emergency
Response Facility
Water Supply –
Tower Water Tower Public
Brookings City of Brookings 22nd Avenue S.
and Olwein St
Non-Emergency
Response Facility Water Supply Water Tower Public
Brookings City of Brookings
3000 8th Street
South & 2304
Medary Ave
Non-Emergency
Response Facility
Water Supply –
Wells Treatment Plant Public
Brookings City of Brookings 21660 470th Ave Non-Emergency
Response Facility Sanitary Sewer Wastewater
Treatment Public
Brookings City of Brookings 405 1st Avenue Non-Emergency
Response Facility
Emergency
Shelter
URC Shelter-
Non-Profit Public
Brookings City of Brookings 415 4th Street Communications
Telephone,
Internet, Cable
Services
Swiftel
Telecommunicati
ons
Public
Brookings City of Brookings 22nd & 6th Street Telecommunicati
ons Switch/Router Interstate
Telecom (ITC) Private
Brookings City of Brookings 22nd Avenue S. Non-Emergency
Response Facility
Natural Gas
Supply Utilities Private
Brookings City of Brookings 300 22nd Avenue Emergency
Response Facility Building Brookings
Hospital Public
110
Jurisdiction/
Entity Location Address Sector Sub sector Name Owner Type
Brookings City of Brookings 2300 Yorkshire
Drive
Emergency
Response Facility Building Ambulance
Facility Public
Brookings City of Brookings Non-Emergency
Response Facility Electrical Supply Sub Station Public
Brookings City of Brookings 127 7th Avenue Government
Facility Transportation Street
Department Public
Brookings City of Brookings 47352 307th
Street
Non-Emergency
Response Facility Waste Facility Landfill Public
Brookings City of Brookings Public Institution Education South Dakota
State University Public
Brookings City of Brookings 520 Elm Avenue Public Institution Education Brookings High
School Pubic
Brookings City of Brookings 1801 12th Street Public Institution Education Mickelson Middle
School Public
Brookings City of Brookings 1401 15th Street Public Institution Education
Camelot
Intermediate
School
Public
Brookings City of Brookings 304 15th Avenue Public Institution Education
Hillcrest
Elementary
School
Public
Brookings City of Brookings 718 5th Street Public Institution Education
Medary
Elementary
School
Public
Brookings City of Brookings 111 26th Street
South Public Institution Education
Dakota Prairie
Elementary
School
Public
Brookings City of Brookings Non-Emergency
Response Facility Electrical Supply Sub Station Public
Brookings City of Brookings Non-Emergency
Response Facility Electrical Supply Sub Station Public
Brookings City of Brookings 1313 Western
Ave
Non-Emergency
Response Facility Transportation BATA Facility Public
Brookings City of Brookings 405 1st Ave Population to
Protect
Nursing Home/
Assisted Living
United Living
Community Private
Brookings City of Brookings 2421 Yorkshire
Dr
Population to
Protect
Nursing Home/
Assisted Living
The
Neighborhoods at
Brookview
Private
Brookings City of Brookings 104 4th St Population to
Protect
Nursing Home/
Assisted Living
Park Place
Assisted Living Private
Brookings City of Brookings 1906 12th St S Population to
Protect
Nursing Home/
Assisted Living
StoneyBrook
Suites Assisted
Living
Private
Brookings City of Brookings 2015 8th St S Population to
Protect
Nursing Home/
Assisted Living
Edgewood
Brookings Private
Brookings City of Brookings 900 20th St S Population to
Protect
Nursing Home/
Assisted Living
Peaceful Pines
Senior Living Private
Brookings City of Brookings 748 22nd Ave S Population to
Protect
Nursing Home/
Assisted Living
Independent
Living Choices
Brookings
Private
111
Jurisdiction/
Entity Location Address Sector Sub sector Name Owner Type
Brookings City of Brookings 908 Hope Dr Population to
Protect
Non-Profit
Organization
United Way &
Food Pantry Private
Brookings City of Brookings 121 10th St W Population to
Protect Recreation Campgrounds Public
Brookings City of Brookings PRIVATE Population to
Protect
Non-Profit
Organization
Domestic Abuse
Shelter Private
Brookings City of Brookings 520 3rd St Building Storm Shelter
City County
Government
Center
Public
Brookings City of Brookings 10th Street and
HWY 14
Population to
Protect
Manufactured
Home Court
Manufactured
Home Court Private
Brookings City of Brookings Medary Ave and
15th St
Population to
Protect
Manufactured
Home Court
Manufactured
Home Court Private
Brookings City of Brookings 13th Street and
7th Ave
Population to
Protect
Manufactured
Home Court
Manufactured
Home Court Private
Brookings City of Brookings 2nd St South and
8th Ave South
Population to
Protect
Manufactured
Home Court
Manufactured
Home Court Private
Brookings City of Brookings
472nd Ave and
Western Estate
Rd
Population to
Protect
Manufactured
Home Court Western Estates Private
Brookings City of Brookings 20th Street and
472nd Ave
Population to
Protect
Manufactured
Home Court
Manufactured
Home Court Private
Brookings City of Brookings 3rd Avenue and
2nd Street
Population to
Protect
Manufactured
Home Court
Manufactured
Home Court Private
Brookings City of Brookings 8th Avenue and
6th Street
Population to
Protect
Manufactured
Home Court
Manufactured
Home Court Private
Brookings City of Brookings Medary Avenue
and Vine Street
Population to
Protect
Manufactured
Home Court
Manufactured
Home Court Private
Brookings City of Brookings 5th Avenue S and
7th Street
Population to
Protect
Manufactured
Home Court
Manufactured
Home Court Private
Brookings City of Brookings 3rd Avenue and
5th Street
Population to
Protect
Manufactured
Home Court
Manufactured
Home Court Private
Bruce City of Bruce 507 Jay Street Government
Facility Building City Hall Public
Bruce City of Bruce 525 Jay Street Government
Facility Building Fire Hall Public
Bruce City of Bruce NW ¼ of STR 7-
111-50
Non-Emergency
Response
Sanitary Sewer –
Lagoon City Lagoon Public
Bruce City of Bruce 611 Washington
Street
Non-Emergency
Response
Sanitary Sewer –
Lift Station Lift Station Public
Bruce City of Bruce 409 Jefferson
Street
Population to
Protect Building Community Club Private
Bruce City of Bruce 608 Jay Street Non-Emergency
Response Building City Shop Public
Bruce City of Bruce 418 Madison
Street
Population to
Protect Recreation Campground Public
Bruce City of Bruce 308 Wagner
Street
Population to
Protect Recreation City Park Public
112
Jurisdiction/
Entity Location Address Sector Sub sector Name Owner Type
Bruce City of Bruce 213 2nd Street Population to
Protect Recreation Ballfield Public
Bruce City of Bruce 5th Street and Jay
Street
Non-Emergency
Response Electrical Supply Sub Station Public
Bushnell Town of Bushnell 47821 Main
Street
Government
Facility Building City Hall Public
Bushnell Town of Bushnell 47821 Main
Street
Non-Emergency
Response Facility
Water Supply -
Well City Well Public
Bushnell Town of Bushnell 47821 Main
Street Communications Emergency
Services Storm Siren Public
Bushnell Town of Bushnell Main St/2nd
Avenue
Population to
Protect Park City Park Public
Bushnell Town of Bushnell 21078 478th
Avenue
Non-Emergency
Response Facility Electrical Supply Ottertail
Transformer Private
Elkton City of Elkton 109 Elk Street Emergency
Services Building Ambulance/Fire
Department Public
Elkton City of Elkton 800 Buffalo Street Public Institution Education Elkton School Public
Elkton City of Elkton
1 Block N of E 2nd
Street & Badger
Street
Non-Emergency
Response Facility
Water Services –
Water Storage
Elkton Water
tower Public
Elkton City of Elkton 485th Ave/218th St Non-Emergency
Response Facility Sanitary Sewer Lagoons Public
Elkton City of Elkton Beaver Street Non-Emergency
Response Facility Electrical Supply Ottertail Power Private
Elkton City of Elkton 206th Buffalo
Street
Government
Facility Building City Shop Public
Elkton City of Elkton 1st Street E Telecommunicati
ons Switch/Router Interstate
Telecom (ITC) Private
Elkton City of Elkton 302nd Beaver
Street
Non-Emergency
Response Facility Sanitary Sewer Lift Station Public
Elkton City of Elkton 215 3rd Street Non-Emergency
Response Facility Sanitary Sewer Lift Station Public
Elkton City of Elkton 470 5th Street Non-Emergency
Response Facility Sanitary Sewer Lift Station Public
Elkton City of Elkton Marshal Street &
1st Street Communications Cell Tower Cell Tower Private
Elkton City of Elkton Cornel Avenue Non-Emergency
Response Facility Water Services Rural Water Private
Elkton City of Elkton Transportation Railroad Elkton Railroad Private
Elkton City of Elkton 3rd Street Population to
Protect Park Campground Private
Sinai Town of Sinai 318 Main Street Government
Facility Building Sinai City Hall Public
Sinai Town of Sinai 311 Main Street Government
Facility Building Sinai Fire
Department Public
Sinai Town of Sinai 309 Main Street Non-Emergency
Response Facility Building American Legion
Hall Public
113
Jurisdiction/
Entity Location Address Sector Sub sector Name Owner Type
Sinai Town of Sinai 302 Main Street Communication Emergency
Services Storm Siren Public
Sinai Town of Sinai 216 2nd Street Non-Emergency
Response Facility Building City Maintenance
Shed Public
Sinai Town of Sinai 2nd Street W Non-Emergency
Response Facility Building City Storage
Building Public
Sinai Town of Sinai 458th Ave & 217th
Street
Non-Emergency
Response
Sanitary Sewer –
Lagoon City Lagoon Public
Sinai Town of Sinai 2nd St W & Main
Ave
Non-Emergency
Response
Sanitary Sewer –
Lift Station Lift Station Public
Volga City of Volga NW of 109
Samara Avenue
Non-Emergency
Response Electrical Supply West Substation Public
Volga City of Volga SW Corner of 100
Caspian Avenue
Non-Emergency
Response Electrical Supply East Substation Public
Volga City of Volga 125 W 2nd Street Population to
Protect Assisted Living Dakota Sun Private
Volga City of Volga 226 Kasan
Avenue
Government
Facility Building City Hall Public
Volga City of Volga 226 Kasan
Avenue
Government
Facility Building Fire Hall Public
Volga City of Volga 220 E Hwy 14 Population to
Protect
Manufactured
Home Court DC Court Private
Volga City of Volga 222 E Hwy 14 Population to
Protect
Manufactured
Home Court Valley Village Private
Volga City of Volga 315 Samara
Avenue
Population to
Protect
Manufactured
Home Court Sand Creek Private
Volga City of Volga 200 Hansina
Avenue
Population to
Protect Education Sioux Valley
School Public
Volga City of Volga 226 E 6th street Population to
Protect Education Volga Christian
School Private
Volga City of Volga (West of City) Non-Emergency
Response
Water Supply –
Wells City Well Public
Volga City of Volga 120 E 1st Street Non-Emergency
Response
Water Supply –
Tower City Water Tower Public
Volga City of Volga Throughout the
City
Non-Emergency
Response
Water Supply –
Transmission
Lines
City Water Lines Public
Volga City of Volga 304 Caspian
Avenue
Non-Emergency
Response
Sanitary Sewer –
Lagoon City Lagoon Public
Volga City of Volga E of 217 E 7th
Street
Non-Emergency
Response
Sanitary Sewer –
Lift Station Lift Station Public
Volga City of Volga 222 E HWY 14 Non-Emergency
Response
Sanitary Sewer –
Lift Station Lift Station Public
Volga City of Volga W of 101 Edman
Avenue
Non-Emergency
Response
Sanitary Sewer –
Lift Station Lift Station Public
Volga City of Volga 212 Kasan
Avenue
Government
Facility
Emergency
Shelter Auditorium Public
114
Jurisdiction/ Entity Location Address Sector Sub sector Name Owner Type
Volga City of Volga 109 Samara
Avenue Government Facility Emergency Shelter Community Center Public
Volga City of Volga 515 Samara
Avenue
Population to
Protect Apartment(s) Country View Private
Volga City of Volga W of 99 Caspian
Avenue Communications Cell Tower Cell Tower Private
Volga City of Volga 6th Street and
Caspian Ave
Non-Emergency
Response
Water Supply
Tower
750,000 Gallon
water tower Public
Volga City of Volga Watts Street Non-Emergency
Response Sanitary Sewer Lift Station Public
Volga City of Volga 601 Samara Ave Population to
Protect Apartments Westside
Apartments Private
Volga City of Volga 109 Samara Ave Government Facility Building City Street Shop Public
Volga City of Volga 120 E 1st Street Communications Cell Tower Cell Tower Private
Volga City of Volga South of HWY 14 Transportation Railroad Rapid City, Pierre &
Eastern Private
Volga City of Volga 225 Samara Ave Population to
Protect Park Swimming Pool Public
Volga/Brookings
County Brookings County East of Volga Non-Emergency
Response
Bridge on
Evacuation Route
US 14 Bridge (E of
Volga) Public
White City of White 499 S Hooker Ave Utility Substation Substation Private
White City of White NE Corner of 477th
Ave & 204th St
Non-Emergency
Response Facility Sanitary Sewer City Lagoons Public
White City of White 100 S School Ave Public Institution School Deubrook School Public
White City of White 300 W Main St Government Facility City Hall White City Hall Public
White City of White 104 N Lincoln Ave Telecommunication
s Private
ITC
Telecommunication
s
Private
White City of White 210 W Main St Government Facility Building White Fire
Department Public
White City of White 107 N Lincoln Ave Non-Emergency
Response Facilities Water Services White Water tower Public
White City of White 102 W 5th Street Emergency
Response Facility Building Storm Shelter Private
White City of White 269 E 2nd St Population to
Protect Park Park/ Campground Public
White City of White 511 W 5th St Population to
Protect Public Park Athletic Complex Public
White City of White 302 E 5th St Population to
Protect Building White Medical Clinic Private
White City of White 301 N Hooker Ave Population to
Protect Building Daycare Private
White City of White 206 W 1st St Population to
Protect Building Daycare Private
115
ASSESSING VULNERABILITY: COMMUNITY CAPABILITIES
Requirement 201.6(c)(3) Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool – C1(a-b).
Requirement 201.6(c)(3). Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool – C2/C2-a.
Each community possesses a unique set of capabilities, including authorities, policies, programs,
staff, funding, and other resources for accomplishing effective mitigation. One crucial step in
assessing a community’s vulnerability is to objectively review the capabilities to implement
mitigation strategies and identify any limiting factors.
To achieve this, each community examined its existing administrative documents, procedures,
and policies. This review enabled the communities and the planning team to evaluate how current
capabilities either alleviate or exacerbate vulnerability to disaster impacts. Table 4.18 identifies
the administrative and technical competences of each community, including the individuals
responsible for those roles. Table 4.19 encapsulates the efficacy of the specified planning
mechanisms regarding disaster mitigation and identifies potential deficiencies in the plans.
116
Table 4.29: Administrative and Technical Capabilities
Administrative/
Staff Composition
Local Jurisdiction
Aurora Brookings Bruce Bushnell Elkton Sinai Volga White Brookings
County
Board of Adjustment Planning
Commission Appointed Elected
Officials NA Elected
Officials NA Elected
Officials
Elected
Officials
Planning
Commission
Building Official NA Appointed NA NA NA NA NA NA Appointed
Community Planner NA Appointed NA NA NA NA NA NA Appointed
Elected Officials Aldermanic Commission Aldermanic Trustee Aldermanic Trustee Aldermanic Aldermanic Commission
Emergency Manager NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Appointed/
Zoning Officer
Engineer/Highway Superintendent NA Appointed NA NA NA NA NA NA Appointed
Floodplain Administrator
Finance
Officer/
Maintenance
Supervisor
City Engineer Finance
Officer NA Finance
Officer
Finance
Officer
City
Manager
Finance
Officer Zoning Officer
GIS Coordinator NA City GIS
Coordinator NA NA NA NA NA NA County GIS
Coordinator
Planning Commission Appointed Appointed NA NA Elected
Officials NA Elected
Officials
Elected
Officials Appointed
Zoning Officer
Finance
Officer/
Maintenance
Supervisor
Appointed Finance
Officer NA Finance
Officer NA Finance
Officer
Finance
Officer &
Mayor
Appointed
Grant Writing Capability Yes* Yes* Yes* Yes* Yes* Yes* Yes* Yes* Yes*
Non-profit organizations focused on
environmental protection. Yes** Yes** Yes** Yes** Yes** Yes** Yes** Yes** Yes**
Public-Private partnership initiatives
addressing disaster-related issues. No No No No No No No No No
NA: This Jurisdiction has nobody serving in this role.
* First District Association of Local Governments provides these services without cost .
** East Dakota Watershed Development District.
117
Table 4.30: Capabilities of Growth Guidance Instruments
Capabilities of Community
Planning Mechanisms Aurora Brookings Bruce Bushnell Elkton Sinai Volga White Brookings
County
Does the Future Land-Use
Map identify natural hazard
areas?
Y Y NA NA Y NA Y Y Y
Do the land-use policies
discourage development or
redevelopment within
natural hazard areas?
Y Y Y NA Y NA Y Y Y
Does the plan provide
adequate space for
expected future growth in
areas located outside
natural hazard areas?
Y Y NA NA Y NA Y Y Y
Does the transportation
plan limit access to hazard
areas?
N N NA NA N NA N N N
Is transportation policy
used to guide growth in
safe locations?
Y Y NA NA Y NA N Y Y
Are movement systems
designed to function under
disaster conditions (e.g.,
evacuation)?
Y Y NA NA Y NA Y Y Y
Are environmental systems
that protect development
from hazards identified and
mapped?
N N NA NA N NA N N N
Do environmental policies
provide incentives to
development that is located
outside protective
ecosystems?
N N NA NA N NA N N N
Do environmental policies
maintain and restore
protective ecosystems?
N N NA NA N NA N N Y
Are the goals and policies of
the comprehensive plan
related to those of the
FEMA Local Hazard
Mitigation Plan?
N N NA NA N NA N N N
118
Capabilities of Community
Planning Mechanisms Aurora Brookings Bruce Bushnell Elkton Sinai Volga White Brookings
County
Is safety explicitly included
in the plan's growth and
development policies?
Y Y NA NA Y NA Y Y Y
Does the monitoring and
implementation section of
the plan cover safe growth
objectives?
N N NA NA N NA N N N
Does the Zoning Ordinance
conform to the
comprehensive plan in
terms of discouraging
development or
redevelopment within
natural hazard areas?
Y Y NA NA Y NA Y Y Y
Does the zoning ordinance
contain natural hazard
overlay zones that set
conditions for land use
within such zones?
Y Y NA NA Y NA Y Y Y
Do rezoning procedures
recognize natural hazard
areas as limits on zoning
changes that allow greater
intensity or density of use?
N Y NA NA N NA Y N Y
Does the zoning ordinance
restrict development
within, or filling of,
wetlands, floodways, and
floodplains?
Y Y Y NA Y NA Y Y Y
Do the subdivision
regulations restrict the
subdivision of land within or
adjacent to natural hazard
areas?
Y Y NA NA NA NA NA Y Y
Do the subdivision
regulations provide for
conservation subdivisions
or cluster subdivisions in
order to conserve
environmental resources?
N N NA NA NA NA NA N Y
Do the subdivision
regulations allow density
transfers where Hazard
areas exist?
N N NA NA NA NA NA N N
NA: This jurisdiction does not have the specified document.
119
ASSESSING VULNERABILITY: ESTIMATING POTENTIAL LOSSES
Requirement 201.6(b)(3). Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool – A4/A4-a.
Requirement 201.6(c)(2)(ii). Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool – B2-a-c.
Requirement 201.6(c)(3). Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool – C2.
Requirement 201.6(d)(3). Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool – E1-a.
The data presented in the following tables was collected from the Brookings County Director of
Equalization. Any inconsistencies or gaps in information are due to the absence of existing
mechanisms, plans, and technical documents available.
The assessor’s office provided the assessed valuation of all structures on every property within
the incorporated and rural areas of the county. The data provides the total value for structures a
certain use on property. It was not possible to discern the number of structures per lot, so the
actual number of structures is based on the number of parcels with the specified use type. For
the purposes of this plan only Residential, Commercial/Industrial, Agricultural, and Manufactured
Homes were included. More specifically, all agricultural structures were included; only primary
residential structures (houses, apartments, etc.) and not including sheds, lean-tos, and garages
were included. All commercial or industrial structures were included, whether considered primary
or accessory structures. Public or quasi-publicly owned structures and other structures for which
the Department of Equalization did not have an assessed value were not included in the
calculation. Structures throughout the incorporated and unincorporated portions of the county
were reviewed based upon updated, preliminary flood hazard areas (Zone “A”) boundaries which
are required to be adopted by the applicable jurisdictions in early 2025. If it was determined any
structures on the applicable lot were located within the flood hazard area, the total assessed value
for structures on said lot was included in the value of structures in the hazard area. The
information does not account for letters of map amendment or letters of map revision which may
have been approved.
All properties with structures, whether owner occupied or not were included in the valuations
provided in Tables 4.31 through 4.40. The reports provided by the assessor’s office did not include
the number of people in each structure; thus, many of the tables are missing this information, so
the degree to which the number of people of affected may vary depending upon the occupancy
status (owner occupied / leased / seasonal). The following tables also do not address information
regarding religious, governmental, or utility structures.
Table 4.31: Brookings County (Rural Area)
Estimated Potential Dollar Losses to Vulnerable Structures
Type of Structure
Number of Structures Value of Structures Number of People
# in
County
# in
HA
% in
HA $ in County $ in HA % in
HA
# in
Rural
Areas
# in
HA
% in
HA
Residential 1,978 776 39.23 $230,352,500 $84,655,600 36.75 6,703 1812 27.03
Commercial/Industrial 120 36 30.00 $72,434,200 $27,349,400 37.76
Agricultural 1,427 789 55.29 $55,538,100 $26,805,700 48.27
Mobile Homes 15 8 53.33 $740,400 $413,800 55.89 19 0.28
Total 3,540 1609 45.45 $359,065,200 $139,224,500 38.77 6,703 1,830 27.31
120
Table 4.32: Aurora Estimated Potential Dollar Losses to Vulnerable Structures
Type of Structure
Number of Structures Value of Structures Number of People
# in
City
# in
HA
% in
HA $ in City $ in HA % in
HA
# in
City
# in
HA
% in
HA
Residential 301 0 0.00 $26,814,400 $0 0.00 1,047 0 0.00
Commercial/Industrial 19 0 0.00 $3,240,700 $0 0.00
Agricultural 0 0 0.00 $0 $0 0.00
Manufactured Home 0 0 0.00 $0 $0 0.00 0 0.00
Total 320 0 0.00 $30,055,100 $0 0.00 1,047 0 0.00
Table 4.33: Brookings Estimated Potential Dollar Losses to Vulnerable Structures
Type of Structure
Number of
Structures Value of Structures Number of People
# in
City
# in
HA
% in
HA $ in City $ in HA % in
HA
# in
City
# in
HA
% in
HA
Residential 4,786 85 1.78 $662,614,400 $8,492,000 1.28 23,377 198 0.85
Agricultural 699 49 7.01 $383,827,000 $22,612,400 5.89
Commercial/Industrial 42 14 33.33 $327,600 $110,800 33.82
Manufactured Home 3 0 0.00 $50,700 $0 0.00 0 0.00
Total 5,530 148 2.68 $1,046,819,700 $31,215,200 2.98 23,377 198 0.85
Table 4.34: Bruce Estimated Potential Dollar Losses to Vulnerable Structures
Type of Structure
Number of Structures Value of Structures Number of People
# in
City
# in
HA
% in
HA $ in City $ in HA % in
HA
# in
City
# in
HA
% in
HA
Residential 97 44 45.36 $5,352,600 $1,864,500 34.83 210 79 37.61
Agricultural 28 5 17.86 $1,370,700 $186,700 13.62
Commercial/Industrial 1 0 0.00 $700 $0 0.00
Manufactured Home 4 3 75.00 $212,000 $125,800 59.34 5 2.56
Total 130 52 40.00 $6,936,000 $2,177,000 31.39 210 84 40.17
Table 4.35: Bushnell Estimated Potential Dollar Losses to Vulnerable Structures
Type of Structure
Number of Structures Value of Structures Number of People
# in City # in
HA
% in
HA $ in City $ in
HA
% in
HA # in City # in
HA
% in
HA
Residential 36 0 0.00 $1,854,000 $0 0.00 71 0 0.00
Agricultural 4 0 0.00 $80,800 $0 0.00
Commercial/Industrial 5 0 0.00 $119,500 $0 0.00
Manufactured Home 0 0 0.00 $0 $0 0.00 0 0.00
Total 45 0 0.00 $2,054,300 $0 0.00 71 0 0.00
121
Table 4.36: Elkton Estimated Potential Dollar Losses to Vulnerable Structures
Type of Structure
Number of Structures Value of Structures Number of People
# in City # in
HA
% in
HA $ in City $ in
HA
% in
HA # in City # in
HA
% in
HA
Residential 277 0 0.00 $19,685,100 $0 0.00 755 0 0.00
Agricultural 54 0 0.00 $4,382,800 $0 0.00
Commercial/Industrial 2 0 0.00 $4,300 $0 0.00
Manufactured Home 0 0 0.00 $0 $0 0.00 0 0.00
Total 333 0 0.00 $24,072,200 $0 0.00 755 0 0.00
Table 4.37: Sinai Estimated Potential Dollar Losses to Vulnerable Structures
Type of Structure
Number of Structures Value of Structures Number of People
# in
City
# in
HA
% in
HA $ in City $ in HA % in
HA
# in
City
# in
HA
% in
HA
Residential 64 6 9.38 $2,563,600 $2,563,600 100.00 99 10 10.53
Agricultural 2 0 0.00 $620,600 $0 0.00
Commercial/Industrial 0 0 0.00 $0 $0 0.00
Manufactured Home 0 0 0.00 $0 $0 0.00 0 0.00
Total 66 6 9.09 $3,184,200 $2,563,600 80.51 99 10 10.53
Table 4.38: Volga Estimated Potential Dollar Losses to Vulnerable Structures
Type of Structure
Number of
Structures Value of Structures Number of People
# in
City
# in
HA
% in
HA $ in City $ in HA % in
HA
# in
City
# in
HA
% in
HA
Residential 562 1 0.18 $69,032,500 $292,700 0.42 2,113 2 0.11
Agricultural 84 7 8.33 $14,722,000 $1,241,900 8.44
Commercial/Industrial 12 6 50.00 $33,400 $15,700 47.01
Manufactured Home 2 0 0.00 $51,000 $0 0.00 0 0.00
Total 660 14 2.12 $83,838,900 $1,550,300 1.85 2,113 2 0.11
Table 4.39: White Estimated Potential Dollar Losses to Vulnerable Structures
Type of Structure
Number of
Structures Value of Structures Number of People
# in
City
# in
HA
% in
HA $ in City $ in HA % in
HA
# in
City
# in
HA
% in
HA
Residential 203 2 0.99 $15,158,700 $67,800 0.45 537 4 0.79
Agricultural 35 2 5.71 $2,133,400 $297,900 13.96
Commercial/Industrial 5 2 40.00 $83,800 $50,800 60.62
Manufactured Home 0 0 0.00 $0 $0 0.00 0 0.00
Total 243 6 2.47 $17,375,900 $416,500 2.40 537 4 0.79
122
Table 4.40: Brookings County (Total)
Estimated Potential Dollar Losses to Vulnerable Structures
Type of Structure
Number of Structures Value of Structures Number of People
# in
City
# in
HA
% in
HA $ in City $ in HA % in
HA
# in
City
# in
HA
%
in
HA
Residential 8,304 914 11.01 $1,033,427,800 $97,936,200 9.48 34,375 2,106 6.13
Agricultural 1,045 99 9.47 $482,812,200 $51,688,300 10.71
Commercial/Industrial 1,494 813 54.42 $56,107,400 $26,983,000 48.09
Manufactured Home 24 11 45.83 $1,054,100 $539,600 51.19 24 0.07
Total 10,867 1837 120.73 $1,573,401,500 $177,147,100 119.46 34,375 2,130 6.20
Notes:
# in HA: Number of structures in hazard area identifies the number of properties of a given use type, with structures located
within the floodplain. Aerial photography, Comprehensive Land Use Plans, and DFIRM boundaries provided by FEMA
were used for identification. Some structures included may have received LOMA’s, removing them from the flood plain,
since the effective date of the current DFIRM.
$ in HA: Value of structures in hazard area was estimated by extrapolating assessed valuations of structures on parcels which
had a primary structure within the hazard area. This data was provided by the Brookings County Department of
Equalization and is classified by land use.
# in [Jurisdiction]: The number of people was based on the 2020 Census.
# in Hazard Area: The number of people in a hazard area was determined by multiplying the average household size of a given
community as identified by the number of structures in the identified hazard area and multiplying that number
by the rate of occupancy for the community (All statistics from the US Census 2020). (Occupancy status of
the structure was not available, so therefore not considered.)
ASSESSING VULNERABILITY: ANALYZING DEVELOPMENT TRENDS
Requirement 201.6(b)(3). Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool – A4.
Requirement 201.6(c)(2)(ii). Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool – B2-a-c.
Requirement 201.6(c)(3). Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool – C2.
Requirement 201.6(d)(3). Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool – D1.
Requirement 201.6(d)(3). Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool – D2.
Requirement 201.6(d)(3). Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool – E1-a.
Requirement 201.6(d)(3). Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool – E2-c.
The land use and development trends for each jurisdiction were identified by the representatives
from each of the jurisdictions. Most communities within Brookings County are experiencing growth
and have comprehensive land use plans which identify future areas for development. Five of the
seven participating communities are showing growth.
In addition to Brookings County, the cities of Aurora, Brookings, Elkton, Volga, and White all have
adopted Comprehensive Land Use Plans with Future Land Use Maps. Elkton completed an
update of its Comprehensive Land Use Plan in 2020. Brookings completed its update to the
Comprehensive Plan in 2018. Volga and Aurora are scheduled to review and update its
respective plans and ordinances in 2025.
The Comprehensive Land Use Plans for each community were reviewed by each community
utilizing one. Specifically, available undeveloped areas projected for residential, commercial, and
industrial uses were reviewed. Based upon their own projected density of development for each
land use, the communities then identified the potential number of lots which could be created
within flood hazard areas given current land use regulations and controls. Participating
123
communities in Brookings County are in the process of adopting the most recently prepared
National Flood Insurance Program Flood Hazard Maps and recommended ordinances for the
proper regulation of property within the floodplain. Each respective community intends on
adopting those ordinances and maps in early 2025. Those maps have changed since the last
update to the PDM Plan. Tables 4.32 – 4.36 utilize those new flood hazard boundary maps to
identify the projected vulnerability for communities which have adopted land use plans. Future
Land Use Maps for each jurisdiction which have adopted Comprehensive Land Use Plans are
included in Appendix G.
Table 4.41: Brookings County (Unincorporated Area)
Potential Floodplain Development – By Land Use Type
Community Totals Flood Hazard Area
Land Use
Category
Projected
Development
Density
(Acres/Unit)
Acres of
projected
future
development
Acres of future
development in
Hazard Area
% Area for
future
development
Potential # of
Lots for future
development
# of Undeveloped
Lots Already
Appropriately
Zoned
Ag –
Residential 35 N/A N/A N/A 76* 54
Lake –
Residential 2 N/A N/A N/A 2 2
Commercial 2 N/A N/A N/A 0 0
Industrial 2 N/A N/A N/A 0 0
N/A: Most of the rural area is planned to remain agricultural in use with varying degree of land use restrictions.
*This only includes those lots entirely contained within the floodplain.
Not all portions of Lake-Residential Lots appropriately zoned are within the 100-year Floodplain
Table 4.42: City of Aurora
Potential Floodplain Development – By Land Use Type
Community Totals Flood Hazard Area
Land Use
Category
Projected
Development
Density
(Units/Acre)
Acres of
projected
future
development
Acres of future
development in
Hazard Area
% Area for
future
development
Potential # of
Lots for future
development
# of Undeveloped
Lots Already
Appropriately
Zoned
Ag –
Residential 2.5 54 4.25 7.9 10 1
Commercial 1 54 12.0 22.4 12 1
Industrial 0.25 268 25.5 9.5 6 0
124
Table 4.43: City of Brookings
Potential Floodplain Development – By Land Use Type
Community Totals Flood Hazard Area
Land Use
Category
Projected
Development
Density
(Units/Acre)
Acres of
projected
future
development
Acres of future
development in
Hazard Area
% Area for
future
development
Potential # of
Lots for future
development
# of Undeveloped
Lots Already
Appropriately
Zoned
Ag –
Residential 2.5 500* 0.0 0 0 3
Commercial 1 N/A** 20 N/A 5 0
Industrial 0.25 N/A** 100 N/A 25 0
*Does not include Low Density Residential category
**Many land use categories are form based and combine commercial/industrial uses.
Table 4.44: City of Elkton
Potential Floodplain Development – By Land Use Type
Community Totals Flood Hazard Area
Land Use
Category
Projected
Development
Density
(Units/Acre)
Acres of
projected
future
development
Acres of future
development in
Hazard Area
% Area for
future
development
Potential # of
Lots for future
development
# of Undeveloped
Lots Already
Appropriately
Zoned
Ag –
Residential 2.5 198 0.0 0 0 0
Commercial 1 47 0.0 0 0 0
Industrial 0.25 98 0.0 0 0 0
Table 4.45: City of Volga
Potential Floodplain Development – By Land Use Type
Community Totals Flood Hazard Area
Land Use
Category
Projected
Development
Density
(Units/Acre)
Acres of
projected
future
development
Acres of future
development in
Hazard Area
% Area for
future
development
Potential # of
Lots for future
development
# of Undeveloped
Lots Already
Appropriately
Zoned
Ag –
Residential 3 298 12 4.0 36 1
Commercial 1 32 5 15.6 15 3
Industrial 0.25 57 0 0 0 0
125
Table 4.46: City of White
Potential Floodplain Development – By Land Use Type
Community Totals Flood Hazard Area
Land Use
Category
Projected
Development
Density
(Units/Acre)
Acres of
projected
future
development
Acres of future
development in
Hazard Area
% Area for
future
development
Potential # of
Lots for future
development
# of Undeveloped
Lots Already
Appropriately
Zoned
Ag –
Residential 2.5 87 1.3 1.4 3 0
Commercial 1 6 0.0 0 0 0
Industrial 0.25 24 0.0 0 0 0
Brookings County is one of the fastest growing counties in the State of South Dakota in terms of
growth as a percentage of population. Population in all of Brookings County’s communities,
except Sinai, has grown since the previously adopted PDM Plan, as is evidenced by Table 1.1.
New single family development has been the driver of growth in Volga and Aurora. The City of
Brookings is growing with a wide variety of housing types, but a particular increase in multi-family
dwellings has occurred since the previous plan. Other municipalities are experiencing infill growth
with modest expansion on the fringe. While some homes are being built on large estates and
farmsteads; (rural) Brookings County’s population is primarily increasing as a result of
subdivisions within the fringe of the City of Brookings as well as redevelopment and expanded
development near lakes.
UNIQUE OR VARIED RISK ASSESSMENT
Requirement 201.6(c)(2)(i). Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool – B1.
Requirement 201.6(c)(2)(ii). Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool – B2-a-c.
After conducting the risk assessment for each jurisdiction, the PDM Planning Team decided that
all areas of the county have an equal chance of a natural hazard occurrence in their area. While
the extent to which each jurisdiction is affected by such hazards varies slightly between the local
jurisdictions, the implications are the same. Thus, the PDM Planning Team decided that all
jurisdictions in the County are equally affected by the types of hazards/risks that affect the PDM
jurisdiction. Thus, the unique or varied risk requirement is not applicable to the Brookings County
PDM.
On the following pages, a hazard vulnerability map is shown for each of the jurisdictions
participating in this PDM. The maps identify critical infrastructure. The maps identify critical
infrastructure and one-hundred-year flood plain. Since most major hazards facing the county are
not geographically based. Winter storms and severe summer storms carry an equal probability
of occurring throughout the county. While specific locations for above ground electrical distribution
lines are not identified on the map(s), they are located throughout the County and are vulnerable
to both flooding and severe weather (See Figures 4.1 through 4.10).
126
Figure 4.10: Brookings County (Rural Areas) Hazard Vulnerability Map
127
Figure 4.11: Brookings County Hazard Vulnerability Map
128
Figure 4.12: City of Aurora Hazard Vulnerability Map
129
Figure 4.13: City of Brookings Hazard Vulnerability Map
130
Figure 4.14: City of Bruce Hazard Vulnerability Map
131
Figure 4.15: Town of Bushnell Hazard Vulnerability Map
132
Figure 4.16: City of Elkton Hazard Vulnerability Map
133
Figure 4.17: Town of Sinai Hazard Vulnerability Map
134
Figure 4.18: City of Volga Hazard Vulnerability Map
135
Figure 4.19: City of White Hazard Vulnerability Map
Figure 4.11: City of Bryant Hazard Vulnerability Map
136
CHAPTER 5 ꟾ
MITIGATION STRATEGY
MITIGATION OVERVIEW
Requirement 201.6(b)(1) …Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool – A3.
Requirement 201.6(c)(3)(i). Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool – C3.
Requirement 201.6(c)(3)(ii). Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool – C4 (inc. C4-a&b).
Requirement 201.6(c)(3)(iii) & (iv). Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool – C5.
Requirement 201.6(d)(3). Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool – E2-a&b.
The SD SHMP addresses several mitigation categories, including warning and forecasting,
community planning, and infrastructure reinforcement. The County and participating entities’
critical needs are mitigating high wind and flood hazards, acquiring backup generators for critical
infrastructure, construction of tornado safe rooms and/or storm shelters, and enhancing public
awareness.
Following the completion of the risk assessment (which encompassed identifying hazards,
evaluating their probability, and assessing vulnerability), the PDM Planning Team reached a
mutual consensus. The team agreed that the mitigation strategies should primarily focus on
addressing the following hazards: winter storms, severe summer storms, flooding, and
drought/wildfires in both urban and rural areas.
The PDM Planning Team began by reviewing the goals, objectives, and priorities of the 2019
Plan. They found the goals and objectives of the previous plan were still relevant, with only minor
changes being needed. The goals and objectives were then revised and incorporated into the
updated plan. Similarly, the priorities and focuses of the mitigation strategies from the previous
plan were also deemed appropriate and integrated into the updated plan.
To complete the goal identification process, the PDM Planning Team assessed the county’s and
participating jurisdictions’ vulnerability to each identified hazard and the severity of the threat
posed by each. The discussion largely centered around past event damage and strategies to
reduce or eliminate future damage. Though reviewing each jurisdiction’s Comprehensive Land
Use Plan (if available), the participants were also able to consider how future development might
impact each jurisdictions’ vulnerability to the hazards they face.
While pinpointing goals, numerous activities or projects were identified with broadly defined
benefits for several jurisdictions within the County. Although many actions were acknowledged
by the PDM Planning Team to have wide-reaching benefits, due to the scope or varying levels of
importance to individual jurisdictions, specific costs, timeframes, or priorities were not assigned.
Along with this, while many infrastructure projects and policies throughout all communities would
help mitigate hazards, they were not always located in the most vulnerable areas.
Each community reviewed the activities/policies and corresponding problem statements to
determine their applicability to their respective jurisdictions. The results of this community review
are displayed in Tables 5.1 – 5.12. Unless otherwise noted, the lead contact for all mitigation
projects in those tables will be the Finance Officer for each respective municipality and the County
Auditor for Brookings County. The funding source for projects in Tables 5.1 – 5.12 will be from
the general fund of the applicable jurisdiction unless specifically noted.
137
Projects/policies marked with a “✓” were identified in previous plans and determined to be not
completed since the previous plan. Projects/policies marked with a “” are new for the respective
community. Projects/policies marked with a “” were determined no longer viable. Each
project/policy in Tables 5.1 – 5.12 should be considered as a “medium” priority rating in relation
to the projects listed in 5.13. Unless otherwise noted, any project listed within Tables 5.1 – 5.12
should be expected to commence within three (3) to five (5) years. Projects with “*” are already
occurring and expected to remain ongoing during the life of the plan; such as the regular
publication of articles relating to natural hazards and disaster resiliency as shown in Figure 5.1.
Specific projects for each community are listed in Table 5.13. Projects listed in Table 5.13 may
duplicate those listed in Tables 5.1 – 5.12. Table 5.13 represents more specific requests where it
may have been determined a different funding source may be sought, or a more specific location
or purpose for a strategy may have been determined. Those projects intended to mitigate
problems at a specific location are represented in Figures 5.1a to 5.10.
Figure 5.1: Sample Newspaper Article by Emergency Manager
1. Reduce the loss of life, property, infrastructure, critical facilities, cultural resources and
impacts from severe weather, flooding and other natural disasters.
2. Improve public safety during severe weather, flooding and other natural disasters.
3. Improve the County’s Emergency Preparedness and Disaster Response and Recovery
capabilities.
Principal Goals
138
Goal #1: Protect specific areas of Brookings County from flooding due to heavy rain, rapid snow
melt, and ice jams.
Goal #2: Educate and inform Brookings County residents regarding flooding safety in relation to
heavy rain, rapid snow melt, and ice jams.
Goal #3: Reduce the extent to which utility interruptions affect areas during flooding events
caused by heavy rain, rapid snow melt, and ice jams.
➢ Actions/Projects to reduce flood risk through policy implementation. (See Table 5.1)
➢ Actions/Projects to change the characteristics or impacts of flood hazards. (See Table 5.2)
➢ Actions to reduce loss potential of infrastructure to flood hazards. (See Table 5.3)
Goal #1: Increase public awareness and education on severe summer weather events (includes:
thunderstorms, high wind, hail, lightning, and tornadoes) and severe winter weather
events (includes: blizzards, freezing rain, and high wind).
Goal #2: Improve public safety during severe summer weather events (as above) and severe
winter weather events (as above).
Goal #3: Reduce the extent to which utility interruptions affect areas during severe summer
weather events (as above) and severe winter weather events (as above).
Goal #4: Reduce crippling effects of winter weather events (as above).
➢ Actions/Projects to reduce severe weather risk through policy implementation.
(See Table 5.4)
➢ Actions/Projects to change the characteristics or impacts of severe weather hazards.
(See Table 5.5)
➢ Actions/Projects to reduce loss potential of infrastructure to severe weather hazards.
(See Table 5.6)
Mitigation Activities for Flooding Hazards
Mitigation Activities for Severe Weather Hazards (summer and winter)
139
Table 5.1: Actions/Projects to Reduce Flood Risk through Policy Implementation
Problem Statements Actions Aurora Brookings Bruce Bushnell Elkton Sinai Volga White Brookings
County
Public is unaware of scope of
flood risk and existing
emergency plans.
Public education. Disseminate
information regarding how to deal
with flooding. This would include
transportation issues, home
protection strategies, safety issues,
and how to move forward after a
flooding situation.
✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Encouraging homeowners in flood-
prone areas to purchase flood
insurance.
✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Jurisdiction is unaware of
potential hydrologic impacts of
drainage or development
projects.
Conduct necessary studies
addressing drainage (stormwater
flow/runoff, etc.).
✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Residents are not eligible for
flood insurance.
Begin participation in the National
Flood Insurance Program. ✓
Failure to comply with NFIP
programs makes the
community ineligible for flood
insurance and certain funding.
Ensure continued National Flood
Insurance Program compliance by
enforcing floodplain management
ordinance.
✓* ✓* ✓* ✓* ✓* ✓* ✓* ✓*
Jurisdiction is unaware of
opportunities to participate in
programs to assist in achieving
mitigation goals.
Work to improve the level of
communication and coordination
with the State NFIP coordinator.
✓* ✓* ✓* ✓* ✓* ✓* ✓* ✓*
Jurisdiction has no legal
mechanism to regulate land
use.
Adoption and enforcement of land
use regulation. ✓ ✓
Jurisdiction needs to continue
to regulate minimum land use
and development standards.
Continue enforcement of zoning and
subdivision ordinances. ✓* ✓* ✓* ✓* ✓* ✓* ✓*
Jurisdiction has little legal
mechanism to regulate
drainage.
Developing a county/city drainage
ordinance. ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
140
Problem Statements Actions Aurora Brookings Bruce Bushnell Elkton Sinai Volga White Brookings
County
Jurisdiction needs to continue
to regulate minimum
construction standards.
Continue enforcement of building
codes. (Currently IBC 2023) ✓* ✓* ✓*
Jurisdiction lacks technical
analysis or identification of
specific mitigation projects.
Identify and prioritize
capital/structural mitigation projects
that are cost effective and
technically feasible.
✓* ✓*^ ✓* ✓* ✓* ✓* ✓* ✓* ✓*
^Continue to study other areas, and refine cost/benefit activities over time.
Table 5.2: Actions/Projects to Change the Characteristics or Impacts of Flood Hazards
Problem Statements Actions Aurora Brookings Bruce Bushnell Elkton Sinai Volga White Brookings
County
Portions of storm sewer
system is not designed to 100-
year flood event.
Installing or upgrading storm sewer
piping/or overland flow. ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Drainage patterns have
changed; culverts are
inadequate for conveyance of
water.
Installing or enlarging drainage
culverts. ✓* ✓* ✓* ✓* ✓* ✓* ✓* ✓* ✓*
Install drainage tile. ✓
Install or enlarge detention/retention
ponds. ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Certain streets have
substandard or no curb and
gutter.
Install curbing and guttering in city
streets to improve stormwater flow. ✓* ✓*
✓
5-10
years
✓
5-10 years ✓*
✓
5-10
years
✓*
✓
5-10
years
141
Problem Statements Actions Aurora Brookings Bruce Bushnell Elkton Sinai Volga White Brookings
County
Capacity of rivers, streams,
and retention areas is
decreased due to
accumulation of debris.
Clean out debris in drainage areas,
tributaries, etc. to improve water flow. ✓* ✓* ✓* ✓* ✓* ✓* ✓* ✓* ✓*
Install valves or plugs in sanitary and
stormwater sewer system. ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Install riprap around sanitary sewer
ponds. ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Potential for development in
flood prone areas.
Preservation and expansion of open
space along the river and enhancement
of existing berm areas.
✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Work with property owners to
implement deed restrictions for open
lots/vacant properties in the flood
hazard areas to prevent development.
✓ ✓
Table 5.3: Actions/Projects to Reduce Loss Potential of Infrastructure to Flood Hazards
Problem Statements Actions Aurora Brookings Bruce Bushnell Elkton Sinai Volga White Brookings
County
Many roads and bridges
were built prior to
identification of flood
hazard areas.
Replace and raise bridges. ✓
5-10 years
✓
5-10 years
Elevating roads in flood-prone areas. ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓*
Some utility structures are
located in areas
vulnerable to flooding.
Flood-proof or replace utility
structures in flood-prone areas. ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Structures constructed in
the floodplain prior to
identification of flood
hazard areas at risk of
flooding or impeding
water/ice.
Making structural retrofits to
infrastructure. ✓* ✓* ✓* ✓* ✓* ✓* ✓* ✓* ✓*
Work with property owners to
mitigate repetitive loss residences
through elevation, acquisition, or
relocation.
✓ ✓
142
Table 5.4: Actions/Projects to Reduce Severe Weather Risk through Policy Implementation
Problem Statements Actions Aurora Brookings Bruce Bushnell Elkton Sinai Volga White Brookings
County
Public is unfamiliar
with certain disaster
preparation measures.
Public education.
Disseminate information regarding how to deal
with severe weather (summer/winter).
Some of the issues that may be addressed
would include: safety issues on downed power
lines, electrical and fire dangers, necessity for
generators and how to use them, protecting
property, survival strategies during storms, and
purchasing of back-up power for various
household and farming operations. (W/S)
✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Lack of data regarding
vulnerability to severe
summer & winter
storms.
Gather data to create a more precise loss
estimate for winter storms. (W) ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Gather data to create a more precise loss
estimate for summer storms. (S) ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Projects denoted with “(S)” are specific to Summer Storms, “(W)” for Winter Storms.
Table 5.5: Actions/Projects to Change the Characteristics or Impacts of Severe Weather Hazards
Problem Statements Actions Aurora Brookings Bruce Bushnell Elkton Sinai Volga White Brookings
County
Certain areas and
populations are not served
by storm shelters
Identify area of need for tornado safe
rooms or community shelters. (S) ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Identify areas of need for storm
shelters at manufactured home and
RV parks. (S)
✓ ✓ ✓
Critical facilities are
vulnerable to power failure.
Install backup generators for
infrastructure, shelters, and
emergency operations. (W/S)
✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Certain areas are
susceptible to snow drifting.
Survey areas in need of snow
shelterbelts and plant trees
accordingly. (W)
✓*
Install or plant living snow fences. (W) ✓*
143
Problem Statements Actions Aurora Brookings Bruce Bushnell Elkton Sinai Volga White Brookings
County
Certain areas of town cannot
hear storm sirens and other
emergency warning systems
Construct new or improve existing
warning systems. (S) ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Storm sirens and other
emergency warning systems
are outdated.
Replace or upgrade existing warning
systems. (S) ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Lack of emergency
preparedness supplies and
equipment.
Ensure emergency shelters area
stocked with adequate supplies.
(W/S)
✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Table 5.6: Actions/Projects to Reduce Loss Potential of Infrastructure to Severe Weather Hazards
Problem
Statements Actions Aurora Brookings Bruce Bushnell Elkton Sinai Volga White Brookings
County
Utility lines and
structures are
subject to failure in
high wind, heavy
rain, ice events
Upgrading of utility lines. (W/S) ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Burial of utility lines when needed. (W/S) ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Require upgrading of overhead lines when
age or disasters provide an opportunity.
(W/S)
✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Removal of trees near power lines. (W/S) ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Attachment of guy wires to dead-end poles.
(W/S) ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Testing integrity of poles. (W/S) ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Usage of anti-galloping devices. (W/S) ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Making structural retrofits to facilities. (W/S) ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
144
Goal #1: Improve fire prevention education and fire response.
Goal #2: Reduce the negative effects droughts have on Brookings County.
Goal #3: Reduce the negative effects wildfires have on Brookings County.
➢ Actions/Projects to reduce fire and drought risks through policy implementation.
(See Table 5.7)
➢ Actions/Projects to change the characteristics or impacts of fire and drought hazards.
(See Table 5.8)
➢ Actions to reduce loss potential of infrastructure to fire and drought hazards.
(See Table 5.9)
The hazards of landslides, subsidence, earthquakes, and dam failures have no history of
occurring in any jurisdiction within Brookings County. These hazards were not identified for
planning purposes but were listed in exercises merely for comparative purposes. It was
determined by the PDM Planning Team that since these hazards have never occurred, and there
is no reason to expect them to occur in the future within Brookings County’s jurisdictions, no
mitigation activities are necessary.
Technological (See Table 5.10):
Planning (See Table 5.11):
Administration/Coordination (See Table 5.12)
Mitigation Activities for Fire and Drought Hazards
General Mitigation Activities
Mitigation Activities for Hazards Identified but Do Not Occur
145
Table 5.7: Actions/Projects to Reduce Fire and Drought Risk through Policy Implementation
Problem Statements Actions Aurora Brookings Bruce Bushnell Elkton Sinai Volga White Brookings
County
Community becomes
vulnerable to fire
hazard while staff is
being trained.
Find funding sources to pay
for persons to fill positions
while individuals are at
training courses.
✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Potential for
development in areas
vulnerable to wildfire or
urban fire.
Adoption and enforcement of
property regulations in areas
vulnerable to wildfire.
✓* ✓* ✓* ✓* ✓* ✓* ✓* ✓* ✓*
Establish/require minimum
fire suppression standards
for subdivisions.
✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Community has no
plan/policy for water
rationing in
emergency.
Develop water rationing
measures that will be
implemented during a
drought situation.
✓* ✓* ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓* ✓ ✓
Public is unaware of
fire safety and benefits
of conserving water.
Educate residents on fire
safety and the benefits of
conserving water at all times,
not just during a drought.
✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Table 5.8: Actions/Projects to Reduce Loss Potential of Infrastructure to Fire and Drought Hazards
Problem Statements Actions Aurora Brookings Bruce Bushnell Elkton Sinai Volga White Brookings
County
Firefighting equipment
becomes out of date
quickly.
Ensure that fire departments
are adequately equipped to
respond to wildfires.
✓* ✓* ✓* ✓* ✓* ✓* ✓* ✓* ✓*
Fire hydrants become
unusable.
Locate dry fire hydrants and
improve existing infrastructure
for hydrant hook-ups.
✓* ✓* ✓* ✓* ✓* ✓* ✓* ✓* ✓*
Construct additional water
supply. ✓ ✓ ✓
Fire protection
capabilities are limited. Construct new fire station.
146
Table 5.9: Actions/Projects to Change the Characteristics or Impacts of Fire and Drought Hazards
Problem Statements Actions Aurora Brookings Bruce Bushnell Elkton Sinai Volga White Brookings
County
Reservoirs are vulnerable
to silting and decrease in
efficient provision of water
services in emergency
situations.
Dredge reservoirs to improve
water quality. Reservoirs silt
in and dredging, water can
flow to more places, more
quickly, and more easily.
✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Dead or dry plant material
creates fire
hazard/location changes
seasonally and annually.
Burn areas, as necessary, to
ensure a fire break rather
than ignition fuel.
✓*
Local economy is very
dependent on
corn/soybean production.
Educate farmers on the
benefits of a diversified crop
protection plan in the event of
a drought.
✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Work with local farmers to
investigate the use of more
drought resistant crops.
✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Table 5.10: Technological Activities
Problem
Statements Actions Aurora Brookings Bruce Bushnell Elkton Sinai Volga White Brookings
County
Current data and
software can
become obsolete
or out of date.
Continue utilizing a working computer-aided
mapping system for the County. This
includes using overlays of GIS data, HazMat,
flood zones, and roads.
✓* ✓* ✓* ✓* ✓* ✓* ✓* ✓* ✓*
Enhance existing computer-aided dispatch. ✓* ✓* ✓* ✓* ✓* ✓* ✓* ✓* ✓*
Use HAZUS software to estimate losses in
flooding situations. Information may also be
able to be used for other hazard areas.
✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Work with South Dakota State University to
explore additional methods of estimating
losses in natural hazards.
✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
147
Table 5.11: Planning Activities
Problem Statements Actions Aurora Brookings Bruce Bushnell Elkton Sinai Volga White Brookings
County
Maintenance of a mitigation
plan is beyond the economic
capability of this community.
Find funding to review and update the
regional and local disaster mitigation
plans on a five-year cycle.
✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Disaster mitigation projects
have not always been
incorporated into other plans.
Incorporate disaster mitigation actions
into appropriate local and regional
plans – master plans, land use,
transportation, open space, and
capital programming.
✓* ✓* ✓* ✓* ✓* ✓* ✓* ✓* ✓*
Integrate disaster mitigation concerns
into subdivision, site plan review, and
other zoning reviews. In particular,
require the consideration of
downstream flooding impacts caused
by new projects.
✓* ✓* ✓* ✓* ✓* ✓* ✓*
Integrate disaster mitigation concerns
into transportation projects (e.g.,
drainage improvements, underground
utilities, etc.).
✓* ✓* ✓* ✓* ✓* ✓* ✓*
This community's mitigation
projects are not coordinated
with other communities'
projects.
Develop a means for sharing
information on a regional basis about
successful disaster mitigation planning
and programs.
✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
148
Table 5.12: Administration/Coordination Activities
Problem Statements Actions Aurora Brookings Bruce Bushnell Elkton Sinai Volga White Brookings
County
This community is not
staffed, nor does it have
funding mechanisms to
apply for and administer
funding sources for
mitigation projects.
Identify and pursue funding that builds local
capacity and supports grant-writing for
mitigation actions identified in the PDM.
✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Need to create manner
of mass dissemination of
emergency
preparedness and
response information.
Establish social media pages, and identify
individual to maintain said pages and
establish authority to determine what
information is posted.
Populations to protect
and socially
disadvantaged
populations are not
identified.
Create and update list of vulnerable
populations within jurisdiction; and provide
notification to those populations of plan
updates.
Need to improve
coordination of activities
with other governmental
jurisdictions and utility
providers.
Increase communication/coordination
between federal, state, regional, county,
municipal, private, and non-profit agencies
in the area of pre-disaster mitigation.
✓* ✓* ✓* ✓* ✓* ✓* ✓* ✓* ✓*
Maintain and enhance working
relationships with the utility providers. ✓* ✓* ✓* ✓* ✓* ✓* ✓* ✓* ✓*
149
After holding meetings with the PDM Team and local jurisdictions, as well as hosting multiple
opportunities for public input, the mitigation goals from the 2019 plan were confirmed as the best
aid the County for reducing and lessening the effects of natural hazards. Projects previously
identified in the 2019 PDM were carefully analyzed and discussed to determine which of the
projects had enough merit to be included in the updated PDM and to determine if the projects
meet the hazard mitigation needs of the county. The projects were evaluated based on a
cost/benefit ratio and priority.
Although this PDM focuses on disaster mitigation rather than disaster preparedness, most
communities conversed over disaster preparedness projects as well. It was difficult for individual
communities to recognize the difference between providing storm shelters and making sure the
storm shelters function properly (for example). Actions considered in this category included the
acquisition of emergency generators, and erecting or replacing warning sirens in areas that are
currently underserved.
Most of the mitigation actions proposed by the jurisdictions were identified by city council/town
board members, public works personnel, or PDM Planning Team members from the jurisdiction.
Natural hazards and vulnerability were discussed. Projects were suggested for inclusion on the
mitigation list. Project cost estimates were created based upon similar projects in the region. Local
jurisdiction Boards evaluated each project based on importance, need, urgency, benefits, cost,
funding availability, and timeline. Projects were then either included on the list or removed. Then
assigned a priority metric and other parameters.
Some actions were also proposed by townships and utility providers due to the direct impact of
disasters on infrastructure and services they provide. Once each jurisdiction had its list of
proposed actions complete, it was submitted to the Emergency Management Director. At the
second PDM Planning Team meeting, the actions were reviewed. At the third PDM Planning
Team meeting a final opportunity was given for the jurisdictions to add any additional actions or
refine information relating to previously identified projects.
Although additional data will be needed in some cases, a timeframe for completion, oversight,
funding sources, and any other relevant issues were addressed. These implementation strategies
are geared toward the specific goal and area. Often, these projects will not encounter any
resistance from environmental agencies, legal authorities, and political entities. Table 5.13 is a
presentation of the mitigation actions proposed by the PDM Planning Team. In addition to
identifying the proposed actions, the table includes additional information about each action.
Elected officials and staff of each municipality and the county were responsible for providing most
of this information for actions in their community, but the other planning participants helped in this
process.
The following information is provided for each action:
• A statement regarding the specific problem the proposed action will mitigate.
• The local priority rating:
o “High”-greater importance, unanimous Board agreement, meets an essential need,
shorter implementation time and funding availability.
o “Medium”-less urgent need, limited benefits, maintenance activities and limited funding
availability.
o “Low”-least important, minimal benefits, longer term project and lack of funding availability.
150
• The time frame to accomplish the action:
o “Short” means actions that are intended to be initiated within two years.
o “Medium” is for actions that should be started within five years.
o “Long” is for actions that are not anticipated to be started for at least five years.
• The party(s) primarily responsible for implementing the action.
• The estimated cost/benefit – projected costs for many of the actions were obtained from
knowledgeable sources based on current information. Estimations are subject to change due
to details of specific projects. Benefits for most projects were not readily quantifiable.
• Potential sources of funding (discussed below).
• The primary hazard being addressed.
• The goal corresponding to the action.
As mentioned above, jurisdictions and entities integrally involved in the planning for disasters due
to their wide breadth implications include townships and most utility providers. Utility providers
were represented on the PDM Planning Team. Each utility provider was asked individually to
submit their own mitigation actions. The main mitigation activity proposed by utility providers is
the burying or upgrading of overhead lines in rural areas of the county to make them more
resistant to hazards.
In January of 2024, each individual township in Brookings County was mailed maps upon which
they were asked to identify potential mitigation activities and vulnerable roads or infrastructure
and to return the maps to First District for inclusion in the Plan. In addition, a meeting at which all
township supervisors were invited was held on February 29th, 2024. At this meeting, those
townships that had not responded to the mailed maps were asked to identify potential mitigation
projects and vulnerable roads or infrastructure. Primarily these activities included replacing
culverts with larger culverts, elevating or rip-rapping roads, and reconstructing roads. Not all
townships submitted the maps with potential activities; however, the Appendix E includes maps
of vulnerable sites and potential mitigation actions in the County as proposed by those townships
that participated.
Particular attention needs to be paid to sources of funding for the actions. Given the existing
financial reality of very tight county and municipal budgets, some of the proposed actions cannot
realistically be implemented without substantial grant assistance. With such assistance, it is likely
that many of the high priority projects can be undertaken without placing an onerous burden on
local budgets. Resources for some of the actions available from FEMA through the South Dakota
Office of Emergency Management include the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program, Building
Resilient Infrastructure Communities grant program, and Flood Mitigation Assistance grant
programs. Other possible sources of funding include:
Grant and loan programs/sources
• Community Development Block Grant program
• Economic Development Administration
• FEMA Assistance to Firefighters Grant program
• South Dakota Dept of Environment and Natural Resources
• South Dakota Dept of Transportation
• US Department of Agriculture Rural Development Office
151
Local resources
• General obligation bonds
• Revenue bonds
• Tax Increment Financing (TIF) districts
• City/Town Enterprise Funds
• City/Town/County General Fund (any reference to “City,” “Town,” or “County” refers to the
general fund of the specified Town, City, or County.)
152
Table 5.13: Proposed Mitigation Activities
BROOKINGS
COUNTY
PROBLEM
STATEMENTS
BROOKINGS COUNTY
ACTIONS
PRIORITY
RATING TIMEFRAME CONTACT COST/BENEFIT FUNDING
SOURCE HAZARD GOAL
Base flood
elevation for
residentially
developed lakes is
unknown.
Establishment of base
flood elevations for
Poinsett, Campbell, and
Oakwood Lakes.
High Short
Brookings County
Floodplain
Administrator
Cost is a percentage
of present staffing.
Elevations are
provided in floodmap
going effective April
2025.
County General
Fund Flooding
Protect Specific
Areas of Brookings
County from floods.
Poorly defined
drainage leads to
flooding of
manufactured
homes and
potential
development
property in and
around SW1/4 of
Sec 11-T109N-
R50W.
Study and implement
drainage improvements in
low lying areas to run
water into Big Sioux River
southwest of Sec 11-
T109N-R50W.
High Medium
Brookings County
Emergency
Management
Director
$750,000/reduce
flood-related
damages in the
county
County, City,
HMGP, DOT Flooding
Protect Specific
Areas of Brookings
County from floods.
Flood Control
measures along
Big Sioux River
have degraded,
and an
uncontrolled
portion of river has
expanded to cause
damage to the
area.
Construct flood control
measures (Levee/Dam)
along Big Sioux River in
South Half of Sec 9-T109N-
R50W.
Medium Medium
Brookings County
Emergency
Management
Director
Unknown/reduce
flood-related
damages in the
county
County, HMGP,
DENR Flooding
Protect Specific
Areas of Brookings
County from floods.
153
Alternative
medical facilities
lack back-up
power for
provision of
service
Back-up generator or
power for Dakota Bank
Center (Emergency
Shelter/ Emergency or
back-up care center) All
Jurisdictions
High Short
Brookings County
Emergency
Management
Director
Unknown/Size or
manner of providing
back-up power may
require study to
determine
appropriate
generator
Private,
County/Municipal
General Funds,
USDA, BRIC, HMGP
Extreme Heat,
Extreme Cold,
Severe Storms
(W/S),
Improve public
safety during severe
weather and
extreme
temperatures.
Communication
gaps between
responders during
emergencies.
Purchase & distribute new
mobile units and install
additional transmission
repeater. (All Jurisdictions)
High Short
Brookings County
Emergency
Management
Director
$150,000/improve
emergency services
in the county
County General
Fund, 911 funds All
Improve public
safety during severe
weather.
Educate County
residents
regarding risks,
vulnerability, and
mitigation
activities for
hazardous events
Continue periodic
newspaper articles Severe
Weather Awareness,
Winter Weather
Awareness and Fire
Prevention Weeks
(All Jurisdictions)
High Ongoing
Emergency
Management
Director
<$1,000 - part of
duties of emergency
management office/
Keep weather
preparedness in
public conscience
County General
Fund All
Improve public
safety during
hazardous
conditions
Communities do
not have metric to
measure effects of
Lightning/lack of
public data.
Keep record of and track
damages resulting from
lightning strikes
(life/property)
(All Jurisdictions)
High Short
Emergency
Management
Director /
Respective Fire
Chief
<$1,000 – cost of
coordination and
record keeping/ gain
insight on how to
mitigate lighting
damage
County/Fire
Department
General Funds
Lightning,
Urban Fire,
Wild Fire
Improve public
safety during severe
(Summer) weather.
Drought may
increase risk of
wildfire spreading
Annual reminders
(newspaper article/PSA)
for farmers to have tillage
equipment prepared to till
buffer to stop spread of
wildfire – especially during
harvest/drought.
Low Short
Emergency
Management
Director
<$1,000 – cost
interview or printing
materials/ reminder
of active role
everyone plays in
managing fire
County General
Fund
Wildfire,
Drought
Change the
characteristics or
impacts of fire and
drought hazards
Rural and public
water supplies at
risk of depleting
due to demand
Policy of support for
regional water supplier
such as Project Mainstem
(All Jurisdictions)
Medium Long
Brookings County
Emergency Mgmt
Director/Respective
Finance Officers
$0/Support beginning
of long process to
establish regional
water
N/A Fire, Drought,
Extreme Heat
Improve firefighting
capabilities, ensure
continuation of
service in disasters
154
Overhead power
lines are
vulnerable to loss
of service or
damage due to
high winds and/or
ice.
Bury or upgrade overhead
power lines to make them
more resistant to damage
from ice
High Medium Utility Provider
Dependent on type
of line and
construction
method/ reduce
damage and prevent
loss of power service
OEM/HMGP,
USDA, Utility Funds
Severe
Weather
Hazards
(summer and
winter)
Reduce the extent to
which utility
interruptions affect
areas during severe
weather situations.
Overhead power
lines are
vulnerable to loss
of service or
damage due to
high winds and/or
ice.
Bury power lines in heavy
tree areas or
rebuild/relocate overhead
lines away from heavy tree
areas
Medium Medium Utility Provider
Dependent on type
of line and
construction
method/ reduce
damage and prevent
loss of power service
OEM/HMGP,
USDA, Utility Funds
Severe
Weather
Hazards
(summer and
winter)
Reduce the extent to
which utility
interruptions affect
areas during severe
weather situations.
Overhead lines
and support
structures are
vulnerable to
flooding.
Bury or rebuild/relocate
overhead power lines
away from flood-prone
areas
Medium Medium Utility Provider
Dependent on type
of line and
construction
method/ reduce
flood-related damage
and prevent loss of
power service
OEM/HMGP,
USDA, Utility Funds Flooding
Reduce the extent to
which utility
interruptions affect
areas during flooding
events caused by
heavy rain, and rapid
snow melt.
Water sources
become depleted
during drought.
(All Municipalities)
Establish policies to
decrease water
consumption during
specified periods of
drought/low water
storage. (All
Municipalities)
Low Long
Respective Finance
Officer (All
Municipalities)
$2,500 per year for
enforcement (Each
Municipality)
Municipal General
Funds
Drought/Urban
fire/ wildfire
Water sources
become depleted
during drought.
CITY OF AURORA
PROBLEM
STATEMENTS
CITY OF AURORA
ACTIONS
PRIORITY
RATING TIMEFRAME CONTACT COST/BENEFIT FUNDING
SOURCE HAZARD GOAL
New development
has occurred in
areas that cannot
hear storm sirens.
Place additional storm
siren in park on Lilac
Avenue and Pine Street
Intersection.
High Short
(Aurora)
Maintenance
Supervisor
$17,000 HMGP/OEM
Severe
Weather
Hazards
(Summer and
Winter)
Improve public
safety during severe
weather.
155
CITY OF AURORA
PROBLEM
STATEMENTS
CITY OF AURORA
ACTIONS
PRIORITY
RATING TIMEFRAME CONTACT COST/BENEFIT FUNDING
SOURCE HAZARD GOAL
Portions of Lilac &
Linden Avenues &
E. Redmond Road
prone to flooding
in heavy rain or
rapid snow melt.
Conduct drainage study to
identify location,
elevation, and size for
culverts and other
drainage improvements.
Medium Medium
(Aurora)
Maintenance
Supervisor
$250,000 HMGP, City,
Watershed District Flooding
Protect Specific
Areas of Brookings
County from floods.
Portions of Lilac &
Linden Avenues &
E. Redmond Road
prone to flooding
in heavy rain or
rapid snow melt.
Implement stormwater
drainage improvements in
targeting these streets.
Medium Medium
(Aurora)
Maintenance
Supervisor
$250,000 HMGP Flooding
Protect Specific
Areas of Brookings
County from floods.
CITY OF
BROOKINGS
PROBLEM
STATEMENTS
CITY OF BROOKINGS
ACTIONS
PRIORITY
RATING TIMEFRAME CONTACT COST/BENEFIT FUNDING
SOURCE HAZARD GOAL
Ensure Emergency
Storm Shelter
access within
proximity for all
rec facilities.
Discuss and map existing
emergency storm shelters
in order to identify and fill
in gaps.
Low Short
City of Brookings
Parks, Recreation,
and Forestry
$500,000 per
structure/prevent
injuries and save lives
HMGP, BRIC,
USDA/CDBG, City
Tornado/
Severe
Weather
Storms
Improve public
safety during severe
weather
Certain areas of
the city are subject
to varying degrees
of flooding
resulting in
property damage
and disruption of
services
Implement goals,
strategies, and projects
identified in the City of
Brookings Master Drainage
Plan
High
(projects
are
prioritized
within
that plan)
Short
(ongoing)
City of Brookings
Engineer
$42 Million/reduce
flood insurance
payments and flood
damage for residents
and reduce
disruption of
transportation and
utility service in
floods
City General Fund,
HMGP, CDBG, BRIC Flooding
Protect Specific
Areas of Brookings
County from floods.
156
CITY OF
BROOKINGS
PROBLEM
STATEMENTS
CITY OF BROOKINGS
ACTIONS
PRIORITY
RATING TIMEFRAME CONTACT COST/BENEFIT FUNDING
SOURCE HAZARD GOAL
Community has
Repetitive Flood
Loss Properties
Purchase of properties
identified as Repetitive
Flood Loss
High Short Brookings City
Manager
$250,000/ remove
property from
repetitive loss and
limit risk of injury due
to flooding
HMGP, BRIC,
Private Flooding
Protect Specific
Areas of Brookings
County from floods.
Properties and
residences are
repeatedly flooded
in the northwest
part of the City by
Six Mile Creek.
Refine and implement
strategies identified in the
2024 Six-Mile Creek
Feasibility Study
High
(projects
are not
prioritized
in plan
but
offered as
options)
Medium City of Brookings
Engineer
$17-85 Million Cost
Preliminary
Cost/Benefit of 5
options range from
0.27 – 1.49 based on
preliminary estimates
City General Fund,
HMGP, FMA, BRIC Flooding
Protect Specific
Areas of Brookings
County from floods.
CITY OF BRUCE
PROBLEM
STATEMENTS
CITY OF BRUCE
ACTIONS
PRIORITY
RATING TIMEFRAME CONTACT COST/BENEFIT FUNDING
SOURCE HAZARD GOAL
City does not have
a designated storm
shelter/community
hall.
Construction of a multi-
use storm
shelter/gathering space.
Medium Long Town Board
President
$600,000/prevent
injuries and save lives
HMGP, BRIC,
USDA/CDBG, City Tornado
Improve public
safety during severe
weather
City has many
structures within
the Floodplain
Provide information to
individuals in flood prone
areas on available
mitigation activities
(elevation, floodproofing,
buyout, ICC funding, etc.
High Short Finance Officer
$0/inform residents
of options to mitigate
flood damage
City General Fund Flooding
Protect specific
areas of Bruce from
Flooding
157
TOWN OF
BUSHNELL
PROBLEM
STATEMENTS
TOWN OF BUSHNELL
ACTIONS RATING TIMEFRAME CONTACT COST/BENEFIT FUNDING
SOURCE HAZARD GOAL
Town Hall
(emergency
shelter) lacks a
backup generator
in case of power
failure.
Purchase and install of
emergency backup
generator for Town Hall.
High Short Town Board
President
$100,000/ provide a
location for persons
needing shelter
HMGP, BRIC, Town
General Fund
Severe
Weather
Hazards (W/S);
Extreme Heat/
Cold
Improve public
safety during severe
weather
The town lacks a
storm shelter.
Construction of Tornado
Emergency Shelter. Medium Medium Town Board
President
$500,000/prevent
injuries and save lives
HMGP, BRIC,
USDA/CDBG, City Tornado
Improve public
safety during severe
weather
Town has no
functioning fire
hydrants to
respond to fires.
Install water tank for
emergency purposes. Medium Long Town Board
President
$50,000/reduce fire
damage potential in
town & save lives
FMAG, FP&S, DOI Urban/
Wildfire
Maintain firefighting
capabilities
Powerlines are
vulnerable to loss
of service due to
high winds and/or
ice.
Bury overhead power
lines. High Short Town Board
President
Unknown/prevent
loss of power service
OEM/HMGP, City,
USDA, Ottertail
Electric
Severe
Weather
Hazards
Reduce the extent to
which utility
interruptions affect
areas during severe
weather situations.
CITY OF ELKTON
PROBLEM
STATEMENTS
CITY OF ELKTON
ACTIONS RATING TIMEFRAME CONTACT COST/BENEFIT FUNDING
SOURCE HAZARD GOAL
Old trees are
vulnerable to
breakage during
high wind events
affecting overhead
power lines.
Bury overhead power
lines. High Short Finance Officer/
Utility Provider
Unknown/prevent
loss of power service
OEM/HMGP, City,
USDA, Ottertail
Electric
Severe
Weather
Hazards
Reduce the extent to
which utility
interruptions affect
areas during severe
weather situations.
158
CITY OF ELKTON
PROBLEM
STATEMENTS
CITY OF ELKTON
ACTIONS RATING TIMEFRAME CONTACT COST/BENEFIT FUNDING
SOURCE HAZARD GOAL
Old trees are
vulnerable to
breakage during
high wind events
affecting overhead
power lines.
Implement tree
replacement program.
Offer economic assistance
for citizens to remove old
trees & replant with new /
trim old trees.
High Short Finance Officer
$50,000
each/prevent loss of
services & injuries
OEM/HMGP, City,
USDA, Ottertail
Electric
Severe
Weather
Hazards
Reduce the extent to
which utility
interruptions affect
areas during severe
weather situations.
Residents in the SE
portion of City
cannot hear
warning siren.
Purchase and install
additional storm warning
siren for SE portion of City.
High Short Finance Officer $50,000/prevent
injuries and save lives City, OEM/HMGP
Severe
Weather
Hazards
Improve public
safety during severe
weather.
Campground and
ballfield users
vulnerable to
sudden storm
events.
Develop emergency plan
for severe weather &
purchase fliers/signage to
be posted in locations for
at risk persons.
High Short Finance Officer Unknown prevent
injuries and save lives City General Fund All Hazards
Improve public
safety during all
hazards.
Town does not
have a storm
shelter or tornado
safe room.
Construct a tornado
Emergency Shelter near
campground.
High Medium Finance Officer
$500,000/provide a
location for persons
to shelter
HMGP, BRIC,
USDA/CDBG, City
Severe
Weather
Hazards
Improve public
safety during severe
weather.
Community lacks
wind protection
outside of City.
Establish living snow
fence/shelterbelts north
and west of community.
Low Long Finance Officer
Unknown/ensure
evacuation routes
remain clear during
winter storms & save
lives
NRCS/City
Severe
Weather
Hazards
Improve public
safety during severe
weather.
159
TOWN OF SINAI
PROBLEM
STATEMENTS
TOWN OF SINAI
ACTIONS RATING TIMEFRAME CONTACT COST/BENEFIT FUNDING
SOURCE HAZARD GOAL
The town does not
have a Tornado
Safe Emergency
Shelter.
Construction of Tornado
Shelter. Medium Medium Finance Officer $500,000/prevent
injuries and save lives
BRICE/
OEM/HMGP, Town,
USDA
Tornado
Improve public
safety during severe
weather.
Low lying areas are
prone to overland
flooding due to
Lake Sinai.
Complete required
drainage improvements
from engineering study.
Medium Medium Finance Officer
$150,000/reduce
flood damages in
town
HMGP Flooding
Protect Specific
Areas of Brookings
County from floods.
Town does not
have a back-up
generator for
emergency use.
Purchase of portable back-
up generator. High Short Town
Board President
$30,000/provide
temporary power
during an emergency
HMGP, BRIC, Town
General Fund
Severe
Weather
Hazards
Reduce the extent to
which utility
interruptions affect
areas during severe
weather situations.
CITY OF VOLGA
PROBLEM
STATEMENTS
CITY OF VOLGA
ACTIONS RATING TIMEFRAME CONTACT COST/BENEFIT FUNDING
SOURCE HAZARD GOAL
Powerlines are
vulnerable to
damage due to
high winds and/or
ice.
Bury overhead powerlines. Medium Short Finance Officer Unknown/prevent
loss of power service
OEM/HMGP, City,
USDA, Ottertail
Electric
Severe
Weather
Hazards
Reduce the extent to
which utility
interruptions affect
areas during severe
weather situations.
The town does not
have a Tornado
Safe Emergency
Shelter.
Construction of Tornado
Shelter. Medium Short Finance Officer $500,000/prevent
injuries and save lives
BRICE/
OEM/HMGP, Town,
USDA
Tornado
Improve public
safety during severe
weather.
160
CITY OF VOLGA
PROBLEM
STATEMENTS
CITY OF VOLGA
ACTIONS RATING TIMEFRAME CONTACT COST/BENEFIT FUNDING
SOURCE HAZARD GOAL
Wastewater
Treatment Facility
does not have
adequate backup
generators.
Purchase backup
generators and support
systems.
Medium Medium Finance Officer
$300,000/provide
temporary power
during an emergency
HMGP, BRIC, Town
General Fund
Severe
Weather
Hazards
Reduce the extent to
which utility
interruptions affect
areas during severe
weather situations.
Stormwater
system
infrastructure on
2nd Street from
Astrachan to
Samara Ave
require extensive
on-going
maintenance and
are unable to
handle increased
water levels.
Implement improvements
listed in Volga Stormwater
Plan (Banner 2018).
High Long Finance Officer
$777,000/reduce
flood damages in
town
HMGP/DENR/
City/Rural
Development
Severe
Weather
Hazards
(summer and
winter)
Reduce the extent to
which utility
interruptions affect
areas during severe
weather situations.
Stormwater
system
infrastructure on
6th Street require
extensive on-going
maintenance and
are unable to
handle increased
water levels.
Implement improvements
listed in Volga Stormwater
Plan (Banner 2018).
High Long Finance Officer
$1,800,000/reduce
flood damages in
town
HMGP/DENR/
City/Rural
Development
Severe
Weather
Hazards
(summer and
winter)
Reduce the extent to
which utility
interruptions affect
areas during severe
weather situations.
Stormwater
drainage through
town is known to
cause local
flooding issues.
Implement improvements
such as sizing up
stormwater sewer.
Medium Medium Maintenance
Supervisor
$350,000/reduce
flood damages in
town
HMGP, BRIC, City
General Funds
Severe
Weather
Hazards
(summer and
winter)
Protect Specific Area
of Brookings County
from Floods.
161
CITY OF VOLGA
PROBLEM
STATEMENTS
CITY OF VOLGA
ACTIONS RATING TIMEFRAME CONTACT COST/BENEFIT FUNDING
SOURCE HAZARD GOAL
Improve upon
ability to review
building plans, site
plans, subdivision
proposals, nor
ensuring fire safe,
orderly
development
which may be
efficiently
provided
emergency, utility
service and
minimize flood risk
Update Comprehensive
Land Use Plan and Zoning
Regulations.
Low Long Finance Officer
$5,000/prevent &
reduce flood-related
damages.
City Flooding
Improve public
safety during severe
weather.
Current Fire Hall
underserves staff
and volunteers.
Construct new Fire Hall. High Short Finance Officer
Unknown/equip the
community with
more fire-fighting
capabilities & save
lives.
FMAG, FP&S,
DOI/City
Urban/ Wild
Fire
Maintain firefighting
capabilities.
CITY OF WHITE
PROBLEM
STATEMENTS
CITY OF WHITE
ACTIONS RATING TIMEFRAME CONTACT COST/BENEFIT FUNDING
SOURCE HAZARD GOAL
Town does not
have a tornado
Emergency
Shelter.
Construction of tornado
safe room in a central
community location.
High Medium Finance Officer $500,000/prevent
injuries and save lives
BRICE/
OEM/HMGP, Town,
USDA/ Fire
Fire
Improve public
safety during severe
weather.
162
CITY OF WHITE
PROBLEM
STATEMENTS
CITY OF WHITE
ACTIONS RATING TIMEFRAME CONTACT COST/BENEFIT FUNDING
SOURCE HAZARD GOAL
Improve upon
ability to review
building plans, site
plans, subdivision
proposals, nor
ensuring fire safe,
orderly
development
which may be
efficiently
provided
emergency, utility
service and
minimize flood risk
Update Comprehensive
Land Use Plan and Zoning
Regulations.
Low Short Finance Officer
$5,000/prevent &
reduce flood-related
damages.
City Flooding
Improve public
safety during severe
weather.
163
Figure 5.1a: Brookings County Potential Mitigation
164
Figure 5.2: City of Aurora Potential Mitigation
165
Figure 5.3: City of Brookings Potential Mitigation Project Map
166
Figure 5.4: City of Bruce Potential Mitigation Project
167
Figure 5.5: City of Bushnell Potential Mitigation Project
168
Figure 5.6: City of Elkton Potential Mitigation Project Map
169
Figure 5.7: Town of Sinai Potential Mitigation Project Map
170
Figure 5.8: City of Volga Potential Mitigation Project Map
171
Figure 5.9: City of White Potential Mitigation Project Map
172
IMPLEMENTATION OF MITIGATION ACTIONS
Requirement 201.6(c)(4)(ii). Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool – D3 (a-c).
Requirement 201.6(d)(3). Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool – E2 (c)
Upon adoption of the updated Brookings County PDM, each jurisdiction will become
responsible for implementing its own mitigation actions. The planning required for
implementation is the sole responsibility of the local jurisdictions and private businesses that
have participated in the PDM update. All of the municipalities have indicated that they do not
have the financial capability to move forward with projects identified in the PDM at this time,
however, all will consider applying for funds through the State and Federal Agencies once
such funds become available. If and when the municipalities are able to secure funding for the
mitigation projects, they will move forward with the projects identified. A benefit cost analysis
will be conducted on an individual basis after the decision is made to move forward with a
project.
The 2007 PDM was the first approved mitigation plan that the County has ever had on file. At
that time, the PDM was drafted the requirements for an approved mitigation plan were much
different than the current Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool. Since disaster mitigation was a
relatively new concept at that time, mitigation plans were approved with less scrutiny. The
same depth of planning was not utilized in the 2007 PDM as was used for the 2014 PDM
update. The 2007 PDM had the “bare minimum” to meet the FEMA requirements for a
mitigation plan, resulting in a lack of relevant information that could be utilized and easily
integrated into the County’s and Municipalities’ existing planning mechanisms.
Due to these factors, the 2007 PDM was not used or incorporated into other planning
documents or mechanisms. From a practical standpoint the 2014 PDM update required
communities to reflect on past disasters, consider future disasters, and think about how or if
future disasters would be handled differently, or better. It is anticipated with the amount of
time, energy, and professional guidance involved during the drafting process of the updated
2019 PDM, that the County has created a document that has validity and a clear purpose
which will be more likely to fit in the existing planning mechanisms that exist county-wide.
Lastly, by involving all the local jurisdictions and bringing the PDM to the attention of
neighboring communities, the planning process has brought more awareness of hazard
mitigation to the people residing in the County, which will encourage further involvement in the
future. The 2014 PDM plan was referenced during the 2019 PDM update process. Similarly,
the 2019 PDM plan was referenced during the drafting process for the current 2024 Brookings
County PDM plan.
Since 2019 (adoption of last PDM Plan), Brookings County has completed updates of its
zoning ordinance and Joint Jurisdiction Zoning Ordinance with the City of Brookings. The City
of Elkton has also adopted Comprehensive updates to its zoning ordinances. The County as
well as the Cities of Brookings and Elkton each reviewed the respective rules regarding bulk,
height, and density of development to determine whether consistent, not only with the
established planning principles of the community but also to ensure those regulations
practicably employed the goals of the pre-disaster mitigation plan with reference to protection
from fire, drought (impacts on water supply), limitation of density in flood prone areas and
review of regulations for areas determined to be in a 100-year floodplain.
Updates have been made to the Hazardous Materials Plan and Emergency Operations Plan
since 2019. During the revision of those plans the emergency manager reviewed the PDM
Plan to ensure harmony. No other plans, policies, regulations have been significantly
amended since the 2019 Plan. Thus, changes have not been made to other planning
mechanisms to incorporate the 2019 Plan.
173
CHAPTER 6 ꟾ
PLAN MAINTENANCE
MONITORING, EVALUATING, AND UPDATING THE PLAN
Requirement 201.6(c)(4)(iii). Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool – D1.
Requirement 201.6(c)(4)(i). Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool – D2-a-c.
The County and all of the participating local jurisdictions thereof will incorporate the findings
and projects of the PDM in all planning areas as appropriate. Periodic monitoring and reporting
of the PDM is required to ensure that the goals and objectives for the County PDM are kept
current and that local mitigation efforts are being carried out. Communities will establish an
annual review of projects and infrastructure listed in the plan. As funding becomes available,
projects are completed, or the inevitable new project needs to be added, communities will
report to the Brookings County Emergency Management Director.
Communities will utilize Worksheet 10: Plan Update Evaluation Form from the Local Mitigation
Planning Handbook (see Appendix I) by October 31 each year and following any disaster to
assess strengths, weaknesses, and evaluate potential updates to the existing plan. The
Finance Officer or a designated representative from the City Council/Town Board will submit
the findings of this review to the Emergency Manager. The Emergency Manager will then
compile an annual report summarizing the results for each community and for Clark County,
which will be presented to the County Commissioners in November.
During the process of implementing mitigation strategies, the county or communities within
the county may experience lack of funding, budget cuts, staff turnover, and/or a general failure
of projects. These scenarios are not in themselves a reason to discontinue and fail to update
the PDM. A good plan needs to provide for periodic monitoring and evaluation of its successes
and failures and allow for appropriate changes to be made.
CONTINUED PUBLIC PARTICIPATION & INVOLVEMENT
Requirement 201.6(c)(4)(iii). Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool – D1-a.
Requirement 201.6(c)(4)(i). Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool – D2-a-c.
During interim periods between the five-year re-write, efforts will be continued to encourage
and facilitate public involvement and input. The PDM will be available for public view and
comment at the Brookings County Emergency Management Office located in the Brookings
County Sheriff’s Office and the First District Association of Local Governments office. The
PDM will also be available for review on the web at the First District Association of Local
Governments homepage www.1stdistrict.org. Comments will always be received whether
orally over the phone, physically by mail, or electronically by e-mail.
All ongoing workshops and trainings will be open to the public and appropriately advertised.
Ongoing press releases and interviews will help disseminate information to the general public
and encourage participation.
As implementation of the mitigation strategies continues in each local jurisdiction, the primary
means of public involvement will be the jurisdiction’s own public comment and hearing
process. State law as it applies to municipalities and counties requires this as a minimum for
many of the proposed implementation measures. Effort will be made to encourage cities,
towns and counties to go beyond the minimum required to receive public input and engage
stakeholders.
174
ANNUAL REPORTING PROCEDURES
Requirement 201.6(c)(4)(iii). Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool – D1.
Requirement 201.6(c)(4)(i). Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool – D2-a-c.
The PDM shall be reviewed annually, as required by the County Emergency Management
Director, or as the situation dictates such as following a disaster declaration. The Brookings
County Emergency Management Director will utilize Worksheet 10: Plan Update Evaluation
Form (see Appendix I) from the Local Mitigation Planning Handbook to review the PDM
annually in November and ensure the following:
1. The County Elected body will receive an annual report and/or presentation on the
implementation status of the PDM;
2. The report will include an evaluation of the effectiveness and appropriateness of the
mitigation actions proposed in the PDM, including comments received from specific
communities; and
3. The report will recommend, as appropriate, any required changes or amendments to the
PDM.
FIVE-YEAR PDM REVIEW
Requirement 201.6(c)(4)(i). Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool – D2-a-c.
Requirement 201.6(c)(4)(ii). Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool – D3-c.
Every five years the PDM will be reviewed, and a complete update will be initiated. All
information in the PDM will be evaluated for completeness and accuracy based on new
information or data sources. New property development activities will be added to the PDM
and evaluated for impacts. New or improved sources of hazard related data will also be
included.
In future years, if the County relies on grant dollars to hire a contractor to write the PDM
update, the County will initiate the process of applying for and securing such funding in the
third year of the PDM to ensure the funding is in place by the fourth year of the PDM. The fifth
year will then be used to write the PDM update, which in turn will prevent any lapse in time
where the county does not have a current approved PDM on file.
The goals, objectives, and mitigation strategies will be readdressed and amended as
necessary based on new information, additional experience and the implementation progress
of the PDM. The approach to this PDM update effort will be essentially the same as the one
used for the original PDM development.
The Emergency Management Director will meet with the PDM Planning Team for review and
approval prior to final submission of the updated PDM.
PLAN AMENDMENTS
PDM amendments will be considered by the Brookings County Emergency Management
Director, during the PDM’s annual review to take place the end of each county fiscal year. All
affected local jurisdictions (cities, towns, and counties) will be required to hold a public hearing
and adopt the recommended amendment by resolution prior to considerations by the PDM
Planning Team.
175
INCORPORATION INTO EXISTING PLANNING MECHANISMS
Requirement 201.6(B)(3). Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool – A4.
Requirement 201.6(c)(4)(i). Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool – D2-a-c.
Requirement 201.6(c)(4)(ii). Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool – D3.
All towns with existing comprehensive land use plans will review mitigation projects annually
when reviewing their comprehensive land use plan, as is recommended in each of their plans.
In addition, all municipalities, including the towns without comprehensive land use plans, will
consider the mitigation requirements, goals, actions, and projects when it considers and
reviews the budget and other existing planning documents. Preparation of the budget is an
opportune time to review the plan since municipalities are required by state law to prepare
budgets for the upcoming year and typically consider any expenditure for the upcoming year
at that time.
The local jurisdictions will post a permanent memo to their files as a reminder for them to
incorporate their annual review of the mitigation actions identified into the budget preparation
process. This does not require the projects be included in the budget, it merely serves as a
reminder to the city officials that they have identified mitigation projects in the PDM that should
be considered if the budget allows for it.
POTENTIAL FUNDING SOURCES
Although all mitigation techniques will likely save money by avoiding losses, many projects
are costly to implement. None of the local jurisdictions have the funds available to move
forward with mitigation projects at this time; thus, the Potential Funding Sources section was
included so that the local jurisdictions can work towards securing funding for the projects.
Inevitably, due to their small tax bases and small populations, most local jurisdictions do not
have the ability to generate enough revenue to support anything beyond the basic needs of
the community. Thus, mitigation projects will not be completed without a large amount of
funding support from State or Federal programs.
The County jurisdictions will continue to seek outside funding assistance for mitigation projects
in both the pre- and post-disaster environment. Primary Federal and State grant programs
have been identified and briefly discussed, along with local and non-governmental funding
sources, as a resource for the local jurisdictions.
Federal
The following federal grant programs have been identified as funding sources which
specifically target hazard mitigation projects:
Title: Rural Fire Assistance Grants
Agency: U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (DOI)
Each year, the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (FWS) provides Rural Fire Assistance (RFA) grants to
neighboring community fire departments to enhance local wildfire protection, purchase equipment,
and train volunteer firefighters. Service fire staff also assist directly with community projects.
These efforts reduce the risk to human life and better permit FWS firefighters to interact and work
with community fire organizations when fighting wildfires. The Department of the Interior (DOI)
receives an appropriated budget each year for the RFA grant program. The maximum award per
grant is $20,000. The DOI assistance program targets rural and volunteer fire departments that
routinely help fight fire on or near DOI lands.
176
Title: Fire Management Assistance Grant Program
Agency: Federal Emergency Management Agency
The Fire Management Assistance Grant (FMAG) program provides grants to states, tribal
governments, and local governments for the mitigation, management, and control of any fire
burning on publicly (non-federal) or privately owned forest or grassland that threatens such
destruction as would constitute a major disaster.
The Fire Management Assistance declaration process is initiated when a state submits a request
for assistance to the FEMA Regional Director at the time a “threat of major disaster” exists. The
entire process is accomplished on an expedited basis and decisions are rendered within a matter
of hours.
However, before a grant can be awarded, a state must demonstrate that total eligible costs for the
declared fire meet or exceed the individual fire cost threshold. This applies to single fires or
cumulative fire cost threshold. The grants are made in the f orm of cost sharing with the federal
share being 75% of total eligible costs. Eligible firefighting costs may include expenses for: field
camps, repair and replacement tools, mobilization and demobilization activities, equipment use,
and materials/supplies.
Title: Fire Prevention and Safety (FP&S) Grants
Agency: Federal Emergency Management Agency
The Fire Prevention and Safety grants support projects that enhance the safety of the public and
firefighters from fire and other related hazards. The primary goal is to target high -risk populations
and reduce injury and prevent death. Eligibility includes fire departments, national, re gional, state,
and local organizations, tribal organizations, and/or community organizations recognized for their
experience and expertise in fire prevention and safety programs and activities. Private non-profit
and public organizations are also eligible.
Title: Wildland Urban Interface Community & Rural Fire Assistance
Agency: Bureau of Land Management (DOI)
This program is designed to implement the National Fire Plan and assist communities at risk from
catastrophic wildland fires by providing grants, technical assistance, and training for community
programs that develop local capability, such as:
Assessment and planning, mitigation activities, and community and homeowner education and
action; hazardous fuels reduction activities, including the training, monitoring or maintenance
associated with such hazardous fuels reduction activities, on federal land, or on adjacent
nonfederal land for activities that mitigate the threat of catastrophic fire to communities and natural
resources in high risk areas; and, enhancement of knowledge and fire protection capability of rural
fire districts through assistance in education and training, protective clothing and equipment
purchase, and mitigation methods on a cost-share basis.
The Rural Fire Assistance (RFA) program funds are appropriated by Congress annually. The
maximum award is $20,000. This funding focuses specifically on enhancing fire protection
capabilities of rural and volunteer fire departments through training, equipment purchases, and fire
prevention work on a cost-shared basis.
177
Title: Western Wildland Urban Interface Grants
Agency: USDA Forest Service
The National Fire Plan (NFP) is a long-term strategy for reducing the effects of catastrophic
wildfires throughout the nation. The Division of Forestry's NFP Program is implemented within the
Division's Fire and Aviation Program through the existing USDA Forest Service, State & Private
Forestry, and State Fire Assistance Program.
Congress has provided increased funding assistance to states through the U.S. Forest
Service State and Private Forestry programs since 2001. The focus of much of this additional
funding was mitigating risk in WUI areas. In the West, the State Fire Assistance funding is
available and awarded through a competitive process with emphasis on hazard fuel reduction,
information and education, and community and homeowner action. This portion of the
National Fire Plan was developed to assist interface communities manage the unique hazards
they find around them. Long-term solutions to interface challenges require informing and
educating people who live in these areas about what they and their local organizations can do
to mitigate these hazards.
The 10-Year Comprehensive Strategy focuses on assisting people and communities in the
WUI to moderate the threat of catastrophic fire through the four broad goals of improving
prevention and suppression, reducing hazardous fuels, restoring fire-adapted ecosystems,
and promoting community assistance. The Western States Wildland Urban Interface Grant
may be used to apply for financial assistance towards hazardous fuels and educational
projects within the four goals of: improved prevention, reduction of hazardous fuels, restoration
of fire- adapted ecosystems and promotion of community assistance.
Title: Community Planning Assistance for Wildfire
Agency: Private Community Wildfire Planning Center
Established in 2015 by Headwaters Economics and Wildfire Planning International, Community
Planning Assistance for Wildfire (CPAW) works with communities to reduce wildfire risks
through improved land use planning. CPAW is a grant-funded program providing
communities with professional assistance from foresters, planners, economists and wildfire
risk modelers to integrate wildfire mitigation into the development planning process. All
services and recommendations are site-specific and come at no cost to the community.
Title: U.S. Bureau of Land Management, Community Assistance Program
Agency: Bureau of Land Management
BLM provides funds to communities through assistance agreements to complete mitigation
projects, education and planning within the WUI.
178
Title: Hazard Mitigation Grant Program Post Fire Grant Program
Agency: Federal Emergency Management Agency
The Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) has Post Fire assistance available to help
communities implement hazard mitigation measures after wildfire disasters. States, federally
recognized tribes and territories affected by fires resulting in a Fire Management Assistance Grant
(FMAG) declaration on or after October 5, 2018, are eligible to apply.
The application period for this grant is only open for six months after the state or territory’s first
FMAG declaration of the fiscal year is made. Prioritized HMGP Post Fire activities include wildfire
mitigation, infrastructure retrofit, soil and slope stabilization, and flood prevention.
Title: Urban and Community Forestry (UCF) Program
Agency: USDA Forest Service
A cooperative program of the U.S. Forest Service that focuses on the stewardship of urban
natural resources. With 80 percent of the nation's population in urban areas, there are strong
environmental, social, and economic cases to be made for the conservation of green spaces to
guide growth and revitalize city centers and older suburbs. UCF responds to the needs of urban
areas by maintaining, restoring, and improving urban forest ecosystems on more than 70
million acres. Through these efforts the program encourages and promotes the creation of
healthier, more livable urban environments across the nation. These grant programs are focused
on issues and landscapes of national importance and prioritized through state and regional
assessments.
Title: Flood Mitigation Assistance Grant Program
Agency: Federal Emergency Management Agency
The Flood Mitigation Assistance (FMA) program provides funding to assist states and communities
in implementing measures to reduce or eliminate the long-term risk of flood damage to buildings,
manufactured homes, and other structures insurable under the National Flood Insurance Program
(NFIP). FMA was created as part of the National Flood Insurance Reform Act of 1994 (42 USC
4101) with the goal of reducing or eliminating claims under the NFIP.
FMA is available to states, local communities, and federally recognized tribes and territories on an
annual basis.. This funding is available for mitigation planning and implementation of mitigation
measures that reduce or eliminate risk of repetitive flood damage to NFIP insured buildings only.
The federal cost share for an FMA project is 75%. At least 25% of the total eligible costs must be
provided by a non-federal source. Of this, no more than half can be provided as in-kind contributions
from third parties.
States administer the FMA program and are responsible for selecting projects for funding from the
applications submitted by all communities within the state. FMA funds are very limited, which makes
the application selection quite competitive. The state then forwards selected applications to FEMA
for an eligibility determination. Although individuals cannot apply directly for FMA funds, their local
government may submit an application on their behalf.
179
Title: Community Development Block Grants
Agency: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development
The Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program provides grants to local governments
for community and economic development projects that primarily benefit low and moderate-income
households with decent housing, suitable living environments, and expanded economic
opportunities. Eligible activities include community facilities and improvements, roads and
infrastructure, housing rehabilitation and preservation, development activities, public services,
economic development, planning, and administration.
Public improvements may include flood and drainage improvements. In limited instances and
during times of “urgent need” (e.g., post disaster), CDBG funding may be used to acquire a property
located in a floodplain that was severely damaged by a recent flood, demolish a structure severely
damaged by an earthquake, or repair a public facility severely damaged by a hazard event. CDBG
funds can be used to match FEMA grants.
Title: Hazard Mitigation Grant Program
Agency: Federal Emergency Management Agency
The Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) was created in November 1988 through Section of
404 the Stafford Act. The HMGP is a post-disaster mitigation program that offers assistance to
states and local communities in implementing long-term mitigation measures following a
Presidential disaster declaration.
HMGP may fund up to 75% of the eligible costs for hazard mitigation projects that will protect
property in an area covered by a federal disaster declaration or that will reduce likely damage from
future disasters. The state or local cost-share match does not need to be cash; in-kind services or
materials may also be used. With the passage of the Hazard Mitigation and Relocation Assistance
Act of 1993, federal funding under the HMGP is now based on 15% of the federal funds spent on
the Public and Individual Assistance programs (minus administrative expenses) for each disaster.
The HMGP can be used to fund projects to protect either public or private property, so long as the
projects in question fit within the state and local governments overall mitigation strategy for the
disaster area and comply with program guidelines. Examples of projects include the acquisition,
demolition, or relocation of structures from hazard-prone areas, the retrofitting or elevation of
existing structures to reduce future damage; and the development of state or local standards to
protect the jurisdiction from future damages.
Eligibility for funding under the HMGP is limited to state and local governments, certain private
nonprofit organizations or institutions that perform essential public services, Indian tribes, and
authorized tribal organizations. Individuals or homeowners cannot apply directly for funding through
HMGP, so these organizations must apply on their behalf. In turn, applicants must work through
their state because the state is responsible for setting priorities for funding and administering the
program.
180
Title: Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities Grant Program
Agency: Federal Emergency Management Agency
The Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities (BRIC) grant program supports states, local
communities, tribes, and territories as they undertake hazard mitigation projects to reduce risks
from disasters and natural hazards. BRIC replaced the Pre-Disaster Mitigation (PDM) program.
The new program is authorized by Section 203 of the Stafford Act.
The BRIC program aims to categorically shift the federal focus away from reactive disaster
spending and toward proactive investment in community resilience. Focus is placed on mitigation
activities that emphasize infrastructure projects benefiting disadvantaged communities, nature-
based solutions, climate resilience and adaptation, and adopting hazard resistant building codes.
As a competitive annual grant program, applicants can apply on a yearly basis. Individuals,
businesses, and non-profit organizations are not eligible to apply for BRIC funds; however local
governments can apply on their behalf.
HMGP can fund up to 75% of the eligible costs for hazard mitigation activities. The local cost-share
match does not need to be cash; in-kind services or materials may also be used. FEMA will provide
100% federal funding for management costs. FEMA may fund up to 90% of eligible mitigation
activity costs for small, impoverished communities or disadvantaged rural communities.
Title: Public Assistance (Infrastructure) Program, Section 406
Agency: Federal Emergency Management Agency
FEMA’s Public Assistance Program, through Section 406 of the Stafford Act, provides
supplemental funding to local governments following a Presidential Disaster Declaration for
mitigation measures in conjunction with the repair of damaged public facilities and infrastructure.
The mitigation measures must be related to eligible disaster-related damages and must directly
reduce the potential for future, similar disaster damages to the eligible facility. These opportunities
usually present themselves during the repair/replacement efforts.
Proposed projects must be approved by FEMA prior to funding. They will be evaluated for cost
effectiveness, technical feasibility, and compliance with statutory, regulatory, and executive order
requirements. In addition, the evaluation must ensure that the mitigation measures do not
negatively impact a facility’s operation or risk from another hazard.
Public facilities are operated by state, local, and tribal governments and include infrastructure such
as:
* Roads, bridges & culverts * Water, power & sanitary systems
* Draining & irrigation channels * Airports & parks
* Schools, city halls & other buildings
Private non-profit organizations are groups that own or operate facilities that provide services
otherwise performed by a government agency and include, but are not limited to the following:
* Universities and other schools * Power cooperatives & other utilities
* Hospitals & clinics * Custodial care & retirement facilities
* Volunteer fire & ambulance * Museums & community centers
181
Title: Rural Development Loan and Grant Assistance
Agency: U.S. Department of Agriculture
The USDA provides grants (and loans) to cities, counties, states, tribes, and other public entities to
improve community facilities for essential services to rural residents. Projects can include housing,
businesses, utilities, and fire and rescue services (funds have been provided to purchase fire-
fighting equipment for rural areas). No match is required.
Title: EPA – Hazard Mitigation for Natural Disasters: A Starter Guide for Water and
Wastewater Utilities
Agency: US Environmental Protection Agency
The EPA released guidance on how to mitigate natural disasters specifically for water and
wastewater utilities.
Title: Various Homeland Security Grants
Agency: U.S. Department of Homeland Security
The DHS enhances the ability of states, local, and tribal jurisdictions, as well as other regional
authorities, in the preparation, prevention, and response to terrorist attacks and other disasters, by
distributing grant funds. Localities can use grants for planning, equipment, training, and exercise
needs. The grants include but are not limited to areas of Critical Infrastructure Protection Equipment
and Training for First Responders.
Title: Environmental Quality Incentives Program
Agency: National Resources Conservation Service
The Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP), administered through the NRCS, is a cost-
share program that provides financial and technical assistance to agricultural producers to plan and
implement conservation practices that improve soil, water, plant, animal, air, and other related
natural resources on agricultural land and non-industrial private forestland.
Owners of land in agricultural or forest production or persons who are engaged in livestock,
agricultural, or forest production on eligible land and that have a natural resource concern on that
land may apply to participate in EQIP. Eligible land includes cropland, rangeland, pastureland, non-
industrial private forestland, and other farm or ranch lands.
Title: NOAA Office of Education Grants
Agency: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
The Office of Education supports formal, informal, and non-formal education projects and programs
through competitively awarded grants and cooperative agreements to a variety of educational
institutions and organizations in the United States.
182
Title: EPA – Smart Growth in Small Towns and Rural Communities
Agency: US Environmental Protection Agency
EPA has consolidated resources just for small towns and rural communities to help them
achieve their goals for growth and development while maintaining their distinctive rural
character.
Title: STAR Community Rating System
Private Agency: Urban Sustainability Directors Network
Consider measuring your mitigation success by participating in the STAR Community Rating
System. Local leaders can use the STAR Community Rating System to assess how sustainable
they are, set goals for moving ahead and measure progress along the way.
Local
Local governments depend upon local property taxes as their primary source of revenue.
These taxes are typically used to finance services that must be available and delivered on a
routine basis to the general public. If local budgets allow, these funds are used to match
Federal or State grant programs when required for large-scale projects.
Non-Governmental
Another potential source of revenue for implementing local mitigation projects are monetary
contributions from non-governmental organizations, such as private sector companies,
churches, charities, community relief funds, the Red Cross, hospitals, Land Trusts, and other
non-profit organizations.
183
APPENDIX
Appendix A – Resolution of Adoption by Jurisdiction
Appendix B – PDM Planning Team Agendas, Sign-in Sheets, and Minutes
Appendix C – Community Meeting Agendas and Sign-in Sheets
Appendix D – Hazard Identification/Vulnerability Worksheets
Appendix E – Township Vulnerable and Potential Mitigation Project Site Maps
Appendix F – Online Survey Information
Appendix G – Comprehensive Land Use Maps
Appendix H – Review of 2019 PDM Mitigation Project Implementation
Appendix I – Worksheet 10: Plan Update Evaluation Form
Appendix J – References
184
Appendix A
Resolution of Adoption by Jurisdiction
185
Brookings County
186
City of Aurora
187
City of Brookings
188
City of Bruce
189
City of Elkton
190
City of Volga
191
City of White
192
Town of Bushnell
193
Town of Sinai
194
Appendix B
PDM Planning Team Meeting Materials
195
PDM Participation Invitation Letter
BROOKINGS COUNTY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
Emergency Management/Planning, Zoning and Drainage
Brookings City/County Government Center
520 3rd Street, Suite 200
BROOKINGS, SOUTH DAKOTA 57006
ROBERT W. HILL
TELEPHONE (605) 692-5212
FAX (605) 696-8355
E-MAIL rhill@brookingscountysd.gov
To Whom It May Concern:
In 2020 Brookings County (County) received notification from the Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA) that its 2019 – 2024 Pre-disaster Mitigation Plan (Plan) had
been approved. This plan identifies potential natural disasters, their impact and possible
projects to mitigate the impact of said disasters. The County is required by FEMA to update
this plan every five years. The County applied for federal funding to assist with the cost of an
update and was informed in September 2023 of the grant award. The County has entered
into a contract with the First District Association of Local Governments to facilitate the
development of the Plan.
The goal of the plan will be to reduce the personal and economic costs of hazard events in
the rural and urban areas of Brookings County. The County believes this effort is an
investment that will enhance and strengthen the economic structure and long-term stability of
the rural and municipal areas of the County.
Through this planning process, projects are identified that will make the next disaster event as
uneventful as possible. The goal is to enlist the support of community stake holders to sponsor
or support a project. The planning process does not happen overnight. We expect this process
to last approximately nine months. While it might take perhaps years for certain projects to
be completed, the Plan is the document that will bring all pre-disaster mitigation efforts to a
central location.
Your community/school/utility/entity etc. has been identified as a potential partner in this
process. I would be pleased if your organization would select an individual to serve on the
Pre-disaster Mitigation Planning Team. The Mitigation Planning Team will meet three times
over the next six to nine months. I should note that your representative may not have to attend
all the scheduled meetings throughout the process.
An organization/familiarization meeting of the Mitigation Planning Team is set for 1:00 P.M.
on Tuesday, January 23, 2024. The meeting will be held in the Brookings City and County
Government Center in Room 300.
Thank you for your serious consideration of the County’s request.
Sincerely,
Robert W. Hill
Director
Brookings County Emergency Management
196
PDM Team Kickoff Meeting Notice
Brookings County will begin the process of updating the Brookings County Pre-
disaster Mitigation Plan. This plan identifies potential natural disasters, their impact
and possible projects to mitigate the impact of said disasters. The County is required
by the Federal Emergency Management Agency to update this plan every five years.
The Brookings County mitigation planning team will meet at 1:00 PM on January 23,
2024 in Room 300 of the Brookings City and County Government Center. The public
is welcome to attend. Questions or comments may be directed to Brookings County
Emergency Management Director, Bob Hill @ 605-692-5212 .
197
Brookings County
Pre-disaster Mitigation Plan Kickoff Meeting
1:00 p.m. January 23rd, 2024
Brookings City-County Government Center – Room 300
520 3rd St, Brookings, SD 57006
Agenda
• Introduction of PDM Team Members
• What is Mitigation Planning?
• Why is Brookings County updating the Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan?
• Review plan components
• Review timeline/scope
198
199
Brookings County
Pre-disaster Mitigation Plan Kickoff Meeting
1:00 p.m. January 23rd, 2024
Brookings City-County Government Center – Room 300
520 3rd St, Brookings, SD 57006
Minutes
17 individuals were in attendance:
Last First Organization
Drietz Thad City of Brookings
Doll Nathan Brookings Economic Development
Fredericksen Mike Elkton School District
Haugen Richard Brookings County EM
Hill Bob Brookings County EM
Jones Joshua City of Aurora Mayor
Kays Todd First District Assn of Local Govts
Kretsch Heidi Brookings Health
Marfield Kevin Brookings Sheriff Office
Muller Luke First District Assn of Local Govts
Potthost Marc Aurora Fire Dept
Richter Charlie City of Brookings
Schulte Michael City of Volga
Schuurman Arend Elkton Fire/Ambulance
Scott Jeremy Brookings Fire Dept
Stuefen Scott City of Elkton
VuKovich Jacob Brookings Police Dept
Brookings County Emergency Manager, Robert Hill, welcomed those in attendance and had
the Team Members introduce themselves and what entity they represent. Pearson then
introduced Luke Muller and Todd Kays of First District Association of Local Governments.
Muller provided an overview of what is mitigation planning and why the county is required to
update their Pre-Disaster Mitigation (PDM) Plan. Muller and Kays also provided a review of
the components to be included within the plan (risk assessment, vulnerability, proposed
mitigation actions).
A general review of the existing Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan started by defining work
responsibilities, having the First District doing background and research, and the PDM Team
providing oversight and guidance throughout the process. The timeline and scope of project
were reviewed.
Meeting adjourned at 2:00 p.m. Date and time for the next meeting to be scheduled later in
fall of 2024.
Minutes recorded by Luke Muller.
200
PDM TEAM Meetings #2 & #3 Invitation Letter
BROOKINGS COUNTY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
Emergency Management/Planning, Zoning and Drainage
Brookings City/County Government Center
520 3rd Street, Suite 200
BROOKINGS, SOUTH DAKOTA 57006
ROBERT W. HILL
TELEPHONE (605) 692-5212
FAX (605) 696-8355
E-MAIL rhill@brookingscountysd.gov
To Whom It May Concern:
As Brookings County continues the process of updating the Brookings County Pre-disaster
Mitigation Plan (Plan), the Pre-disaster Mitigation Planning Team will be holding its second
PDM Team Meeting at noon. on Tuesday, December 10, 2024. The meeting will be held in
Room 300 of the Brookings City and County Government Center at 520 3rd Street; Brookings,
South Dakota.
Further, the third and final PDM Team Meeting at 1:00 pm on Monday, December 30, 2024.
The meeting will also be held in Room 300 of the Brookings City and County Government
Center at 520 3rd Street; Brookings, South Dakota.
The plan is available online at: https://association.1stdistrict.org/pdmplans/. This Plan
identifies potential natural disasters, their impact, and possible projects to mitigate the impact
of said disasters. The County is required by the Federal Emergency Management Agency to
update this plan every five years.
It is imperative that we have your participation at these meetings. We do not except the
meetings to last over half an hour.
Questions or comments may be directed to myself or Luke Muller at (605) 882-5115 or
luke@1stdistrict.org.
Sincerely,
Robert Hill
Emergency Management Director
Brookings County Emergency Management
(605) 692-5212
201
PDM TEAM Meetings #2 and #3 Public Notice
Published: 12/05/24 Tri-City Star (White, SD) & sdpublicnotices.com
Published: 12/03/24 & 12/03/24 Brookings Register (Brookings, SD) & sdpublicnotices.com
Published: 11/28/24 Volga Tribune (Volga, SD) & sdpublicnotices.com
202
Brookings County
PDM Planning Team Meeting 2
December 10, 2024
Brookings City-County Government Center – Room 300
520 3rd St, Brookings, SD 57006
Agenda
➢ Introduction
➢ Review of Previous Meetings and Plan Development History
➢ Review of PDM Preliminary Draft
o PDM Jurisdiction Risk Assessment Review
▪ Hazard Identification
▪ Hazard Profile
▪ Vulnerability Assessment
o Mitigation Strategy
▪ Review of Goals and Objectives
▪ Mitigation Strategies
▪ Project Identification
➢ Questions
➢ Next Steps in PDM Draft Process
203
204
Brookings County
PDM Planning Team Meeting 2
December 10, 2024
Brookings City-County Government Center – Room 300
520 3rd St, Brookings, SD 57006
Minutes
Thirteen people were in attendance:
Last First Organization
Hill Robert Brookings County Emergency
Management Director
Stanwick Marty Brookings County Sheriff
Dekkenga Gordon Brookings Health System
Muller Luke First District Association of Local
Govt
Haugan Richard Brookings County Emergency
Management
Drake Michael City of Brookings Police
Vukovich Jake City of Brookings Police
Drietz Thad City of Brookings Public Works
Richter Charlie City of Brookings Engineering
Trygstad Jayme SDSU – Emergency Management
Wire Jerae East River Electric Power Coop
Schwartz Dylan City of White/White FD
Jacobson David Volga Fire Department
Luke Muller of the First District provided a review of research and background activities
conducted since the last Team meeting.
Muller also provided an overview of the risk assessment conducted with the communities in
Brookings County. The risk assessment review with those entities dealt with identification of
potential hazards, generating a hazard profile, and vulnerability assessment. After reviewing
the risk assessments, Muller provided an overview of historical hazard events in Hamlin
County since 2013.
The Team also reviewed goals and objectives of the previous 2019 PDM Plan. It was
determined the 2019 goals and objectives were still appropriate for the update PDM plan.
Discussed potential mitigation projects throughout the county.
Muller provided a summary and review of the draft Brookings County Pre-Disaster Mitigation
Plan. Muller discussed recommended changes and considereations from state hazard
mitigation office. The Planning Team decided that it would add a project / strategy to come
up with alternative methods of measuring frequency and extent of hazards where
information is not as reliable or available.
Consensus of the Team was to spend more time on individual review of the document and to
provide First District staff with any corrections/updates.
Meeting adjourned at 12:50 p.m. Final Meeting will be held on December 30, 2024 at 1pm.
Minutes recorded by Luke Muller
205
Brookings County
PDM Planning Team Meeting 3
December 30, 2024
Brookings City-County Government Center – Room 300
520 3rd St, Brookings, SD 57006
Agenda
➢ Final Review of PDM Plan
➢ Recommendation of Approval and Submission to FEMA
Meeting 3 Sign-in Sheet
206
Brookings County
PDM Planning Team Meeting 3
December 30, 2024
Brookings City-County Government Center – Room 300
520 3rd St, Brookings, SD 57006
Minutes
Six people were in attendance:
Last First Organization
Hill Robert Brookings County Emergency
Management Director
Dekkenga Gordon Brookings Health System
Muller Luke First District Association of Local
Govt
Haugan Richard Brookings County Community
Development
Jensen Larry Brookings County Commissioner
Richter Charlie City of Brookings Engineering
Luke Muller of the First District noted there were no substantive changes since the previous
meeting.
Jensen (Brookings County Commission) made a motion to forward the draft to FEMA subject
to any grammatical or non-substantive changes, and changes recommended by Brookings
City Engineer. Second by Haugan (Brookings County Community Development). Motion
Passed Unanimously.
Muller reviewed the community adoption process.
Meeting adjourned at 1:10 p.m.
Minutes recorded by Luke Muller
207
Appendix C
Community Meeting Agendas and Sign-in Sheets
Appendix C includes Agendas and “Sign-in Sheets” from the meetings held at the community
level for the Brookings County Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan. Meetings were held at the regular
monthly meetings for the following Towns:
Town Date
Aurora August 12, 2024
Brookings August 27, 2024
Bruce February 13, 2024
Bushnell March 4, 2024
Elkton March 6, 2024
Sinai April 1, 2024
Volga January 16, 2024
White April 1, 2024
At all of the previously described meetings, each individual in attendance was asked to identify
the probability of each specific hazard’s occurrence. Following discussion on each individual
hazard, Board members categorized these hazards as high probability to occur, low probability
to occur, or unlikely to occur. The result was recorded on a master sheet for each town.
Next, each individual in attendance was asked to identify the town’s vulnerability to each
specific hazard. Following discussion on each individual hazard, Board members classified
the town’s vulnerability to each hazard as high vulnerability, low vulnerability, or noted that the
hazard was not a hazard in the jurisdiction. The result was recorded on a master sheet for
each town. Following the hazard identification and vulnerability exercises the governing body
was asked to rate the level to which they agree with the goals of the Pre-Disaster Mitigation
Plan. The result was recorded on a master sheet for each town. Finally, the Boards were
asked to identify critical infrastructure within the community. All master worksheets compiled
at those meetings can be found in Appendix D. A master infrastructure list was compiled for
each town in Table 4.17.
At the previously described meetings Board members were first asked to identify potential
hazard mitigation projects for their towns. Members then discussed among themselves and
staff before determining a timeframe for these projects to be completed (short-term, medium-
term, long-term). Short-term indicates a time frame of two years or less. Medium -term
indicates a time frame of two to five years. Long-term indicates a time frame of more than five
years.
Finally, members assigned a priority level (high, medium, low) to each project. High priority
projects have greater importance, unanimous Board agreement, more cost effective, provide
more benefits for the entire community as a whole, shorter implementation time and funding
availability. These projects should take precedence over similarly costing projects. Medium
priority projects are important projects with less urgency, limited benefits, maintenance
activities or projects by virtue of their cost and/or necessity is not considered a high priority.
The community should begin planning for completion of these projects. Low priority projects
are projects that due to their cost and/or potential minimal benefits to the community are
considered a lesser priority, maybe a longer-term project that lacks funding availability.
The Board members and Finance Officers were asked to work with First District Staff to identify
who would oversee the potential projects and what a projected cost would be. All projects
identified at those meetings are included in Table 5.13. Townships maps are included in
Appendix E.
208
City of Aurora
209
210
MINUTES
211
212
213
City of Aurora
Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan
Community Meeting
August 12, 2024
Introduction
Personal introduction:
Introduce the plan:
Why update the PDM?
Why is your community doing it individually/Why not just county?
What is a PDM?
Hazard review
Hazard Identification
Summer/Thunderstorm
o Hail, Heavy Rain, Lightning, Tornado, Strong Winds
Winter Storm and Extreme Cold
o Freezing Rain, Sleet, Ice, Heavy Snow,
Drought and Extreme Heat
Flood
o Rapid Snow Melt, Ice jam, (heavy rain can go here too)
o Board determined that rapid snow melt should be moved to high
probability. (See discussion in vulnerability.)
Fire
o Urban fire, wildfire (grass fire)
o Board and public moved urban fire to high probability on basis of
annual fire related calls in town. (see discussion in vulnerability.)
Hazard Vulnerability
Summer/Thunderstorm
o Hail, Heavy Rain, Lightning, Tornado, Strong Winds
o Board noted the remarkably flat topography of the town and areas it
is growing into. As a result, a higher percentage of the community is
vulnerable to rapid snow melt, heavy rain, and a flooding. Much of
the water is due to high water table and saturated soils but water just
does not run in these areas without being pumped. (SPECIAL NOTE –
3 weeks prior to this meeting Aurora received over 3” of rain in less
than 2 hours.)
o The Mayor reiterated a point from the kick-off meeting in March: the
City receives its water from Brookings Municipal Utilities. Disruption
214
in service/ability to serve from BMU limits the town’s ability to
provide water to its residents. In past disasters within the city of
Brookings, the City of Aurora has had to go without water/diminished
water supply because of the inability of BMU to operate its system.
Winter Storm and Extreme Cold
Drought and Extreme Heat (no change to perceived vulnerability)
o Community’s vulnerability to drought is economic. It is unlikely that water supplies
would diminish due to drought. County’s policies on enacting burn bans limit the
likelihood that drought would substantially increase fire risk within city limits. All
that said, the community is still perceives a medium vulnerability to drought.
Flood
o Rapid Snow Melt, Ice jam, (heavy rain can go here too) see above
Fire
o Urban fire, wildfire (grass fire)
o The communities fire department has installed an upgraded pump to
decrease the amount of time to load its pump truck from 30 minutes
to 10 minutes.
Community Capabilities and Plans review
Aurora has adopted effective flood maps and is prepared to adopt updated maps
when elligible.
The city of aurora intends to update its zoning ordinance next year.
Community facilities
Identify/review critical facilities
Are there new facilities/facilities to be removed
o The former city offices/meeting hall collapsed since the last PDM.
o City offices and meeting space is temporarily occupying the City Street Shop.
Currently no plan in place to replace city office/hall.
o Post office will be removed
o Address was updated for fire department
o One lift station was missed in previous plans
o New lift station being added in new development. Exact location no listed, general
location listed.
o New water tower being constructed west of the existing tower. Roughly 3x the size
of the current tower.
o Catholic Church and First Impact Church are in agreement with city to serve as storm
shelters. People also come to Fire Department (because people are there.)
Have addresses changed/are they are correct
Where are the populations to protect
Transient/campgrounds
o Roughly 6 camp pads are located in the park downtown (next to city shop).
215
Poor Populations/economically disadvantaged areas
Schools/children
Elderly
Protected classes (mentally handicapped)
There are no schools or assisted living facilities. The manufactured home court is still
located in the city. The City lists the Apartments as populations to protect due to the fact
that they are constructed at and above grade with no basements or lower level.
Project review
Review past projects
o Are they completed/still necessary/ongoing
o Existing siren was elevated after the City hall was demolished. However new growth
in the community has occurred on the fringes of town (existing siren is in center) and
people complain that they cannot hear the siren in areas of new development, with
more development planned in the near future.
o Drainage is an ongoing issue within the community. A full fledged drainage study is
necessary for the town. Topography limits overland flow and above ground retrofits.
Ask about other projects (not all require FEMA funding)
• Water tower project will help firefighting capabilities and provision of water in
emergency situations (better than at the present time.)
Ask about Policies/activities that already help mitigate Disaster
• Community is requiring new development to plan for and implement engineering to
move water from areas of known ponding to downstream.
• Community is constructing new water tower to be able to accommodate daily use,
emergency water supply, and be prepared for moderately prolonged periods without
supply entering the system. The plan also includes a back-up generator.
• As noted, the city upgraded the water pump at the fire department to speed the
filling of the pump truck.
• Raising of storm siren should help ability to be heard farther away, but increased
growth (has occurred and is planned to occur) will necessitate new sirens.
• During inclement whether, the town utilizes announcements that tell where storm
shelters are located, the locations are also listed on the community’s web page. The
fire department opens those shelters as needed.Community has substantial
floodplain which generally experiences a fast flush of stormwater but very little
impact due to current policies of water management. The town hires help to ensure
culverts keeping ditches are clear for conveyance of water through town to limit
ponding.
Conclusion
• The city is currently engaged in sewer and water upgrades, new development on the
fringe of town and is seeking funding sources to reconstruct its city offices. If money
fell from the sky they would seek avenues to construct a tornado safe room for the
community but did not consider any HMGP projects higher priorities than these
projects that affect the day to day life of all residents of the town.
216
City of Brookings
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
Brookings City Design Review Team (Staff) Meeting Minutes
August 22, 2024
IV. Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan (11:00am) August 22, 2024
Present for The City were Ryan Miller-City Planner, Mike Struck-Director of Community
Development, Pete Bolzer-Fire Chief, Thad Drietz-Assistant City Engineer, Steve Britzman-City
Attorney, Jared Thomas-Chief Building Official, Eric Witte-Brookings Municipal Utilities W/WW
Plant Operations & Engineering Supervisor, Jacob Meshke-Deputy City Manager, Russ
Halgerson-Brookings Municipal Utilities Electric Department Manager, Michael Drake-Chief of
Police, Curt Kabris- Swiftel Technical & Network Operations Manager, Kristin Zimmerman-Parks,
Recreation and Forestry Director, Paul Briseno -City Manager and Steve Meyer Director of
Brookings Municipal Utilities. Also present were Luke Muller-First District Association of Local
Government and Bob Hill-Brookings County Emergency Manager.
FEMA required the City’s Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan to be updated every 5 years. Maintaining
the plan made the community eligible for certain mitigation funding. Hazard identiflcation was a
probability assessment based on historical events. The vulnerability assessment was primarily
subjective and needed more objective data to back it up. If a concern was rated as “High
Vulnerability,” there needed to be a project to mitigate the concern.
Beyond economic impact, identify drought concerns in the city. BMU monitored aquifer
availability and planned to put more wells in to increase source capacity. The new wells would
be by well fleld 4 miles east and 2 miles north of town and would draw from 2 different aquifer
locations for redundancy. The water plants had permanent generators and wells had portable
generators. BMU and Public Safety agreed that the water source should be ok within city limits.
Everyone agreed that drought was not a major concern in area and more about adjusting
watering restrictions so they decided to lower it to medium vulnerability.
During the polar vortex in 2019, damage was well mitigated.
Critical facilities spreadsheet needed to be updated:
-Change name of Swiftel Center to Dacotah Bank Center.
-Swiftel Telecommunications had 1 central office and 3 remote switching offices.
-Brookings County Highway Department was not owned by the city.
-BATA in new facility at 1313 Western Ave.
-SDSU was covered through the state’s plan.
231
-List all manufactured and mobile home courts.
-List all nursing homes or assisted living facilities.
-United Way at 908 Hope Dr.
-Food pantry.
-Campgrounds were Dacotah Bank Center and Sexaur @ 121 west 10th St.
-Domestic Abuse Shelter: Call 692-2113 for location but keep private.
-List City County Government Center as a storm shelter.
The City could opt out of publishing locations of infrastructure by annotating that the
information is on flle. The unpublished sites would need to be identiflable by the name. The City
Attorney advised including addresses for buildings but not substations.
Hazard mitigation activities:
-List tornado shelters in proximity to parks, campgrounds, etc.
-Increased function of City County Government Center by adding generator.
-All new schools are built with storm shelters included. The school may not want unaffiliated
adults within the building and storms are typically after school hours so there would not be
anyone available to let people in – Ruled Out.
-Dacotah Bank Center was identifled as emergency shelter and the backup hospital location
but did not have a permanent generator.
-Alternate care facilities needed to be listed.
On August 13, 2024 City Council was presented with an updated Stormwater Master Plan with
infrastructure projects to mitigate hazard fiooding around community. FEMA’s repetitive loss
property report, included below, could be used to determine if there were properties that should
be bought out. If there were any underserved areas of the community for Public Safety, those
should be identifled. This would be a presentation at the August 27, 2024 City Council Meeting
and it needed to be published as a Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan with time allotted for community
testimony.
232
City of Bruce Agenda
233
*Finance Officer – Rinda Ribstein (ex officio) ; Amber Hanson (in trainining
(not signed in))
**Elected Officials – Jeff Anderson (Mayor (not signed in)), Marylin Edler,
Andrea Diedrich, Kay Ruden, Jon Moir, Dustin Hawley, Mick Cook.
*
**
**
**
**
**
**
234
235
236
237
238
Town of Bushnell
239
Bushnell PDM Meeting 03/04/2024 Meeting Notes
• Prerequisite for federal funding/grants you have to have in order to qualify
• Hazard mitigation project examples: Storm shelter, sirens, power line burials, tree branch
trimming, drainage channels, etc. Projects that help to stave off probably emergency issues
• FEMA requires some sort of plan in place in order to qualify for the 80/20
o FEMA says we need to prepare this plan to help minimize the chaos during
emergency recovery efforts
o Some events happen on a regular basis, sometimes, or almost never
• How likely are events to occur?
• ALWAYS GET COPY OF AGENDA
• When county updates premitigation plan so does the city
o Updated every 5 years
• Worksheet #1
o Council/public present had no issues or questions about which current boxes were
checked.
o Leave as is
• Worksheet #2
o Move Extreme Heat from low to medium
o Move Hail from Medium to High
o Move Heavy Rain from low to Medium
o Move lightning from low to medium
o Move Thunderstorm from NA to High (council was very confused as to why this was
marked NA back in 2019)
• Critical Infrastructure from 2019-24
o No changes, everything is the same. No new improvements or additions
• Map of Hazard Vulnerability/Critical Infrastructure
o Remove R in Strangeland St (should be Stangeland St)
• Bushnell Mitigation Activity Sites
o Remove R in Strangeland St (should be Stangeland St)
• Table
o Has not purchased back up generator
o No construction of tornado shelter yet
▪ Use town hall still
o No installation of water tank for emergency purposes
• Wishlist Items
o Tornado Shelter
o Bury powerlines
o Tree trimming (Ottertail coming in /storm took out a lot)
o Updated siren in 2016-2018 (couldn’t remember which year) but still in great
working condition
o No sanitary sewer
o No water lines- all private wells or rural water
o No public utilities all privately owned
240
City of Elkton
241
242
Elkton City Council Minutes
March 6, 2024
The Elkton City Council meeting was called to order by Mayor Charles Remund at
6:00 PM. Council members present were Jordan Beck, David Bierman, Tal Farnham, Bill
Kuehl and Rick Weible. Council member Scott Stuefen was not in attendance.
Motion by Weible second by Beck to approve the agenda as presented. All in favor –
motion carried.
Motion by Weible, second by Kuehl to approve the February 5th regular meeting
minutes. All in favor - motion carried.
During citizen comments, Elkton School Superintendent, Brian Jandahl was on hand
to speak with the council about the parking and safety issue during pick up time for the
elementary at the north end of the school. The parking area at the north end of the school has
been designated as a pickup and drop off area only, staff have been instructed to park
elsewhere. This seems to be working out well. After school lets out the city crew will work
with the school to remove some of the yellow no parking area and repaint parking lines to
accommodate more vehicles on the west side. Discussion was held on the possibility of
painting lines on the road to stop individuals from crossing the center line to park in the
opposite direction that they were driving. Inquiries will need to be made to see if this is
feasible based on room and laws.
Council member Tal Farnham informed the council that the Boys and Girls Club is
looking to come to Elkton in the near future. They are planning to approach the school about
the possibility of using the school building for the time being until they are able to build a
permanent home. A location for this building is a concern, the city will see if there are any
lots that could be of use to the club.
Kelli Henricks a GIS Specialist with First District Association of Local Governments
was on hand with a packet for the council to go thru and update for the Brookings County
Pre-Disaster Mitigation plan. This plan is required to be updated every 5 years. The council
made a few changes to the plan.
A temporary liquor permit was requested by the Elkton Youth Sports Association for
the fundraiser event on March 22nd. Motion by Farnham, second by Weible to approve the
temporary permit. All in favor – motion carried.
Public Works Director, Steve Jensen was on hand to give his report. Jensen and
Nelson attended a training session in Brookings on February 27th. Sever water leaks were
fixed. The gravel is being dragged and smoothed on the boulevards and alleys. Installation
of the new batteries for the water meters continues with only about 100 left to be installed.
Jennifer McBrien, Bar Manager was on hand to give her report. The ice machine
continues to not keep up on busy days and weekends. This unit only makes 150 pounds per
day, which is not enough. At one point GES offered to upgrade the unit, McBrien will reach
out and find out their options through GES. Buck Euchre tournament was well attended last
weekend. Karaoke will be held on March 16th. The bar is still looking for new bartenders to
fill in part time.
Susan Schuurman, Finance Officer was on hand and gave her report. The council will
meet for the Board of Equalization on March 18th at 6 PM to hear any grievances submitted
by March 14th. Motion by Weible, second by Beck to move the April meeting to Thursday,
April 4th at 6 PM. All in favor – motion carried.
The fire department will hold a fish fry on March 29th.
The ambulance plans to submit some grant application for equipment needed for the
new ambulance. They are also planning a breakfast fundraiser in May. Plans for the new
ambulance garage are still in the works.
243
City Librarian, Sherry Bauman was not in attendance, but left her report. Story hour
and Daycare deliveries continue. Work on the Annual Public Library survey to the SD State
Library is being done to have the document submitted by the end of March. Bauman
continues to plan for the summer reading program. The next library board meeting is March
13th at 5 PM.
No applications for the Park and Rec position have been received.
The council reviewed the budget overview for February.
In unfinished business, regarding the infrastructure projects, Schuurman asked if there
were any updates on the updated application that is due to the state on March 8th. Jensen will
reach out to SPN in the morning. Council member Beck will speak with Elkton Lumber to
make sure the community center shingles are replaced this summer.
The water tower is due to be inspected and cleaned this summer. The council was
given two option by Maguire Iron. First is a contract for one year service at the price of
$2,650.00, the second is an option to sign a contract locking in the $2,650.00 rate for the next
10 years, the full cost being due the first year. The council decided to go with the one year
contract. Motion by Farnham, second by Weible to approve a 1 year contract for the water
tower maintenance. All in favor – motion carried.
In regard to the infrastructure project there is a need to televise some of the sewer
lines. This includes a section on the north end of Beaver Street to determine the condition of
the line underneath the railroad tracks. Also, the sewer line on 4th Street, to determine how
far east of Badger Street the line goes and if it ties into the manhole in the park. This project
will cost approximately $1,000.00. Motion by Bierman, second by Farnham to approve the
televising. All in favor – motion carried.
The council discussed a date for the spring clean up. They chose April 26th or May
3rd if the dates were still available with the contractor.
Motion by Beck, second by Bierman to approve payment of the March bills. All in
favor – motion carried.
With no further business before the council. Motion by Farnham, second by Weible
to adjourn the meeting at 7:08 PM. All in favor – motion carried.
March 2024 payments
Aflac 27.04 insurance; A-OX welding 40.19 shop supplies; Aramark 869.72 bar, c-ctr
mats, supplies; AT&T 170.07 cell service; Austreim Excavating 87.50 south road
maintenance; Avid Hawk 45.00 website monthly fee; BankStar 9.62 petty cash; BankStar
128.10 insurance; Beal Distributing 5149.60 beer purchases; Britzman, Steven 160.00
lawyer fees; Br. Co. Sheriff’s Dept 2862.44 contract law enforcement; Br. Deuel Rural
Water System 4750.60 water purchased; Capital One 21.22 finance office supplies;
Century Business Products 71.76 library copier lease, copies; Chesterman 401.90 pop
purchased; CHS 1281.35 propane, supplies; City of Elkton 347.40 utility fees; Colonial
Life 306.94 insurance; Cook’s Wastepaper 4128.72 contract garbage; Core & Main
49,500.00 new meter batteries; Dakota Beverage Co 3808.00 beer purchases; Dakota Pump
& Control 1040.82 install temp sewer pump; Dakota Toms 185.60 bar supplies; *Dept of
Revenue 16.70 title & registration fees; Dept of Revenue 2304.14 sales tax remittance;
DMI 154.50 JCB maintenance; EFTPS 5094.77 federal tax payments; Green Energy
Solution 219.30 ice machine maintenance; Harry’s Frozen Food 1109.25 pizzas for bar;
Henry’s 4075.18 bar supplies; Innovative Office Solutions 186.38 building permit cards;
ITC 792.70 phone & internet service; Jensen, Steve 70.00 phone reimbursement; Johnson
Bros 2563.49 liquor purchases; LEAF 41.00 finance office copier lease; Lowes 48.82
shop supplies; Lyle Signs 67.31 street signs; McBrien, Jennifer 30.00 phone
reimbursement; Nelson, Terry 30.00 phone reimbursement; Nova Entertainment 450.00
bar entertainment; One Office Solution 16.94 copier maintenance, copies; Ottertail 2014.30
244
electricity; Pepsi 48.00 pop purchased; Postmaster 227.00 postage; *Practice Sports
900.00 pickleball posts, nets; Republic Beverage Company 446.50 liquor purchases;
Rubber Flooring 22,493.16 pickleball flooring; Runnings 5.58 shop supplies; Schuurman,
Susan 51.42 phone, mileage reimbursement; SD Retirement 2336.68 retirement payment;
Sioux Valley Energy 56.00 lagoon electricity; Skyview 235.50 fuel purchases; Southern
Glazer’s 559.60 liquor purchases; Vadim Municipal Software 16.16 ebilling fee; Visa
4233.97 bar, library, finance, park supplies; Visa – Street 321.33 shop supplies; Visa – Bar
134.56 bar supplies; Wellmark BC/BS 3339.91 health insurance; Wex 206.07 fuel
purchases.
*denotes already pd. *Payroll: Mayor/Council 860.06; Finance 4771.49; C-ctr 167.58;
Street 3532.44; Library 1486.79; Bar 8961.62; Water 3983.32; Sewer 3532.42.
245
Elkton PDM Meeting 03/06/2024 Meeting Notes
• Prerequisite for federal funding/grants you have to have in order to qualify
• Hazard mitigation project examples: Storm shelter, sirens, power line burials, tree branch
trimming, drainage channels, etc. Projects that help to stave off probably emergency issues
• FEMA requires some sort of plan in place in order to qualify for the 80/20
o FEMA says we need to prepare this plan to help minimize the chaos during
emergency recovery efforts
o Some events happen on a regular basis, sometimes, or almost never
• How likely are events to occur?
• ALWAYS GET COPY OF AGENDA
• When county updates premitigation plan so does the city
o Updated every 5 years
• Worksheet #1
o Move drought from low to high
o Move flood from low to high
o Can categories be added?
▪ Want to add high winds as they have been experiencing high winds the past
few years that does damage on occasion (ripping off siding, shingles, blowing
down trees, etc)
▪ Can Solar Flares category be added? With the increase in demand for
telecommunications or technology solar flares have been increasing (due to
ozone thinning) that it is causing havoc on grid power or telecommunication
outages.
• Worksheet #2
o Move Drought from NA to medium
o Move Flood from NA to high (city is so flat that if they flood everyone is impacted)
o Move Hail from medium to high
o Move Heavy rain from medium to high
o Move Heavy snow from medium to high
o Move Thunderstorm from medium to high
o Can categories be added?
▪ Strong winds (see worksheet 1 note)
▪ Solar flares (see worksheet 1 note)
• Critical Infrastructure List
o No changes.
• Map of Critical Infrastructure
o No changes.
• Map of Mitigation Activity Sites
o No changes.
• City of Elkton Problems
o Bury Overhead powerlines
▪ Not done
o Tree replacement Program
▪ Haven’t implemented. Have removed trees, but haven’t started a program to
replace them.
▪ Ottertail has been removing trees that damage or impact power lines
o Install storm siren
246
▪ Not done
o Develop and Implement Emergency Plan for Tornados
▪ Not done
o Construction of Tornado Shelter
▪ Not done. Community center acts as a storm shelter to get out of
thunderstorms but not safe enough for tornados council felt
o Comprehensive Drainage Study
▪ Yes has had part of the town done with the street projects
o Establish living snow fence
▪ Not done
o Other Items Discussed:
▪ Burying powerlines would be nice, but Ottertail owns them and has been
slowly doing it. They are also doing tree trimming and removals as needed.
▪ Better water storm drains with various street constructions
▪ Sanitary and water in great condition in parts of town.
• They are currently on 3rd phase of replacing water and sewer and
will have a 4th phase.
• Currently half the town is done with brand new water/sewer and the
goal is to finish the entire town.
• West side of town has drain tile to help with drainage issues
▪ Partner with the school for storm shelter as another location to help get
more people to safety
▪ Fliers to help make people aware of where to go during storm events
▪ Bank during tornados as a safety shelter?
• School would be #1 storm shelter location to go but possibly the
bank as a tornado shelter?
▪ CO2 pipeline- communities prevention/chain of command for what should
be done during CO2 pipeline burst
• What plan of action? Who to contact? What to do with local
residents?
• 5-10 mile dispersement so now part of the community is impacted.
• Want to get a Hazard plan of Action for CO2 Pipeline burst for
everyone impacted, proper training for City staff & residents, proper
equipment.
• Ethanol industry might impact this/need to have a safety plan in
place and will work with local communities?
• Bob Hill will need to coordinate with
247
Town of Sinai
248
249
Sinai PDM Meeting 04/01/2024 Meeting Notes
• Prerequisite for federal funding/grants you have to have in order to qualify
• Hazard mitigation project examples: Storm shelter, sirens, power line burials, tree
branch trimming, drainage channels, etc. Projects that help to stave off probably
emergency issues
• FEMA requires some sort of plan in place in order to qualify for the 80/20
o FEMA says we need to prepare this plan to help minimize the chaos during
emergency recovery efforts
o Some events happen on a regular basis, sometimes, or almost never
• How likely are events to occur?
• ALWAYS GET COPY OF AGENDA
• When county updates premitigation plan so does the city
o Updated every 5 years
• Worksheet #1
o Leave as is. Council was in agreement everything looked flne in the current
categories
• Worksheet #2
o Leave as is. Council was in agreement everything looked flne in the current
categories
• Critical Infrastructure from 2019-24
o Lots of updates to addresses. Julie sent a list with information to update. See list
below
▪ Sinai City Hall (this is actually our maintenance garage or what we call
the "pumphouse") 318 Main Street
▪ Sinai Fire Dept (where we had our meeting) 311 Main Street
▪ American Legion Hall (legion disbanded, FD now owns bldg) 309 Main
Street
▪ Storm Siren (located next to Brookings County Maint Shed) 302 Main
Street
▪ City Sewer Lagoons (south of town) 458th Ave and 217th St
▪ Sewer Lift Station (west end of town) 2nd St W & Main Ave
▪ City Park (west end of town, 2nd St W & Park Ave) 111 Park Avenue
▪ Red Shed (maintenance shed for tractor, equipment storage) 216 2nd St
▪ Old sewer bldg (storage) 2nd St W
• Town of Sinai Hazard Vulnerability/Critical Infrastructure Map
o Add items listed above
• Town of Sinai Mitigation Activities Map
o No changes to be made.
• Table of Problem Statements
o Construction of Tornado Shelter
▪ Not built.
o Complete required drainage improvements from engineering study.
▪ Not done yet.
o Other comments:
▪ Use basement of church for tornado shelter currently
▪ Sioux Valley owns all the power lines and maintains them.
• This summer they will be burying all lines.
250
• They also maintain tree trimming along power line routes
▪ Brand new siren, still in good shape about 15 years old
▪ Would like generators if had the money to buy them
▪ Sanitary sewer is only a few years old, same with lagoon
▪ Rural water installed all new water lines
▪ No fiood issues so no need for levees or issues of ice jams
251
City of Volga
252
253
254
Meeting Minutes
255
Outline
Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan
Community Meetings
City of Volga, SD
Introduction
Personal introduction:
All individuals in attendance introduced themselves.
Introduce the plan: Luke Muller of FDALG introduced the group to the PDM planning
process and the community’s role in the process, discussing the following:
Why update the PDM?
Why is your community doing it individually/Why not just county?
What is a PDM?
Hazard review
Hazard Identification
Summer/Thunderstorm
o Hail, Heavy Rain, Lightning, Tornado, Strong Winds
Winter Storm and Extreme Cold
o Freezing Rain, Sleet, Ice, Heavy Snow,
Drought and Extreme Heat
Flood
o Rapid Snow Melt, Ice jam, (heavy rain can go here too)
Fire
o Urban fire, wildfire (grass fire)
The City of Volga reviewed the previous PDM’s Risk Assessment worksheet (Hazard
Identification – Probability) and made no changes.
Hazard Vulnerability
Summer/Thunderstorm
o Hail, Heavy Rain, Lightning, Tornado, Strong Winds
Winter Storm and Extreme Cold
o Freezing Rain, Sleet, Ice, Heavy Snow,
Drought and Extreme Heat
Flood
o Rapid Snow Melt, Ice jam, (heavy rain can go here too)
Fire
o Urban fire, wildfire (grass fire)
The City of Volga reviewed the previous PDM’s Risk Assessment worksheet (Hazard
Identification – Vulnerability) and made no changes.
Community Capabilities and Plans review
The City manager administers the zoning ordinance and would like to update the city’s
comprehensive land use plan and zoning ordinance. The city is currently undergoing
256
a capital improvement plan update with ISG and an update to its strategic plan with
FDALG.
Community facilities
Identify/review critical facilities
Are there new facilities/facilities to be removed
o The city pool should be added to the list of populations to protect.
Have addresses changed/are they correct - city staff will review the
addresses and communicate with FDALG.
Discussed the populations to protect
Transient/campgrounds
Poor Populations/economically disadvantaged areas
Schools/children
Elderly
Protected classes (mentally handicapped)
Project review
Review past projects
• All past projects should be retained
Ask about other projects (not all require FEMA funding)
The city needs to upsize storm sewer in certain locations, manage storm water
gathering and containment better, install sirens downtown
Ask about Policies/activities that already help mitigate Disaster
City imposes watering restrictions in dry conditions, has added water storage
and wells for water services, the city has added generators to wells and lift stations
and has a portable generator for general use.
Electrical lines in town have been buried
The city cleared out a portion of the creek in town to allow stormwater to move
more freely (in 2023) and are eager to monitor to see if it works. (Relatively dry
2024)
257
City of White
258
259
260
261
Outline
Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan
Community Meeting – White, SD
April 1st 2024
Introduction
Hazard review
Hazard Identification
• Leave as is – Council didn’t see a need to move anything from the previous plan
Hazard Vulnerability
• Move rapid snow melt from NA to Low Vulnerability. In the past 5 years the City has
experienced rapid snow melt up around the golf course and did use FEMA funding to
help rebuild roads. Left at low vulnerability due to the percent of jurisdiction that is
affected.
Community Capabilities and Plans review
• No changes
Community facilities
Identify/review critical facilities
Are there new facilities/facilities to be removed
NEW Facilities –
o White Sports Athletic Complex – 511 W 5th St
o New Fire Hall – 210 W Main St
o White Medical Clinic -
o 2 in home daycares
▪ 301 N Hooker Ave
▪ 206 W 1st St
Have addresses changed/are they correct
• Verify address change for Fire Hall with Kayla – 210 W Main
Project review
Review past projects
• The City will have a back up generator at the new Fire Hall when that is completed.
• Ottertail has taken the initiative and buried the majority of the overhead lines in
town.
• They are currently in the process of building a new Fire Hall.
Ask about other projects (not all require FEMA funding)
Ask about Policies/activities that already help mitigate Disaster
262
Appendix D - Hazard Identification/Vulnerability Worksheets
Appendix D includes master worksheets for Hazard Identification and Vulnerability for
jurisdictions compiled as described in Appendix C. Lists were gathered at meetings as
described below:
Entity Date
Aurora August 12, 2024
Brookings August 27, 2024
Bruce February 13, 2024
Bushnell March 4, 2024
Elkton March 6, 2024
Sinai April 1, 2024
Volga January 16, 2024
White April 1, 2024
Master worksheets for Hazard Identification and Vulnerability for generated by the
participating jurisdictions (communities and Brookings County) are listed below.
263
Brookings County Commission
Brookings County PDM
Worksheet #1 (Commissioners)
Risk Assessment Worksheet – Hazard Identification
What is the probability of occurrence of the following hazards?
Hazard
High Probability
to Occur
(At least once in a year)
Low Probability
to Occur
(May have occurred in
the past but do not
occur on a yearly basis)
Unlikely
to Occur
(Never occurred in
the area before or
are unlikely to occur)
Dam Failure X
Drought X
Earthquake X
Extreme Cold X
Extreme Heat X
Flood X
Freezing
Rain/Sleet/Ice X
Hail X
Heavy Rain X
Heavy Snow X
Ice Jam X
Landslide X
Lightning X
Rapid Snow Melt X
Strong Winds X
Subsidence X
Thunderstorm X
Tornado X
Urban Fire X
Wildfire X
264
Brookings County Commission
Brookings County PDM
Worksheet #2 (Commissioners)
Risk Assessment Worksheet – Hazard Vulnerability
How vulnerable is the community from the following hazard? In other words, if the hazard
occurs is there a potential to impact the community? If so, what would be impacted?
Brookings county commission reviewed materials from previous plan and clarified hazards
that pose a threat in the county. They used it as an opportunity to review community
projects and policies in conjunction with theirs. The county chose to add general support to
regional water providers such as “Project Mainstem” to create future redundancy of water
services in case capacity is exhausted by either supply, demand, or contamination.
265
266
City of Aurora
Brookings County PDM
Worksheet #1 (Aurora)
Risk Assessment Worksheet – Hazard Identification
What is the probability of occurrence of the following hazards?
Hazard
High Probability
to Occur
(At least once in a year)
Low Probability
to Occur
(May have occurred in
the past but do not
occur on a yearly basis)
Unlikely
to Occur
(Never occurred in
the area before or
are unlikely to occur)
Dam Failure X
Drought X
Earthquake X
Extreme Cold X
Extreme Heat X
Flood X
Freezing
Rain/Sleet/Ice X
Hail X
Heavy Rain X
Heavy Snow X
Ice Jam X
Lightning X X
Rapid Snow Melt X
Strong Winds X
Subsidence X
Thunderstorm X
Tornado X
Urban Fire X
Wildfire X
267
Brookings County PDM
Worksheet #2 (Aurora)
Risk Assessment Worksheet – Hazard Vulnerability
How vulnerable is the community from the following hazard? In other words, if the hazard
occurs is there a potential to impact the community? If so, what would be impacted?
Hazard
High Vulnerability
Significant risk/major
damage potential (more
than 10% of the
jurisdiction and/or
regular occurrence)
Medium
Vulnerability
Moderate damage
potential (5-10% of
the jurisdiction and/or
irregular occurrence)
Low
Vulnerability
Little damage
potential (less
than 5% of the
jurisdiction)
NA
Not a
hazard to
the
jurisdiction
Dam Failure X
Drought X
Earthquake X
Extreme Cold X
Extreme Heat X
Flood X
Freezing
Rain/Sleet/Ice X
Hail X
Heavy Rain X
Heavy Snow X
Ice Jam X
Lightning X
Rapid Snow Melt X
Strong Winds X
Subsidence X
Thunderstorm X
Tornado X
Urban Fire X
Wildfire X
268
City of Brookings
Brookings County PDM
Worksheet #1 (Brookings)
Risk Assessment Worksheet – Hazard Identification
What is the probability of occurrence of the following hazards?
Hazard
High Probability
to Occur
(At least once in a year)
Low Probability
to Occur
(May have occurred in
the past but do not
occur on a yearly basis)
Unlikely
to Occur
(Never occurred in
the area before or
are unlikely to occur)
Dam Failure X
Drought X
Earthquake X
Extreme Cold X
Extreme Heat X
Flood X
Freezing
Rain/Sleet/Ice X
Hail X
Heavy Rain X
Heavy Snow X
Ice Jam X
Lightning X
Rapid Snow Melt X
Strong Winds X
Subsidence X
Thunderstorm X
Tornado X
Urban Fire X
Wildfire X
269
Brookings County PDM
Worksheet #2 (Brookings)
Risk Assessment Worksheet – Hazard Vulnerability
How vulnerable is the community from the following hazard? In other words, if the hazard
occurs is there a potential to impact the community? If so, what would be impacted?
Hazard
High Vulnerability
Significant risk/major
damage potential (more
than 10% of the
jurisdiction and/or
regular occurrence)
Medium
Vulnerability
Moderate damage
potential (5-10% of
the jurisdiction and/or
irregular occurrence)
Low
Vulnerability
Little damage
potential (less
than 5% of the
jurisdiction)
NA
Not a
hazard to
the
jurisdiction
Dam Failure X
Drought X
Earthquake X
Extreme Cold X
Extreme Heat X
Flood X
Freezing
Rain/Sleet/Ice X
Hail X
Heavy Rain X
Heavy Snow X
Ice Jam X
Lightning X
Rapid Snow Melt X
Strong Winds X
Subsidence X
Thunderstorm X
Tornado X
Urban Fire X
Wildfire X
270
City of Bruce
Brookings County PDM
Worksheet #1 (Bruce)
Risk Assessment Worksheet – Hazard Identification
What is the probability of occurrence of the following hazards?
Hazard
High Probability
to Occur
(At least once in a year)
Low Probability
to Occur
(May have occurred in
the past but do not
occur on a yearly basis)
Unlikely
to Occur
(Never occurred in
the area before or
are unlikely to occur)
Dam Failure X
Drought X
Earthquake X
Extreme Cold X
Extreme Heat X
Flood X
Freezing
Rain/Sleet/Ice X
Hail X
Heavy Rain X
Heavy Snow X
Ice Jam X
Lightning X
Rapid Snow Melt X
Strong Winds X
Subsidence X
Thunderstorm X
Tornado X
Urban Fire X
Wildfire X
271
Brookings County PDM
Worksheet #2 (Bruce)
Risk Assessment Worksheet – Hazard Vulnerability
How vulnerable is the community from the following hazard? In other words, if the hazard
occurs is there a potential to impact the community? If so, what would be impacted?
Hazard
High Vulnerability
Significant risk/major
damage potential (more
than 10% of the
jurisdiction and/or
regular occurrence)
Medium
Vulnerability
Moderate damage
potential (5-10% of
the jurisdiction and/or
irregular occurrence)
Low
Vulnerability
Little damage
potential (less
than 5% of the
jurisdiction)
NA
Not a
hazard to
the
jurisdiction
Dam Failure X
Drought X
Earthquake X
Extreme Cold X
Extreme Heat X
Flood X
Freezing
Rain/Sleet/Ice X
Hail X
Heavy Rain X
Heavy Snow X
Ice Jam X
Lightning X
Rapid Snow Melt X
Strong Winds X
Subsidence X
Thunderstorm X
Tornado X
Urban Fire X
Wildfire X
272
Town of Bushnell
Brookings County PDM
Worksheet #1 (Bushnell)
Risk Assessment Worksheet – Hazard Identification
What is the probability of occurrence of the following hazards?
Hazard
High Probability
to Occur
(At least once in a year)
Low Probability
to Occur
(May have occurred in
the past but do not
occur on a yearly basis)
Unlikely
to Occur
(Never occurred in
the area before or
are unlikely to occur)
Dam Failure X
Drought X
Earthquake X
Extreme Cold X
Extreme Heat X
Flood X
Freezing
Rain/Sleet/Ice X
Hail X
Heavy Rain X
Heavy Snow X
Ice Jam X
Lightning X
Rapid Snow Melt X
Strong Winds X
Subsidence X
Thunderstorm X
Tornado X
Urban Fire X
Wildfire X
273
Brookings County PDM
Worksheet #2 (Bushnell)
Risk Assessment Worksheet – Hazard Vulnerability
How vulnerable is the community from the following hazard? In other words, if the hazard
occurs is there a potential to impact the community? If so, what would be impacted?
Hazard
High Vulnerability
Significant risk/major
damage potential (more
than 10% of the
jurisdiction and/or
regular occurrence)
Medium
Vulnerability
Moderate damage
potential (5-10% of
the jurisdiction and/or
irregular occurrence)
Low
Vulnerability
Little damage
potential (less
than 5% of the
jurisdiction)
NA
Not a
hazard to
the
jurisdiction
Dam Failure X
Drought X
Earthquake X
Extreme Cold X
Extreme Heat X
Flood X
Freezing
Rain/Sleet/Ice X
Hail X
Heavy Rain X
Heavy Snow X
Ice Jam X
Lightning X
Rapid Snow Melt X
Strong Winds X
Subsidence X
Thunderstorm X
Tornado X
Urban Fire X
Wildfire X
274
City of Elkton
Brookings County PDM
Worksheet #1 (Elkton)
Risk Assessment Worksheet – Hazard Identification
What is the probability of occurrence of the following hazards?
Hazard
High Probability
to Occur
(At least once in a year)
Low Probability
to Occur
(Hazards that may have
occurred in the past or
could occur in the future
but do not occur on a
yearly basis)
Unlikely
to Occur
(Hazards or disasters
that have never occurred
in the area before and
are unlikely to occur)
Dam Failure X
Drought X
Earthquake X
Extreme Cold X
Extreme Heat X
Flood X
Freezing
Rain/Sleet/Ice X
Hail X
Heavy Rain X
Heavy Snow X
Ice Jam X
Lightning X
Rapid Snow Melt X
Strong Winds X
Subsidence X
Thunderstorm X
Tornado X
Urban Fire X
Wildfire X
275
Brookings County PDM
Worksheet #2 (Elkton)
Risk Assessment Worksheet – Hazard Vulnerability
How vulnerable is the community from the following hazard? In other words, if the hazard occurs
is there a potential to impact the community? If so, what would be impacted?
Hazard
High Vulnerability
Significant risk/major
damage potential (for
example, destructive,
damage to more than
10% of the jurisdiction
and/or regular
occurrence)
Medium
Vulnerability
Moderate damage
potential (causing
partial damage to 5-
10% of the
jurisdiction, and
irregular occurrence)
Low
Vulnerability
Little damage
potential (minor
damage to less
than 5% of the
jurisdiction)
NA
Not a
hazard to
the
jurisdiction
Dam Failure X
Drought X
Earthquake X
Extreme Cold X
Extreme Heat X
Flood X
Freezing
Rain/Sleet/Ice X
Hail X
Heavy Rain X
Heavy Snow X
Ice Jam X
Lightning X
Rapid Snow Melt X
Strong Winds X
Subsidence X
Thunderstorm X
Tornado X
Urban Fire X
Wildfire X
276
Town of Sinai
Brookings County PDM
Worksheet #1 (Sinai)
Risk Assessment Worksheet – Hazard Identification
What is the probability of occurrence of the following hazards?
Hazard
High Probability
to Occur
(At least once in a year)
Low Probability
to Occur
(May have occurred in
the past but do not
occur on a yearly basis)
Unlikely
to Occur
(Never occurred in
the area before or
are unlikely to occur)
Dam Failure X
Drought X
Earthquake X
Extreme Cold X
Extreme Heat X
Flood X
Freezing
Rain/Sleet/Ice X
Hail X
Heavy Rain X
Heavy Snow X
Ice Jam X
Lightning X
Rapid Snow Melt X
Strong Winds X
Subsidence X
Thunderstorm X
Tornado X
Urban Fire X
Wildfire X
277
Brookings County PDM
Worksheet #2 (Sinai)
Risk Assessment Worksheet – Hazard Vulnerability
How vulnerable is the community from the following hazard? In other words, if the hazard
occurs is there a potential to impact the community? If so, what would be impacted?
Hazard
High Vulnerability
Significant risk/major
damage potential (more
than 10% of the
jurisdiction and/or
regular occurrence)
Medium
Vulnerability
Moderate damage
potential (5-10% of
the jurisdiction and/or
irregular occurrence)
Low
Vulnerability
Little damage
potential (less
than 5% of the
jurisdiction)
NA
Not a
hazard to
the
jurisdiction
Dam Failure X
Drought X
Earthquake X
Extreme Cold X
Extreme Heat X
Flood X
Freezing
Rain/Sleet/Ice X
Hail X
Heavy Rain X
Heavy Snow X
Ice Jam X
Lightning X
Rapid Snow Melt X
Strong Winds X
Subsidence X
Thunderstorm X
Tornado X
Urban Fire X
Wildfire X
278
City of Volga
Brookings County PDM
Worksheet #1 (Volga)
Risk Assessment Worksheet – Hazard Identification
What is the probability of occurrence of the following hazards?
Hazard
High Probability
to Occur
(At least once in a year)
Low Probability
to Occur
(May have occurred in
the past but do not
occur on a yearly basis)
Unlikely
to Occur
(Never occurred in
the area before or
are unlikely to occur)
Dam Failure X
Drought X
Earthquake X
Extreme Cold X
Extreme Heat X
Flood X
Freezing
Rain/Sleet/Ice X
Hail X
Heavy Rain X
Heavy Snow X
Ice Jam X
Lightning X
Rapid Snow Melt X
Strong Winds X
Subsidence X
Thunderstorm X
Tornado X
Urban Fire X
Wildfire X
279
Brookings County PDM
Worksheet #2 (Volga)
Risk Assessment Worksheet – Hazard Vulnerability
How vulnerable is the community from the following hazard? In other words, if the hazard
occurs is there a potential to impact the community? If so, what would be impacted?
Hazard
High Vulnerability
Significant risk/major
damage potential (more
than 10% of the
jurisdiction and/or
regular occurrence)
Medium
Vulnerability
Moderate damage
potential (5-10% of
the jurisdiction and/or
irregular occurrence)
Low
Vulnerability
Little damage
potential (less
than 5% of the
jurisdiction)
NA
Not a
hazard to
the
jurisdiction
Dam Failure X
Drought X
Earthquake X
Extreme Cold X
Extreme Heat X
Flood X
Freezing
Rain/Sleet/Ice X
Hail X
Heavy Rain X
Heavy Snow X
Ice Jam X
Landslide X
Lightning X
Rapid Snow Melt X
Strong Winds X
Subsidence X
Thunderstorm X
Tornado X
Urban Fire X
Wildfire X
280
City of White
Brookings County PDM
Worksheet #1 (White)
Risk Assessment Worksheet – Hazard Identification
What is the probability of occurrence of the following hazards?
Hazard
High Probability
to Occur
(At least once in a year)
Low Probability
to Occur
(May have occurred in
the past but do not
occur on a yearly basis)
Unlikely
to Occur
(Never occurred in
the area before or
are unlikely to occur)
Dam Failure X
Drought X
Earthquake X
Extreme Cold X
Extreme Heat X
Flood X
Freezing
Rain/Sleet/Ice
X
Hail X
Heavy Rain X
Heavy Snow X
Ice Jam X
Lightning X
Rapid Snow Melt X
Strong Winds X
Subsidence X
Thunderstorm X
Tornado X
Urban Fire X
Wildfire X
281
Brookings County PDM
Worksheet #2 (White)
Risk Assessment Worksheet – Hazard Vulnerability
How vulnerable is the community from the following hazard? In other words, if the hazard
occurs is there a potential to impact the community? If so, what would be impacted?
Hazard
High Vulnerability
Significant risk/major
damage potential (more
than 10% of the
jurisdiction and/or
regular occurrence)
Medium
Vulnerability
Moderate damage
potential (5-10% of
the jurisdiction and/or
irregular occurrence)
Low
Vulnerability
Little damage
potential (less
than 5% of the
jurisdiction)
NA
Not a
hazard to
the
jurisdiction
Dam Failure X
Drought X
Earthquake X
Extreme Cold X
Extreme Heat X
Flood X
Freezing
Rain/Sleet/Ice
X
Hail X
Heavy Rain X
Heavy Snow X
Ice Jam X
Lightning X
Rapid Snow Melt X
Strong Winds X
Subsidence X
Thunderstorm X
Tornado X
Urban Fire X
Wildfire X
282
Appendix E
Township Vulnerable and Potential Mitigation Project Site Maps
In January of 2024, First District mailed a request to the Township Clerk or Road Supervisor
of every township in Brookings County. They were requested to list any critical infrastructure
and identify (on a map) any areas which are most vulnerable to natural hazards, specifically
flooding. The Association of Brookings County Townships Annual Meeting was held on
February 29th, 2024. Townships in attendance were requested to complete the maps and
hazard information, if they had not responded to the maps that had been previously mailed to
them. Of the 23 requests sent, all maps were returned with vulnerable areas identified (see
table below).
Township Name Response
Afton Township Returned/ No vulnerabilities
Alton Township Returned/ No changes to identified vulnerabilities
Argo Township Returned/ No changes to identified vulnerabilities
Aurora Township Returned/ No changes to identified vulnerabilities
Bangor Township Returned/ No changes to identified vulnerabilities
Brookings Township Returned/ No changes to identified vulnerabilities
Elkton Township Returned/ No changes to identified vulnerabilities
Eureka Township Not returned/ No changes to identified vulnerabilities
Lake Hendricks Township Returned/ No changes to identified vulnerabilities
Lake Sinai Township Returned/ No changes to identified vulnerabilities
Laketon Township Returned/ No changes to identified vulnerabilities
Medary Township Returned/ No changes to identified vulnerabilities
Oak Lake Township Returned/ No vulnerabilities
Oakwood Township Returned/ No vulnerabilities
Oslo Township Returned/ No vulnerabilities
Parnell Township Returned/ No vulnerabilities
Preston Township Returned/ No changes to identified vulnerabilities
Richland Township Returned/ No changes to identified vulnerabilities
Sherman Township Returned/ No changes to identified vulnerabilities
Sterling Township Returned/ No changes to identified vulnerabilities
Trenton Township Returned/ No changes to identified vulnerabilities
Volga Township Returned/ No changes to identified vulnerabilities
Winsor Township Returned/ No changes to identified vulnerabilities
Maps identifying vulnerable areas for those townships which identified such areas are shown
below.
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
Appendix F – Online Survey Information
Survey Notice to Participate
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
Appendix G – Comprehensive Land Use Maps
320
Brookings County Future Land Use Map
321
City of Aurora Future Land Use Map
322
City of Brookings Future Land Use Map
323
City of Elkton Future Land Use Map
324
City of Volga Future Land Use Map
325
City of White Future Land Use Map
326
Appendix H – Review of Previous PDM Mitigation Project Implementation
2019 PDM Plan Mitigation Project Implementation
COMMUNITY POTENTIAL MITIGATION
PROJECTS HAZARD INCLUDED IN
2024 PLAN? STATUS
City of Brookings Purchase Back-up Generator for
Government Center All Hazards No Completed/Removed
from Table 5.13
Bruce Perform study and inspection of
sewer infrastructure.
Severe Weather
Hazards No
Complete/
Removed from Tables
5.1-5.13
Bruce Purchase new emergency city
sirens.
Severe Weather
Hazards No
Complete/
Removed from Tables
5.1-5.13
Bruce
Study and implement stormwater
drainage improvements targeting
problem areas.
Flooding No
Complete/
Removed from Tables
5.1-5.13
Bruce Purchase a portable
backup generator.
Severe Weather
Hazards No
Complete/
Removed from Tables
5.1-5.13
Elkton Replace old trees with new/trim old
trees.
Severe Weather
Hazards Yes Ongoing/Included in
Tables 5.1-5.13
Volga Portable generator for water
system.
Severe Weather
Hazards No
Complete/
Removed from Tables
5.1-5.13
Volga Portable generator for lift stations. Severe Weather
Hazards No
Complete/
Removed from Tables
5.1-5.13
Volga Implement stormwater drainage
improvements. Floding Yes Ongoing/Included in
Tables 5.1-5.13
White Construct new Fire Hall. Fire No In progress/ Removed
from Tables 5.1-5.13
White Bury overhead powerlines. Severe Weather
Hazards No Completed
White Purchase backup generator for
McKnight Hall.
Severe Weather
Hazards No In progress/ Removed
from Tables 5.1-5.13
*Any projects/activities listed in the 2019 PDM Plan that are not referenced in this section
were retained in this Plan, with or without modification, and listed in Tables 5.1 - 5.13.
327
Appendix I – Worksheet 10: Plan Update Evaluation Form
328
329
330
Appendix J - References
Brookings County Comprehensive Land Use Plan – First District Association of Local
Governments, 2000.
Brookings County Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan, 2019.
City of Aurora Comprehensive Land Use Plan and Zoning Ordinance - First District Association
of Local Governments, 2012.
City of Elkton Comprehensive Land Use Plan and Zoning Ordinance - First District Association of
Local Governments, 2006.
City of Volga Future Land Use Map and Major Street Plan – First District Association of Local
Governments, 2015.
City of White Comprehensive Land Use Plan and Zoning Ordinance - First District Association of
Local Governments, 2008.
Federal Emergency Management Agency. 2011. Local Hazard Mitigation Planning Tool.
Local Hazard Mitigation Planning Tool – Federal Emergency Management Agency, 2011.
NFIP Flood Insurance Rate Maps, FEMA.
State of South Dakota Hazard Mitigation Plan. South Dakota Office of Emergency Management.
2019.
South Dakota State University - 2024 Annual Security and Fire Safety Reports.
Brookings, SD Comprehensive Plan 2040, 2018.
City of Brookings (South Dakota) Master Drainage Plan – July 2024; ISG Inc.
City of Brookings (South Dakota) Six Mile Creek Feasibility Study – May 2024; Re/Spec Inc. &
Banner Engineering Corp.
City of Brookings
Staff Report
Brookings City & County
Government Center, 520
Third Street
Brookings, SD 57006
(605) 692-6281 phone
(605) 692-6907 fax
File #:ORD 25-013,Version:1
Introduction and First Reading on Ordinance 25-013, an Ordinance to Change the Zoning within the
City of Brookings (the East 1 Acre of Rudebusch Addition Easterly 2 Acres of Lot 1 in NE1/4 of Sec 4,
T109N, R50W, also known as 1809 West 20th Street South, from Joint Jurisdiction Agriculture District
to Joint Jurisdiction Residence R-1A Single-Family District). Public Hearing and Action: July 8, 2025.
Summary and Recommended Action:
Richard & Donna Rudebusch have submitted a petition to rezone the East 1 Acre of Rudebusch
Addition Easterly 2 Acres of Lot 1 in NE1/4 of Section 4, T109N, R50W, also known as 1809 West 20
th Street South. The request is to rezone the area from Joint Jurisdiction Agriculture to Joint
Jurisdiction Residence R-1A Single Family. The Development Review Team does not support the
petition to rezone. The Planning Commission voted 5-3 to recommend denial.
Attachments:
Memo
Ordinance
Hearing Notice - City Council
Hearing Notice - Planning Commission
Planning Commission Minutes
Petition to Rezone
Location Map
Zoning Map
Future Land Use Map
Floodplain Map
City of Brookings Printed on 6/18/2025Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™
City Council Agenda Item Memo
From: Ryan Miller, City Planner
Council Meeting: June 24, 2025 / July 8, 2025
Subject: Ordinance 25-013: an Ordinance to Change the Zoning
within the City of Brookings (the East 1 Acre of Rudebusch
Addition Easterly 2 Acres of Lot 1 in NE1/4 of Sec 4, T109N,
R50W , also known as 1809 West 20th Street South, from
Joint Jurisdiction Agriculture District to Joint Jurisdiction
Residence R-1A Single-Family District).
Presenter: Mike Struck, Community Development Director
Summary and Recommended Action:
Richard & Donna Rudebusch have submitted a petition to rezone the East 1 Acre of
Rudebusch Addition Easterly 2 Acres of Lot 1 in NE1/4 of Section 4, T109N, R50W,
also known as 1809 West 20th Street South. The request is to rezone the area from
Joint Jurisdiction Agriculture to Joint Jurisdiction Residence R-1A Single Family. The
Development Review Team does not support the petition to rezone. The Planning
Commission voted 5-3 to recommend denial.
Item Details:
1809 West 20th Street South is a two-acre lot located along West 20th Street South. The
lot has two access drives and is located within the 100-year floodplain (zone A). The lot
is located in the Joint Jurisdiction Agriculture District and previously included a
residential use. The residential use has been removed for over one year. Any future
use must comply with the current zoning requirements.
The property owner has a purchase agreement with a prospective buyer for the east
acre of the property, which is contingent on that half of the property being rezoned to a
Residence R-1A Single Family District for the purposes of building a single-family
dwelling. In the Joint Jurisdiction Agriculture District, a minimum of 35-acres is required
for a single-family slab on grade dwelling. The JJ R-1A District would allow a single-
family dwelling on a lot with a minimum of 15,000 square feet in area and 100-feet in
width.
The Future Land Use Map from the City of Brookings’ 2040 Comprehensive Plan
describes the area as Open/Floodplain. The Future Land Use map should be
interpreted generally and is not intended to provide the specificity or the rigidity of a
zoning map or engineering document. The map should provide guidance for the zoning
map. From the Comprehensive Plan, the 100-year floodplain is an area prone to
inundation by a 100-year flood event (an event with a 1% annual probability, or that over
the course of a 30-year mortgage, has a 26% chance of being flooded at least once).
These areas are severely limited from development and are subject to many additional
requirements. It is difficult to mitigate these issues responsibly, and the extent of these
areas should continue to be studied. Development should not occur in the 100-year
floodplain unless the impact can be responsibly mitigated.
The prospective rezone area is also located within the South Development Policy Area
of the Comprehensive Plan, which states a limited amount of larger lot or acreage
development may occur in areas where the water table is high. However, municipal
sewer may be required to ensure groundwater quality.
Any development of the east acre of the lot would require fill to remove the building
location from the floodplain, along with the addition of compensatory storage back to the
floodplain on a 1:1 basis from what is filled. Because the property is in a Zone A
Floodplain, a floodplain study would be required to determine the base flood elevation.
An approved Floodplain Permit would be required for both the rezone and building
permits. Preliminary and final plats would be required prior to issuing permits. A
grading permit would also be required.
The dwelling is unlikely to a connect to municipal sewer without a lift station due to its
location downhill from the nearest existing sanitary sewer line. An alternative sanitary
sewer option which maintains groundwater quality would be necessary. The state
would regulate any septic system type and surrounding fill. The dwelling would use
rural water. The Fire Department would be required to grant an exception to the Fire
Code requiring hydrants within one mile of the city limits during the permitting phase.
Joint Jurisdiction rezones are submitted to Brookings County who sets the public
hearing for the Joint City and County Planning Commission meeting. The Joint
Planning Commission makes a recommendation to approve or deny the request. That
recommendation is made to both the City Council and County Commission who must
both affirm any recommendation to approve a rezone in the Joint Jurisdiction Area.
Legal Consideration:
None.
Strategic Plan Consideration:
Economic Growth – The City of Brookings will support effective diversified community
investment and equitable opportunities for prosperity.
Financial Consideration:
None.
Supporting Documentation:
Ordinance
Hearing Notice – City Council
Hearing Notice – Planning Commission
Planning Commission Minutes
Petition to Rezone
Location Map
Zoning Map
Future Land Use Map
Floodplain Map
ORDINANCE 25-013
AN ORDINANCE TO CHANGE THE ZONING WITHIN THE JOINT JURISDICTIONAL
AREA SURROUNDING 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 Joint Jurisdictional Area surrounding the
City of Brookings, in Brookings County, shall be amended as follows, to-wit:
The East One Acre of Rudebusch Addition Easterly Two Acres of Lot 1 in the
Northeast Quarter of Section Four, Township One-Hundred Nine North, Range
Fifty W est, Brookings County, South Dakota, from a Joint Jurisdiction Agriculture
(JJ-A) District to Joint Jurisdiction Residence (R-1A) Single Family District.
In accordance with Section 4.04.01 of Article IV of the Brookings Joint Jurisdiction
Ordinance, Brookings South Dakota, as said districts are more fully set forth and
described in Article III of Ordinance No. 22-037 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. 22-
037 of the City of Brookings, South Dakota.
Section 3. All sections and ordinances in conflict herewith are hereby repealed.
FIRST READING: June 24, 2025
SECOND READING AND ADOPTION: July 8, 2025
PUBLISHED: July 11, 2025
CITY OF BROOKINGS, SD
________________________
Oepke G. Niemeyer, Mayor
ATTEST:
_________________________
Bonnie Foster, City Clerk
PLEASE PUBLISH TWO TIMES:
THURSDAY, JUNE 19 AND THURSDAY, JUNE 26
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
BROOKINGS COUNTY ORDINANCE 2025-04 AND
BROOKINGS CITY ORDINANCE 25-013
AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING REZONING OF “EAST 1 ACRE OF
RUDEBUSCH ADDITION EASTERLY 2 ACRES OF LOT 1 IN NE 1/4 OF
SEC 4, T109N, R50W (MEDARY TOWNSHIP)”
The Brookings County Board of County Commissioners and Brookings City
Council will hold a public hearing and second reading on Tuesday, July 8, 2025, at 5:30
PM at the Brookings City & County Government Center, Room 310 Chambers, 520 3rd
St., Brookings, SD 57006 on Brookings County Ordinance 2025-04 and Brookings City
Ordinance 25-013: an ordinance authorizing rezoning from Joint Jurisdiction-Agricultural
to Joint Jurisdiction Residence R1A Single Family District. The property is described as:
“East 1 Acre of Rudebusch Addition Easterly 2 Acres of Lot 1 in NE 1/4 of Sec 4,
T109N, R50W (Medary Township).”
All interested persons are encouraged to attend and comment on Brookings
County Ordinance 2025-04 and Brookings City Ordinance 25-013: an Ordinance
Authorizing Rezoning of “East 1 Acre of Rudebusch Addition Easterly 2 Acres of Lot 1 in
NE 1/4 of Sec 4, T109N, R50W (Medary Township).”
Proposed Brookings County Ordinance 2025-04 will be made available for public
inspection during normal business hours at the Brookings County Commission Office,
520 3rd Street, Suite 210, Brookings, South Dakota or online at:
www.brookingscountysd.gov and proposed Brookings City Ordinance 25-013 will be
made available for public inspection during normal business hours at the Brookings City
Clerk’s Office, 520 3rd Street, Suite 230, Brookings, South Dakota or online at
www.cityofbrookings-sd.gov .
It is the policy of Brookings County, South Dakota not to discriminate on the basis
of color, national origin, sex, religion, age, or disability in employment or the provision of
service.
Published twice at the total approximate cost of $____________.
PUBLIC NOTICE
Richard L & Donna Rudebusch have made an application, 2025jjrz002, to the
Brookings County Planning Commission for property to be re-zoned from Joint Jurisdiction
Agricultural District to Joint Jurisdiction Residence R-1A Single Family District. The
property is described as: “East 1 Acre of Rudebusch Addition Easterly 2 Acres of Lot 1 in
NE1/4 of Sec 4, T109N, R50W (Medary Township)”.
The request, 2025jjrz002, will be heard at a joint public hearing with the Brookings
County Planning & Zoning Commission and the City of Brookings Planning Commission
in the Brookings City & County Government Center, 310 Chambers, 520 3rd St, Brookings,
SD 57006 on Tuesday, June 3, 2025, at 8:00 PM. Any action taken by the City of
Brookings Planning Commission and Brookings County Planning & Zoning Commission
serves as a recommendation to the Brookings City Council and Brookings County
Commission.
Any person interested may attend and be heard at this time.
The application and other associated written materials are available for public
review at www.brookingscountysd.gov/agendacenter on Monday, May 26, 2025. Written
comments may be filed with the Zoning Officer at 520 3rd St, Ste 110, Brookings, SD 57006
or by emailing: countydevelopment@brookingscountysd.gov on or before noon on Friday,
May 30, 2025. No materials will be placed on the website address after 5 PM on Friday,
May 30, 2025.
Robert W. Hill
Brookings County
Development Director
Published 2x at the total approximate cost of _________.
Publication Info:
Email on May 15, 2025
To be published as follows:
Brookings Register on May 20 & 27, 2025
June 3, 2025
Meeting Minutes DRAFT
1
BROOKINGS COUNTY PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
MINUTES OF JUNE 3, 2025 JOINT COUNTY & CITY PLANNING MEETING
The Brookings County Planning & Zoning Commission and the City of Brookings
Planning Commission met in a joint session on Tuesday, June 3, 2025. Brookings
County Planning Commission members present: Chair Chad Ford, CC Kelly VanderWal,
Tim Paulson, Darrel Kleinjan, Kyle VanderWal, Mark Jorenby and Randy Jensen, and
alternate Justin DeGroot. Absent were Cody Clark, Neil Trooien, and alternate Dale
Storhaug.
City of Brookings Planning Commission members present: Chair Scott Leddy, Jacob
Limmer, Kyle Jamison, Roger Solum, Tanner Aiken, Emily Braun, Billie Jo Hinrichs and
Debra Spear. Absent was Nick Schmeichel.
Also present were County Development Director/Emergency Manager Robert Hill,
Deputy Director Richard Haugen, Senior Planner from First District Association of Local
Governments Luke Muller, Community Development Director Mike Struck and City
Planner Ryan Miller.
CALL TO ORDER
Chair Ford and Chair Leddy called the meeting to order at 8:01 PM
APPROVAL OF JOINT PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
(Kyle VanderWal/Kelly VanderWal) Motion by County Planning Commission to approve
the Feb 4, 2025, Joint Co City Planning Minutes. All present voted aye. MOTION
CARRIED.
(Solum/Jamison) Motion by the City Planning Commission to approve Feb 4, 2025, Joint
Co City Planning Minutes. All present voted aye. MOTION CARRIED.
ITEMS TO BE ADDED TO AGENDA BY COMMISSION MEMBERS OR STAFF.
None added.
INVITATION FOR CITIZENS TO SCHEDULE TIME ON AGENDA FOR ITEM NOT
LISTED. Time limited to 5 minutes per person to address the board.
No one scheduled time to address the board.
DISCLOSURE OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST
None.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
(Kleinjan/Paulson) Motion by the County Planning Commission to approve the agenda.
All present voted aye. MOTION CARRIED.
(Aiken/Solum) Motion by the City Planning Commission to approve the agenda.
All present voted aye. MOTION CARRIED.
June 3, 2025
Meeting Minutes DRAFT
2
CONVENE AS JOINT COUNTY & CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
2025JJRZ002
Richard L & Donna Rudebusch have made an application, 2025jjrz002, to the Brookings
County Planning Commission for property to be re-zoned from Joint Jurisdiction
Agricultural District to Joint Jurisdiction Residence R-1A Single Family District. The
property is described as: “East 1 Acre of Rudebusch Addition Easterly 2 Acres of Lot 1 in
NE1/4 of Sec 4, T109N, R50W (Medary Township)”.
(Kyle VanderWal/Kleinjan) Motion by County Planning Commission to approve the
rezoning request. All present vote aye. MOTION CARRIED.
(Hinrich/Spear) Motion by City Planning Commission to approve the rezoning request.
All present voted aye. MOTION CARRIED.
STAFF REPORT: County Planner, Richard Haugen reported: 1) Richard L & Donna
Rudebusch applied for the rezoning property in the Joint Jurisdictional Area from “Joint
Jurisdiction Agriculture” to “Joint Jurisdiction R1A-Single Family District”. 2) Property
located west of the intersection of W 20th Street S and W 167th Ave S. 3) Lot 1 had been
platted on October 24, 1989. The Easterly 2 acres of Lot 1 was deeded off on November
18, 1989, and had a mobile home located on it at that time which was a nonconforming
use. The mobile home had been removed, and the property became a non-buildable lot
for a residence in the Agricultural District, as it was a non-conforming use. 4) Property is
in the Floodplain and would need to follow the City of Brookings Floodplain Ordinance
for building in the floodplain, if the rezoning request was approved. 5) The current owner
has a purchase agreement for the “East 1 Acre of Rudebusch Addition Easterly 2 Acres
of Lot 1” provided the rezoning request is approved. 6) Brookings County Development
Office has reviewed the request and had no objections to the request, providing it meets
the requirements of the Brookings City Community Development Office. 7) The decision
made by the Joint Planning Commissions would be a recommendation to the Brookings
County Commission and the Brookings City Council for the final decision of the rezoning
request. Public notices were published in the Brookings Register on May 20 & 27, 2025.
Letters were sent to the Medary and Brookings Township Chairman and Clerk. The
applicant had notified the abutting landowners by certified mail of the proposed rezoning
request at least 14 days prior to the public hearing.
City Planner Ryan Miller reported: 1) Proposed rezone area was entirely in the
Floodplain. 2) The city of Brookings Comprehensive Plan discusses the floodplain and
the need to protect the areas within the floodplain from development that could have a
negative impact on the floodplain. The future land use map adopted with the 2040
Comprehensive plan identifies the area as Open/Floodplain, which does not support any
sort of rezone out of the current Ag District.3) The proposed area is surrounded by the
Ag District.
PUBLIC HEARING: Thomas Chandler, representative of Richard and Donna
Rudebusch, had nothing to add.
Proponents: None.
Opponents: None.
DISCUSSION: Board member had no questions or comments.
CITY VOTE: Limmer-nay, Jamison-aye, Spear-nay, Hinrichs-aye, Braun-aye, Solum-
nay, Aiken-nay, Leddy-nay. 3-aye, 5-nay. MOTION FAILED.
COUNTY VOTE: Kelly VanderWal-nay, Paulson-nay, Kleinjan-nay, Kyle VanderWal-nay,
Jorenby-nay, DeGroot-nay, Jensen-nay, Ford-nay. 0-aye, 8-nay. MOTION FAILED.
ADJOURN
(Kyle VanderWal/Paulson) Motion by Brookings County Planning Commission to
adjourn. All present voted aye. MOTION CARRIED.
(Aiken/Jamison) Motion by City of Brookings Planning Commission to adjourn. All
present voted aye. MOTION CARRIED.
County Chair Ford and City Chair Leddy adjourned the meeting at 8:13 PM.
________________________________
Rae Lynn Maher
Brookings County
Development Department
.
June 3, 2025
Meeting Minutes DRAFT
3
W 16TH AVE SLocation Map
BrookingsCityLimits
Parcels
Brookings County Roads
5/22/2025, 11:25:24 AM
0 0.1 0.20.05 mi
0 0.15 0.30.07 km
1:9,028
ArcGIS Web AppBuilder
JJ-A W 16TH AVE SZoning Map
BrookingsCityLimits
Parcels
Zoning
A
JJ-A
Brookings County Roads
5/22/2025, 12:55:29 PM
0 0.1 0.20.05 mi
0 0.15 0.30.07 km
1:9,028
ArcGIS Web AppBuilder
Open Space
Open SpaceW 16TH AVE SFuture Land Use Map
BrookingsCityLimits
Parcels
FLU_RDG
Open Space
Brookings County Roads
5/22/2025, 1:03:13 PM
0 0.1 0.20.05 mi
0 0.15 0.30.07 km
1:9,028
ArcGIS Web AppBuilder
Floodplain Map
Floodplain Prelim Update
AE,
5/22/2025, 5:14:19 PM
0 0.06 0.110.03 mi
0 0.09 0.170.04 km
1:4,514
ArcGIS Web AppBuilder
City of Brookings
Staff Report
Brookings City & County
Government Center, 520
Third Street
Brookings, SD 57006
(605) 692-6281 phone
(605) 692-6907 fax
File #:ORD 25-014,Version:1
Introduction and First Reading on Ordinance 25-014, an Ordinance Amendment the Zoning
Ordinance of the City of Brookings and Pertaining to the Expiration of a Conditional Use Permit for
the Purpose of Administration of the Zoning Ordinance. Public Hearing and Action: July 8, 2025.
Summary and Recommended Action:
The City of Brookings is proposing amendments to Chapter 94 Zoning pertaining to the expiration of
conditional use permits. The change would extend the expiration of a conditional use permit approval
from one to two years. Staff recommends approval. The Planning Commission voted 8-0 to
recommend approval.
Attachments:
Memo
Ordinance - clean
Ordinance - marked
Notice - City Council
Notice - Planning Commission
Planning Commission Minutes
City of Brookings Printed on 6/18/2025Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™
City Council Agenda Item Memo
From: Ryan Miller, City Planner
Council Meeting: June 24, 2025 / July 8, 2025
Subject: Ordinance 25-024: Amendments to Chapter 94 pertaining to
the expiration of conditional use permits.
Presenter: Mike Struck, Community Development Director
Summary and Recommended Action:
The City of Brookings is proposing amendments to Chapter 94 Zoning pertaining to the
expiration of a conditional use permit. The change would extend the expiration of a
conditional use permit approval from one to two years. Staff recommends approval. The
Planning Commission voted 8-0 to recommend approval.
Item Details:
Conditional Use Permits are defined in the Zoning ordinance as a use which, because
of its unique or varying characteristics, cannot be properly classified as a permitted
use in a particular district. After due consideration, as provided in zoning ordinance, of
the impact of such use upon neighboring land and of the p ublic need for the particular
use at a particular location, such conditional use may or may not be granted (see
"Conditional use permit").
The Conditional Use Permit is further described in Article V of Chapter 94 which
includes the review and approval pr ocess, permit application, expiration and
revocation etc., and standards for approval. Currently, a Conditional Use Permit
expires after one year from the date upon which it becomes effective if no significant
work has commenced. Staff is recommending to amend the expiration date from one
to two years.
A previously approved Conditional Use Permit for townhomes in a residential district
set off the proposal. In this particular case, a Conditional Use Permit was approved for
the townhomes, which required extensive infrastructure such as streets, water and
sewer prior to permitting the dwellings. The infrastructure work took over one year and
no building permit was sought for the residential dwellings, therefore the Conditional
Use Permit expired. This forced the developer to renew the Conditional Use Permit
when no substantial changes were made to the proposed project.
Legal Consideration:
None.
Strategic Plan Consideration:
Economic Growth – The City of Brookings will support effective diversified community
investment and equitable opportunities for prosperity.
Financial Consideration:
None.
Supporting Documentation:
Ordinance - clean
Ordinance - marked
Hearing Notice – City Council
Hearing Notice – Planning Commission
Planning Commission Minutes
1
ORDINANCE 25-014
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF
BROOKINGS AND PERTAINING TO THE EXPIRATION OF A CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT FOR THE PURPOSE OF ADMINISTRATION OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE
BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Brookings, State of South Dakota:
that Chapter 94, Zoning, shall be amended as follows:
SECTION 1.
Section 94-229. Expiration.
A conditional use permit shall expire two years from the date upon which it becomes
effective if no significant work has commenced.
SECTION 2.
Any and all ordinances in conflict herewith are hereby repealed.
FIRST READING: June 24, 2025
SECOND READING: July 8, 2025
PUBLISHED: July 11, 2025
CITY OF BROOKINGS, SD
Oepke G. Niemeyer, Mayor
ATTEST:
Bonnie Foster, City Clerk
1
ORDINANCE 25-014
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF
BROOKINGS AND PERTAINING TO THE EXPIRATION OF A CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT FOR THE PURPOSE OF ADMINISTRATION OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE
BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Brookings, State of South Dakota:
that Chapter 94, Zoning, shall be amended as follows:
SECTION 1.
Section 94-229. Expiration.
A conditional use permit shall expire one two years from the date upon which it
becomes effective if no significant work has commenced.
SECTION 2.
Any and all ordinances in conflict herewith are hereby repealed.
FIRST READING: June 24, 2025
SECOND READING: July 8, 2025
PUBLISHED: July 11, 2025
CITY OF BROOKINGS, SD
Oepke G. Niemeyer, Mayor
ATTEST:
Bonnie Foster, City Clerk
If you require assistance, alternative formats and/or accessible locations consistent with the Americans with Disabilities Act,
please contact the City ADA Coordinator at 692-6281 at least 48 hours prior to the meeting.
Published ______ time(s) at an approximate cost of $ _____________.
NOTICE OF HEARING
UPON A CHANGE IN ZONING REGULATIONS
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN That the City of Brookings has submitted amendments to
Chapter 94 pertaining to the expiration of a conditional use permit for the purpose of
administration of the Zoning Ordinance.
NOTICE IS FURTHER GIVEN That said request will be acted on by the City Council at
6:00 PM on Tuesday, July 8, 2025, in the Chambers Room on the third floor of the Brookings
City and County Government Center at 520 Third Street, Brookings, South Dakota.
Any person interested may appear and be heard on this matter.
Dated this 25th day of June, 2025.
Bonnie Foster
City Clerk
If you require assistance, alternative formats and/or accessible locations consistent with the Americans with Disabilities Act,
please contact the City ADA Coordinator at 692-6281 at least 48 hours prior to the meeting.
Published ______ time(s) at an approximate cost of $ _____________.
NOTICE OF HEARING
UPON A CHANGE IN ZONE REGULATIONS
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN That the City of Brookings has submitted amendments to
Chapter 94 pertaining to the expiration of a conditional use permit for the purpose of
administration of the Zoning Ordinance.
NOTICE IS FURTHER GIVEN That said request will be acted on by the Planning
Commission at 5:30 PM on Tuesday, June 3, 2025, in the Chambers Room on the third floor
of the Brookings City and County Government Center at 520 Third Street, Brookings, South
Dakota. Any action taken by the Planning Commission is a recommendation made to the City
Council.
Any person interested may appear and be heard on this matter.
Dated this 21st day of May, 2025.
Ryan Miller
City Planner
Planning Commission
Brookings, South Dakota
June 3, 2025
OFFICIAL MINUTES
Chairperson Scot Leddy called the meeting of the Planning Commission to order on Tuesday, June 3,
2025, at 5:30 PM in the Council Chambers Room #310 on the third floor of the City & County
Government Center. Members present were Tanner Aiken, Emily Braun, Billie Jo Hinrichs, Kyle
Jamison, Scot Leddy, Jacob Limmer, Roger Solum and Debra Spear. Nick Schmeichel was absent.
Also present were Community Development Director Michael Struck, City Planner Ryan Miller and
Associate Planner Bailey Maca. Also present were Kurt Gutormson, Susan Gannon, Richard Howey,
Matt Wagner, Kyle Rausch and Alicia Haich from the public.
Item #5c – The City of Brookings is proposing amendments to Chapter 94 Zoning pertaining to the
expiration of a conditional use permit for the purpose of administration of the Zoning Ordinance. Staff
recommends approval.
(Aiken/Jamison) Motion to approve the amendments to Chapter 94 Zoning Ordinance. All present
voted aye. MOTION CARRIED.
OFFICIAL SUMMARY
Item #5c – The City of Brookings is proposing amendments to Chapter 94 Zoning pertaining to the
expiration of a conditional use permit for the purpose of administration of the Zoning Ordinance.
Currently, a Conditional Use Permit expires after one year from the date upon which it becomes
effective if no significant work has commenced. Staff is recommending to amend the expiration date
from one to two years.
Limmer stated that another approach the problem would be to redefine “significant work.” Miller
stated that it is another option, however, the request as proposed is to change the expiration to 2 years.
Hinrichs was pleased that the city utilized a measure of time.
City of Brookings
Staff Report
Brookings City & County
Government Center, 520
Third Street
Brookings, SD 57006
(605) 692-6281 phone
(605) 692-6907 fax
File #:ORD 25-015,Version:1
Introduction and First Reading on Ordinance 25-015, an Ordinance Amending the Zoning Ordinance
Pertaining to Concrete, Asphalt, and Rock Crushing Facility for the Purposes of Administration of the
Zoning Ordinance. Public Hearing and Action: July 8, 2025.
Summary and Recommended Action:
The City of Brookings is proposing amendments to Chapter 94 Zoning for the purpose of regulating
the use of a concrete, asphalt and rock crushing facility. The use would be allowed as a conditional
use with proposed conditional use standards. Staff recommends approval. The Planning
Commission voted 8-0 to recommend approval with changes to the hours of operation.
Attachments:
Memo
Ordinance
Hearing Notice - City Council
Hearing Notice - Planning Commission
Planning Commission Minutes
City of Brookings Printed on 6/20/2025Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™
City Council Agenda Item Memo
From: Ryan Miller, City Planner
Council Meeting: June 24, 2025 / July 8, 2025
Subject: Ordinance 25-015: Amendments to Chapter 94 Zoning for
the addition of concrete, asphalt and rock crushing facility as
an allowable conditional use.
Presenter: Mike Struck, Community Development Director
Summary and Recommended Action:
The City of Brookings is proposing amendments to Chapter 94 Zoning for the purpose
of regulating the use of a concrete, asphalt and rock crushing facility. The use would be
allowed as a conditional use with proposed conditional use standards. Staff
recommends approval. The Planning Commission voted 8-0 to recommend approval
with changes to the hours of operation.
Item Details:
A concrete, asphalt or rock crushing facility is currently not defined as a use in the
zoning ordinance. Other similar uses such as mining or concrete plant are defined,
however the use of crushing specifically and individually is not defined. In order to fill
this gap, staff is proposing a new use: Concrete, Asphalt and Rock Crushing Facility.
The use would be defined as:
A use in which the principal activity is performed in an open area where concrete,
asphalt, rock, brick, cement or other similar paving or building materials are crushed,
ground, pulverized, bought, sold, exchanged, stored, mixed, packed, disassembled or
handled. A concrete, asphalt and rock crushing facility does not include:
(1) The use on a public roadway construction or repair project approved by the city
engineer of equipment which directly moves along the roadway surface and
grinds, or grinds, reconstitutes and resurfaces the roadway; or
(2) The temporary on-site crushing, grinding, or pulverizing of a razed building,
parking area or structural materials
The use would be permitted via Conditional Use Permit in the Agriculture District,
Industrial I-1 Light District and Industrial I-2 Heavy District with the following conditions
for approval:
(a) All concrete, asphalt and rock crushing facilities shall be located at least three
hundred (300) feet from any non-industrial or non-agriculture zoned district
boundary line.
(b) The crusher(s) and stockpiles of material shall be setback a minimum of one
hundred (100) feet from the property line and/or right-of-way line.
(c) Hours of operation shall be limited to 7 am to 6 pm Monday through Saturday
when abutting Agriculture or Industrial zoned properties and 8 am to 5 pm
Monday through Friday when abutting properties zoned other than Agriculture or
Industrial.
(d) The use shall be conducted, operated and maintained in accordance with any
necessary local, state and federal permits, copies of which shall be provided to
and maintained on file in the Community Development Department.
(e) The following shall be provided with an application for a conditional use permit:
(1) A site plan drawn to scale showing the location of buildings; areas of outdoor
processing and storage; fences, walls, landscaping and screening vegetation;
and the location of any stream, river, lake, wetland and major topographical
feature within three hundred (300) feet of the site.
(2) A dust management plan describing dust emission sources, their quantity and
composition, and indicating conformance with all applicable air quality
regulations.
(3) A drainage plan for stormwater management and runoff indicating
conformance with all applicable stormwater regulations.
(4) A traffic plan describing the number of truck/vehicle trips the proposal will
generate and the principal access routes to the facility including a description of
the facility’s traffic impact on the surrounding area.
After discussion at the June 3rd Planning Commission meeting, the hours of operation
were changed to set difference hours of operation if located adjacent to a non -
agriculture or industrial district.
Legal Consideration:
None.
Strategic Plan Consideration:
Economic Growth – The City of Brookings will support effective diversified community
investment and equitable opportunities for prosperity.
Financial Consideration:
None.
Supporting Documentation:
Ordinance
Hearing Notice – City Council
Hearing Notice – Planning Commission
Planning Commission Minutes
ORDINANCE 25-015
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF
BROOKINGS AND PERTAINING TO CONCRETE, ASPHALT AND ROCK
CRUSHING FACILITY FOR THE PURPOSES OF ADMINISTRATION OF THE
ZONING ORDINANCE
BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Brookings, State of South Dakota:
that Chapter 94, Zoning shall be amended as follows:
SECTION 1.
ARTICLE I. IN GENERAL
Section 94-1. – Definitions
Concrete, asphalt and rock crushing facility. A use in which the principal activity is
performed in an open area where concrete, asphalt, rock, brick, cement or other similar
paving or building materials are crushed, ground, pulverized, bought, sold, exchanged,
stored, mixed, packed, disassembled or handled. A concrete, asphalt and rock
crushing facility does not include:
(1) The use on a public roadway construction or repair project approved by the city
engineer of equipment which directly moves along the roadway surface and
grinds, or grinds, reconstitutes and resurfaces the roadway; or
(2) The temporary on-site crushing, grinding, or pulverizing of a razed building,
parking area or structural materials
ARTICLE IV. – DISTRICT REGULATIONS
DIVISION 1. – GENERALLY
Section 94-122. – Agricultural A district.
(e) Conditional uses.
(9) Concrete, asphalt and rock crushing facility.
Section 94-136. – Industrial I-1 Light District.
(e) Conditional uses.
(6) Concrete, asphalt and rock crushing facility.
Section 94 -137. – Industrial I-2 Heavy District.
(e) Conditional uses.
(20) Concrete, asphalt and rock crushing facility.
ARTICLE V. CONDITIONAL USE
DIVISION 3. STANDARDS
Section 94-264.7. – Concrete, asphalt and rock crushing facility.
(a) All concrete, asphalt and rock crushing facilities shall be located at least three
hundred (300) feet from any non-industrial or non-agriculture zoned district
boundary line.
(b) The crusher(s) and stockpiles of material shall be setback a minimum of one
hundred (100) feet from the property line and/or right-of-way line.
(c) Hours of operation shall be limited to 7 am to 6 pm Monday through Saturday
when abutting Agriculture or Industrial zoned properties and 8 am to 5 pm
Monday through Friday when abutting properties zoned other than Agriculture or
Industrial.
(d) The use shall be conducted, operated and maintained in accordance with any
necessary local, state and federal permits, copies of which shall be provided to
and maintained on file in the Community Development Department.
(e) The following shall be provided with an application for a conditional use permit:
1) A site plan drawn to scale showing the location of buildings; areas of outdoor
processing and storage; fences, walls, landscaping and screening vegetation;
and the location of any stream, river, lake, wetland and major topographical
feature within three hundred (300) feet of the site.
2) A dust management plan describing dust emission sources, their quantity and
composition, and indicating conformance with all applicable air quality
regulations.
3) A drainage plan for stormwater management and runoff indicating
conformance with all applicable stormwater regulations.
4) A traffic plan describing the number of truck/vehicle trips the proposal will
generate and the principal access routes to the facility including a desc ription
of the facility’s traffic impact on the surrounding area.
SECTION 2.
Any and all ordinances in conflict herewith are hereby repealed.
FIRST READING: June 24, 2025
SECOND READING: July 8, 2025
PUBLISHED: July 11, 2025
CITY OF BROOKINGS, SD
Oepke G. Niemeyer, Mayor
ATTEST:
Bonnie Foster, City Clerk
If you require assistance, alternative formats and/or accessible locations consistent with the Americans with Disabilities Act,
please contact the City ADA Coordinator at 692-6281 at least 48 hours prior to the meeting.
Published ______ time(s) at an approximate cost of $ _____________.
NOTICE OF HEARING
UPON A CHANGE IN ZONING REGULATIONS
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN That the City of Brookings has submitted amendments to
Chapter 94, Zoning for the addition of concrete, asphalt and rock crushing facility as an
allowable conditional use.
NOTICE IS FURTHER GIVEN That said request will be acted on by the City Council at
6:00 PM on Tuesday, July 8, 2025, in the Chambers Room on the third floor of the Brookings
City and County Government Center at 520 Third Street, Brookings, South Dakota.
Any person interested may appear and be heard in this matter.
Dated this 25th day of June, 2025.
Bonnie Foster
City Clerk
If you require assistance, alternative formats and/or accessible locations consistent with the Americans with Disabilities Act,
please contact the City ADA Coordinator at 692-6281 at least 48 hours prior to the meeting.
Published ______ time(s) at an approximate cost of $ _____________.
NOTICE OF HEARING
UPON A CHANGE IN ZONE REGULATIONS
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN That the City of Brookings has submitted amendments to
Chapter 94, Zoning for to the addition of concrete, asphalt and rock crushing facility as an
allowable conditional use.
NOTICE IS FURTHER GIVEN That said request will be acted on by the Planning
Commission at 5:30 PM on Tuesday, June 3, 2025, in the Chambers Room on the third floor
of the Brookings City and County Government Center at 520 Third Street, Brookings, South
Dakota. Any action taken by the Planning Commission is a recommendation to the City
Council.
Any person interested may appear and be heard in this matter.
Dated this 21st day of May, 2025.
Ryan Miller
City Planner
Planning Commission
Brookings, South Dakota
June 3, 2025
OFFICIAL MINUTES
Chairperson Scot Leddy called the meeting of the Planning Commission to order on Tuesday, June 3,
2025, at 5:30 PM in the Council Chambers Room #310 on the third floor of the City & County
Government Center. Members present were Tanner Aiken, Emily Braun, Billie Jo Hinrichs, Kyle
Jamison, Scot Leddy, Jacob Limmer, Roger Solum and Debra Spear. Nick Schmeichel was absent.
Also present were Community Development Director Michael Struck, City Planner Ryan Miller and
Associate Planner Bailey Maca. Also present were Kurt Gutormson, Susan Gannon, Richard Howey,
Matt Wagner, Kyle Rausch and Alicia Haich from the public.
Item #5d – The City of Brookings is proposing amendments to Chapter 94 Zoning for the purpose of
regulating the use of a concrete, asphalt and rock crushing facility. The use would be allowed as a
conditional use with proposed conditional use standards. Staff recommends approval.
(Limmer/Solum) Motion to approve the amendments to Chapter 94 Zoning Ordinance including
adding commercial to (c). All present voted aye. MOTION CARRIED.
OFFICIAL SUMMARY
Item #5d – The City of Brookings is proposing amendments to Chapter 94 Zoning for the purpose of
regulating the use of a concrete, asphalt and rock crushing facility. The use would be allowed as a
conditional use with proposed conditional use standards. A concrete, asphalt or rock crushing facility is
currently not defined as a use in the zoning ordinance. Other similar uses such as mining or concrete
plant are defined, however the use of crushing specifically and individually is not defined.
Struck requested amending Item (c) to “Hours of operation shall be limited to 7 am to 6 pm Monday
through Saturday when abutting Agricultural or Industrial Zoned Properties and 8 am to 5 pm Monday
through Friday when abutting properties other than Agricultural or Industrial.” Limmer made a motion
to approve the request including the amended Item (c) and Solum seconded the motion. Aiken asked
what previously happened with rock crushing. Struck stated that there was not previously an ordinance
which led to crushing being performed on vacant parcels causing problems on adjacent properties.
Struck expanded that it is a good re-use for these materials and needs to be accounted for in ordinance.
Hinrichs asked what determined the distances requested in the ordinance. Struck stated that these
distances were obtained from other municipalities ordinances as there is not a lot of communities with
this type of ordinance in place.
City of Brookings
Staff Report
Brookings City & County
Government Center, 520
Third Street
Brookings, SD 57006
(605) 692-6281 phone
(605) 692-6907 fax
File #:ORD 25-021,Version:1
Introduction and First Reading on Ordinance 25-021, an Ordinance authorizing Budget Amendment
No. 4 to the 2025 Budget. Second Reading and Action: July 8, 2025.
Summary and Recommended Action:
Staff recommends approval of an ordinance authorizing budget amendment in the amount of
$2,250,000 from Economic Development reserves in the General Fund to Ryan Companies. The
grant supports offsite infrastructure and detention pond improvements associated with the
Marketplace Development (TID #13), as outlined in the Development Agreement adopted November
12, 2024.
Attachments:
Memo
Ordinance
Development Agreement
City of Brookings Printed on 6/18/2025Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™
City Council Agenda Item Memo
From: Ashley Rentsch, Finance Director
Council Meeting: June 24, 2025
Subject: Ordinance 25-021: Amendment No. 4 to the 2025 Budget
Presenter: Ashley Rentsch, Finance Director
Summary and Recommended Action:
Staff recommends approval of an ordinance authorizing the previously agreed grant
which supports offsite infrastructure and detention pond improvements associated with
the Marketplace development (TID #13), as outlined in the Development Agreement
and adopted November 12, 2024. The infrastructure will support Aldi, Target, Kwik Star
and more. This ordinance also includes a budget amendment to reflect this
appropriation to Ryan Co., as the grant was not included in the original adopted budget.
Adequate reserves are available for these agreed upon terms.
Item Details:
The City of Brookings entered into a Development Agreement with Ryan Companies on
November 12, 2024, in connection with the Marketplace Development and creation of
Tax Increment District (TID) #13. In addition to TIF-supported improvements, the
agreement includes a commitment by the City to provide an Economic Development
Grant in the amount of $2,250,000 to support offsite infrastructure and detention pond
construction. Total construction investment from Ryan Co. and retailers is estimated at
$57 million, and economic output is estimated at $80.9 million.
Section 8 of the Development Agreement states: “The City will provide an additional
Economic Development Grant of $2,250,000 to the Developer for the Developer’s
construction of public improvements (Exhibit C – site plan improvements). Developer
will be authorized to draw down on these funds through the submission of payment
requests with appropriate supporting documentation, subject to the reasonable approval
of the City.”
These improvements are shown in Exhibit C of the agreement and include road
segments, stormwater facilities, and related infrastructure to support the Marketplace
site and adjacent development areas.
This resolution formally allocates the $2.25 million grant from General Fund Economic
Development reserves and amends the 2025 Budget accordingly, as the grant was not
included in the adopted appropriations.
Legal Consideration:
In compliance with SDCL 9-21-7, this budget amendment is necessary to authorize
supplemental appropriations funded through available reserves. The transfer and use
of funds reflect strategic alignment with legal, financial, and economic development
objectives.
Strategic Plan Consideration:
Fiscal Responsibility – The City of Brookings will responsibly manage resources
through transparency, efficiency, equity, and exceptional customer service.
Economic Growth – The City of Brookings will support effective diversified
community investment and equitable opportunities for prosperity.
Financial Consideration:
This ordinance increases the General Fund expenditure budget by $2,250,000. This
grant is fully supported by funds specifically committed to economic development.
Supporting Documentation:
Ordinance
Development Agreement
ORDINANCE 25-021
AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING BUDGET AMENDMENT NO. 4
TO THE 2025 BUDGET
BE IT ORDAINED by the City of Brookings, South Dakota:
WHEREAS, State Law (SDCL 9-21-7) and the City Charter (4.06 (a)) permit
supplemental appropriations provided there are sufficient funds and revenues available
to pay the appropriation when it comes due.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council that the City Manager be
authorized to make the following budget adjustments to the 2025 budget:
Fund Budgetary Account Account Description Budget Increase Amount
General Fund 101-495-5-466-01 Economic Incentive Grant $2,250,000
All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict herewith are hereby repealed.
FIRST READING: June 24, 2025
SECOND READING: July 8, 2025
PUBLISHED: July 11, 2025
CITY OF BROOKINGS, SD
_______________________________
Oepke G. Niemeyer, Mayor
ATTEST:
_______________________________
Bonnie Foster, City Clerk
1
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
THIS DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT is entered into as of this _____ day of ___________,
2024, (this “Agreement”) by and between the City of Brookings, a South Dakota Municipality (“City”),
and Ryan Companies US, Inc., a Minnesota Corporation (“Developer”);
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, City has an interest in promoting economic development through the development of
commercial property and is authorized pursuant to SDCL Chapter 11-9 (the “Act”) to create tax increment
districts for such purposes; and;
WHEREAS, in order to accelerate the development of certain property that would not otherwise
occur solely through private investment in the reasonably foreseeable future, the City Council on November
12, 2024, adopted Resolution #_____ a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit A pursuant to which the
City of Brookings created Tax Increment District Number 13 (the “TID” or “District”) with boundaries set
forth immediately below:
The real property to be located within the Tax Increment District consists of a tract of land
described as:
Lot 2, Block 1, Wiese Addition and abutting road rights-of-way, City of Brookings,
Brookings County, State of South Dakota
The West One Hundred Thirty-four Feet (W 134') of Lot 3, Block 1, Wiese Addition and
abutting road rights-of-way, City of Brookings, Brookings County, State of South
Dakota
Block 9, Wiese Addition and abutting road rights-of-way, City of Brookings, Brookings
County, State of South Dakota
32nd Avenue rights-of-way from 6th Street North Six Hundred Feet (N 600'); and
WHEREAS, the Tax Increment District (TID) Number 13 boundaries set forth above encompass
the following described real property which is the subject of Developer’s “Marketplace Development”,
and which is referred to in this Agreement as the “TID Property”:
A 17.55 acre parcel located within the following described property: Block Nine (9) of Wiese
Addition in the Southwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter (SW¼SE¼) of Section Nineteen (19),
Township One Hundred Ten (110) North, Range Forty-nine (49) West of the 5th P.M., City of
Brookings, County of Brookings, State of South Dakota.
The above-described 17.55 acre parcel is located within the boundaries of the City of Brookings, Brookings
County, South Dakota including within and adjacent rights-of-ways; and
WHEREAS, the Act authorizes the expenditure of funds derived within a tax increment district
for the payment of expenditures made or estimated to be made and monetary obligations incurred or
estimated to be incurred by the City establishing the TID, for grants, costs of public works or public
improvements in the TID, plus other costs incidental to those expenditures and obligations, consistent with
the project plan of the TID, which expenditures and monetary obligations constitute project costs, as defined
in Section 11-9-14 of the Act; and
WHEREAS, on November 12, 2024, the City Council adopted Resolution #_____ to also approve
the Tax Increment Project Plan, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit B providing for development
of the TID Property (the “Project Plan”), which included the payment of a grant in an amount not to exceed
Five Million Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($5,500,000) toward certain costs of development as
described in the Project Plan; and
WHEREAS, in addition to the implementation of the Project Plan for Tax Increment District 13,
this Agreement will also address in Sections 8 and 9 of this Agreement, the agreement of the parties as to
City-funded off-site improvements and Developer’s obligations concerning the construction of off-site
improvements and detention ponds serving Developer’s development.
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises, covenants, obligations,
apportionment and benefits contained in this Agreement, City and Developer hereby agree as follows:
Section 1. Definitions
Unless the context otherwise requires, the terms used in this Agreement will have the meanings set forth in
this Section. If not defined in this Agreement, capitalized terms will have the meaning given to them in the
Project Plan.
“Act” means SDCL Chapter 11-9, as may be amended from time to time.
“Base Revenues” means the taxes collected on the Base Value.
“Base Value” means the value of the TID Property at the time of the creation of the district as
certified by the South Dakota Secretary of Revenue.
“Construction Schedule” means the timetable for constructing the improvements specified in
Section 3.01b.
“Developer” means Ryan Companies US, Inc.
“Grant” means an amount not to exceed $5,500,000 in total, payable through the use of Tax
Increment Revenues.
“Project” means the construction of public improvements (water, sewer, street, drainage, utilities)
for the commercial development of the TID Property.
“Project Costs” means the approximate cost of construction costs associated with the Project.
“Project Plan” means the Project Plan attached as Exhibit B.
“Public Improvements” means those improvements to be made by Ryan Companies US, Inc. all
to the extent set forth in the Project Plan.
“Tax Increment Revenues” means all tax revenues of the TID Property in excess of the Base
Revenues.
“TID” will have the meaning specified in the recitals.
“TID Property” will have the meaning set forth in the recitals.
Words used herein in the singular, where the context so permits, also includes the plural and vice versa,
unless otherwise specified. Unless otherwise specified, the terms used in this Agreement found in the Act
shall have the meaning set forth in the Act.
Section 2. Obligation and Representations
2.01 Remittance of Tax Increment Revenues; City Expenses.
(a) City agrees to pay to Developer, pursuant to the terms of this Agreement, through a Grant, solely
funded by Tax Increment Revenues, a sum up to but not to exceed Five Million Five Hundred Thousand
Dollars ($5,500,000).
2.02 Grant. The parties acknowledge that Developer’s right to receive the Tax Increment Revenues
hereunder is a grant under the Act, and a personal property right vested with Developer on the date hereof.
2.03 No Certificated Tax Increment Revenue Bonds. City will have no obligations to the Developer
except as set forth in this Agreement and will not issue any certificated tax increment revenue bonds to
evidence such obligations.
2.04 Developer’s Representations. Developer represents to City as follows:
(a) Developer is a corporation organized in the State of Minnesota;
(b) Developer has the authority to enter into this Agreement and to perform the requirements of
this Agreement;
(c) Developer’s performance under this Agreement will not violate any applicable judgment,
order, law or regulation;
(d) Developer’s performance under this Agreement will not result in the creation of any claim
against City for money or performance, any lien, charge, encumbrance or security interest
upon any asset of City; and
(e) Developer will have sufficient capital to perform all of its obligations under this Agreement,
and Developer owns the TID Property.
(f) Developer waives its right to participate in the City or County’s Property Tax Reduction
Program (aka “Discretionary Formula”), if applicable, as described in the Project Plan and
Section 3.01 (a).
(g) Developer recognizes and accepts South Dakota Codified Law 13-13-10.10, which provides:
13-13-10.10. Industrial, economic development, and affordable housing purposes defined
for purposes of § 13-13-10.9. For the purposes of § 13-13-10.9, the terms, industrial, and
economic development, include only those areas where there is or will be one or more businesses
engaged in any activity defined as commercial or industrial by the governing body that has zoning
authority over the real property contained within the tax increment financing district.
2.05 Approvals. The City’s obligations pursuant to this Agreement are specifically conditioned upon
the resolution and ordinances implementing TID 13 becoming effective.
2.06 Payment of Tax Increment Revenues. The City and Developer agree Tax Increment Revenue
will be reimbursed to Developer in accordance with this Agreement to the extent revenue is available in the
Tax Increment District 13 Fund once the following have been completed:
(a) Developer shall have demonstrated in writing to the reasonable satisfaction of the City that
the public improvements described herein have been made consistent with the final, City
approved, Project Plan and this Agreement.
(b) Developer shall have submitted invoices showing the services / public improvements have
been made.
The City will make eligible payments due to Developer within a reasonable time, not to exceed 45 days
from the City’s receipt of real estate tax payments semi-annually.
2.07 Continued Cooperation. City and Developer represent each to the other that they will make
reasonable efforts to expedite the subject matters hereof and acknowledge that the successful performance
of this Agreement requires its continued cooperation.
2.08 No General Obligation of the City. City obligations hereunder are limited obligations payable
solely out of the Tax Increment Revenues and are not payable from any other revenues of the City, nor a
charge against its general taxing power. Developer shall bear all risks that such Tax Increment Revenues
may be insufficient to pay the maximum amounts specified in Section 2.01.
2.09 Assignment of Payments/Financing Costs. Developer hereby irrevocably partially assigns to the
anchor retailer, Developer’s rights to payments hereunder such that sixty-nine percent (69%) of all
payments owing by the City pursuant to Section 2.06 of this Agreement will be paid directly to the anchor
retailer, at the address that the anchor retailer provides the City, but the anchor retailers right to such
payments is subject to the other limitations of this Agreement. The Developer shall be eligible to receive
reimbursement from TID 13 for actual financing costs associated with financing the public improvements
set forth in this Agreement, subject to available Tax Increment Revenue. Accordingly, to the extent the total
cost of the public improvements does not exceed $5,500,000, the difference will be distributed to Developer
to reimburse Developer’s financing costs. Developer agrees to provide a copy of the financing terms and
amortization schedule as documentation of financing costs. Developer further agrees that if the financing
terms or conditions change, an updated copy of the financing terms and amortization schedule shall be
provided to the City. If Developer does not finance the Project, Developer may include interest on the
Project Costs at a commercially reasonable rate, subject to the terms of this section and the Total Tax
Increment Grant limit, inclusive of Project Costs and financing costs, in the total sum of $5,500,000. Upon
written notice to the City, Developer may assign its rights to the portion of payments hereunder not assigned
to the anchor retailer in this Section 2.09, in whole or in part (including but not limited to for the purposes
of financing its obligations related to this Agreement), but any assignee’s right to such payments is subject
to the other limitations of this Agreement. Any such assignment pursuant to the preceding sentence shall
be made in accordance with an Assignment Agreement, the form of which will be attached hereto by written
amendment of this Agreement and marked as Exhibit D and is incorporated herein by this reference.
Section 3. The Project.
3.01 The Project. The Project will be comprised of real estate, and the design, construction, assembly,
and installation of the improvements described in the Project Plan.
(a) Description of the Project. The Project includes $5,500,000 of public improvements to the
TID Property.
(b) Completion of the Project Improvements: Developer shall diligently work to complete the
public improvements of the Project by October 31, 2026.
The time periods set forth above in this Section 3.01(b) shall be extended by reason of delays caused by
Force Majeure. As used herein, “Force Majeure” shall refer to delays caused by or occasioned by labor
disputes, acts of God, moratoriums, war, riots, insurrections, civil commotion, a general inability to obtain
or delay in obtaining labor or materials, fire, unusual delay in transportation, severe and adverse weather
conditions preventing performance of work, unavoidable casualties, failures to act by any governmental
entity or their respective agents or employees, governmental restrictions, regulations or controls including
the delays or inability to obtain the necessary governmental approvals, inspections, and/or permits
necessary to complete any portion of the Project, or any similar cause beyond Developer’s reasonable
control.
3.02 Construction of the Public Infrastructure Improvements. Upon review and approval by the
City and local municipal utilities of the Developer’s final construction plans and specifications for the
public improvements as detailed in the Project Plan, Developer shall act as the general contractor.
Developer agrees to obtain competitive subcontractor quotes for the Public Improvements. Developer shall
be responsible for soliciting quotes from multiple subcontractors, and providing tabulations to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer for review and approval prior to awarding such quote or quotes to the
lowest responsible bidders. The Developer shall provide to the City Engineer copies of all advertising
notices, plan holders lists, and any direct marketing efforts such as mailings, email, telephone solicitations
as proof of obtaining competitive subcontractor quotes for the public improvements.
City may undertake any legal or equitable action available to enforce the provisions of this
Agreement in addition to any other remedy provided herein. In the event the City is required to undertake
any action to enforce the terms of this Agreement and prevails in such action, the Developer, its heirs,
assigns or successors in interest agree the City may recover its reasonable expenses, including reasonable
attorney’s fees incurred with respect to such action.
The Developer will cause Public Improvements to be constructed by the Developer through private
contract. The City will not bid nor contract any improvement described in this Agreement. The Developer
will make sure all Public Improvements are to the City of Brookings standards and specifications and are
constructed in a manner which is satisfactory with City’s Engineer. In addition, Public Improvements shall
be constructed in a manner consistent with City of Brookings’ Schedule of TID Construction and
Maintenance Standards, set forth as Exhibit E. The improvements to be constructed shall include the Work
and Materials as provided in the Opinion of Probable Costs as provided in the Project Plan.
3.03 Use of Local Contractors. Developer agrees to solicit, encourage, and utilize all reasonable and
prudent means to employ or contract with local contractors, vendors, and service providers for these
purposes.
3.04 Financing of the Project and Improvements. Payment of all Project Costs will be made from
Developer’s own capital and from other sources obtained solely by Developer. Developer may use any or
part of the Developer’s Property as collateral for such loans as required to pay Project Costs.
Section 4. Developer Covenants
4.01 Duties and Obligations of Developer. Developer hereby agrees to: (a) complete, or cause to be
completed, all improvements described in the Project Plan and this Agreement by October 31, 2026, (b)
provide, or cause to be provided, all materials, labor, and services for completing the Project, (c) obtain or
cause to be obtained, all necessary permits and approvals from City and/or all other governmental agencies
having jurisdiction over the construction of improvements to the TID Property, (d) provide the City all
necessary information, including documentation of actual expenses incurred for reimbursable Project Costs,
and (e) submit written annual reports, starting no later than thirty (30) days following the end of the fiscal
year in which the TID was created detailing the amount of Tax Increment Revenues assigned or requested.
4.02 Insurance. Developer will maintain a policy of liability insurance, acceptable to City, with liability
limits of at least One Million Dollars ($1,000,000) combined single limit per occurrence and Two Million
Dollars ($2,000,000) aggregate that names City as an additional insured. Such a policy must remain in
effect until the City of Brookings accepts the Public Improvements. City will provide no insurance for the
Project.
4.03 Indemnification. Developer will without a determination of liability or payment being made
FULLY INDEMNIFY, DEFEND, and HOLD HARMLESS, City (and the elected officials, employees,
officers, directors, and representatives of City) and Brookings Municipal Utilities from and against any
and all costs, claims, liens, damages, losses, expenses, fees, fines, penalties, proceedings, actions, demands,
causes of action, liability and suits of any kind and nature, including but not limited to, personal injury or
death and property damage, made upon City directly or indirectly arising out of, resulting from or related
to Developer’s negligence, willful misconduct or criminal conduct in Developer’s activities under this
Agreement, including any such acts or omissions of Developer or any agent, officer, director,
representative, employee, or consultant of Developer, and their respective officers, agents, employees,
directors and representatives while in the exercise or performance of the rights or duties under this
Agreement, all without, however, waiving any governmental immunity available to City under South
Dakota law and without waiving any defenses of the parties under South Dakota law. The provisions of this
INDEMNIFICATION are solely for the benefit of the parties hereto and not intended to create or grant any
rights, contractual or otherwise, to any other person or entity. Developer will promptly advise City in
writing of any claim or demand against City related to or arising out of Developer’s activities under this
Agreement and will see to the investigation and defense of such claim or demand at Developer’s cost to the
extent required in this paragraph. City will have the right, at its option and expense, to participate in such
defense with attorneys of its choice, without relieving Developer of any of its obligations under this
paragraph.
4.04 Liability. Developer will be solely responsible for compensation and taxes payable to any
employee or contractor of Developer, and none of Developer’s employees or contractors will be deemed to
be employees or contractors of City. No elected official, director, officer, employee, representative or agent
of City shall be personally responsible for any liability arising out of or resulting from this Agreement.
4.05 Taxes & Licenses. Developer will pay, on or before their respective due dates, to the appropriate
collecting authority all Federal, State, and local taxes and fees that are now or may hereafter be levied upon
the TID Property or upon Developer or upon the business conducted on the TID Property, or upon any of
Developer’s property used in connection therewith, including employment taxes; and Developer shall
maintain in current status all Federal, State, and local licenses and permits required for the operation of the
business conducted by Developer.
4.06 Examination of Records. Developer will allow City to conduct examinations and copying, during
regular business hours and following notice to Developer by City, the books and records related to this
Agreement no matter where books and records are located.
Section 5. Term and Termination
5.01 Term. The term of this Agreement shall commence on the date the resolution or ordinance
approving this Agreement becomes effective and end on the date which is the earliest to occur of the
following, at which time City’s obligations hereunder will be deemed fully discharged:
(i) the date on which the amount payable under Section 2.01 has been paid in full to Developer;
or
(ii) the date this Agreement is terminated as provided in Section 5.02; or
(iii) the 20th anniversary of the year of the creation of the TID.
5.02 Default and Termination. If Developer fails to commence and complete construction
substantially in accordance with the construction schedule detailed in Section 3.01(b) above, City may
terminate this Agreement if Developer does not fully cure its failure within sixty (60) calendar days after
receiving written notice from City requesting the failure be cured. If the Agreement is terminated as set
forth in this Section, City’s obligations under this Agreement will be deemed fully discharged.
Section 6. Miscellaneous
6.01 Non-Waiver. Provisions of this Agreement may be waived only in writing. No course of dealing
on the part of City, or Developer nor any failure or delay by City or Developer in exercising any right,
power, or privilege under this Agreement shall operate as a waiver of any right, power or privilege owing
under this Agreement.
6.02 Entire Agreement. This Agreement embodies the final and entire agreement between the parties
hereto concerning the subject matter herein. The Exhibits attached to this Agreement are incorporated
herein and shall be considered a part of this Agreement for the purposes stated herein, except that if there
is a conflict between any such Exhibit and a provision of this Agreement, the provision of this Agreement
will control.
6.03 Amendments. All amendments to this Agreement and the Project Plan may only be made in a
writing executed by City and Developer, after obtaining all necessary approvals.
6.04 Severability. If any clause or provision of this Agreement is held invalid or unenforceable, such
holding will not invalidate or render unenforceable any other provision hereof.
6.05 Venue and Governing Law. This Agreement shall be construed under and in accordance with the
laws of the state of South Dakota. Any legal action or proceeding brought or maintained, directly or
indirectly, as a result of this Agreement shall be heard and determined in Brookings County, South Dakota.
6.06 Notice. Any notice sent under this Agreement shall be written and mailed with sufficient postage,
sent by certified mail, return receipt requested, documented facsimile or delivered personally to an officer
of the receiving party at the following addresses:
City
City of Brookings
C/O: TID 13
520 – 3rd St., Ste. 230
Brookings, SD 57006
Developer
Ryan Companies US, Inc.
533 S. 3rd St., Ste. 100
Minneapolis, MN 55415
Attention: Patrick Daly
Any of the above parties may, by notice given hereunder, designate any further or different addresses to
which subsequent notices, certificates, or other communications may be sent.
6.08 Captions. Captions used herein are only for the convenience of reference and shall not be
construed to have any effect or meaning as to the agreement between the parties hereto.
Section 7. Other Provisions.
7.01 No Recording; No Running with the Land. Neither this Agreement nor any memorandum or
notice hereof shall be recorded. The respective rights of the City and Developer under this Agreement shall
be personal to each of them, and shall not run with the land. No person undertakes any obligations of
Developer under this Agreement (or acquires any rights of Developer under this Agreement, including but
not limited to Developer’s right to receive the payments under Section 2.06) by acquiring any portion of
the TID Property or otherwise, unless such rights or obligations are assigned to and/or assumed by such
person in writing in accordance with the terms of this Agreement.
7.02 No Limitations on Conveyance. Nothing in this Agreement limits the ability of Developer to the
transfer all or any portion of the TID Property and such transferee may thereafter transfer or convey interests
in such land in transferee’s sole and absolute discretion.
7.03 Default by Developer. No failure by Developer to comply with this Agreement, including
Developer’s Covenants under Section 4 above, will limit any other person’s ability to construct, complete,
open for business and operate on any portion of the TID Property.
Section 8. City Obligations concerning the funding of off-site improvements and detention ponds.
The City understands and agrees to the following:
The City will provide an additional economic development grant of
$2,250,000 to the Developer for the Developer’s construction of public
improvements (Exhibit C – site plan improvements). Developer will be
authorized to draw down on these funds through the submission of payment
requests with appropriate supporting documentation, subject to the reasonable
approval of the City. The City, or their appropriate representatives, shall be
responsible for reasonable approval of final design of these public
improvements, which approval shall be a condition to the performance of all
of Developer’s obligations under this Agreement.
Section 9. Developer’s Obligations concerning the construction of off-site improvements, and
Detention Ponds and on-going maintenance costs. The Developer understands and agrees to the
following obligations:
(i) The Developer will construct all off-site improvements as shown and described on
Exhibit C.
(ii) The Developer will provide the City as-built plans for the constructed detention ponds.
(iii) The Developer will provide the City with an Operations and Maintenance manual for
each constructed detention pond. The Operations and Maintenance manual shall be
stamped by a registered Engineer in the State of South Dakota and shall comply with
the requirements of the City’s MS4 permit storm water permit.
(iv) The Developer agrees to include in its common area maintenance fees an annual or
monthly fee for the on-going maintenance of the constructed detention ponds.
Section 10. Clawback in the event of lack of Development by Developer. In the event Developer does
not commence the Developer’s improvements described in Sections 8 and 9 within three (3) years of the
date Developer acquires the Property, upon request by the City of Brookings, Developer will promptly re-
convey all of Developer’s property, except any property conveyed to the anchor retailer, free from liens
and encumbrances to the City of Brookings for consideration not to exceed the original purchase price of
$1.40 per square foot, together with reimbursement for the cost of improvements described in Sections 8
and 9 which Developer has made. This Section does not pertain to any lands or improvements conveyed
to or constructed by anchor retailer, since this Section pertains solely to the Developer’s improvements as
set forth in Sections 8 and 9, and as described in Exhibit “C” – Site Plan Improvements.
IN WITNESS THEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this instrument to be duly executed as of the day
and year first written above.
City of Brookings
ATTEST: Oepke G. Niemeyer, Mayor
Bonnie Foster, City Clerk
Ryan Companies US, Inc.
_________________________________
By: ______________________________
Its: ______________________________
EXHIBIT A
Resolution Creating Tax Increment District 13
Resolution No. 24-102
RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR THE CREATION OF TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT
NUMBER THIRTEEN, CITY OF BROOKINGS
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has recommended the District Boundaries for Tax
Increment Financing District Number Thirteen, City of Brookings, and has recommended its creation;
and
WHEREAS, the City of Brookings has the powers, pursuant to SDCL 11-9-2, to create Tax
Increment Financing District Number Thirteen, City of Brookings, and to define its boundaries.
NOW THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED:
1. Authority and Declaration of Necessity. The City of Brookings declares the necessity for the
creation of Tax Increment Financing District Number Thirteen, City of Brookings (hereinafter
sometimes referred to as the “District”), pursuant to SDCL Chapter 11-9. Further, the City finds
that the improvement of the area within the District is likely to enhance significantly the value
of substantially all of the other real property in the District and is necessary for economic
development within the city.
2. Findings of Economic Welfare. The City Council makes the following findings with regard
to economic welfare:
a. More than 50% of the property in the District will stimulate and develop the general
economic welfare and prosperity of the state through the promotion and advancement of
industrial, commercial, manufacturing, agricultural, or natural resources development;
b. Improvements to the District will significantly and substantially enhance the value of all
property within the District;
c. The aggregate assessed value of the District plus the tax incremental base of all other
existing Districts in the city does not exceed Ten (10%) percent of the total assessed
valuation in the City.
3. Findings of Maximum Percentage of Tax Increment Financing Districts. The aggregate
assessed value of the taxable property in the District, plus all other tax incremental districts, does
not exceed Ten (10%) percent of the total assessed valuation of the City of Brookings.
4. Creation of District. There is hereby created, pursuant to SDCL Chapter 11-9, Tax Increment
Financing District Number Thirteen, City of Brookings. The District is hereby created on the
day this Resolution becomes effective, which shall be twenty days after publication of this
Resolution.
5. Designation of District boundaries. The District shall be located with the boundaries of the
following described real property:
Lot 2, Block 1, Wiese Addition and abutting road rights-of-way, City of Brookings, Brookings
County, State of South Dakota
West 134’ of Lot 3, Block 1, Wiese Addition and abutting road rights-of-way, City of Brookings,
Brookings County, State of South Dakota
Block 9, Wiese Addition and abutting road rights-of-way, City of Brookings, Brookings County,
State of South Dakota
32nd Avenue rights-of-way from 6th Street north six hundred (600’) feet
6. Creation of Tax Incremental Fund. There is hereby created, pursuant to SDCL 11-9-31, a
City of Brookings Tax Increment Financing District Number Thirteen Fund, which shall be a
segregated asset account. All tax increments collected pursuant to Tax Incremental District
Number Thirteen shall be deposited into the Tax Increment Financing District Number Thirteen
Fund. All funds in the Tax Increment Financing District Number Thirteen Fund shall be used
solely for those purposes expressly stated and reasonably inferred in SDCL Chapter 11-9.
Passed and approved this 12th day of November 2024.
CITY OF BROOKINGS
____________________________________
ATTEST: Oepke G. Niemeyer, Mayor
Bonnie Foster, City Clerk
EXHIBIT B
Project Plan for Tax Increment District 13
The Project Plan and Map of TIF District 13 follows this page.
TAX INCREMENTAL DISTRICT
NUMBER THIRTEEN
CITY OF BROOKINGS
TAX INCREMENTAL
PROJECT PLAN
Table of Contents
INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE .................................................................................................................................... 3
GENERAL DEFINITIONS AS USED IN THIS PLAN ...................................................................................................... 3
PROPERTY WITHIN THE TAX INCREMENT DISTRICT .............................................................................................. 6
LISTING OF KIND, NUMBER, LOCATION AND DETAILED COSTS OF PROPOSED PUBLIC WORK AND
IMPROVEMENTS ... ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 7
EXPENDITURES EXCEEDING ESTIMATED COST ...................................................................................................... 9
DETAILED LIST OF ESTIMATED PROJECT COSTS ..................................................................................................... 9
FEASIBILITY STUDY ........................................................................................................................................................ 9
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STUDY ............................................................................................................................. 9
FISCAL IMPACT STATEMENT ........................................................................................................................................ 9
METHOD OF FINANCING, TIMING OF COSTS AND MONETARY OBLIGATIONS ................................................ 9
MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF TAX INCREMENTAL REVENUE ....................................................................................... 9
DURATION OF TAX INCREMENTAL PLAN.................................................................................................................. 9
ESTIMATED IMPACT OF TAX INCREMENT FINANCING ON REVENUES OF TAXING JURISDICTIONS ......... 10
CONDITIONS MAP, IMPROVEMENTS MAP, ZONING CHANGE MAP ..................................................................... 10
CHANGES TO THE CITY OF BROOKINGS MASTER PLAN, MAP, BUILDINGS CODES AND CITY ORDINANCES.
.............................................................................................................................................................................................. 10
LIST OF ESTIMATED NON‐PROJECT COSTS ............................................................................................................... 10
STATEMENT OF DISPLACEMENT AND RELOCATION PLAN .................................................................................. 10
PERFORMANCE BOND SURETY BOND OR OTHER GUARANTY ............................................................................ 10
LIST OF SCHEDULES ................................................................................................................................................. 11
ATTACHMENTS .......................................................................................................................................................... 11
SCHEDULE 1 ‐ "DETAIL OF PROJECT COSTS"… ......................................................................................................... 12
SCHEDULE 2 – "ECONOMIC FEASIBILITY STUDY" ................................................................................................... 14
SCHEDULE 3 ‐ “ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STUDY” .............................................................................................. 16
SCHEDULE 4 – “FISCAL IMPACT STATEMENT” ......................................................................................................... 18
SCHEDULE 5 – “ESTIMATED CAPTURED TAXABLE VALUES” ............................................................................... 20
ATTACHMENT 1 ................................................................................................................................................................ 21
ATTACHMENT 2 ................................................................................................................................................................ 22
ATTACHMENT 3 ................................................................................................................................................................ 23
3
INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE
The purpose of this Plan, to be implemented by the City of Brookings, Brookings County, South Dakota, is to
satisfy the requirements for a Tax Incremental District Plan Number 13, City of Brookings, Brookings County
as specified in SDCL Chapter 11‐9. There are 11 mandated requirements of the Plan, each to be addressed in
this Plan. The principal purpose of the Plan is to define eligible property and to define a Tax Increment Plan
for funding eligible activities in an eligible area of the City.
This Plan was prepared for adoption by the Planning Commission and the City Council in recognition that the
area requires a coordinated, cooperative strategy, with financing possibilities, to promote economic
development through the new construction of a commercial retail box store and supplemental commercial
outlots for retail and office uses to attract new business or facilitate the relocation and expansion of existing
business (the “Project”). This development will promote economic development through the Project area and
the City of Brookings. The Project shall consist of one (1) Phase. It is anticipated that over 200,000 square feet
of retail and office space, associated parking, and other public improvements will be built in the Project. The
intent of the Project is to create new economic development within the community.
The driving interest in the establishment of this Plan is to offer tax increment financing as a tool to stimulate
and leverage private sector development to provide and to promote economic development throughout the TIF
District and the City of Brookings.
Development and redevelopment in the area is anticipated to occur in the near future through public and private
partnerships, with the potential for tax increment financing to provide the impetus and means to undertake this
redevelopment at a faster pace than might occur otherwise.
GENERAL DEFINITIONS AS USED IN THIS PLAN
The following terms found in this Plan have the following meanings:
“Base” or “Tax Incremental Base” means the aggregate assessed value of all taxable property located within
a Tax Incremental District on the date the district is created, as determined by SDCL § 11‐9‐20.
"Blighted" means property that meets any of the following criteria:
Any area, including slum area, in which the structures, buildings, or improvements, by reason of:
(1) dilapidation, age, or obsolescence;
(2) inadequate provisions for ventilation, light, air, sanitation, or open spaces;
(3) high density of population and overcrowding;
(4) the existence of conditions which endanger life or property by fire and other causes; or
(5) any combination of such factors; are conducive to ill health, transmission of disease, infant
mortality, juvenile delinquency, or crime, and which is detrimental to the public health,
safety, morals, or welfare, is a blighted area1; or
Any area which by reason of:
4
(1) the presence of a substantial number of substandard, slum, deteriorated, or
deteriorating structures;
(2) predominance of defective or inadequate street layouts;
(3) faulty lot layout in relation to size, adequacy, accessibility, or usefulness;
(4) unsanitary or unsafe conditions;
(5) deterioration of site or other improvements;
(6) diversity of ownership, tax, or special assessment delinquency exceeding the fair value
of the land;
(7) defective or unusual conditions of title;
(8) the existence of conditions which endanger life or property by fire and other causes; or
(9) any combination of such factors;
substantially impairs or arrests the sound growth of a municipality, retards the provision of
housing accommodations, or constitutes an economic or social liability and is a menace to the
public health, safety, morals, or welfare in its present condition and use, is a blighted area 2;
or
Any area which is predominantly open and which because of obsolete platting, diversity of ownership,
deterioration of structures or of site improvements, or otherwise, substantially impairs or arrests the
sound growth of a municipality, is a blighted area.3
1 SDCL § 11‐9‐9
2 SDCL § 11‐9‐10
3 SDCL § 11‐9‐11
5
“City Councils” means the Brookings City Council.
"City of Brookings” means Brookings, South Dakota.
"Department of Revenue" means the South Dakota Department of Revenue.
“District” means the Tax Incremental District.
"Economic Development" means all powers expressly granted and reasonably inferred pursuant to SDCL §9‐
54.
"Fiscal year" means that fiscal year of City of Brookings.
"Generally Applicable Taxes" shall have the same meaning as set forth in 26 CFR § 1.141‐4(e).
"Governing body" means City of Brookings City Council.
"Grant" means the transfer for a governmental purpose of money or property to a transferee that is not a
related party to or an agent of the municipality;
"Infrastructure Improvements" means a street, road, sidewalk, parking facility, pedestrian mall, alley,
bridge, sewer, sewage treatment plant, property designed to reduce, eliminate, or prevent the spread of
identified soil or groundwater contamination, drainage system, waterway, waterline, water storage facility,
rail line, utility line or pipeline, or other similar or related structure or improvement, together with necessary
easements for the structure or improvement, for the benefit of or for the protection of the health, welfare, or
safety of the public generally.
"Municipality" means any incorporated city or county in this state.
"Planning Commission" means City of Brookings Planning Commission.
“Plan” means this Project Plan.
“Project Costs” means any expenditure or monetary obligations by Developer, whether made, estimated to
be made, incurred or estimated to be incurred, which are listed as Project Costs herein will include any costs
incidental thereto but diminished by any income, special assessments, or other revenues, other than tax
increments, received, or reasonably expected to be received, by Developer in connection with the
implementation of this Plan.
“Project Plan” means properly approved Plan for the development or redevelopment of a tax incremental
district including all properly approved amendments thereto as recommended pursuant to SDCL § 11‐9‐13.
"Public Works" means the Infrastructure Improvements, the acquisition by purchase or condemnation of real
and personal property within the Tax Incremental District and the sale, lease, or other disposition of such
property to private individuals, partnerships, corporations, or other entities at a price less than the cost of such
acquisition which benefit or further the health, safety, welfare and economic development of the Town and
Project Costs.
"Taxable Property" means all real taxable property located in a Tax Incremental District.
6
"Tax Incremental District" means a contiguous geographic area within the City defined and created by
resolution of the governing body and named City of Brookings Tax Incremental District #13.
"Tax Increment Valuation" is the total value of the Tax Incremental District minus the tax incremental
base pursuant to § 11‐9‐19.
“Tax Increment Law” means South Dakota Codified Laws Chapter 11‐9.
PROPERTY WITHIN THE TAX INCREMENT DISTRICT
The real property to be located within the Tax Increment District consists of a tract of land described as:
Lot 2, Block 1, Wiese Addition and abutting road rights-of-way, City of Brookings, Brookings
County, State of South Dakota
West 134’ of Lot 3, Block 1, Wiese Addition and abutting road rights-of-way, City of Brookings,
Brookings County, State of South Dakota
Block 9, Wiese Addition and abutting road rights-of-way, City of Brookings, Brookings County,
State of South Dakota
32nd Avenue rights-of-way from 6th Street north six hundred (600’) feet
The area making up Tax Increment District #13 is shown on the Boundary Map in Figure 1.
Figure 1. TID 13 Boundary
7
LISTING OF KIND, NUMBER, LOCATION AND DETAILED COSTS OF
PROPOSED PUBLIC WORKS AND IMPROVEMENTS4
In order to implement the provisions of SDCL Chapter 11‐9, the following are Project Costs and
expenditures made or estimated to be made and the monetary obligations incurred or estimated to be
incurred by the Developer. The Project Costs may, by South Dakota law, include capital costs, financing
costs, real property assembly costs, professional fee costs, imputed administration costs, relocation costs,
organizational costs, discretionary costs and grants, plus any costs incidental thereto, diminished by any
income, special assessments, or other revenues, other than tax increments, received, or reasonably expected
to be received, by the City.
The City and Developer are working to develop an economic and competitive base to benefit the City and
the State as a whole. All project costs are found to be necessary and convenient to the creation of the Tax
Incremental District and its implementation. The project is a commercial development consisting of a retail
and office uses and is a proper public purpose of the City. The City exercises the powers expressly stated in
and reasonably inferred by SDCL §11‐9‐15 and Chapter 9‐54. The Developer or its assignee shall enter into
all contracts in accordance with South Dakota law.
A combination of private investment and tax increment financing will assist progress toward the
following additional objectives:
To address and remedy conditions in the area that impair or arrest the sound growth of the City;
To implement the Comprehensive Plan and its related element;
To redevelop and rehabilitate the area in a manner which is compatible with and complementary to
unique circumstances in the area;
To effectively utilize undeveloped and underdeveloped land;
To improve pedestrian, bicycle, vehicular, and transit‐related circulation and safety;
To ultimately contribute to increased revenues for all taxing entities;
To encourage the voluntary construction of businesses, improvements, and conditions;
To watch for market and/or project opportunities to promote economic development, and when such
opportunities exist, to take action within the financial, legal and political limits of the City to acquire
land, pursue redevelopment, improvement and construction projects; and
To improve areas that are likely to significantly enhance the value of substantially all property in the
district.
4 SDCL §11‐9‐13(1)
Costs of Public Works or Improvements
In accordance with SDCL § 11‐9‐14 the following is the kind, number, location and dollar amount of
estimated Project Costs, costs of public works and improvements.
8
The following are listed as estimated costs of the Project.
Kind of Project Location
1
Amount Reference2
Capital Costs (Street, Water & Sewer)
(Cleaning & grading of land
& associated costs)
District 11-9-15(1)
Financing Costs District 11-9-15(2)
Real Property Assembly District 11-9-15(3)
Professional Fees District 11-9-15(4)
Administrative Costs District 11-9-15(5)
Relocation Costs District 11-9-15(6)
Organizational Costs District 11-9-15(7)
Discretionary Costs and Grants District $9,380,891* 11-9-15(8)
Eligible Project Costs $9,380,891
*Eligible Project Costs may be reallocated during the five years from creation of the TIF.
The above are estimates of the costs involved in the project; the final total may be greater or lesser. An itemized
listing of the estimated costs is set forth in Schedule #1. The cost estimates are only projected expenditures,
thus the total authorized TID costs is expected to be $9,380,891. This amount is the controlling value with
respect to authorized TID Project Costs rather than the particular line item amounts contained in the above Chart
and Schedule #1. The line item categories proposed are for guidance only, and actual costs will be determined
upon completion of the improvements. The above total represents eligible Project Costs. Only such amounts as
are feasible will be allowed by the City or by monetary obligation.
1 District shall mean the Tax Increment District.
2 SDCL §11 -9-15
(1) ) Capital costs, including the actual costs of the construction of public works or improvements, buildings, structures, and p ermanent fixtures;
the demolition, alteration, remodeling, repair, or reconstruction of existing buildings, structures, and permanent fixture s; the acquisition of
equipment; the clearing and grading of land; and the amount of interest payable on tax incremental bonds or notes issued pursuant to this
chapter until such time as positive tax increments to be received from the district, as estimated by the Project Plan, are sufficient to pay the
principal of and interest on the tax incremental bonds or notes when due;
(2) Financing costs, including all interest paid to holders of evidences of indebtedness issued to pay for Project Costs, any premium paid over the
principal amount thereof because of the redemption of such obligations prior to maturity and a reserve for the payment of principal of and interest
on such obligations in an amount determined by the governing body to be reasonably required for the marketability of such obligations;
(3) Real property assembly costs, including the actual cost of the acquisition by a municipality of real or personal property wit hin a tax
incremental district less any proceeds to be received by the municipality from the sale, lease, or other disposition of such property pursuant
to a Project Plan;
(4) Professional service costs, including those costs incurred for architectural, planning, engineering, and legal advice and services;
(5) Imputed administrative costs, including reasonable charges for the time spent by municipal employees in connection with the
implementation of a Project Plan;
(6) Relocation costs;
(7) Organizational costs, including the costs of conducting environmental impact and other studies and the costs of informing the public of the
creation of tax incremental districts and the implementation of project plans; and
(8) Payments and grants made, at the discretion of the governing body, which are found to be necessary or convenient to the creation of tax
incremental districts or the implementation of project plans.
9
Expenditures Exceeding Estimated Cost
Any expenditures which in sum would exceed the total amount stated in Eligible Project Costs will
require an amendment of this Plan. All amendments would be undertaken pursuant to SDCL §11‐9‐23.
If the expenditures within the Plan are increased in excess of the total Eligible Project Costs, the
Department of Revenue will be required to reset the base, in accordance with SDCL §11‐9‐23.
Detailed List of Estimated Project Costs
Attached as Schedule 1 is a detailed list of estimated Project Costs as per SDCL § 11‐9‐13(3). No
expenditure for Project Costs is provided for more than five years after the District is created.
Feasibility Study
An economic feasibility study per SDCL § 11‐9‐13(2) is attached as Schedule 2.
Economic Development Study
Not less than 50% of the area within the proposed district will stimulate and develop the general economic
welfare and prosperity of the state through commercial, manufacturing and agricultural development as
evidenced by the Economic Development Study attached as Schedule 3.
Fiscal Impact Statement
Attached as Schedule 4 is a Fiscal Impact Statement showing the impact of the Tax Increment District, until
and after the bonds are repaid, upon all entities levying property taxes in the district. Required as per SDCL
§ 11‐9‐13(4).
Method of Financing, Timing of Costs and Monetary Obligations
The payment of Project Costs is anticipated to be made by the City to Developer from the special fund of
the Tax Incremental District. SDCL § 11‐9‐13(5). Pursuant to the Developer's Agreement, the City will pay
to the Developer all available tax increment funds it receives from the District according to the
Development Agreement.
Maximum Amount of Tax Incremental Revenue
The maximum amount of tax incremental revenue bonds or monetary obligations to be paid through Tax
Increment District #13 shall be the amount sufficient to reimburse the Developer for the payments made for
Project Costs and pay all tax increment bonds or monetary obligations in an amount not to exceed
$9,380,891principal and interest or such lesser amount as may be feasible with the estimated revenue
generated by the Tax Increment District. The final terms and conditions will be set forth in the Development
Agreement.
Duration of Tax Incremental Plan
The duration of the Plan will extend to the number of years it will take for the reimbursement of the
extinguishment of bonds and the monetary obligation except that the Plan duration shall not exceed 20
calendar years from the date of creation of the District.
10
Estimated Impact of Tax Increment Financing on Revenues of Taxing Jurisdictions
The site will generate taxes to the local jurisdictions at or above the assessed value of the Base. All taxing
districts shall receive that base which was established in 2023. The tax increment will be available to the
taxing jurisdictions at or before twenty (20) years after the creation of the District. Schedule 5 details the tax
capture implications to each of the local taxing jurisdictions. After the repayment of the project costs, taxing
entities will receive their proportionate share of tax dollars for the base value and the tax incremental
values.
Conditions Map, Improvements Map, Zoning Change Map
The Conditions Map, SDCL § 11‐9‐16(1), is included as Attachment 2.
The Improvements Map, SDCL § 11‐9‐16(2), is included as Attachment 3.
The Zoning Change Map, SDCL § 11‐9‐16(3), is included as Attachment 4.
Changes to the City of Brookings Comprehensive/Master Plan/Map, Building Codes &
City Ordinances per SDCL § 11‐9‐16(4)
No changes to the City's Master Plan, Building Codes, or Ordinances are requested.
List of Estimated Non‐Project Costs
The following is a list of the Non‐Project Costs per SDCL § 11‐9‐16(5). All costs are listed as taxable value;
actual non‐ project costs will exceed the following amounts.
Item Amount
Commercial Construction $30,000,000
TOTAL $30,000,000
Statement of Displacement and Relocation Plan
No residents or families will be displaced by the Project. SDCL § 11‐9‐16(6)
Performance Bond Surety Bond or other Guaranty
As security for its fulfillment of the agreement with the governing body, a purchaser or lessee of
redevelopment property may furnish a performance bond, with such surety and in such form and amount
as the governing body may approve or make such other guaranty as the governing body may deem
necessary in the public interest. This additional security may be provided for in a Developer’s Agreement.
11
LIST OF SCHEDULES
SCHEDULE 1 Detail of Project Costs
SCHEDULE 2 Economic Feasibility Study
SCHEDULE 3 Economic Development Study
SCHEDULE 4 Fiscal Impact Statement
SCHEDULE 5 Estimated Captured Taxable Values
LIST OF ATTACHMENTS
Attachment 1. Map and Legal Description and existing uses and conditions
Attachment 2. Map of Real property/Improvement
Attachment 3. List of proposed changes in zoning ordinances
12
SCHEDULE 1 – "DETAIL OF PROJECT COSTS"
The project contains the clearing, grading, soil correction/remediation, water, sanitary sewer, storm sewer, curb,
gutter, streets, sidewalks, street lights, parking lots, and drainage improvements to serve a 26 + acre
development site for commercial retail and office space.
Kind of Project Cost Number of Projects Location5 Amount Reference6
Capital Costs District $0 11‐9‐15(1)
Financing Costs District $0 11‐9‐15(2)
Real Property Assembly District $0 11‐9‐15(3)
Professional Fees District $0 11‐9‐15(4)
Administrative Costs District $0 11‐9‐15(5)
Relocation Costs District $0 11‐9‐15(6)
Organizational Costs District $0 11‐9‐15(7)
Discretionary Costs and Grants 1 District $9,380,891 11‐9‐15(8)
Eligible Project Costs $9,380,891
The above total represents eligible Project Costs.
5 District shall mean the Tax Increment District.
6 SDCL §11‐9‐14
(1) Capital costs, including the actual costs of the construction of public works or improvements, buildings, structures, and
permanent fixtures; the demolition, alteration, remodeling, repair, or reconstruction of existing buildings, structures, and
permanent fixtures; the acquisition of equipment; the clearing and grading of land; and the amount of interest payable on
tax incremental bonds or notes issued pursuant to this chapter until such time as positive tax increments to be received from
the district, as estimated by the Project Plan, are sufficient to pay the principal of and interest on the tax incremental bonds or
notes when due;
(2) Financing costs, including all interest paid to holders of evidences of indebtedness issued to pay for Project Costs, any
premium paid over the principal amount thereof because of the redemption of such obligations prior to maturity and a
reserve for the payment of principal of and interest on such obligations in an amount determined by the governing body to
be reasonably required for the marketability of such obligations;
(3) Real property assembly costs, including the actual cost of the acquisition by a municipality of real or personal
property within a tax incremental district less any proceeds to be received by the municipality from the sale, lease, or
other disposition of such property pursuant to a Project Plan;
(4) Professional service costs, including those costs incurred for architectural, planning, engineering, and legal advice and
services;
(5) Imputed administrative costs, including reasonable charges for the time spent by municipal employees in connection with
the implementation of a Project Plan;
(6) Relocation costs;
(7) Organizational costs, including the costs of conducting environmental impact and other studies and the costs of
informing the public of the creation of tax incremental districts and the implementation of project plans; and
(8) Payments and grants made, at the discretion of the governing body, which are found to be necessary or convenient to the
creation of tax incremental districts or the implementation of project plans.
13
TIF ELIGIBLE EXPENSES/RESPONSIBLE DEVELOPER
SDCL 11‐9‐15
Kind of Project Cost Estimate
Infrastructure and Other Project Costs $4,215,502
Land Acquisition $1,290,269
Professional Fees/Engineering, Design & Legal $271,251
Interest Expense $3,603,870
TOTAL COSTS $9,380,891
Engineers Estimate Updated 9.23.24
USES: Total
Steet Segment A $ 152,559
Street Segment B $ 318,987
Steet Segment C $ 285,221
Street Segment D $ 263,511
Street Segment E $ 667,785
Street Segment F $ 80,400
Street Segment G $ 193,303
Street Segments Total $ 1,961,767
Storm Segment $ 209,908
Storm Segment $ 316,591
Water/Sewer $ 455,415
Dev Track Water/Sewer $ 544,647
Contaminated Soil – Lot 2 $ 15,219
$ 1,541,780
Land Purchase - Detention Cells - City $ 220,000
Land Purchase $ 1,070,269
Dev Tract Site Prep & Correction $ 711,955
Professional Services Cost $ 271,251
Carrying Cost - Estimate $ 3,603,870
$ 5,877,345
Estimated Total Cost $ 9,380,891
14
SCHEDULE 2 – “ECONOMIC FEASIBILITY STUDY”
The City of Brookings has entered into a development agreement with Ryan Companies (“Developer”)
concerning the creation of a tax increment district to be located within the City of Brookings, Brookings
County, South Dakota, on certain real property known as Block 9, Wiese Addition; Lot 2, Block 1, Wiese
Addition; West 134’ of Lot 3, Block 1, Wiese Addition; and abutting rights-of-way all in the City of
Brookings. The project is a commercial development consisting of a big box retailer, outlots for additional
retail, restaurant, and office buildings, public improvements consisting of streets, water, sanitary sewer,
storm sewer, drainage facilities, street lights, sidewalks, parking, and landscaping. The land is currently
undeveloped and was formerly a South Dakota Department of Transportation Highway Maintenance
Facility.
The Developer has indicated that the project is not feasible without the assistance of the Tax Increment
District. This is a “but for” type of tax increment district financing. The project will not proceed “but
for” the assistance from the City through the creation of a tax increment district for the project.
The City has made it clear that funding for public improvements, remediation of blight, site grading, and
environmental remediation must be supported by the tax revenues generated by the Project, and not by the
general revenues of the City. The vehicle through which this can be accomplished is through tax increment
financing under the South Dakota Tax Incremental District Law (South Dakota Codified Laws Chapter 11‐
9). Tax increment financing is an indispensable self‐financing tool used throughout the United States to
help local governments successfully develop and redevelop areas and encourage economic development.
In tax increment financing, the current real property tax assessed value of all properties in a designated
project area (“tax increment financing district”) is established as the “base value.” As development in the
tax increment financing district increases the assessed values of the redeveloped properties, a portion of
the additional tax revenue generated by the increase in assessed value over the base value is set aside and
committed by the City to the reimbursement of approved project costs.
Tax increment financing is permitted only in connection with a “Project Plan” duly adopted by the City. The
estimated increment resulting from the improvements would be $4,524,624 as evidenced by the Table on page
15.
Since the Developer is funding the improvements and being reimbursed through collected tax increment, the plan
is feasible. The estimated captured taxable values are only an estimate and will be subject to actual collections.
This document represents the feasibility study required under Tax Increment District Law 11-9-13 (Subsections,
2, 4, and 5). Tax Increment District #13 has $317,800 in taxable base value and as such, will minimally contribute
to the ten percent (10%) limitation on the total taxable value in the City of Brookings. The study concludes that
the proposed project in the project area is feasible.
15
“ESTIMATED CAPTURED TAXABLE VALUES”
BASE - ESTIMATED TAXES THAT WILL GO TO TAXING DISTRICTS DURING TIF
INCREMENT – ESTIMATED TAXES THAT WILL GO TO TAX INCREMENT FUND DURING TIF
TIF Creation Date 2023
First Year Assessed 2024
First Year Collected 2025
Base $317,800
Year TIF
Year
Assessed Collected Assessed
Valuation
Taxes City County School
District
Water
District
1 2024 2025 2026 $910,000 $17,240 $2,058 $3,644 $11,519 $19
2 2025 2026 2027 $910,000 $17,240 $2,058 $3,644 $11,519 $19
3 2026 2027 2028 $10,635,830 $201,496 $24,058 $42,586 $134,628 $223
4 2027 2028 2029 $12,354,330 $234,053 $27,945 $49,467 $156,381 $259
5 2028 2029 2030 $12,954,330 $245,420 $29,303 $51,869 $163,976 $272
6 2029 2030 2031 $13,404,330 $253,945 $30,321 $53,671 $169,672 $281
7 2030 2031 2032 $13,404,330 $253,945 $30,321 $53,671 $169,672 $281
8 2031 2032 2033 $13,404,330 $253,945 $30,321 $53,671 $169,672 $281
9 2032 2033 2034 $13,404,330 $253,945 $30,321 $53,671 $169,672 $281
10 2033 2034 2035 $13,404,330 $253,945 $30,321 $53,671 $169,672 $281
11 2034 2035 2036 $13,404,330 $253,945 $30,321 $53,671 $169,672 $281
12 2035 2036 2037 $13,404,330 $253,945 $30,321 $53,671 $169,672 $281
13 2036 2037 2038 $13,404,330 $253,945 $30,321 $53,671 $169,672 $281
14 2037 2038 2039 $13,404,330 $253,945 $30,321 $53,671 $169,672 $281
15 2038 2039 2040 $13,404,330 $253,945 $30,321 $53,671 $169,672 $281
16 2039 2040 2041 $13,404,330 $253,945 $30,321 $53,671 $169,672 $281
17 2040 2041 2042 $13,404,330 $253,945 $30,321 $53,671 $169,672 $281
18 2041 2042 2043 $13,404,330 $253,945 $30,321 $53,671 $169,672 $281
19 2042 2043 2044 $13,404,330 $253,945 $30,321 $53,671 $169,672 $281
20 2043 2044 2045 $13,404,330 $253,945 $30,321 $53,671 $169,672 $281
Note: These numbers are for projection purposes only and do not reflect what the actual number(s) may be. These
numbers are based on the following assumptions.
Assumptions:
1. Land value of Blk 9, Wiese Addition exempt at time base value determined.
2. Calculations based upon five-year commercial build out schedule with land assessed value during year 1.
3. Discretionary formula is waived by developer.
16
SCHEDULE 3 – “ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STUDY”
SECTION 1‐ INTRODUCTION
The City has been approached concerning the creation of a tax increment district located within the City of
Brookings, Brookings County, South Dakota. In order to determine whether a tax increment district (TID)
may be created, the governing body must make a finding that not less than 50%, by area, of the real property
within the district will stimulate and develop the general economic welfare and prosperity of the State
through the promotion and advancement of industrial, commercial, manufacturing, agricultural and natural
resources, and the improvement of the area is likely to enhance significantly the value of substantially all of
the other real property in the district. This Schedule will address Economic Development through the
development of a commercial development consisting of a big box retailer, outlots for retail, restaurant, a nd
office space, public improvements consisting of water, sanitary sewer, storm sewer, streets, parking areas,
drainage facilities, sidewalks and landscaping within the city limits of the City of Brookings.
SECTION 2 – STUDY AREA BOUNDARY
The Study area is described as the area depicted on the map attached to this Project Plan as
Attachment 2 and includes the legal descriptions set forth within this Project Plan.
SECTION 3 – ESTABLISHING TIF ELIGIBLE
Developer has entered into a development agreement for Block 9, Wiese Addition, City of Brookings.
Developer plans on the real estate being developed into a commercial development consisting of a big box
retailer, commercial outlots for retail, restaurants, office space and associated public improvements to
serve the development.
Section 4 – Finding That the Improvements to the Area are Likely to Enhance Significantly
the Value of Substantially All of the Other Real Property in the District
The primary goal of the TID is to provide commercial business upon real property located within the TID
boundaries, to complete site preparation, public infrastructure, and site grading necessary to serve the real
property located within the TID boundaries.
The TID area consists of an undeveloped 26 acre parcel owned by the City of Brookings within the
corporate limits of the City. The completion of the commercial development will allow for the creation of
new jobs and the retention of existing jobs and develop not only the general economic welfare and
prosperity of the City of Brookings, but also of the State of South Dakota through promotion and
advancement of commercial and industrial business and retention of workforce.
It is specifically found that once the improvements set forth within City of Brookings TIF #13 Pr oject Plan
are completed, this Project will significantly enhance the value of substantially all of the other real property
in the TID District. It is anticipated that the Project will provide additional development and employment
opportunities in the Brookings and Brookings County area through providing new business and visitor dollars
to the community while expanding the services and amenities for residents of Brookings and surrounding
areas.
17
Section 5 – Conditions within the Study Area; Land Use and Planning
Comprehensive Plan
The Development is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan and existing planning and zoning
requirements.
SECTION 6 – FINDINGS WITHIN THE STUDY AREA ANALYSIS
In accordance with state law, it is found that not less than fifty percent (50%) by area of the real property
within the District will stimulate and develop the general economic welfare and prosperity of the State of
South Dakota through the promotion and advancement of commercial development by increasing the
number of businesses and expanding the retail trade area associated with a big box retailer and associated
sales tax revenues, as well as creating new employment opportunities, and it is found that the improvement
of the area is likely to enhance significantly the value of substantially all of the other real property in the
District in accord with SDCL 11‐9‐8(1) and (2).
18
SCHEDULE 4 – “FISCAL IMPACT STATEMENT”
FISCAL IMPACT STATEMENT – TAX INCREMENT DISTRICT
NUMBER 13
INTRODUCTION
The fiscal impact statement is intended to provide a succinct analysis of the estimated impact of the Tax
Increment District to the public pursuant to SDCL § 11‐9‐16(4). It is not intended to rival the level of detail
required by a detailed financial analysis. A fiscal impact statement shows the impact of the Tax Increment
District, both until and after the bonds or obligations are repaid, upon all entities levying taxes upon property
in the district.
DEFINITIONS
“Assumptions” means factors or definitions used in the fiscal analysis. Assumptions may include facts
and figures identified by the District and educated guesses that are sometimes necessary when not all of the
information is available. Assumptions are often used to extrapolate an estimate. Assumptions may include
an estimate of tax levies of each taxing entity, the school aid formula contribution, the value of the real
property, etc.
“Base Revenues” means the taxes collected on the base value.
“Fiscal Impact” means the increase or decrease in revenues and generally refers to an impact to revenues
caused by the district.
“Revenue” means ad valorem taxes.
“Tax Increment District“ means City of Brookings Tax Increment District Number 13.
“Taxing Districts” means all political subdivisions of the state which have ad valorem taxing power over
property within the boundaries of the Tax Increment District.
“Tax Increment Revenues” means all revenues above the Base Revenues.
ASSUMPTIONS:
1. The property will have improvements which at completion will be valued for taxable purposes at a
minimum of $13,000,000.
2. The average tax levy of all taxing districts will be $18.945 per thousand dollars of taxable valuation
(2023) for non‐ag other commercial.
3. Tax increment will start to be collected in 2025 and end in or prior to 2044.
4. Interest: The loan obligations may be capitalized.
19
FISCAL IMPACT
The total fiscal impact upon the taxing entities during the term of the Tax Increment District is as follows: Tax District
will not receive any new increment generated until the expiration of the Tax Increment District.
TIF Creation Date 2023
First Year Assessed 2024
First Year Collected 2025
Base $317,800
Year TIF Year Assessed Collected Assessed
Valuation
Taxes City County School
District
Water
District
1 2024 2025 2026 $910,000 $17,240 $2,058 $3,644 $11,519 $19
2 2025 2026 2027 $910,000 $17,240 $2,058 $3,644 $11,519 $19
3 2026 2027 2028 $10,635,830 $201,496 $24,058 $42,586 $134,628 $223
4 2027 2028 2029 $12,354,330 $234,053 $27,945 $49,467 $156,381 $259
5 2028 2029 2030 $12,954,330 $245,420 $29,303 $51,869 $163,976 $272
6 2029 2030 2031 $13,404,330 $253,945 $30,321 $53,671 $169,672 $281
7 2030 2031 2032 $13,404,330 $253,945 $30,321 $53,671 $169,672 $281
8 2031 2032 2033 $13,404,330 $253,945 $30,321 $53,671 $169,672 $281
9 2032 2033 2034 $13,404,330 $253,945 $30,321 $53,671 $169,672 $281
10 2033 2034 2035 $13,404,330 $253,945 $30,321 $53,671 $169,672 $281
11 2034 2035 2036 $13,404,330 $253,945 $30,321 $53,671 $169,672 $281
12 2035 2036 2037 $13,404,330 $253,945 $30,321 $53,671 $169,672 $281
13 2036 2037 2038 $13,404,330 $253,945 $30,321 $53,671 $169,672 $281
14 2037 2038 2039 $13,404,330 $253,945 $30,321 $53,671 $169,672 $281
15 2038 2039 2040 $13,404,330 $253,945 $30,321 $53,671 $169,672 $281
16 2039 2040 2041 $13,404,330 $253,945 $30,321 $53,671 $169,672 $281
17 2040 2041 2042 $13,404,330 $253,945 $30,321 $53,671 $169,672 $281
18 2041 2042 2043 $13,404,330 $253,945 $30,321 $53,671 $169,672 $281
19 2042 2043 2044 $13,404,330 $253,945 $30,321 $53,671 $169,672 $281
20 2043 2044 2045 $13,404,330 $253,945 $30,321 $53,671 $169,672 $281
Note: These numbers are for projection purposes only and do not reflect what the actual number(s) may be.
These numbers are based on the following assumptions.
Assumptions:
1. Land value of Blk 9, Wiese Addition exempt at time base value determined.
2. Calculations based upon five-year commercial build out schedule with land assessed value during year 1.
3. Discretionary formula is waived by developer.
20
SCHEDULE 5 – “ESTIMATED CAPTURED TAXABLE VALUES”
It is assumed, for purposes of this Plan, that a commercial development consisting of a big box
retailer will be constructed in Year 2 of the TIF with commercial outlots occurring each year
thereafter until fully built out. Actual valuation shall depend upon the value determined by the
Brookings County Director of Equalization when assessed, with the application of dollars‐per‐
thousand from local taxes. All tax increment revenues shall be from Generally Applicable Taxes
attributable to the improvements to be constructed in the TID. The potential for total increment
collections are estimated to be at the maximum range of $4,524,624 covering a span of captured tax
years not to exceed twenty (20). Collection is anticipated to begin in 2025, and the schedule carries
out the tax captured 20 years from the date of Plan adoption.
“ESTIMATED CAPTURED TAXABLE VALUES”
BASE - ESTIMATED TAXES THAT WILL GO TO TAXING DISTRICTS DURING TIF
INCREMENT – ESTIMATED TAXES THAT WILL GO TO TAX INCREMENT FUND DURING TIF
TIF Creation Date 2023
First Year Assessed 2024
First Year Collected 2025
Base $317,800
Year TIF
Year
Assessed Collected Assessed
Valuation
Taxes City County School
District
Water
District
1 2024 2025 2026 $910,000 $17,240 $2,058 $3,644 $11,519 $19
2 2025 2026 2027 $910,000 $17,240 $2,058 $3,644 $11,519 $19
3 2026 2027 2028 $10,635,830 $201,496 $24,058 $42,586 $134,628 $223
4 2027 2028 2029 $12,354,330 $234,053 $27,945 $49,467 $156,381 $259
5 2028 2029 2030 $12,954,330 $245,420 $29,303 $51,869 $163,976 $272
6 2029 2030 2031 $13,404,330 $253,945 $30,321 $53,671 $169,672 $281
7 2030 2031 2032 $13,404,330 $253,945 $30,321 $53,671 $169,672 $281
8 2031 2032 2033 $13,404,330 $253,945 $30,321 $53,671 $169,672 $281
9 2032 2033 2034 $13,404,330 $253,945 $30,321 $53,671 $169,672 $281
10 2033 2034 2035 $13,404,330 $253,945 $30,321 $53,671 $169,672 $281
11 2034 2035 2036 $13,404,330 $253,945 $30,321 $53,671 $169,672 $281
12 2035 2036 2037 $13,404,330 $253,945 $30,321 $53,671 $169,672 $281
13 2036 2037 2038 $13,404,330 $253,945 $30,321 $53,671 $169,672 $281
14 2037 2038 2039 $13,404,330 $253,945 $30,321 $53,671 $169,672 $281
15 2038 2039 2040 $13,404,330 $253,945 $30,321 $53,671 $169,672 $281
16 2039 2040 2041 $13,404,330 $253,945 $30,321 $53,671 $169,672 $281
17 2040 2041 2042 $13,404,330 $253,945 $30,321 $53,671 $169,672 $281
18 2041 2042 2043 $13,404,330 $253,945 $30,321 $53,671 $169,672 $281
19 2042 2043 2044 $13,404,330 $253,945 $30,321 $53,671 $169,672 $281
20 2043 2044 2045 $13,404,330 $253,945 $30,321 $53,671 $169,672 $281
21
ATTACHMENT 1
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF REAL PROPERTY
Lot 2, Block 1, Wiese Addition and abutting road rights-of-way, City of Brookings, Brookings
County, State of South Dakota
West 134’ of Lot 3, Block 1, Wiese Addition and abutting road rights-of-way, City of Brookings,
Brookings County, State of South Dakota
Block 9, Wiese Addition and abutting road rights-of-way, City of Brookings, Brookings County,
State of South Dakota
32nd Avenue rights-of-way from 6th Street north six hundred (600’) feet
22
ATTACHMENT 2
MAP OF REAL PROPERTY/IMPROVEMENTS
23
ATTACHMENT 3
LIST OF PROPOSED CHANGES IN ZONING
ORDINANCES
No zoning ordinance changes are required.
EXHIBIT C
Developer Constructed Off-Site Improvements
The Developer constructed off-site improvements follows this page.
EXHIBIT D
Assignment by Developer
In the event Developer assigns this Agreement or the rights to payments hereunder for financing
purposes or otherwise, a copy of the executed Assignment shall be attached to this Agreement and shall
follow this page.
EXHIBIT E
City of Brookings Tax Increment District No. 13
Construction and Maintenance Standards
__________________________________________
Section 1 - Developer’s Obligations and Improvements Required
A. General
a. Developer agrees to install, or cause to be installed, the following subdivision
improvements: curb and gutter, streets with asphalt surface, water service lines, sanitary sewer, storm
sewer, drainage, drainage facilities, and all other improvements necessary to develop the area in
accordance with the City of Brookings Subdivision Regulations, City of Brookings Engineering Design
Standards and Specifications, Brookings Zoning Ordinance, and all other applicable ordinances of the
City. All public improvements shall be installed in accordance with the Construction Plans filed with and
approved by the City’s Engineer, as applicable.
b. Required improvements will be accepted as dedications to, and shall become the property
of the City when completed to City standards and upon approval by the City’s Engineer, along with
formal acceptance by the City.
B. Streets
a. Streets shall be constructed in each and every platted right -of-way and shall be built to
the exterior lot lines of the subdivision and constructed as the sections are shown in the approved
construction plans on file at the office of the City’s Engineer.
C. Sanitary Sewer
a. Developer shall install, or cause to be installed, sanitary sewer and services to the property
line for each lot served and shall be built to the exterior lot line of the subdivision, as shown on the
approved construction plans.
D. Storm Sewer, Drainage and Facilities
a. Developer shall construct or cause to be constructed, to City standards, all storm sewers,
catch basins, drop inlets, culverts, drainage-ways, detention ponds, spill-ways, and other
related and required drainage improvements.
b. Developer shall comply with all City and State stormwater regulations.
E. Municipal Utilities
a. Developer will, prior to installation, coordinate with all utilities to ensure that the electric,
natural gas, and water supply utilities are installed according to policies and standards established by
each of the local utilities.
b. Developer shall install, or cause to be installed, water services to the property line for
each lot so served.
F. Grading and Erosion Control
a. Developer shall complete grading of all utility easements and drainage ways to the
elevations as shown on the approved final grading plan.
b. Developer shall utilize and maintain the erosion control devices and employ additional
measures as necessary if the installed measures fail to retain soil on the site, until such time as the site is
fully stabilized.
c. All erosion control devices shall be removed by the Developer after the site is fully
stabilized and approved by the City’s Engineer.
Section 2 - Maintenance and Acceptance
A. Maintenance of Gravel Streets Under Development
a. For streets under construction, the Developer will provide minimum maintenance and
snow removal on gravel and first lift asphalt streets to provide minimum vehicular passage. If there is any
damage to manholes, valves, curb and gutter, valley gutters, or other appurtenances, repairs shall be done
at the Developer’s expense. Gravel streets will be allowed through one winter season only. The City will
take over maintenance upon completion of the final lift of asphalt and written acceptance by the City.
B. Completion of Final Lift on Street/Infrastructure Inspection Report
a. No sooner than one (1) year after the first lift has been applied or at any time when
requested by the City, the Developer shall place the final lift of asphalt on the street. Prior to this action,
the Developer will notify the City and state its intentions. The City’s Engineer or their representative will
inspect the public improvements and make an inspection report to the Developer as to the necessary work
needed for the project to meet City specifications. This inspection report will encompass all aspects of the
water, sanitary sewer, storm sewer, curb and gutter, or any other part of the construction as provided for
in the preliminary plan as approved. Adjustments or repairs will be the responsibility of the Developer
and shall be made prior to the placement of the final lift. The warranty period shall be one (1) year after
placement of the final lift of asphalt. Trench settlement shall be warranted for five (5) years per City
Ordinance.
C. Final Acceptance of Improvements
a. After the Developer deems that all the street and utility improvements have been
completed and has placed the final lift of asphalt, the Developer will notify the City and local utilities in
writing that the street and utility improvements are completed. Upon receipt of the certificate of
completion from the developer’s engineer and warranty security, the City’s Engineer and local utilities
will then inspect all the public improvements and inform the Developer of any deficiencies. Any
deficiencies shall be remedied by the Developer at the Developer’s expense. Prior to final acceptance, the
Developer shall furnish a complete set of “As-Built” drawings to the City’s Engineer. The “As-Built”
drawings will be the following information overlayed on the Project Plans for the public improvements
within the right-of-way (Lefevre Drive, 32nd Avenue, Market Way, and Capital Street), Outlot A and
Outlot B: curb and gutter spot elevations; storm sewer structure rim and invert elevations; sanitary sewer
rim and invert elevations; water main valve spot elevations; top nut hydrant elevations; pond toe of slope
and top of slope spot elevations; pond inlet invert elevations; and pond emergency overflow spot
elevations. Upon the recommendation of the City’s Engineer, the City will then issue a transfer of street
ownership certificate setting a date as to when the one (1) year warranty will end.
D. Developer’s Warranty Responsibilities
a. The Developer shall warranty the public improvements of water, sanitary sewer, storm
sewer, drainage infrastructure, curb and gutter, valley gutter, off-site improvements, and any other part of
the construction specified in the Project Plan for a period of one year from the date as stated in the
transfer of street ownership certificate. Prior to the end of the one (1) year warranty period, the City’s
Engineer and local utilities will inspect the public improvements and report the findings to the City. The
City shall confirm or reject the Acceptance Certificate. If confirmed, the Developer’s responsibility for
the public improvements ends and the public improvements become the responsibility of the City. If any
portion is rejected, the Developer will repair or replace the rejected portion and a one (1) year warranty
period will begin again on the rejected portion and the Developer shall again comply with the provisions
as stated in this Agreement.
City of Brookings
Staff Report
Brookings City & County
Government Center, 520
Third Street
Brookings, SD 57006
(605) 692-6281 phone
(605) 692-6907 fax
File #:RES 25-047,Version:1
Public Hearing and Action on Resolution 25-047, a Resolution of Intent to Lease Real Property at
Brookings Regional Airport to Isaac Wilde.
Summary and Recommended Action:
Staff recommends approval of the proposed resolution authorizing the City Manager to:
1.Enter into a land lease with Isaac Wilde for 4,032 square feet located on Sites 117A & 117B at
the Brookings Regional Airport (Section 26 and 27, T110N, R50W); and
2.Terminate the existing land lease with M&C Partners, LLC.
The notice of public hearing was published on June 13, 2025 as required per SDCL 9-12-5.2.
Attachments:
Memo
Resolution
Notice
Location Map
City of Brookings Printed on 6/18/2025Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™
City Council Agenda Item Memo
From: Charlie Richter, City Engineer
Council Meeting: June 24, 2025
Subject: Resolution 25-047: Intent to Lease Real Property at
Brookings Regional Airport to Isaac Wilde
Presenter: Lucas Dahl, Airport Manager
Summary and Recommended Action:
Staff recommends approval of the proposed resolution authorizing the City Manager to:
1) Enter into a land lease with Isaac Wilde for 4,032 square feet located on Sites #117A
& 117B at the Brookings Regional Airport (Section 26 and 27, T110N, R50W ); and
2) Terminate the existing land lease with M&C Partners, LLC.
Item Details:
M&C Partners LLC has leased this land and constructed a hangar on it since 2002. The
hangar was recently sold to Isaac Wilde.
The proposed lease with Mr. Wilde will be for a 25-year term, which is standard for
hangar leases. The lease rate is $0.18 per square foot, resulting in an annual amount
of $725.76. Mr. Wilde intends to use the hangar to store equipment for his agricultu ral
spraying business or to lease it for aircraft storage. Given these intended commercial
uses, the commercial lease rate is applicable. The lease amount will increase by 2%
annually and will be subject to review by the City Manager and Airport Board as
necessary. In accordance with SDCL 9-12-5.2, a public hearing is required prior to
leasing municipal property to a private individual.
SDCL 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.
The Notice of Public Hearing was published as required on June 13, 2025.
Legal Consideration:
The lease has been previously reviewed by the City Attorney.
Strategic Plan Consideration:
Fiscal Responsibility – The City of Brookings will responsibly manage resources through
transparency, efficiency, equity, and exceptional customer service.
Financial Consideration:
The lease rate will be $0.18/square foot for a total annual revenue of $725.76 , which will
be increased by 2% annually and will be subject to review by the City Manager and
Airport Board as necessary.
Supporting Documentation:
Resolution
Notice
Location Map
RESOLUTION 25-047
A RESOLUTION OF INTENT TO LEASE REAL PROPERTY AT BROOKINGS
REGIONAL AIRPORT TO ISAAC WILDE
BE IT RESOLVED by the governing body of the City of Brookings, South Dakota, that
the City of Brookings intends to enter into a land lease with Isaac Wilde for a period of
25-years, commencing on June 24, 2025 and ending December 31, 2049 and
pertaining to the following described property:
4,032 square feet on Sites #117A & 117B at the Brookings Regional Airport, in
Section 26 and 27, T110N, R50W in the City of Brookings, Brookings County,
South Dakota.
The lease will be payable annually by the last day of January of each year and subject
to increases set by the Brookings City Council. The 2026 lease amount will be Seven-
hundred Twenty-five Dollars and seventy-six cents ($725.76) and will be increased 2%
annually and subject to review by the City Manager and Airport Board as necessary.
BE IT FURTHER NOTED, that a Public Hearing on this Resolution was held on June
24, 2025 at 6:00 o’clock p.m. in the Chambers at the Brookings City and County
Government Center and that all persons were given an opportunity to be heard on the
intent to lease real property.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Brookings, South Dakota, as follows:
A. The City of Brookings will enter into a new lease agreement with Isaac Wilde as
set forth above; and
B. The City of Brookings will terminate a current lease agreement dated December
20, 2022 with M&C Partners LLC;and
C. That the City Manager is authorized to terminate the current lease and execute a
new lease agreement in accordance with this Resolution.
Passed and Approved this 24th day of June, 2025.
CITY OF BROOKINGS, SD
____________________________
Oepke G. Niemeyer, Mayor
ATTEST:
__________________________
Bonnie Foster, City Clerk
Notice of Public Hearing On Adoption of Resolution Of Intent To Lease Real
Property at Brookings Regional Airport to Isaac Wilde
Notice Is Hereby given that on Tuesday, June 24, 2025 at 6:00 o’clock p.m., the
Brookings City Council will hold a public hearing in the Chambers, Brookings City
and County Government Center, 520 3rd Street, Brookings, South Dakota, on
Resolution of Intent to Lease to Isaac Wilde the following property:
4,032 square feet on sites 117A & 117B at the Brookings Regional Airport, in
Section 26 and 27, T110N, R50W in the City of Brookings, Brookings County,
South Dakota.
At the time and place affixed for said public hearing, all who appear will be given
an opportunity to express their views for or against th e proposal to lease the
above-described property.
Dated this 13th day of June, 2025.
Bonnie Foster, City Clerk
Published ___ time(s) at an approximate cost $___________.
If you require assistance, alternative formats and/or accessible locations consistent with the
Americans with Disabilities Act, please contact the City ADA Coordinator at 692 -6281 at least 48
hours prior to the meeting.
Location Map
Isaac Wilde Hangar
Sites #117A & 117B
Location
City of Brookings
Staff Report
Brookings City & County
Government Center, 520
Third Street
Brookings, SD 57006
(605) 692-6281 phone
(605) 692-6907 fax
File #:RES 25-058,Version:1
Public Hearing and Action on Resolution 25-058, a Resolution to Amend the 2040 Comprehensive
Plan’s Future Land Use Map.
Summary and Recommended Action:
Matt Wagner has submitted a Future Land Use Map revision for 3707 Main Avenue South. The
request is to change the Future Land Use Map from Open Wetland/Urban Low Intensity to Urban
Medium Intensity. Staff recommends approval of the request. The Panning Commission voted 8-0 to
recommend approval.
Attachments:
Resolution
Memo
Hearing Notice - City Council
Hearing Notice - Planning Commission
Planning Commission Minutes
Request Letter
Location Map
Future Land Use Map
Zoning Map
Floodplain Map
Suitability Map
City of Brookings Printed on 6/20/2025Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™
City Council Agenda Item Memo
From: Ryan Miller, City Planner
Council Meeting: June 24, 2025
Subject: Resolution 25-058: Future Land Use Map Amendment –
3707 Main Avenue South
Presenter: Mike Struck, Community Development Director
Summary and Recommended Action:
Matt Wagner has submitted a Future Land Use Map revision for 3707 Main Avenue
South. The request is to change the Future Land Use Map from Open Wetland/Urban
Low Intensity to Urban Medium Intensity. Staff recommends approval of the request.
The Planning Commission voted 8-0 to recommend approval.
Item Details:
The 2040 Comprehensive Plan, adopted in 2018, includes a Future Land Use Map
which aims to guide future development, redevelopment , and rezoning proposals within
the planning area.
The Future Land Use Map describes the property located at 3707 Main Avenue South
as Urban Low Intensity and Open Wetland. The Open Wetland future land use
category is meant to be applied to areas potentially impacted by wetlands or a high
water table. The Urban Low Intensity supports low to medium density residential or
commercial uses.
The property at 3707 Main Avenue South does not appear to be impacted by delineated
wetlands; however, based on the Development Suitability Map, the property is likely
impacted by high water table and relatively low and flat topography. This development
constraint can be mitigated by grading as necessary. The property is not located within
the floodplain. Existing zoning includes a mix of Joint Jurisdiction (JJ) Agriculture, JJ
Residence R-3A, and JJ Business B-3 Districts. The property owner is interested in a
future rezone of parcels within the amendment area.
The Future Land Use Map has been modified in a number of locations in proximity to
the existing request including land immediately to the west and north, which were
recently amended to Urban Medium Intensity during a series of amendments along
South Main Avenue.
Future Land Use Map amendments are reviewed by the Planning Commission, who
makes a recommendation to approve or deny any requests. This recommendation is
then forwarded on the City Council who makes any map amendments via adopted
resolution.
Legal Consideration:
None.
Strategic Plan Consideration:
Economic Growth – The City of Brookings will support effective diversified community
investment and equitable opportunities for prosperity.
Financial Consideration:
None.
Supporting Documentation:
Resolution
Hearing Notice – City Council
Hearing Notice – Planning Commission
Planning Commission Minutes
Request Letter
Location Map
Future Land Use Map
Zoning Map
Floodplain Map
Suitability Map
RESOLUTION 25-058
A RESOLUTION TO AMEND THE BROOKINGS, SOUTH DAKOTA
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 2040
WHEREAS, the Comprehensive Plan provides a Major Street Plan Map, identifies a
Future Land Use Map, projects population figures for the planning period, and describes
an integrated land use vision for the City; and
WHEREAS, portions of Future Land Use Map as shown on the attached area map are to
be amended to wit from Urban Low Intensity and Open Wetland to Urban Medium
Intensity; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Brookings, SD held a public hearing in
accordance with SDCL 11-6-18 on the proposed amendment to the Future Land Use Map
of the Brookings, South Dakota Comprehensive Plan 2040; and
WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission of the City of Brookings, SD has
recommended approval of the amendments to the Future Land Use Map of the Brookings,
South Dakota Comprehensive Plan 2040 in accordance with SDCL 11-6-17;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that said amendment to the Future Land Use
Map of the Brookings South Dakota Comprehensive Plan 2040 is hereby adopted by the
City of Brookings.
Passed and Approved this 24th day of June, 2025.
CITY OF BROOKINGS, SD
___________________________
Oepke G. Niemeyer, Mayor
ATTEST:
_______________________________
Bonnie Foster, City Clerk
If you require assistance, alternative formats and/or accessible locations consistent with the Americans with Disabilities Act,
please contact the City ADA Coordinator at 692-6281 at least 48 hours prior to the meeting.
Published ______ time(s) at an approximate cost of $ _____________.
NOTICE OF HEARING
UPON AMENDMENTS TO THE
2040 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
FOR THE CITY OF BROOKINGS
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN That the City Council will hold a public hearing on
an amendment to the 2040 Comprehensive Plan for the City of Brookings pertaining to
the future land use map on the following described real estate:
Lots A, B and C of Outlot 15, Outlot 16, Outlot 17 and Outlot 18 in the West Half
of the South Half of the Northeast Quarter in Section 11, Township 109, Range
50, Brookings County, South Dakota.
NOTICE IS FURTHER GIVEN That said public hearing will be held at 6:00 PM
on Tuesday, June 24, 2025 in the Chambers Room on the third floor of the Brookings
City and County Government Center at 520 Third Street, Brookings, South Dakota.
Any person interested may appear and be heard in this matter.
Dated this 11th day of June, 2025.
Bonnie Foster
City Clerk
If you require assistance, alternative formats and/or accessible locations consistent with the Americans with Disabilities Act,
please contact the City ADA Coordinator at 692-6281 at least 48 hours prior to the meeting.
Published ______ time(s) at an approximate cost of $ _____________.
NOTICE OF HEARING
UPON AMENDMENTS TO THE
2040 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
FOR THE CITY OF BROOKINGS
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN That the Planning Commission will hold a public
hearing on an amendment to the 2040 Comprehensive Plan for the City of Brookings
pertaining to the future land use map on the following described real estate:
Lots A, B and C of Outlot 15, Outlot 16, Outlot 17 and Outlot 18 in the West Half
of the South Half of the Northeast Quarter in Section 11, Township 109, Range
50, Brookings County, South Dakota.
NOTICE IS FURTHER GIVEN That said public hearing will be held at 5:30 PM
on Tuesday, June 3, 2025 in the Chambers Room on the third floor of the Brookings
City and County Government Center at 520 Third Street, Brookings, South Dakota. Any
action taken by the Planning Commission is a recommendation made to the City
Council.
Any person interested may appear and be heard in this matter.
Dated this 21st day of May, 2025.
Ryan Miller
City Planner
Planning Commission
Brookings, South Dakota
June 3, 2025
OFFICIAL MINUTES
Chairperson Scot Leddy called the meeting of the Planning Commission to order on Tuesday, June 3,
2025, at 5:30 PM in the Council Chambers Room #310 on the third floor of the City & County
Government Center. Members present were Tanner Aiken, Emily Braun, Billie Jo Hinrichs, Kyle
Jamison, Scot Leddy, Jacob Limmer, Roger Solum and Debra Spear. Nick Schmeichel was absent.
Also present were Community Development Director Michael Struck, City Planner Ryan Miller and
Associate Planner Bailey Maca. Also present were Kurt Gutormson, Susan Gannon, Richard Howey,
Matt Wagner, Kyle Rausch and Alicia Haich from the public.
Item #5a – Matt Wagner has submitted a Future Land Use Map revision for 3707 Main Avenue South.
The request is to change the Future Land Use Map from Open Wetland/Urban Low Intensity to Urban
Medium Intensity. Staff recommends approval of the request.
(Solum/Spear) Motion to approve the Future Land Use Map Amendment. All present voted aye.
MOTION CARRIED.
OFFICIAL SUMMARY
Item #5a – Matt Wagner has submitted a Future Land Use Map revision for 3707 Main Avenue South.
The request is to change the Future Land Use Map from Open Wetland/Urban Low Intensity to Urban
Medium Intensity. The property does not appear to be impacted by delineated wetlands, however,
based on the development suitability map the property is likely impacted by high water table and
relatively low and flat topography. This development constraint can be mitigated by grading as
necessary. The property is not located within the floodplain.
Wagner had consulted with Civil Design Incorporated prior to purchasing the property and was assured
that there were no wetlands recorded with the fish and wildlife services. He also confirmed that the
property was not deemed too low to be built on. With recent Future Land Use Map Amendments, the
request for Urban Medium Intensity is in line with the region. He also noted that the existing
designation refers to Open Space and Floodplain where this property is Open Space more so than
Wetland. Hinrichs inquired the difference between wetland and Open Space on the future land use
map. Miller stated that the Open Space wetland is area similar to the floodplain with low lying areas
that are wet and historic drainage. Floodplain is a delineated location identified by the federal
government for the purpose of homeowners insurance.
3817 ASHTON AVE
3901 MAIN AVE S
3707 MAIN AVE S
3901 MAIN AVE S
3823 MAIN AVE S
518 36TH ST S
3707 MAIN AVE S
3707 MAIN AVE S
519 37TH ST S401 37TH ST S
3707 MAIN AVE S
Location Map
Parcels
5/27/2025, 11:21:59 AM
0 0.03 0.050.01 mi
0 0.04 0.080.02 km
1:2,257
ArcGIS Web AppBuilder
3817 ASHTON AVE
518 36TH ST S519 37TH ST S401 37TH ST S
3901 MAIN AVE S
3707 MAIN AVE S
3707 MAIN AVE S
3707 MAIN AVE S
3901 MAIN AVE S
3823 MAIN AVE S
3707 MAIN AVE S
Urban Medium
Urban Low
Future Land Use Map
Parcels
FLU_RDG
Open Wetland
Urban Low
Urban Medium
5/27/2025, 11:28:34 AM
0 0.03 0.050.01 mi
0 0.04 0.080.02 km
1:2,257
ArcGIS Web AppBuilder
3817 ASHTON AVE
518 36TH ST S519 37TH ST S401 37TH ST S
3901 MAIN AVE S
3707 MAIN AVE S
3707 MAIN AVE S
3707 MAIN AVE S
3901 MAIN AVE S
3823 MAIN AVE S
3707 MAIN AVE S
JJ-R3A
JJ-R3A
JJ-B3
JJ-B3
Zoning Map
Parcels
Zoning
JJ-A
JJ-B3
JJ-R3A
5/27/2025, 11:27:35 AM
0 0.03 0.050.01 mi
0 0.04 0.080.02 km
1:2,257
ArcGIS Web AppBuilder
3817 ASHTON AVE
3901 MAIN AVE S
3707 MAIN AVE S
3901 MAIN AVE S
3823 MAIN AVE S
518 36TH ST S
3707 MAIN AVE S
3707 MAIN AVE S
519 37TH ST S401 37TH ST S
3707 MAIN AVE S
Location Map
Parcels
5/27/2025, 11:21:59 AM
0 0.03 0.050.01 mi
0 0.04 0.080.02 km
1:2,257
ArcGIS Web AppBuilder
3817 ASHTON AVE
518 36TH ST S519 37TH ST S401 37TH ST S
3901 MAIN AVE S
3707 MAIN AVE S
3707 MAIN AVE S
3707 MAIN AVE S
3901 MAIN AVE S
3823 MAIN AVE S
3707 MAIN AVE S
Suitability Map
Parcels
SuitabilityModel
Low Limitations
Moderate Limitations
5/27/2025, 11:39:06 AM
0 0.03 0.050.01 mi
0 0.04 0.080.02 km
1:2,257
ArcGIS Web AppBuilder
City of Brookings
Staff Report
Brookings City & County
Government Center, 520
Third Street
Brookings, SD 57006
(605) 692-6281 phone
(605) 692-6907 fax
File #:RES 25-057,Version:1
Action on Resolution 25-057, a Resolution Transferring Capital Improvement Plan Sinking Funds.
Summary and Recommended Action:
Staff recommends approval of a resolution authorizing the transfer of $27,950 from the Capital
Improvement Plan (CIP) Sinking Fund to the Fire Department to support critical maintenance and
repairs for fire apparatus. This allocation addresses pressing operational needs and aligns with the
City’s goals for maintaining a strong and responsive emergency services infrastructure.
Attachments:
Memo
Resolution
City of Brookings Printed on 6/18/2025Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™
City Council Agenda Item Memo
From: Troy Hughes, Fire Chief, Ashley Rentsch, Finance Director
Council Meeting: June 24, 2025
Subject: Resolution 25-057: Transferring CIP Sinking Funds
Presenter: Troy Hughes, Fire Chief
Summary and Recommended Action:
Staff recommends approval of a resolution authorizing the transfer of $27,950 from the
Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) Sinking Fund to the Fire Department to support critical
maintenance and repairs for fire apparatus. This allocation addresses pressing
operational needs and aligns with the City’s goals for maintaining a strong and
responsive emergency services infrastructure.
Item Details:
The Fire Department requests a transfer of $27,950 from the CIP Sinking Fund to
support repairs and maintenance across several apparatus units. The scope of this
work includes:
Apparatus/Item Description of Service Estimated Cost
11 Fire Apparatus Units Routine oil and fuel filter service $6,600
Tower 1 Replace electronic management
system screen and controller $5,000
Rescue 1 Replace electronic management
system screen and controller $5,000
Ladder 2 Replace electronic management
system screen and controller $5,000
Engine 5 Rebuild water pump (incl. seals and
impeller components $4,500
Engine 3 Repair battery charging system $1,850
These repairs and services will be performed on multiple apparatus units to support the
department’s operational readiness and equipment functionality.
Legal Consideration:
None.
Strategic Plan Consideration:
Fiscal Responsibility – The City of Brookings will responsibly manage resources
through transparency, efficiency, equity, and exceptional customer service.
Safe, Inclusive, Connected Community – The City of Brookings will create an
environment for inclusive programs, gathering places, and events where the
community can safely live, work and come together to participate in opportunities
for learning, recreation and enjoyment.
Financial Consideration:
The proposed resolution reallocates $27,950 from the CIP Sinking Fund to the Fire
Department without increasing the City’s overall budget. The transfer enables critical
repairs and promotes improved equipment maintenance planning.
Supporting Documentation:
Resolution
RESOLUTION 25-057
A RESOLUTION TRANSFERRING CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
SINKING FUNDS
WHEREAS, the City of Brookings hereby transfers City Manager’s contingency funds to
fund unplanned operational obligations of the municipality. This resolution is for the
purpose of completing a transfer of contingency funds to the following accounts:
422 Fire
101-403-5-422-07 Contracted Services $27,950
Total Transfers $27,950
The Financing Source for this transfer is from the following account s:
213-405-5-911-00 CIP Sinking Fund $27,950
Total Source of Funding $27,950
WHEREAS, this resolution is deemed necessary for the immediate preservation of the
public peace, health, safety and support of the City, and shall become effective upon
publication.
Passed and Approved this 24th day of June, 2025.
CITY OF BROOKINGS, SD
Oepke G. Niemeyer, Mayor
ATTEST:
Bonnie Foster, City Clerk
City of Brookings
Staff Report
Brookings City & County
Government Center, 520
Third Street
Brookings, SD 57006
(605) 692-6281 phone
(605) 692-6907 fax
File #:ID 25-0307,Version:1
City of Brookings Progress Report.
Summary:
Samantha Beckman, Assistant to the City Manager, will provide a progress report highlighting the
City’s activities and projects.
Attachments:
Report
City of Brookings Printed on 6/20/2025Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™
Progress ReportJune 2025
Brookings Public
Library
•Teen Escape Room
•Bike Rodeo
• Rescheduled to June 27
th
•Summer Reading Program
• 1,047 Registered
https://www.brookingslibrary.org/library_services/summer_reading_program_registration.php
Dacotah Bank Center
•Carnival
• May 29-31
•Chicago
• Tickets on Sale, November 16
•Uncle Sam Jam
• July 4
Police
•Hiring
• Deputy Chief of Police
• Communications Operator - Dispatcher
•New Law
• Move Over Law begins July 1
•Safety Town
• Began June 2
• NEW Brookings buildings
Public Works
Engineering Division
•Slurry Seal Project
• Work Completed June 9-16
• Areas Covered
Downtown
8th St S
Medary Ave (2
nd St S – 20
th St S)
20th St S (West of Main Ave S)
Main Ave S (South of 20th St S)
Public Works
Engineering Division
•Asphalt Maintenance Project
• 7
th Avenue utility work completed
• Continuing work at 1
st Ave, 2nd Ave, 3rd Ave, Ridge Dr, Deer Ln
• To be completed in October
•12th St S Shared-Use Trail Project
• Removal work started this month
• To be completed by August
•Main Ave S & 12th St S Traffic Signal & Ramp Project
• Ramp/Electric work started this month
• To be completed in August
Public Works
•Facility Improvements
• Landfill Equipment Storage Building – Complete
• Landfill Parking Lot Pavement - Complete
•New Equipment
• Landfill – Dozer
• Streets – Motor Grader with Wing & Roller
Parks, Recreation
& Forestry
•Fifth Street Gym
• Open gym times began June 1
•Brookings Activity Center
• Pie & Ice Cream Fundraiser
• June 28, 11am-3pm
•Hillcrest Aquatic Center
• Open for the season
Downtown Fire
Update
• 322 MainAve – Masonry
• 320 MainAve – Demolition
• 318 Main Ave – Debris Removal
• 314 MainAve – Restoration, Masonry
• Next Steps: Sidewalk Repairs
City of Brookings
Staff Report
Brookings City & County
Government Center, 520
Third Street
Brookings, SD 57006
(605) 692-6281 phone
(605) 692-6907 fax
File #:ID 25-0289,Version:1
Executive Session, pursuant to SDCL 1-25-2.3, for the purpose of consulting with legal counsel or
reviewing communications from legal counsel about proposed or pending litigation or contractual
matters; and SDCL 1-25-2.5, for the purpose of discussing marketing or pricing strategies by a board
or commission of a business owned by the state or any of its political subdivisions, when public
discussion may be harmful to the competitive position of the business.
SDCL 1-25-2. Executive or closed meetings--Purposes--Authorization--Violation as misdemeanor.
Executive or closed meetings may be held for the sole purposes 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 contractor;
2)Discussing the expulsion, suspension, discipline, assignment of or the educational program of
a student or the eligibility of a student to participate in interscholastic activities provided by the
South Dakota High School Activities Association;
3)Consulting with legal counsel or reviewing communications from legal counsel about proposed
or pending litigation or contractual matters;
4)Preparing for contract negotiations or negotiating with employees or employee
representatives;
5)Discussing marketing or pricing strategies by a board or commission of a business owned by
the state or any of its political subdivisions, when public discussion may be harmful to the
competitive position of the business; or
6)Discussing information pertaining to the protection of public or private property and any person
on or within public or private property specific to:
a.Any vulnerability assessment or response plan intended to prevent or mitigate criminal
acts;
b.Emergency management or response;
c.Public safety information that would create a substantial likelihood of endangering
public safety or property, if disclosed;
d.Cyber security plans, computer, communications network schema, passwords, or user
identification names;
e.Guard schedules;
f.Lock combinations;
g.Any blueprint, building plan, or infrastructure record regarding any building or facility
that would expose or create vulnerability through disclosure of the location,
configuration, or security of critical systems of the building or facility; and
h.Any emergency or disaster response plans or protocols, safety or security audits or
reviews, or lists of emergency or disaster response personnel or material; any location
or listing of weapons or ammunition; nuclear, chemical, or biological agents; or other
military or law enforcement equipment or personnel.
However, any official action concerning the matters pursuant to this section shall be made at an open
official meeting. An executive or closed meeting must be held only upon a majority vote of the
City of Brookings Printed on 6/18/2025Page 1 of 2
powered by Legistar™
File #:ID 25-0289,Version:1
members of the public 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 prevents
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.
Source: SL 1965, ch 269; SL 1980, ch 24, § 10; SL 1987, ch 22, § 1; SL 2014, ch 90, § 2; SL 2019,
ch 2, § 1; SL 2022, ch 4, § 2.
City of Brookings Printed on 6/18/2025Page 2 of 2
powered by Legistar™