City Council - Regular Meeting

Thank you.

All right, let's start this meeting. I call this meeting to order. Please stand for the Pledge of Allegiance.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Thank you all for coming this evening will the city clerk please take attendance All council members are present.

Mr. Mayor city attorney is joining us on conference line.

All right. Thank you entertain a motion to approve the agenda so moved Second they're moving second. Is there any comments on the agenda from the public? Council have comments questions Please call the roll Avery I Doran I Hager I Nehmeyer I specker I Tilton burn I Wendell I move on to open forum in order to provide equal access to all during the open forum and public comment portions of the meeting. Each individual offering comments shall not exceed the allotted three minute period. The podium light will turn green and then to yellow when there is one minute remaining. Your time for comment has expired when the podium light turns red. Is there a member of the public who wishes to address the council on an item not on tonight's agenda? And if you do so, come up to the mic, please state your name and address. Come forward, sir.

My name is Robert Herb. I'm a resident of City of Aurora. I'm coming up to discuss the automated license plate readers that have come up all over our city. Would any of you just for the matter of public safety like to list everywhere you've been in the past seven days? I don't see any takers. We have some members of our law enforcement community here. Would you like to state where you've been for the past seven days? No, that's not surprising. Maybe if you don't want to tell everybody where you've been, you can just tell me. I am a security analyst. You can definitely trust me with that data. I will keep it safe and I won't let anybody know where you've been, except my business partners and those who have a legitimate reason. um of course i won't be verifying what those legitimate reasons are how on earth would i ever know um i will just trust them when they say they have a legitimate reason to track your location and everywhere that you've been um this is what the city of brookings is asking us well actually you're not asking us you're telling us that if we want to live and work and shop in brookings that we must hand over a detailed list of everywhere that we have been in the city of brookings every day that we come here To me, that does not sound like a safe city to be in. That does not sound like a city that I want to shop in. I don't want to come here to work because I don't want to be tracked. If that sounds reasonable to you, I'll leave my email address so you can send me that list of everywhere that you've been, and I look forward to it. Thank you.

Thank you for your comments. Any other comments, please?

My name is Andrew Kniczny. I'm a resident of Brookings, South Dakota. I'm a hockey, swim team, and baseball dad, a health care provider in our community, and a proud graduate of SDSU. Tonight I want to lay out the framework this group of concerned citizens is going to walk you through. But first one thing, nothing that we say tonight is aimed at any of you. We believe that you want what we want, and that's what's best for Brookings. When you approved what was presented to you as a simple budget line item, you made the best decision you could with the very limited information that you had and promises that have proved to be false. So if you hear anger in my voice tonight, I'm not angry at any of you. I'm angry on your behalf. I'm angry for all of us here. We're not here to take your time, we're here to hopefully save you time. What we're handing you is a primary sourced material document. Every claim cited back to its source, the promises Flock made, and where each one was broken. Birkin signed contract with Flock and Chief Drake's own responses, which you'll want to compare against the contract itself. This took us months to assemble. I'm hoping it takes you an evening to review. Having it all laid out in one place makes it easier to stay on the structural questions and not get pulled into the vendor's framing. We will start with a community IT and cybersecurity professional explaining what these cameras actually do. And then we are going to take the time to address the pro-flock arguments, the they're just license plate readers and your phone already tracks you arguments. These ejections are not stupid. Individually, these hypotheses can make sense on the surface, but they skip past the linchpin issue straight into what's downstream from it, none of which hold if the load-bearing issue underneath it fails. So we will help clear them out of the way, not to tell you what to think, But so when we actually get to what happened here in our actual city of Brookings with our ALPR contracts and what's wrong with it, that we don't get stuck in the weeds debating hypothetical points on our own heads that are mute until the basic foundational problem is addressed. And that big problem is that we have been lied to enough times about what ALPR technology was going to do versus what they actually did, that continuing to believe them is not only irresponsible, But it stops being a decision you can defend to your constituents. We will outline these lies, each one cited directly from flock's own terms and conditions or marketing materials. You have the packet emailed to you from months ago and I sent it again today and it should be in the meeting minutes. This evidence is irrefutable by anyone willing to hear the truth.

Thank you for your comments. Any other comments?

Anybody have comments?

No, I'm good.

GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS CRAIG JORGENSEN. MY NAME IS CRAIG JORGENSEN. I WORKED AS A CYBERSECURITY I WORKED AS A CYBERSECURITY ANALYST FOR A NUMBER OF ANALYST FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS. YEARS. I WANTED TO SPEAK TONIGHT TO I WANTED TO SPEAK TONIGHT TO PROVIDE SOME INFORMATION OF THE PROVIDE SOME INFORMATION OF THE HARD FACTS OF ALPR CAMERAS, HARD FACTS OF ALPR CAMERAS, SPECIFICALLY FLOCK CAMERA SPECIFICALLY FLOCK CAMERA OPERATIONS. ALPRs or automated license plate readers are a type of camera that monitor a section of property or road continuously. They are online and operating 24-7. These cameras are different than the frost cameras the city uses to monitor road conditions or the traffic light cameras seen on many of the traffic lights here in Brookings. Upon detecting motion, ALPRs capture a set of images and process what is seen in the hardware at the camera's location. It captures license plate details if possible, but will also log vehicle make, model, color, and distinguishing features like bumper stickers or body damage. It then sends this processed information along with the time and location to a flock managed database. I want to make this very clear. They capture and log the details of every single vehicle that drives past them. Once the data is in the database, it is searchable by the org that leased the camera. Searching or creating alerts in the system does not require a warrant or an ongoing investigation to be performed. The database is also searchable by any organizations that the leasing organization chooses to share the data with. To date, Brookings Police Department has not disclosed what agencies they share that data with. The value of a system like this is that vehicles can be flagged and alerted to law enforcement for quick responses. One cost the system comes at is it cannot know criminal from innocent traffic until the data is already captured. I presented a number of questions to this body in February. After that meeting and with assistance from members of the council, I posed a number of questions to Chief Drake about how Brookings Police Department is using this system. Every question I asked about how Flock operates in Brookings was met with either a rejection to privilege that information or sales information from Flock's own website, some of which was factually inaccurate at the time. While you hear more commentary from the public, I would strongly request at least a study session on this topic by the city council to help provide answers to the Brookings community. Thank you.

Hi, my name is Amanda Figgis. I live in Brookings, and I'd just like to address some of the pro-FLOC arguments. It's just a license plate reader. That confusion comes straight from what they choose to call it, and you don't have to take my word that it's more than that. FLOC's own developer documentation allows an officer to search their database with no plate entered at all. Their own comparison page against a competitor advertises identifying a car, quote, even without a plate. A license plate reader that works with no license plate is not a license plate reader. Flock's own marketing refers to this as a vehicle fingerprint. They even trademarked it. A fingerprint identifies a person. They chose that word. We didn't. The reality is that we were sold a plate reader, but what we got was a vehicle identification system that tracks and logs the locations of our community members. There's no expectation of privacy in public. I understand that instinct. And if this were one camera, not aggregated, not shared outside Brookings, I'd meet you halfway. But that's not what we're talking about. We're talking about the aggregate, and that's exactly the line the courts draw. In Carpenter, the Supreme Court held that stepping outside doesn't surrender your rights when the government compiles a permanent record of your movements. The leading court to examine these exact cameras set the test. How long the tracking lasts, whether it's silent, how much of your life the pattern reveals. Now apply that here. This isn't one camera, and the data doesn't stay in Brookings. Customs and border protection has been documented querying FLOC's national network directly in some states, including Illinois, in apparent violation of the state law. A University of Washington study found federal access reaching even departments that it never opted in at no cost through a back door. That's the aggregate, a searchable record of where you go reachable by agencies you never voted for and never authorized. Your phone already tracks you. The difference is choice. I can leave it at home, I can turn it off, and even then the government can't get what's on it without a warrant. That's how the system is supposed to work. And if we find out the government is doing it anyway, tracking us illegally in violation of the Fourth Amendment, that's a call to fight back. One violated right isn't an invitation for more. DON'T YOU WANT TO CATCH CRIMINALS? OF COURSE. EVERYONE IN THIS ROOM DOES. OKAY.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS.

Hi, I'm Lawrence Novotny, a long-time Brookings resident and chair of Career Partners. Career stands for Community Law Enforcement Action Response. Our mission is to support community-focused policing to increasing communication between civilians and law enforcement. While CREAR recognizes that four cameras play a vital role in police investigations and the apprehension of felons, we also believe there needs to be regulations on the cameras' use. CREAR is asking both the City Council and the Brookings Police Department to hold a public study session on the cameras and to develop policies governing the use of the cameras. The study session and the policies need to address these issues. What safeguards oversight does the Brookings Police have in place to protect the public from any potential abuse by the people who have access to the cameras? Are the cameras necessary? How many times out of the length of the time the cameras have been in place were the cameras used to investigate a crime? How long is the data being stored? Who has access to it? What guarantee is there that the data has been completely erased? When a citizen asks if they are being monitored, they need to receive a response within a reasonable timeframe, like a week. So thank you very much for taking this into consideration.

Thank you for your comments. Next.

Bradley Walker, resident of Brookings. The truth is, I'd love the luxury of debating any of these merits, but even if you trusted the government completely, believed every politician told the truth, and extended that same trust to detect billionaires profiting from this data, even then, you'd still need an agreement both sides actually kept. Flock didn't keep theirs. That's the issue underneath all the others. Settle it, and every one of these debates is worth having. Leave it unsettled, and none of them are. When Flock came to Brookings, four distinct promises were made. Every single one has been broken. Broken promises, part one. On February 16th, 2026, Flock rewrote the contract that governs the city, not with a meeting, not with a phone call, not with a signature from anyone in Brookings, because our contract binds us to whatever Flock posts on his own website. You may have been told otherwise that Brookings is still on the original terms that nothing's changed. I'm leaving each of you a copy of their signed contract tonight. Look at the last page directly above the signatures. We are bound to whatever terms sit at that URL. And we've confirmed there is no master services agreement protecting us from those changes. The full cited review is in front of you. I won't read contact language into the record. You have it. In three minutes, here's what it comes down to. Promise one, the city owns the data. FLOC contracts stated it plainly as between FLOC and customer, all right, title and interest in the customer data belong to and are retained solely by customer. FLOC's marketing said it more simply, your neighborhood owns 100% of the data. Promise two, FLOC will not sell your data. Prior contract language included an ambiguous promise. FLOC does not own and shall not sell customer data. Promise number three, data retention is temporary. FLOC committed to a 30-day default retention period after which data would be automatically and permanently deleted. This was a central selling point. Short retention, no long-term tracking. Local agencies control access. Flock assured cities that local law enforcement would decide who could access data. Flock's own privacy stated Flock's safety will never share, sell, or access your data. That's about it for me. Thank you for your time.

Thank you, Bradley. Any other comments? might say well this gentleman's coming up here bonnie i would assume you've got a sign up sheet for everyone to yes i do all right if you make comments tonight please sign up so that we've got your record of your name and address thank you hello i'm caleb evenson long time residents here in brookings it's been quite a while since i've seen many of you so continuing on our statement

Under those original conditions, city councils approved these cameras. Residents, all right, sorry.

Sorry, too fast.

FLOC's license to use data was limited. Earlier contract versions granted FLOC only a limited license to use customer data, quote, as may be necessary for FLOC to provide the FLOC services to customer. That was it. Nothing perpetual, nothing irrevocable, nothing about improving flock zone products. The source is flocked safety standard EULA, same archive document referenced above. Under those original conditions, city councils approved these cameras. Residents accepted them, most of us did. The conditions that made those agreements agreeable no longer exist. What changed and why it matters? On February 16th of 2026, FLOC Safety published updated terms and conditions. The changes were not cosmetic. Every one of the promises lifted above has been weakened, removed, or reversed. FLOC's updated section 4.1 says grants to FLOC a limited, non-exclusive, royalty-free, irrevocable, perpetual worldwide license to A, use and disclose customer data to provide the FLOC services and B, to use customer data to support and improve FLOC's products and services. At the same time, FLOC removed the explicit promise that had appeared in prior contract versions. The sentence, FLOC does not own and shall not sell customer data, no longer appeared anywhere in FLOC's operative contract language. Here's what's changed, stated plainly. The data license went from limited to perpetual and irrevocable. It no longer expires when the contract ends. Flock can now use customer data to support and improve Flock's products and services. This language is so broad, it is functionally meaningless as a limitation. ANY USE OF THE DATA CAN BE FRAMED AS IMPROVING A PRODUCT OR SERVICE. THERE IS NO WAY TO ENFORCE THIS, NO WAY TO PROVE A VIOLATION, AND NO WAY TO HOLD FLOCK ACCOUNTABLE FOR WHAT IT DOES WITH THE CITY'S DATA UNDER THIS Clause. THAT IS NOT AN ACCIDENT. IT IS A BLANK CHECK WRITTEN IN LEGAL LANGUAGE. The promise not to sell customer data was deleted. Flock calls this redundant, but no replacement language existed anywhere in the February 16th contract. Disputes now go to mandatory arbitration under Georgia law. Not local courts, not local laws. If any city ever needed to challenge Flock's conduct, it would no longer do so in front of a local judge applying local law. And I'll step down for the next.

Thank you. Any other comments?

Hi. My name is Matthew Sanders. I actually am a Brookings resident, but I just bought my first house in Brookings at the beginning of August. So I'm kind of excited to be here and talk in front of you. So I'll finish up and kind of summarize our concerns and why we've brought this to your attention today. We do not have a debate whether your phone tracks you. We don't have to re-litigate the Fourth Amendment. We do not have to argue about whether this technology could theoretically prevent some crime. We just have to look at what actually happened. An agreement was made with our community. Distinct promises were made about ownership, about sales, about jurisdiction. about the terms themselves. Every single one of those promises has been broken, and every one of them was broken by a company that is still today advertising the deleted promises on its marketing website. I, we, could stand here for another hour and walk you through more of it. How Flock's own patents describe capabilities they never disclosed to the cities buying their cameras, how they have misled other municipalities, how they have proven again and again that they are not trustworthy stewards of the data that they collect. but we don't need any of that tonight. We already have everything we need right in front of you or in your inboxes. We are requesting that you do not renew this contract, and we hope that you pass a moratorium on all automated license plate readers and surveillance cameras inside city limits, including removal of what's already there. We know that's a big ask. Lawrence and Clear at least mentioned the study session. That we feel would be a big improvement on sort of the communications and what we've had in the past. we know that you have approved one agreement we're kind of living under another I don't think we voted or at least you guys have voted for a second one this time but you can at least vote for our future we know that's a tough ask we know that with law enforcement and living in a community like Brookings can be tricky So we have a few requests. We've listed them out for you today. Other people have our concerns. We may not be the last people to talk to you about this. So we hope that you listen to us. Again, thank you for your time and I'll yield to someone else. Thank you.

Thank you for your comments. Is there any other comments on this subject?

Hello, my name is Noah Heason. I'm a resident of Plain in South Dakota. I'm an SDSU alum, and I currently temporarily reside in Brookings.

Sure, bring your mic down so I can.

Yeah. There you go. Sorry. I'm here tonight to express my strong opposition of the automated license plate readers, ALPRs, that are in and around the Brookings community for the reasons that have been expressed by other members of the public. So thank you.

WE HAVE ANY OTHER COMMENTS ON THIS PARTICULAR SUBJECT? IS THERE ANYONE ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO APPROACH THE COUNSEL ON ANOTHER SUBJECT BESIDES THE FLOCK CAMERAS? ALL RIGHT. WE'RE GOING TO MOVE ON TO CONSENT AGENDA. I'M SORRY. GO AHEAD.

Thank you. I am Brenda Anderson, and I'm a resident of Brookings. And I am here to publicly request that the council not approve Jeff Strewe.

Brenda, we're getting there.

We're getting there.

Yeah, comments later.

Thank you.

All right. Okay, consent agenda. Before I even start to ask public order, I am going to make a motion to remove item 5B from the consent agenda and place it on the regular agenda immediately after our consent agenda. Do I have a second?

I would second.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Opposed? Or do we need a voice vote?

Roll call, please.

Roll call. Please call the roll.

Dorian? Aye. Hager? Aye. Nehmeyer?

Aye.

Specker? Aye. Tilton-Byrne? Aye. Wendell?

Aye.

Avery?

Aye. All right. This item will be immediately after the consent agenda. Is there any other objections to what we have on consent agenda tonight? Council have any questions, comments? All right.

Please call the roll.

Hager, Nehmeyer, Specker, Tiltonburn, Wendell, Avery, Doran.

Okay, so all right, before I move on, I want to just make a statement. We did have a lot of comments about the flock cameras and the contract that we had. The chief of the police is going to do a presentation on the 22nd of September, so mic that on your calendars. All right, so we'll move on to the next item, which is the one that we removed. I make a motion to approve item 5B.

I'll second that.

All right. Before I ask for comments from both the public and the council, I have basically a statement. The city charter states the mayor's responsibility is to appoint members to the city's volunteer boards. with the advice and consent of the City Council. The County Commission has recommended Jeff Strui to serve as its representative on the City of Brookings Human Rights Commission. As a courtesy to the City's partners at Brookings County, I am bringing their recommendation to the Council for consideration. The Human Rights Commission has a responsibility to promote human and civil rights, discourage discrimination, and make Brookings an inclusive and welcoming community. I do not believe the candidate's past public comments and expressed views reflect the purpose and the intent of the Human Rights Commission. In full transparency, I do not personally support this appointment. I will be voting no on this appointment, and I would ask the County Commission to provide an alternative recommendation. Is there any public comment on this item? Now you can, Brenda.

Thank you very much. Brenda Anderson, Brookings resident, and I emailed you each as well. I am here to publicly request that the city council not approve of Jeff Strieff as a member of the Human Rights Commission. In truth, his words about the LGBTQ community in public are not in line with the mission of the commission. stating things that are not factual when they are really quite dangerous and people start to believe that That's very concerning me. Therefore. I ask that you vote. No and not support his Application.

Thank you Are there any other comments on this particular subject?

Hi Chris social. City of Brookings. I also want to oppose the appointment of of Jeff Sri for very similar. Purposes he has a history of comments that are very antithetical to the actual purpose of the Commission and would not do the duties of it and. And you know, it's just not a. Not a good fit, so I want to make that or support the same previous statements.

Good evening. I'm Jane Pafer. I'm here to support Jeff Struwe. Jeff, as a military veteran, brings a perspective on Human Rights Commission vital lived experiences regarding systemic equity, institutional rights, and the intersection of service member status with civil protections. In addition, he has Diverse representation strengthens the Human Rights Commission and their credibility when evaluating complex discrimination claims across varied public and private sectors. In addition, Jeff has a child with significant disabilities, which gives him personal experience in people who have challenges, diverse challenges. Thank you very much.

My name is Joni Holm, and I'm a Brookings resident. I believe in freedoms for all individuals, whether that's speech or what I read, where I worship or if I worship. And that everyone should be able to live their authentic life, whether that's homosexual, heterosexual, trans, or any of that combination. I fear that Mr. Strui does not have those beliefs and would not serve all Brookings residents with respect. Thank you.

Hello, my name is Carla Dieter from Brookings, and I'm here in support of Jeff Struwe. I think Jane Pafer made some excellent points. This committee should have diverse ideology, and it would only strengthen it. So I still support Jeff Struwe. Thank you.

I'm Amanda Fickus, a resident of Brookings. I would like to oppose Jeff Struy. He publicly, in a city council meeting, called LGBTQ people child molesters. He was part of a local book ban group, when books are there to increase ideas and awareness, so the argument for free speech doesn't really work. he protested the justice for black lives March he promoted promoting one religion over other religions and he's said many anti-immigrant things as well so for all of those reasons and the Human Rights Commission purpose to uphold the rights of all people from various backgrounds and diversity, I would ask that you oppose his appointment.

Jen Osterloh, also a citizen of the city of Brookings. I also rise to oppose the appointment of Jeff based on many of the things that have already been named, including some of his hateful comments that in fact do the opposite of the purpose of the Human Rights Coalition and who they are set to represent. I also took time to peruse his application so that I could hear in his words why he thought this would be a good fit. And I found it striking that in that application, the thing that he talked about first and most frequently was being a veteran. And while I thank him for his service, I do want to name that the Human Rights Commission is tasked with protecting a great number of people who are discriminated against openly. And that is not one of the challenges that our veterans currently are facing, is being one of those discriminated against groups that needs extra protection. And it makes me question why he would want to be a part of this group. I would hope that we would have people who have diverse opinions, diverse experiences, diverse ideas. I think that's really, really valuable. I have appreciated that about living in the city of Brookings, that we are a diverse people. And I do believe we should have diverse voices represented. However, I also think that it is important that the diversity of those voices are able to lift up, to support, and to protect the diverse voices of people around them. And that is something that I do not believe that Jeff will intend to do based on his own previous public comments. Thank you.

I WOULD JUST LIKE TO SAY THAT I WATCHED THE VIDEO OF THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS APPROVING OF STRUEY'S RECOMMENDATION, AND I FOUND IT SURPRISING THAT THEIR MAIN LOGIC WAS JUST THAT THEY FEEL THE COMMISSION NEEDS A BROADER DIVERSITY IN THE GROUP. SPECIFICALLY, POST, FOR EXAMPLE, SAID THAT STRUEY WOULD HAVE REPRESENTED THE DISAFFECTED IN BROOKINGS COUNTY. I DON'T KNOW EXACTLY WHAT THEY'RE REFERRING TO BECAUSE I'M NOT THAT FAMILIAR WITH THEIR DIALOGUE. HOWEVER, WHAT SURPRISED ME IS THAT HE BROUGHT THAT UP FROM THE MISSION OF THE COMMISSION THAT HE FOUND WITHIN THE DOCUMENTS REGARDING THE COMMISSION AND HE FOCUSED ON THAT, NOT ON WHO NEEDED TO BE PROTECTED. IT SEEMS TO ME LIKE STREWY IS A WEDGE ISSUE HERE. THAT'S JUST MY OPINION. THANKS.

Do we have any other comments from the public?

Bradley Walker again. I wasn't prepared to talk about this particular subject, but I do have a few words. I believe that Jeff Struy is a quality individual, and I have much respect for him. You all claim that Brookings bring your dreams. It's all about diversity. So, and we have people saying that Jeffrey doesn't agree with their values. Well, doesn't that better to have someone on, not everybody's just gonna give it a rubber stamp on everything that comes up and isn't it better to have different opinions to combine on the commission to come and to idea together on whatever issue they're talking about. Anyway, I do support Jeff for this position, thank you.

All right. Any other public comments on this item? I appreciate all the comments that did come before us. I'll close the public session part on this and open it up to City Council for comments or questions. And who wants to start? Council Member, our Deputy Mayor, Mr. Wendell. Thank you, Mayor.

Is Jeff here tonight?

Okay.

I had a question for him that he'd answered for me previously, but I was hoping he could share it with all of us. I was sort of curious why Jeff would be interested in the Human Rights Commission. There's lots of ways to get involved in your community. In fact, the city of Brookings has a number of boards and committees and commissions that his background might be better aligned with and his area of experience and expertise might better more naturally align with. But he had indicated that this appointment from the Brookings County Commission had remained vacant for a year. and a member of the county commission had reached out to him and encouraged him to apply for this position. And that surprised me. And I have lots of concerns about Jeff's fitness for service on the Human Rights Commission. I'll be voting no to approve that recommendation this evening. And we'll hear continued comment about his previous public statements, his social media behavior, his platform when he ran for public office. I think we all have a good sense of Jeff's worldview and the misalignment with the Human Rights Commission. But I would want us to pull back one step to a broader concern I have, which is that the Brookings County Commission unanimously approved this recommendation to the Human Rights Commission, knowing all the things we know about Jeff Struwe's background. And that's really concerning to me. And it isn't random that he applied for this post and was unanimously approved. They recruited him to apply for this seat on the Human Rights Commission. There's more than 28,000 adults in Brookings County. And our commission decided that Jeff Struwe best represented the mission of the Human Rights Commission, that he should occupy the one seat they appoint to that commission. That gives me some pause. I would describe it as baffling, but I'm actually not baffled. by that action, I know exactly what the intention behind that action was. And I'll be very transparent and say, I'm exhausted. And I think a lot of you are exhausted. by life these days that every issue becomes divisive and partisan and politicized. Even something as simple as the appointment to a local board or committee or commission has become intentionally weaponized by elected officials to test their colleagues. We're not going to appoint Jeff Strui to a seat on the Human Rights Commission, but we should ask how he received unanimous support and was recruited by our county commission to this seat. And if you all are as exhausted as I am, please continue to be engaged. Thank you to the dozens of you that reached out with emails and phone calls and texts. To those who are here this evening, thank you. But please continue to pay attention. This was not random. It wasn't an accident. These actions continue to happen because they're intentionally divisive. Please continue to pay attention. We will continue to protect the fort here, but we'll need your support to do it. And so I'm a no on Jeff Struy, and I hope our commission will send us a more appropriate appointment next time around, but we'll need all of you to watch the shop with us.

Any other comments, questions? Council Member Duren?

Thank you, Mayor. I would reiterate a lot of the comments that Deputy Nick Windle said as well. I believe that there is a difference between a working tension and a disruption. And I do believe that this current appointment would stall the progress of the HRC. Just like what Nick said, that there are a lot of other ways that that expertise and skill set that was listed in the application can be utilized. We do have disability awareness committee within the city. We do have local economic groups that represent veterans. We have a lot of nonprofits that need help. There is a need for volunteers, and there is a need for that alignment. It's deeply unfortunate that an individual had to be, just like what Nick said, weaponized in this process, because there are ways that I would like to get every single person in this community engaged and involved and feel like they are making an impact on their community as well. But this action weaponized a volunteer committee and our residents, and I'm deeply disappointed that we are having this discussion, but I look forward to the engagement that that individual can take in more appropriate ways and I do think the community for the Overwhelming engagement that they've provided with City Council and on social media and the County Commission on their feelings with this appointment Councilmember Hager

So first, I want to thank you, Mayor Niemeyer, for explaining the procedural issue involving the conflict between the Human Rights Commission ordinance and the city charter. I watched the county commission meeting where Jeff was put forward, and I also reviewed his application. In my opinion, Mr. Struy's application does not directly speak to the purpose of the Human Rights Commission. It was rather vague, with the exception of mentioning an interest in advocating for veterans and the disabled. Watching the commission meeting, it becomes clear that Mr. Struy is selected for partisan and ideological reasons, although the commissioners are unwilling to say that directly. Instead, they vaguely discuss Mr. Struy's prior public comment before them and how he represents a quote, disaffected population in the county. Other reasons for his appointment focus on public support for Mr. Struy and how he is, quote, open-minded, very positive, willing to compromise, and able to, quote, represent all of Brookings County. Through my knowledge of Mr. Struy's civic engagement and other examples pointed out to me in the numerous emails, texts, and phone calls I received, I disagree with the county commission's assessment of him. Through his various comments on public record, it is clear he will not advance the Human Rights Commission's mission that is centered on quote, fighting discrimination and ensuring that Brookings is a quote, inclusive and welcoming community. In my opinion, this mission is not partisan or ideological and is unifying across most of the political spectrum. It's about being a good neighbor and treating people how you want to be treated. Unfortunately, the County Commission chose to make this political. Unlike their experience, the public comment I received is overwhelmingly in opposition to Mr. Shrewy. Prior to tonight, the sole comment encouraging his appointment was couched in partisan terms. Taken collectively, I will be voting no on adding Jeff Strui to the Human Rights Commission.

Council Member Tilton-Byrne.

Thank you, Mayor. In the 10 years that I have served on this city council, I have never received more public comment around a committee or commission appointment than we did around Mr. Struy's nomination. Of all of the comments that I received, which is right around the number of 40 or 45 comments, the only comments that I heard that were in support of Mr. Struy's nomination were the ones that we heard in this room tonight. all others were very, very much against his nomination. In addition to the public feedback, I agree with the fellow council members that have spoken already that I do not believe Mr. Struwe would uphold the mission of the Human Rights Commission. I believe this not because of my own thoughts, but because of the comments that he has made publicly both in this room and in other spaces in this community. I think that there are many members of this community and within the county that would serve this commission in a really great way, but Mr. Strew is not one of them. This nomination, like others have said, feels very political and partisan, and this commission is not one that should be political or partisan. Instead, they should really be serving all of the people of this great community. I want to first and foremost thank the current members of the Commission for the great work that they're doing. Thank the past members of that Commission because they really have done phenomenal work, and I look forward to continuing to support that, but I will not be supporting Mr. Struy's nomination tonight.

All right. Any other comments from Council? All right. I guess we're done with that. Please call the roll.

Nehmeyer?

No.

Specker? No. Tildenburn? No. Wendell?

No.

Avery?

No.

Doran? No. Hager? No.

Motion fails. All right, we do not have any presentations or reports this evening. We'll move on to contracts and change orders. Item 7A, action on resolution 26-056. Yeah, I'll just stop. Everybody can leave that wants to leave. I want to listen to the rest of our business. Oh, Nick, you've got a question or a comment?

Well, I have a report on the Dakota Bank Center work group. Yeah, let's do that. Come on, nobody wants to hear a report from the Dakota Bank Center. You guys might want to wait. That's all right. I'll try not to take this person away. The press is still here. Okay, you can read about it tomorrow. That's right, that's right.

Okay.

Well, I wanted to give folks a report on the work of the Dakota Bank Center work group. And this is a little bit laud winded. I'll try to be brief because we'll be back in front of you with a full recommendation from the work group on September 22nd. So there's more to come on this. But as a work group, we had committed to the community that we would provide an update at the end of the summer on our work. So I wanted to just give you a little background and then update the group on the progress of the Dakota Bank Center work group. You might remember that in March we did a public engagement campaign. We did electronic surveys to gauge public interest in the future of the Dakota Bank Center, what types of programming the public was looking for at the Dakota Bank Center. We received a phenomenal response, more than 1,400 survey respondents. we began to evaluate those survey respondents. And while we got a lot of tremendous response to the survey, we hosted two public open houses that also had great response and great public participation. The challenge was there was no real consensus coming from those survey respondents. About a third said that they wanted to see the Dakota Bank Center focus on recreation activities. About a third said they wanted the Dakota Bank Center to focus on big concerts and big events. And about a third said they wanted the Dakota Bank Center to be a hybrid. And so without real clarity from public feedback, we had good information, but we didn't have a real template or a path for which to follow. And I'll be very frank and say, and most of you can understand and appreciate this, if the solution to some of the communities challenges at the Dakota Bank Center was easy, we likely would have arrived at it already. And so we know that whatever we do next will be sort of a calculated risk to some extent. But we want to gather as much information as possible before we venture down a path that we know will have some uncertainty. What we also did is began to collect as much data as possible about the events that have happened at the Dakota Bank Center, in particular over the last five years, the types of events the center has hosted, What the economic impact, the facility, those events have included. A broader economic impact analysis, so not just economic impact in the facility, but also to the community, in particular the hospitality sector. Trying to understand if we host concerts and major events at the Dakota Bank Center, does that yield more hotel room stays? Does it yield more traffic in our restaurants and in our convenience stores? We're just trying to get the broadest picture possible. of current activity at the Dakota Bank Center over the last five years to sort of inform the direction we go next. Those decisions couldn't all be made just by the City of Brookings staff and us as a council, so we engaged a work group to sort of move through understanding that data, collecting some more good data, so we're really making data-driven decisions, and getting a better sense of kind of the community's appetite to support future events at the dakota bank center i want to take a moment just to thank the members of the dakota bank center work group that have volunteered to serve with us we meet every wednesday morning at 7 30 a.m and so these are folks that are committing their early morning hours to dig into this issue and help give us good information about what to do next at the at the center. Paul is there representing the city of Brookings. I'm there representing the Brookings City Council. Tom Fishback from First Bank and Trust is there. Laurie Frederick, who is the new CEO of the Brookings Regional Growth Alliance, is on the work group. Jeff Holmes, who is the current chair of the Dakota Bank Center Advisory Committee, affiliated with SDSU Athletics, is on the work group. Jennifer Johnson, who's the vice chair of the Dakota Bank Center Advisory Committee, Jason Merkley from the Brookings Health System, and Erica Saunders, who serves as the chair of the Park and Recreation Board. So we've tried to pull together as many stakeholders that represent different users or future users of the facility as possible to have conversation about current state and what a future state could look like. I won't spend a lot of time doing a deep dive, but I did want to let you know that the real goal of the work group is to build a recommendation that will come back before the council at our meeting on Tuesday, September 22nd. And so we'll be back here presenting to the council the work group's recommendation for the next phase of the Dakota Bank Center on September 22nd. I wanted to just provide a couple of highlights. We're in a challenging phase of a project like this because there's a lot of things that we have some sense of, but we don't know with certainty. And I know that it's important that I'm cautious and not sharing details with certainty that have some potential to change in the next couple of weeks. And so I am being a little thoughtful about what I share, but there are some things that we feel confident enough about that we think it's important to declare for the community in tonight's update. And so I'm going to do that. The mission of the work group really is to ensure that the Dakota Bank Center can serve as the community's premier multipurpose space with a particular emphasis on youth sports, events, and conferences. Some of you know or have kind of got up to speed on the fact that the city of Brookings doesn't currently manage the Dakota Bank Center, but that the Dakota Bank Center is managed through a management agreement with a group called the Oak View Group. We refer to as OVG often. That's an agreement we've had for a number of years with OVG. It expires at the end of this calendar year. And so as we go through this process, we also had to make a decision about whether or not we're going to renew that existing operating agreement with OVG. It expires December 31st of 2026, and we have decided not to renew that agreement. OVG has been a good partner in managing the facility. Their local staff have been phenomenal, but that market is shifting a lot. And so we do not see value in continuing that agreement past the end of 2026. The current staff at the Dakota Bank Center are OVG employees. They're not employees of the city of Brookings. So we've also been working through that transition process with the team because we care deeply about that staff. They're Brookings folks, they're committed to the facility, they're committed to putting on great events in Brookings. We've worked with OBG to ensure that they will release that staff to come work for the city of Brookings as we operate that facility starting January 1st of 2027. And OBG has been a gracious partner. They've removed the non-solicitation clause from those employees' existing agreements, which means we can begin to communicate with those employees about the transition plan into a new facility. If you've managed agreements of this nature or you think about the complexities of employment contracts, you can imagine that the removal of that non-solicitation clause just frees us all up to have open dialogue about the needs of the facility, how we fairly bring staff along through the transition and prepare for 2027. We were able to meet Paul and Johnny and I with the staff at the Dakota Bank Center this morning and share that information with them and we'll continue that dialogue with that team now moving forward as we prepare that September 22nd recommendation for the council and then from September 22nd to the end of the calendar year preparing for that transition and the transition of that staff from OVG employees to City of Brookings employees in the new management structure. Lots of questions we all have about what that will look like, but at the very least we can begin communicating directly with that team and that was really important to us. Another point we wanted to make sure folks understand is that if you have an event on the calendar at the Dakota Bank Center for 2027, that event is still happening. It'll be managed in a city of Brookings managed facility, but your event is on the calendar. You'll continue to work with that team. They'll be reaching out in the coming days to affirm that with you. But we knew as there was conversation around the future of the Dakota Bank Center, there would be obvious questions from folks that have events in 2027, whether or not those were still happening. We are committed to fulfilling those events in the center in 2027. The other thing that the work group wanted to make sure we clarified at this end of summer update was how we're clearly defining recreation. I think there's been some broad conversation around what recreation could mean. We know there's a strong public appetite for an indoor recreation center in Brookings. That means something different to a whole variety of user groups and individual citizens. One thing that I think has sort of paralyzed that conversation over the last couple of years is whether or not indoor recreation should include aquatics and that's very cost prohibitive. And so this first version of what happens at the Dakota Bank Center will not include aquatics. That's not a part of as we're defining recreation. It also will not include a membership model. I know there had been some chatter and maybe some fear in the community that the city was going to invest in a new gym at the Dakota Bank Center that would have a membership model and fitness studios. We're not interested in competing in that market. We have a thriving private gym market in Brookings. We're home to a beautiful university wellness center that is very well resourced and very heavily used. Not wise for us to make that investment. And so that's not what we mean by recreation. We really mean to focus on youth sports, a place for youth sports associations to practice, to have games, to host tournaments for traveling teams. That's a market we're not fully taking advantage of. We've got a lot of youth sports organizations that have an interest in indoor space, practicing year round in a place they could host games and tournaments. we like to meet their needs as best we can and the work group has been engaging those folks throughout the summer and so there's been a lot of support and we'll continue to work so that as many folks can come under the tent as possible and call the dakota bank center phase 2 home Those were some of the highlights we wanted to make sure we provided. I won't get into the logistics of this tonight, but we'll share more on the 22nd. One thing, phase two of the Dakota Bank Center likely will not include our large concerts and those ticketed promoter events that I think some have associated with the Dakota Bank Center for a long time. It's not that we don't love those events. We're just living in a phase where our market is not a great place to host events like that. We don't sell enough tickets. We don't sell enough food and beverage. They're not yielding hotel stays. A venue in a city the size of Brookings can't support touring ticketed events. Lots of those A-list performers are performing in cities like Sioux Falls or larger. A venue like the Premier Center has been phenomenal for Sioux Falls and South Dakota in the region. It hasn't been so kind to a market our size in a facility like the Dakota Bank Center. And we don't compete fairly in that market for live ticketed events. And it's going to be hard for us to put the resources behind trying to continue to expand that market when it just doesn't exist anymore. We're not going to recruit Riley Green or the Jonas Brothers to perform in Brookings. Those folks are going to Sioux Falls. And I wish the Oak Ridge boys would sell enough tickets and enough beer to make that a viable business model. It's just not. And so we're moving away from that. I know that's been a lingering question that I think the work group wanted to speak to this evening as well. So the recommendation on the 22nd will have more information about the budget. what the facility will hold and what investments we intend to make in the facility, what the organizational structure will look like, more clearly defining recreation and what groups could have a home in the Dakota Bank Center, and then an investment that could be made in the conference event meeting space half of the facility and the viability of that part of the process. That's at a very high level, a long-winded recap of the work we've been doing this summer in the work group, and we'll bring a more fully formed recommendation back to the council for public consideration on September 22nd. All right.

Thank you, Nick. We'll just move on now. Contracts and change orders. Item 7A, action on resolution 26-056, a resolution awarding bid on 2026-01-SSI, 2026 Drainage Improvements Project. Charlie Richter, our city engineer, will present this item.

Good evening, council. As your city engineer, I'm here tonight requesting approval of resolution 26-056 to award a contract for the 2026 drainage improvements project. This project includes the following work at two different site locations. The replacement of the drainage channel at Village Square behind Buffalo Wild Wings. And the replacement of the inlet to the detention basin located at the intersection of 15th Street South and 7th Avenue. Bids for the project were opened on August 18th, where we received four bids. The lowest bidder for this project was BX Civil in construction with a low bid of $324,871.85. This bid is approximately 22% less than the engineer's estimate. Sufficient appropriations exist in the amended fiscal year budget and fund 2A2 storm drainage. Public Works recommends that BX Civil and construction be awarded the contract for this project.

Thank you, Charlie. I'm going to attend a motion to approve.

So moved. Second.

All right. Is there any public comment on this item? Council, questions, comments? Council Member Hager.

I just had a question of what can citizens expect as far as a timeline for these projects?

The Village Square channel replacement project will be done this fall. And then it's probable that the inlet replacement project at 15th Street South and 7th Avenue would be done next spring. It's possible that could be done also this fall, but we're getting kind of close to the unfortunate end of the construction season.

Any other questions by council? Comments? Please call the roll.

Specker? Aye. Tildenburn? Aye. Wendell?

Aye.

Avery?

Aye.

Doran? Aye. Hager? Aye. Nehmeyer?

Aye. All right. Item 8A, introduction and first reading on Ordinance 26-025, an ordinance pertaining to lost, unclaimed, or abandoned property in the city of Brookings, South Dakota. Lieutenant Jonathan Meinrich will present this item.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor, City Council, members of the public, and of course, Paul. Today, I'm proposing an ordinance in regards to lost, unclaimed, or abandoned property. This was tasked to me by Chief of Police Mike Drake. Currently, we take in property anywhere from 100 to 200 pieces of property. The vast amount of that property is returned back to owners. As far as it goes by STCL, finders come in, they get it, and then they can go ahead and give it to a person of high moral character. Police department tends to be that area that people like to do. It's also a social norm that people will come in and seek it out of that area. uh with this proposal what i am uh looking for is a 90-day window again items are taken we do our best in order to get them returned the vast majority are but there's always going to be property that's brought in that's going to be something like a key a toyota car key or a phone that's broken or no longer charges we just simply can't identify any person in order to return these since we can't identify anyone and currently we don't have a city ordinance Resolving this it would be great to have something put into place the proposal that we have put together would set a 90-day window during that 90-day window we Anytime property does come in what we do is try to contact the owner we use various methods phone calls contacting other agencies will also go ahead and use other resources within the law enforcement realm in order to try to get this thing returned. Again, vast majority are, not all of them can be. With this, the 90 day window will start. If we do know where the person is located with an address, we would send a certified mail letter to them. notifying them that it's there, that would start a 30-day window. Again, the latter of 30-day window or 90 days, so potentially 129 days, would elapse at that point. We would be able to either surplus the item, dispose of it, give it to donation, and that's especially important with civic organizations for bike strikes and uh... baby items at something under sdc l that we do also that is uh... very beneficial again the purpose is always to uh... get back to the property owner the other thing that we are we would propose is that if someone is a binder and uh... they do want to get possession of that property back Personally, I don't want to maintain that property. If they would go ahead and put in a request 30 days after giving it to us, it would help with sustainability of the city, something that's not going to go ahead and fill up our landfill or anything of that nature. It does very much so assist with that and it allows us to give it back for persons doing the right thing in regards to it. So again, ultimately, we're looking to try to return this property, get it back to them. But instead of having the department hold on to this for an extended amount of time, that fills up our lockers, our areas that we need to house this, it gives us an avenue in order to dispose of it or other ways to rectify it so that we are no longer possessing it. This ordinance was originally drafted by former- City Attorney Steve Brightman. It was passed at Woods and Fuller. And again, I support this. It would be a very viable thing in order to assist the city of Brookings Police Department in their endeavor.

All right. Thanks, John. Is there any public comment on this item?

Once in a while, no public comment, but just a question. On these items, how do you like posting photos of those, like on Facebook, so people can help see what's there and if they can maybe identify some of their own items?

No.

As of late, we haven't. There's always concern with anything of that. If we post a wallet with currency, people could try to claim that or something of that nature. Not a bad idea for certain things that we'd endeavor into, but it does cause difficulty with certain things. If I post a DeWalt drill that has gone missing, someone can come and claim the DeWalt drill. Very rarely are people going to have the serial number of that DeWalt drill or anything like that. Normally when they come in, they say, hey, it fell off my tool chest or something of that nature. They'll come in and then they'll seek it. So again, I do worry for some inappropriate activities that could happen with that. If something did pertain to it where it would be beneficial, it's something we could endeavor into.

All right, any other public comments?

Greg Jorgensen from Aurora. Out of curiosity, does this ordinance represent any tangible change from an existing internal policy? And if you could outline those differences.

no uh it does not uh currently we just house it for an extended period of time again we just don't have a really great way to dispose of anything that's the main purpose of this to get rid of it especially if it's a nominal resale we would just like to clear it out we only have so much space at the brooklyn's police department it's more a way to get rid of items that we have that just again they're not going to be identified by other people Again, the ultimate intention of the Brookings Police Department is to return property, and we've been successful with that. But again, there's just items that are highly improbable to ever get back.

Johnny real quick. I think in the past the police department's also worked with some non-for-profits to help them out with Bicycles and those type of things. I assume that's still the intent with this type of process Absolutely in the ordinance.

It is still outlined in there under STC l again bikes children's equipment I believe trikes are the three items that are in there and the intent is still to provide that for them We do take in Fairly decent amount of bikes simply someone from downtown will grab one something like that. No one ever comes to claim it or anything of that Again sustainability within the city is a very important thing. I'm We have full intention of continuing on with that All right, any other public questions comments?

Councilmember specker Yeah, when I was reading over this it talks about the 30-day window for the person that found the item and but then you're giving the owner 90 days. So I just was thinking maybe you could clarify like why 30 days for the finder, but 90 days for the owner or how that would work exactly.

Oh, great question. Thank you so much. No, as far as it goes, 30 days would just be a request that they'd be able to get it again. Sustainability of the city like we've taken in leaf blowers before. If someone wanted to bring that in, good citizen finder gives it over to someone of good moral standing and they're hoping, hey, this leaf blower would be great. It's something that we will probably not ever use as a police department. Unlikely as a city, they can put in that request. We would still wait the full 90 days, and if we could identify the person, of course, we'd send that certified letter up to a potential 129 days. Highly improbable of that, but we wanted to make sure that we extended that out so that people did have a great opportunity to get their stuff back.

Thank you.

Do we have any other console questions comments? All right. Thanks, Johnny. The second reading will be on September 8th We'll go on to item 8 B introduction and first reading on ordinance 26-0 to 7 an ordinance for a conditional use permit to establish an office in residence r22 family district 1103 3rd Street Mike struck our community development director will Present this item

Thank you, Mayor and members of the Council. The ordinance before you is the establishment of office for a counseling service in a residential R2 zone district, the property located at 1103 3rd Street. Uecker Counseling is proposing to acquire the property and Convert the current residential structure into a counseling office. Their hours are typically run Monday through Thursday, Monday through Friday, 8 to 5. As part of the conditional use, the recommendation is approval for two office suites. It's kind of a two-person counseling service. And then that the conditional use is non-transferable. Some of the conditions that come along are the standards that need to be met for this office use in a residential district needs to be located on an arterial or collector, which 3rd Street is a collector. They look at the structural appearance and is it compatible with the adjacent neighborhood? Well, it's an existing residential structure. There's no exterior modifications proposed. They look at parking and such. In this particular location, it is a corner lot with driveways on both of the streets. They're existing driveways, and they may do some improvements. I think one of the driveways is gravel, but they will need to screen those areas from the adjacent properties for parking so there is adequate on-site parking that currently exists. And then you look at the traffic that's generated from the use. It's a two-person counseling office. Most of the sessions are one-on-one. with their clients, and so there's very minimal traffic that will be generated from this particular use. Signage is consistent with what is allowed currently in the residential district, which is, I think, the maximum sign, maybe is six square feet, and so it's pretty minimal signage. It does come to you as a unanimous recommendation from the Planning Commission, and the staff supports the request for conditional use, and I'd stand for any questions you may have.

Thank you, Mike. Is there any public comment or questions on this item? Council, any questions, comments at this time? Council Member Tilton Byrne.

Thank you, Mayor. I'm wondering if the individual plans to change the interior of the structure. The reason I'm asking this is because I know that it says that they would need to have the appearance on the outside that is still kind of in line with the adjacent properties, but Since this wouldn't transfer to the next owner of the structure, I'm just concerned that maybe there might be construction inside the building that would cause it to maybe no longer be functional as a home. And then if that were to transfer to someone else, if we aren't also transferring the conditional use permit, how that might work.

So at this particular time, they have not provided any indication that they plan to remodel the interior. Their focus has really been on the exterior. Typically with counseling services, they just want some private individual rooms, which in this particular residence on the main floor, they can accommodate that. They may have to do maybe a little bit of minor to maybe enclose a particular area to provide the doors and then just making sure that restrooms are accessible. But they haven't indicated that they plan to come in and truly gut the interior and establish it just as an office use and kind of strip the property of a potential residential use in the future.

Given the language around kind of staying in alignment with the surrounding properties, would the way our current ordinance is written, would that protect the ability to kind of say if there's internal construction plans going on that we might limit it so that it is still usable as a home in the future?

The way our current standards are, no, not on the interior. We focus more on the exterior appearance to make sure that's compatible, that look, the feel, the scaling of the structure. And so they're not proposing any changes there. On the interior modifications, we really don't have any standards that would address that.

Thank you.

Any other questions, comments by council?

All right, thanks, Mike. We'll have a second reading on this on the 8th of September also. We'll move on to item 9, second readings and public hearings. Item 9A, public hearing in action on a request to transfer an on-off sale malt license with video lottery authorization for our Casino 2000 Suite B. Bonnie Foster, our city clerk, will present this item.

Mayor and Council Members, Brooks Barron has submitted an application to transfer the on-off malt license with video lottery authorization for Casino Suite B from Brooks Barron to Barron Management Incorporation. Casino 2000 will be relocating from its existing location at 622 25th Avenue to another location within the City of Brookings. The transfer of ownership for Casino 2000 Suite B is a South Dakota Department of Revenue recommendation to align the ownership of Casino 2000 Suites A and B under Barron Management Incorporated. The owners are Donald Brooks Barron and Thomas Barron. Mr. Barron, this evening, if the council has any questions, if the council approves this ownership change, the on-off license will be reviewed by the South Dakota Department of Revenue and then continue with an annual renewal process. Staff recommends approval.

Thank you, Bonnie. Entertain a motion to approve? So moved.

Second.

I move and second. I open public hearing on this item. Is there any public comment? Close public comment. Questions, comments from council? Please call the roll.

Tiltonburn. Aye. Wendell.

Aye.

Avery.

Aye.

Doran. Aye. Hager. Aye. Nehmeyer.

Aye.

Specker. Aye.

All right, move on to 9B, public hearing in action on request to transfer the location for two on-off sale malt licenses with video lottery authorizations for Casino 2000 in Suites A and B, licenses RB-2492 and RB-28012. Bonnie Foster will also present this.

Mayoring Council members Barron Management, owners Donald Brooks Barrand and Thomas Barrand has applied to move the location of the two Malt licenses associated with video lottery authorizations from 622 25th Avenue to a new location at 986A and 986B 22nd Avenue South. This would be behind TJ Maxx. down there if that helps you place the location if the council does so approve the south dakota department of revenue will put in a final review mr barron is currently reviewing the floor plan you see in front of you with the video lottery office at the state as there are certain requirements that they need to meet with this move staff recommends approval all right thanks bonnie entertain a motion to approve second

All right. Open public hearing on this item. Is there any public comment? Close public comment.

Council questions, comments?

So Bonnie, you said there was two different suites here. They are separate rooms then?

They are separate rooms. They will both have their own entrances. You'll see the blue is where they're going to be removing some existing walls, and the pink is where they're going to be adding walls, with the yellow adding the doors so that we have those separate entrances to each of the suites.

All right. Any other council questions, comments? Please call the roll.

Wendell?

Aye.

Avery?

Aye.

Doran? Aye. Hager? Aye. Niemeyer?

Aye.

Specker? Aye. Tilton-Byrne? Aye.

MOTION PASSES. ON TO ITEM 9C, PUBLIC HEARING AND ACTION ON A REQUEST FOR AN ON-OFF SALE MALT LICENSE FROM QUICK TRIP INCORPORATED DBA QUICKSTAR NUMBER 1910. BONNIE WILL ALSO PRESENT THIS ITEM.

MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS, QUICK TRIP INCORPORATED, THIS IS A LOCATION OUT THERE BY THE NEW TARGET AND ALDI IS LOOKING FOR A NEW ON-OFF MALT LICENSE FOR THIS LOCATION. I DO NOT KNOW IF THERE ARE ANY REPRESENTATIVES FROM QUICKSTAR HERE THIS EVENING. AN INVITATION WAS EXTENDED TO THEM. STAFF DOES RECOMMEND APPROVAL.

ALL RIGHT. ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO APPROVE.

MOVED.

SECOND.

OPEN TO PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS ITEM. IS THERE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT? CLOSED PUBLIC COMMENT. QUESTIONS, COMMENTS FROM COUNCIL? Please call the roll.

Avery?

Aye.

Doran? Aye. Hager? Aye. Niemeyer?

Aye.

Specker? Aye. Chilton-Byrne? Aye. Wendell?

Aye. All right. Item 9D, public hearing in action on Resolution 26-054, a resolution authorizing city manager to enter into a 10-year on-sale wine operating agreement with Quick Trip Incorporated, DBA Quick Star number 1910. Bonnie will present this item.

Mayor and Council members, this is for an on off sale wine license operating agreement with quick start for their new location out there on the northeast side of Brookings. The city of Brookings enters into alcoholic beverage operating agreements for 10 year increments. The proposed resolution would allow the city manager to enter into the first five years of that 10 year agreement. If so approved, the South Dakota Department of Revenue will have a final review and license issuance. Staff recommends approval.

Thanks, Bonnie. Entertain a motion to approve.

So moved.

Moved and seconded. No public hearing on this item. Is there any public comment? All right. Closed public hearing. Council questions, comments? Please call the roll.

Doran. Aye. Hager. Aye. Niemeyer. Aye. Specker. Aye. Tildenburn. Aye. Wendell.

Aye.

Avery.

Aye. All right, we'll move on to other business. Item 10A, action on a preliminary plat of lots three to five in block two, lots one to five in block four, and block five of legacy addition. Mike Strzok, our community development director, will present this item.

Thank you, Mayor and members of the council. The preliminary plat before you tonight for consideration is from the legacy group. They're looking at an industrial development. It consists of approximately 51 acres on the east side of 34th Avenue. They're proposing 10 lots with this particular preliminary plan. The east-west street will be Mission Street and the north-south is 36th Avenue. They have submitted a preliminary drainage plan. They're working with the South Dakota Department of Transportation on a traffic impact study for that connection of 36th Avenue to US Highway 14. It does provide for 10 lots. One of the lots is a smaller lot, 3A, that's on the east side and that is reserved for future access to the lot to the east. It could be converted as a access easement or it is sufficient size that it could become public right away at some point in time in the future. The large lot to the north is a large block, and they're still kind of determining the final plans, but that does provide an opportunity in case there is a larger business that would be looking in the area for relocation or expansion opportunities. The southeast lot is lot one. That is a lot that is going to be designated as drainage up along US Highway 14. THIS DOES COME TO YOU WITH A UNANIMOUS RECOMMENDATION FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND STAFF SUPPORTS THE REQUEST AND I'D STAND FOR ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.

THANK YOU, MIKE. ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO APPROVE.

SO MOVE.

IS THERE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS ITEM?

Thank you, Mr. Mayor, council members. My name is Justin Booker with Banner Associates. We're the civil engineer for the project, and we would stand for any questions you may have.

Thank you, Justin. Any other public comments? All right. Council, questions, comments? Council Member Specker.

Yeah, I noticed the lot one, part of that's in a floodplain. Are there any wetlands? Because a lot of times you include the wetland map in these.

So we did have a wetland study completed and that has been submitted to the Corps of Engineers and they returned it as non-jurisdictional. And I believe the state has also reviewed that and there's some requirements that they have that we will be required to meet and we do have plans to address that.

Okay, thank you.

Good question. Any other comments, questions? Please call the roll.

Hager. Aye. Nehmeyer.

Aye.

Specker. Aye. Tiltonburn. Aye. Wendell. Aye. Avery.

Aye.

Doran. Aye.

All right. That's the end of the business tonight. Item 11, progress report. Johnny Mays, our deputy city manager, will present this item.

Good evening, members of council. Tonight I'm going to present the progress report. So I'll kick it off with the Brookings Regional Airport. The SDSU Aviation Flying Jackson Women in Aviation hosted the annual flying breakfast. They made all the arrangements and prepared all the food for this event. There were planes from South Dakota, North Dakota, and Iowa. approximately 450 people attended 25 aircrafts flew into the event and there were 36 discovery flights were available for participants who wanted to fly in one of sdsu's airplanes also in the engineering division our street maintenance project is progressing well the slurry seal portion of the program has been completed helping to preserve pavement conditions and extend the life of our roadways. Paving has been completed on several streets, including Medary Avenue from 7th Street to 11th Street, Regency Court, Rhonda Road, Spyglass Hill Drive, and Pheasant Run. Additional street paving is scheduled for September. Several drainage improvement projects are moving forward as well. The Village Square Channel Replacement Project and the 15th Street South and 7th Avenue Detention Basin Inlet improvement projects are both scheduled to begin in September. Saturday, August 15th was the annual Household Hazardous Waste event. Over 500 vehicles came to this event to properly dispose of household hazard chemicals. The City of Brookings would like to thank residents for their participation in this event and for making a collective effort to remove hazardous materials from the environment. The Public Works Department would also like to inform residents that the public drop-off area has been paved and striped. Moving on to the library, our summer reading program was super successful this year with the most adult participants ever. Reading Dragon, a card trading game where kids read to collect cards and then battle rock, paper, scissors style to win cards from other readers, was very popular this summer. Each staff member also had a personalized card that kids could win, which was a lot of fun for the kids and the staff. On to parks. A ribbon cutting was held yesterday for the newly renovated skate park. The newly renovated skate park offers features for those just getting started in skating, as well as upgrades for all skaters, including durable concrete, additional ramps and ledges, improved lighting, and security cameras. The golf course water sourcing project is moving along full steam ahead. Dewatering the pond has started, boring has begun, and 2,500 feet of water line has been installed. The project is scheduled to be completed in late October, early November. Also, the nature park has a new water bottle filling fountain to keep visitors hydrated while they enjoy trails on these hot summer days. And last on the list is the Downtown Fire Station. Construction on the new Downtown Fire Station started last week. The new fire station is being built just west of the existing station at 309 3rd Avenue. In July, the city council approved an under budget construction bid for the new station, which will replace the old station that's 65 years old. The new station will have two stories and be over 13,000 square feet. It will house five apparatus bays, a decontamination space, and staff support areas. It's the end of the report.

Thank you, Johnny. Anybody have any questions, comments? I will make one comment. That bottle filler at the nature park, people need to understand that there's also a dish on the bottom part for our furry friends that walk along.

That's right. Absolutely.

Thank you. First time I saw that was way back in Nashville about 10 years ago, so it's a pretty good idea. Okay, so we're going to move on to introduction of topics for future discussion. Next meeting will be September 8th. Obviously, we've got second readings on our two first readings this evening. We've got a proclamation for Welcoming Week and Multicultural Center. Ex-official reports. We will have our first SDSU student report for this fall. And then otherwise beyond that, does the council have anything they would like to have for future agenda items? Council Member Hager.

So in light of our agenda item relating to the county commission's recommendation for the Human Rights Commission, I would like to ask city staff to identify, update, and bring back to us all ordinances that conflict with the city charter's process of the mayor nominating city board and commission members and us confirming them. My personal preferred update would be where the seats previously appointed by the County Commission are reserved for a county resident that the mayor nominates. However, I'm open to hearing what my fellow Council members think on this issue.

Second to that alright. Do we have comment money? Is there any public comment on this item? Council members have any comments, questions? Please call the roll.

Nehemiah.

Aye.

Specker. Aye. Tildenburn. Aye. Wendell.

Aye.

Avery.

Aye.

Doran. Aye. Hager. Aye.

All right. Any other items? Council Member Wendell.

I don't have a motion to make. I just wanted to affirm what you had announced earlier that we'll have a follow-up flock camera presentation from Chief Drake at our meeting on the 22nd.

On the 22nd of September.

Okay. Thank you.

All right.

Any other questions, comments? entertain a motion to adjourn.

So moved. Second.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Opposed? I never get anybody to oppose it. Meeting adjourned.