City Council - Regular Meeting

Good evening and welcome to the City Council meeting for Tuesday, September 8th, 2026. We will begin with a roll call and determination of quorum.

Lehman. Here. Maher. Here. Roberts. Stroman. Here. Armstrong. Here. Sechrist. Here. Bieberdorf. Here. Tamang. Here. Evans. Here. Meyer. Here. We have a quorum.

Thank you. Next, we'll have an invocation by Pastor Ron McLaughlin, followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. If you are able and willing, would you please rise?

Pray with me. Father God, we just thank you and praise you for this day and other day. Lord, we're blessed to live here where we do. I thank you for the men and women in this room, Lord. They're willing to participate and lead and serve in the way that they do. And I pray that you give them wisdom and discernment and direction. And we'll trust you for that in Jesus' name. Amen.

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.

Thanks, everyone. Next, I'll entertain a motion to adopt the agenda.

Second.

Got a motion by Biberdorf with a second by Meyer to adopt the agenda. All in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. Next, we have a special presentation regarding Constitution Week. So if you're here for that, would you meet me right over here at the podium, please?

Thank you.

Pleasure to be joined by Cindy from the Daughters of the American Revolution with us here tonight. And they have put a request in for Constitution Week. This is something we do every year and proud to do it again this year. So we'll go ahead and read the proclamation. Whereas September 17th, 2026 marks the 239th anniversary of the drafting of the Constitution of the United States of America by the Constitutional Convention. And whereas it is fitting and proper to accord official recognition to this magnificent document and its memorable anniversary and to the patriotic celebrations with which the occasion celebrates. Whereas this is the record year as Rapid City observes the 150th anniversary of our founding, the 250th anniversary of the nation's Declaration of Independence, a time to reflect on citizens in our community and nation. And whereas Public Law 915 guarantees the issue of a proclamation each year by the President of the United States of America, designating September 17th through the 23rd as Constitution Week. Now, therefore, I, Jason Solomon, Mayor of Rapid City, South Dakota, do hereby proclaim the week of September 17th through the 23rd, 2026, as Constitution Week in Rapid City, and ask our citizens to reaffirm the ideals of the framers of the Constitution that they had back in 1787 by vigilantly protecting the freedoms guaranteed to us through the guardians of our liberties, remembering the lost rights may never be regained. It is signed and already sealed, and now it's delivered to you, ma'am. Okay. Thank you.

Appreciate it. Thank you everybody. Hello citizens. I'm a feeling for the last minute somebody who should have been here couldn't make it so this is my first time participating in this event. Now as we know United States Constitution is America's most important document. It stands a testament to the tenacity of the Americans throughout history to maintain their liberties, freedoms, and inalienable rights. Constitution week is celebrated annually during the week of September 17th through the 23rd to commemorate its history and importance and to bring attention to how it still serves today. Daughters of the American Revolution, or DAR, some of you may recognize that monogram a little more, asked Congress in 1950, well, they started in 1955, and then the following year, in 56, they went to the president and asked them to make that official, which President Eisenhower signed in 70 years ago last month, in August 1956. So I thank you all, and have a good evening. Thank you. Thanks again.

Well, that was nice. Next, we'll move on to general public comment, a time for members of the public to discuss or express concerns to the council on any issue not on the agenda. Action will not be taken at the meeting on any issue not on the agenda except by placement on the agenda by unanimous vote of the council members present. And I have a speaker request form here from William Wagner. Mr. Wagner, you have three minutes, as you know.

Sorry that I might not have enough for all of y'all. I forgot about police chief over there. Good evening, members of the council. I come before you today as a constitutional advocate ally. You took a solemn oath of office to protect this community and serve as fiduciary trustees of our public assets. That trust is bound by the borders of our land. Under South Dakota codified law, subsection 31-18-2, you are caretakers of our statutory 66 foot roads, meaning that 33 to 35 foot easement flanking our streets is public property. But your duty goes deeper than property lines. It extends to our fundamental liberties. In the landmark Supreme Court ruling, United States versus guests, the highest court affirmed that the right to free travel and unmonitored movement is a core constitutional right. South Dakota's own statutes back this up. South Dakota codified law subsection 32-14-9 explicitly acknowledges that citizens utilize our roadways as a matter of right. By permitting flock safety to erect a permanent mass surveillance grid within our public right of ways, you convert an unconditional right into an itemized database. This is a direct violation of Article 6, Section 11 of the South Dakota Constitution, which explicitly nullifies general warrants. Furthermore, under South Dakota codified law 23A-35-4.3, state law explicitly defines pole cameras and automated automated tracking and surveillance tracking devices that require an individualized judicial search warrant based on probable cause. Allowing a parallel network of private entities to quietly install flock cameras that point into our public 35-foot easements creates an illegal private backdoor to bypass municipal oversight and statutory warrant mandates. The ground is shifting beneath us. Across South Dakota, the tides continue to turn. Aberdeen completely killed the proposed surveillance camera discussions and Codington County pulled their entire flock network. Rapid City is the second largest city in South Dakota and the anchor of the Black Hills. You must take heed of the shifting tide, rise above corporate sales pitches, and represent that exact courage and senatoral defense of the Constitution that your stature demands. As public fiduciaries, you are statutorily bound to the act of good faith under South Dakota codified law 55-7-3, which our state defines as acting with total honesty of inattent. Finally, under South Dakota's newly enacted Uniform Public Expression Act, citizens have an absolute right to voice these grievances regarding public expressions without fear of corporate retaliation. Uphold your oath and act in true good faith Reject this surveillance network. Thank you. And Axion is also just like Flock, just a different name. And also, Mr. Cushman, I'm still waiting for my opinion. It's been quite a while. Thank you.

Thank you. That will conclude general public comment, and we will now move on to appointed personal privilege by Councillor Stroman. Mr. Stroman. Let me get you in the queue here so people can hear you.

There you go. Thank you, Mayor. I'll try to be brief. Yesterday was Labor Day, and as I was resting at home, I thought about the tradespeople and the laborers and the workers who built this country. And I don't know that we actually recognize them as much as we should. But to all those people, I just want to give a big thank you to those people who do the hard work and the heavy lifting. And the other thing that I did yesterday was watch a lot of 9-11 footage, and the 25th commemoration of that is coming up Friday, I think it is. And there's so many people in our society, including my own children, who don't really understand what happened on 9 11. they weren't living and watching it unfold before our eyes and to see they see film now of these first responders running into the fire and and just Sacrificing their lives. They know that they're doing that and We have people here in town that were I know we're in downtown Manhattan when it happened. I know people have we're stuck in Washington DC and had to drive home and and It affects all of us, and one of our own Rapid Cityans spent years as kind of the chief economist for the 9-11 compensation fund, Don Frankenfeld. He went and testified for hours and hours and days and days so that the people that were injured by that would be able to have compensation. And many of you know people in the military that went and fought in Iraq or Afghanistan, all these things that grew out of that. But when I hear a fire or ambulance or police in our downtown, I'm confident that those men and women are going to do their duty, and they're going to be selfless, and they're going to protect the rest of us. And so I just want to thank Chief Culbertson and Chief Hedrick and your departments and all the first responders. Thanks.

Mr. Stroman, very well said. As a reminder, what's interesting is you'll see my note here on 9-11. We will have a 9-11 ceremony on Friday morning at 8 a.m. at the base of M Hill. The fire department's actually leading the ceremony for the 25th anniversary here in Rapid City, so our very own folks are leading that ceremony we also will have public safety folks and the council and of course the entire community are invited to take part in that as we remember that solemn occasion and as very well described by Mr. Stroman thank you again Mr. Stroman. So that will move us on to non-public hearing items 2 through 51. And we will open public comment for items 2 through 47. I have no speaker request forms for those items, so we will close the public comment for items 2 through 47 and move on to consent items 2 through 47. Does the council have any items to pull for separate consideration? Otherwise, I'll entertain a motion to approve items 2 through 47 as a whole. All right, stand by. Councillor Seacrest, you said item 30?

Yes, sir.

OK. All right. We will do the approval of items 2 through 47, with the exception of 30. The motion is by Meyer, with a second by Seacrest. All in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. Item 30, authorize Mayor and Finance Director to sign First Amendment to Facilities Management Agreement with Sports Facilities Management, LLC. Councillor Sechrist, you pulled this item, ma'am.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. If I may direct a question to Director Ainslie, please. Absolutely. I'm director Ainsley. Would you be able to just give us a quick overview of this? this amendment and the reason for this and also just maybe your Encouragement in that I guess this seems like a big amendment to now we're we're taking away our owners representative from my understanding and having the the management facility organization provide that service. So I was just hoping we could get a little bit of clarification on this and the thought process behind that, if I may.

Thank you. Absolutely. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. We began contemplating what direction we should proceed with this project really in about June. At that point, we had already contracted with Tegra to provide owner's representative services for the city through the selection of the construction manager at risk as well as the architectural and engineering firms. By the end of July, there was a group of staff members as well as elected officials and members of the public that took part in that process to review the responses to the architectural and engineering and CMAR process. We had selected those as well as we had selected ultimately the management company that was going to end up completing the day-to-day operations of the facility. And so that's Sports Facility Corporation, also Sports Facility Management. They have different LLCs. So just so everyone's clear, it's the same company that would be doing this. We selected them because of their significant breadth of experience. And they were the ones that had assisted the sports commission during the early conceptual plans of this entire project. So they had been with the sports commission for some time. during the development of this process. In doing so, we began having discussions with SFC, and we saw that they provided additional services that went above and beyond just the services that relate to the operations of the building. And so the original agreement that we had with them is really contemplating their work when the facility opens, because they are going to be doing the day-to-day management of it. They're going to be doing the cost of goods sold. They're going to be doing the leasing, all of that. It will be a city-owned building, but unlike the monument, we will have the private sector is going to actually be operating that. With that being said, there are things that they are going to be assisting us on during the design as well as the construction phase. And so that was part of the original management agreement. So part of that management agreement is after the initial plans and conceptual drawings are done, they would provide comment. So essentially they would be providing comments on the court spaces or something like that. But they would not be interacting with the design team on a daily basis. That is usually what an owner's representative actually ends up doing on behalf of the city. And that again is what we had contracted with Tegra to do through July 31st. When we looked at the price that Tegra was going to be charging the city for the next phase, which is really the design as well as the construction of the building, I think it was 1.5% of the construction value or 1.75%. I'm sorry, I don't remember exactly. When we looked at the total cost of that, we went to SFC and said, could you provide some of those services? And if you could, what would your price tag be? with that they have provided very similar services on literally dozens of buildings throughout the united states doing this and so they have more direct experience with this particular type of construction than even tegra though tegra is a very solid company we mean no nothing against them but sfc does have more relevant experience in this particular industry with that being said they could provide services all the way up to the owner's representative, which is what Tegra would have done. But instead, we looked at that and said, is there a middle ground that you could provide some of the services, provide some consultation when we're looking at the original design of the courts? So rather than just commenting after the design is done and saying, is it functional? Instead, being on a daily basis with the architect saying, This is the amount of square footage that you need in between the courts to allow for circulation in between the various games. And when we have five square feet less, we've seen crowding, especially when there's U12 games versus when there's U8 games or whatever that happens to be, things that truly go beyond what our experience is, as well as what are the size bathrooms and what's the size of the restaurant space and what's the return on the investment for that. They help those discussions at the very beginning. And this project is constrained financially. And so with that, we are going to be continually pressing for value-added engineering. They will be providing that input up front. And so we asked them if they could do some of that while still not being the full owner's representative, saying that there are staff members within our engineering department that would be able to do that. So that's what this amendment is, is essentially picking up some of the duties that an owner's representative would have done, not all of it. So it's a net savings in comparison to what we traditionally would have done on other projects, such as what we did on the Summit Arena. I hope that answers your question.

Yes, I think so. And my interest in pulling this is just making sure that the city's interests are being protected as we go through this process and just understanding that sometimes having a seat at the table. And it sounds as though we will through a combination of our own engineer team and then also through the sports facility management LLC. So thank you very much for that explanation.

All right, Councillor Strowman.

Thank you, Mayor. I'm going to support this. And I appreciate the explanation, Daniel. But I also appreciate Councilman Sechrist raising the questions, and also Dr. Tamang at the Legal and Finance Committee meeting. Because it is, I think, a substantial change from what we had going into this. And it's important that we be fiscally responsible with this endeavor. And I think that we are doing that. I guess I was just a little caught off guard that we would be changing things, adding to their contract a month after their contract was entered into, and that we'd be paying them even before the building was built. But I understand that and yes uh... we have been working with them because they are the leads s f c is the leader in this type of facility in the country and we're fortunate to have them uh... i'm just glad that we are looking at all the options and It seems that this is the best option that we could hope for, the most economical, and still get the value that we need to go into the design of this structure. And I think they're the appropriate entity to perform these functions, and I think it will, in the long run, end up saving the city money without compromising the quality of the the construction or the quality of the final product and so i support this um but i also support you know we ask the hard questions stephen asked the hard questions at legal finance um he drilled down he's He's a pretty talented guy. He could possibly be a lawyer, but he's just a doctor now. But I think that it's important that we analyze things and do a close look at things like this. So I yield.

Thank you. Next up, Councillor Armstrong.

Thank you. I just want to dovetail off of Councilman Stroman's comments. I, too, was caught off guard. I thought, oh, gosh, here we go. Amendments straight out the gate. But what sold me, and I would be remiss in not saying, by eliminating the need for an outside representative, this arrangement will save the city $659,000 compared to the previous standard agreements. So I wanted to make sure that all the taxpayers out there knew that and commend you for doing this. So thank you. I yield.

Thanks, everyone, for the questions, and thank you, Director Ainslie, for that detailed explanation. Otherwise, I look for a motion to approve. I guess a motion.

I didn't have to tell you how to vote, but...

Motion to approve by Meyer with a second by Sechrist. All in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. That takes us to the end of the consent items. Before we move on to non-consent items, I do have another note of personal privilege. This meeting is the final meeting for Parks and Recreation Director Jeff Beigler. Many, many years of service, Jeff. We're so grateful for everything that you've done. I wanted to take this moment in the middle of our meeting. to thank you for your leadership, for your steady hand, and for just being an overall great guy and advocate for our parks. We're better because of your service and leadership and wish you all the best in the next chapters. Thank you, sir. All right, now we'll move on to non-consent items 48 through 51 and open public comment for items 48 through 51. I have no speaker request forms for those items, so we will close the public comment and move on to item 48, second reading and recommendation of ordinance number 6747, an ordinance regarding supplemental appropriation number three for 2026 in the amount of $1,280,319. Motion by Tamang with a second by Sechrist to approve. Councillor Armstrong.

Thank you. I just want to clarify this is for the police station and want to defer to Chief Hedrick if there's any comments he would like to make. If not.

Do you mind if we get an explanation from finance director first? Sure. All right, Director Ainsley.

Thank you very much, Mr. Mayor. The vast majority of this supplemental appropriation is to fund the remodeling that would be occurring at the north police station. It was brought up during legal and finance that the TIF, sorry, I don't remember which number, is the one that's actually financing the majority of the purchase of it. And so those funds were already expended purchasing the building. But as far as actually the remodeling expenditures, there are a couple different sources that we're gathering together the funds, as well as our general fund undesignated cash. And so that's the vast majority of this. There's a couple other minor changes that are just reallocating some existing funds. But almost all of this is for that particular project.

Great.

Anything else? Did you want to get Chief Hedrick in this? Chief, did you want to chime in?

Okay. Well, I had the opportunity to take a tour of the facility. Hopefully, I know all of the other council members were invited. So I want to thank... Scott sits and Amanda Lee for giving me an in-depth tour. I see their vision. I think it's smart I love that it is visible. It's in the heart of that area and that's a great way of taking an empty building and putting it to good use and investing taxpayer diet dollars wisely Thank you.

Thank you chief

Just real briefly, we are happy that we'll be able to bring a lot of our resources that are currently in multiple different buildings under one roof under that neighborhood. And I do believe it's going to help us with our outreach in the neighborhood in that area. And additionally, one thing that I think you'll be happy about is that the bid did come in $500,000 less than what you approved. So that is good news.

Always good news to save money, isn't it? All right, Councilor Strumman.

you

Thank you, Mayor. And speaking of the neighborhood, I would just like to congratulate, well, Councilman Roberts isn't here, but Councilman Lehman. This is in their neighborhood, and they were integral in trying to get this established to meet the needs in their ward and in their neighborhoods. And I think that they should be commended for that.

I yield. Thank you. Yes, sir. Great teamwork all the way around. So we have the motion on the floor to approve. All in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. Item 49, first reading of ordinance number 6748 regarding fiscal year 2027 appropriation ordinance. This item was continued from the previous special council meeting. Councilor Beberdorf.

Yeah, if I could get a motion to restore the $100,000 that was cut from the mayor's budget and hold the floor for discussion.

Okay, we got a motion by Beberdorf and who was the second by?

Maher, all right, the floor is yours, sir. Yeah, and I didn't get this email. It wasn't on my email this afternoon, but I just saw this in front of me now. The 2027 proposed budget for the mayor office is the lowest that it's been in five years, eight, 90, 61. I just think it's important a city our size to have a chief of staff, kind of have the second charge per se. The amount of work that the mayor office has gotten done in the term has been impressive. This chief of staff position wasn't part of this administration. It was budgeted before this administration took over office. So they simply filled that position, as well as the marketing coordinator. I think they're both just vital positions to the city of Rapid City. And I also don't feel comfortable with cutting somebody's job. without Having that direct report give me cause the chief of staff was hired in good faith with the job description to carry out To my knowledge that's been accomplished and if the direct report has something to tell me besides that I believe that if somebody's gonna have their job cut it should come from the the direct report not from the dais so to move this budget, which is conservative and back to 890-61 in a city that has a strong mayor form of government that also encourages the mayor's office to be part of a 9-11 program or to be part of all the things that happen outside of day-to-day management is vitally important. And this email that was on my desk here and I got here today summarizes it clearly.

Before we get to you, Councillor Maher, a point of clarification from either the finance office or the city attorneys, but with this approval, I imagine there might be various amendments, so do I just keep track of the amendments, or do we vote for each of these line items as we go, and then an overall approval? I just want to make sure that we handle this appropriately before we continue any discussion. So, go to City Attorney Cushman.

Yes, thank you. Daniel can feel free to disagree with me, but I think you would take a vote on each amendment, and then after the amendments have been made, then take one vote on the ordinance as amended elsewhere during the meeting.

Thank you. I just wanted clarification so I didn't get us confused. Okay. Councilor Maher, I accidentally bumped you out of the queue. I apologize for that. The floor is yours.

Thank you, Mayor. I just wanted to also say that I think the chief of staff position is critical to the city. I know what is accomplished in that department, and I really appreciate the support of all the department directors who signed a letter supporting that chief of staff for the city, and I want the council to accept that recommendation from all the directors in the city and support reinstating the funding. Thank you.

Next up, Councillor Armstrong.

Yes, thank you. Thank you, Jason, for the additional clarification that you sent this to us today. I still am a little, I'm questioning the organizational structure because what HR gave me as our org chart, it has four different positions reporting directly to your chief of staff. So I don't know if I'm reading that right, or maybe it's changed, it's labeled June, so maybe some changes have happened.

That would be right.

Okay, but more importantly, remember I'm only back here for 63 days. And in that time, and especially within these last couple of weeks, I have seen how reliant you are on this position in order to fulfill your duties. And I want to support you and our mayor. So I guess we'll change our mind and take a vote on it. But we want to be able to make sure that you can do your jobs. And if you feel that you need this chief of staff in order to fulfill what you were elected to do, that's what we need to do for the benefit of the community. Thank you.

Councillor Seacrest.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I have had the opportunity to connect with the mayor's office staff. And actually, they had followed up with me on some comments that I had made at another meeting. was given a breakdown of the mayor's office positions and the delineation of duties for each of the positions in the mayor's office. And I think it helped open my perspective or change my perspective on this in the original motion that we shared and just understanding the workflow and the balance of job duties in the mayor's office. just want to say we have an amazing professional team that have done a great job which I think is a testament to to the hard work that and also some of the concerns proposed here tonight just propelling the mayor's office to being the most professional customer service forward-thinking division in the city that i've seen in a very long time and i think they're doing a wonderful job all that said i am going to support restoring the budget just having broken down the mayor's office budget line item by line item there isn't really any way to reduce the budget we have been presented with a very conservative budget It is the lowest it's been in five years. Historically, we're at a good place with this. In fact, the salary line item was actually decreased $10,000 from the year prior. So with benefits and cost of living and everything, the living increase, I just think that this is a solid move and i just can't speak more highly of the team and leah and brett and daryl and all of you that work so hard to help us every day thank you if i may counselor evans i'm gonna i'll speak after you're done sir

Well, I also am going to support this change. As I've reiterated many times over the past six or seven years, I first proposed this position the first year I was on the council. And I do think it's important. But we also need to keep in mind that we need to have the duties of this position spelled out. And I think that is part of the council's responsibility when we appropriate funds to say, this is what's going to be happening and what that position is going to be used for. Now, I've seen over the past six or seven years, every once in a while, when the council does something that is controversial, I've seen employees weaponized against council members. And I don't think that's ever appropriate. And it's happened more than once, and those of us who have been on the council a long time know that it's true. And so I just want to make sure that we don't politicize any of these positions that way and they're used inappropriately. And I just wanted to bring that up because I think it's important we keep the positions pure. We keep them without any kind of built-in allegiances to any particular person. And so we can justify that particular funding in our budget year after year. I just wanted to say that before we go ahead and vote on this. Thank you.

Thank you. I want to thank the council for your words tonight. I appreciate the spirit in which it's done. I know these are heated discussions and I get just as tough at times as anybody else. I will say this, this position is beyond me. I won't be mayor forever. It's meant to be of service to Rapid City for all future administrations. So we've added this position, which is very common in cities our size and larger. We have a growing complex city. We have a lot going on. Anything that happens in this city is because of a great team, not just in the mayor's office, but all the directors report to me or board that I appoint and you confirm. The fact is that it takes a team to do everything. So when we have these amazing directors, like our chiefs over here, or we're saying farewell to Parks and Recreation Director, and you see them all up here and out in the audience, they're an outstanding team. I always say anything great that happens in the city is not because of the work of one person, certainly not just the work of a mayor. It is because of a team. We have a council, we have a staff, that work on the front lines that serve each and every day. And of course, we have great leadership in this city. And that leadership is the continuity of this city because the elected officials, well, they're temporary. We're stewards and then we're accountable and eventually you hand it off. And we all live here because we love it here. And I trust anybody who runs for this office does it because you love it and because you love this city. And I can just tell you, this is my 10th year, heading into my 10th year in city government. And one of the things I've observed is the work is big. And I'm so grateful for the great team that we have to help make it happen. And that includes the council. So I want to say we have an outstanding chief of staff. Of course, she gets things done. Brett Matias has been an excellent service to the entire city, as is the rest of the mayor's office staff. So I do appreciate The spirit of this conversation tonight as you work through the budget And I want to thank you for that. I really do appreciate it So with that the first vote here is to restore the hundred thousand we have a motion in a second all in favor Any opposed? One no by Greg Strowman Okay, any other items for the budget? otherwise a counselor Armstrong

Thank you. Last week I sent a email to the council about some potential budget considerations. I'm assuming all of you received that. Head nod would be great. Okay, great. I would like for the council to consider and look at this. and make some well for example we can go line by line if you want the fire department is looking for future scba replacement we don't have a firm number but it's anywhere from 800 000 to a million dollars for 2028 so these are things let me clarify that we could consider for the 2027 budget, or at least have on the radar for 2028. Is there anybody that would like to consider for the 2027 budget?

Councillor Stroman's looking to chime in.

I wasn't going to make a motion. Thank you, Mayor. I wasn't going to make a motion, but I did want to chime in. I think that Councilwoman Armstrong's suggestions are well taken, and I think that, especially in the backdrop of the 25th anniversary of 9-11, if we could provide better protective equipment for our first responders or for our firemen that, you know, God forbid they have to walk into a burning building and try to bring people out of there, um they should have the type of equipment that allows them to do that without fear of you know singeing their lungs or whatever it is that happens there's a lot of toxic material and toxic fumes and gases when you're coming into a burning structure and i think that it's something we have to really have on the radar i don't know if it needs to go in this budget because I don't know that we have anyone, enough people are interested in having another budget hearing, but if we did have another budget hearing, I'd certainly explore that because, yeah, just for those reasons, I guess. So thank you, I yield.

We have Fire Chief looking to chime in. Fire Chief Culberson.

Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, Councilor Armstrong, for bringing this up. Yeah, we really, that was intended for 2028. An important piece of equipment for our staff in order to enter any type of immediate dangerous to life or health atmospheres. And unfortunately, those do have a lifespan, and they only last so long. and they're coming up on that time and it's very difficult for us to replace those over the course of time so we can't replace five this year five next year five the following year reason one of the major reasons why is technology changes constantly on those So if you try to replace them then you're going to have mismatched equipment across your apparatus and one of the things that we Have that's really good with our department is no matter what apparatus you get on the same equipment is going to be there and and that's extremely important when you're in a structure fire. You have no visibility, and you're trying to crawl around and find somebody that's inside of there. You want to be able to quickly be able to change and or take that equipment and utilize it. So yes, this needs to be done. Wanted to give some early discussions. I did have this conversation with the mayor and with Daniel earlier this year about that this was going to be coming. One thing we're looking at, It is always a potential, would be some grant funding. We have not been successful with trying to get SCBAs replaced very often. We were going to apply for some of them this year, which we did, but those are simply to hopefully go to Station 9. But we will request that next year. You can't ask for them unless they're expired, and they will expire at the end of next year. So, hence our request that we wanted for 2028. Obviously, I'd take them in 2027, but I don't think we need to do that. 2028 would be good.

And I think that goes to show the forward thinking of our directors. Obviously, if it's requested, obviously this council would have given it. So sometimes in these discussions, when the directors are thinking ahead, they're planting seeds for years even beyond that at times. And I know we all agree that we'd make sure that your folks had everything they need to do their job safely. Councillor Secrets.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. If I may direct a question, again, to our finance director, Daniel Ainslie. Sure. Daniel, do we have a line item that just would reflect the amount that included all of our initial changes, just where we were at with any positives that remained in that balance? I saw in our on our attached agenda item with our current budget, it doesn't have any undesignated reserves listed on there. So I didn't know if you could clarify that for us.

Director Ainsley?

Sure. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. The original proposed budget used $3.28 million of undesignated cash to balance the budget. What that essentially means is that you are using savings from previous years to balance the budget. However, just to put that in perspective, that's because it is very uncommon for a department to use 100% of the budget that's allocated. So you wanna keep that number fairly low. What that ends up representing is just about 2.8% of the adopted budget, which is in the range. You definitely don't wanna go higher than 3%. With the changes that the council made during your budget hearing, that use of undesignated cash was reduced down to $2.22 million. So it's actually $2,221,676. Sorry. So $2,221,676 was the use of undesignated cash that's in the ordinance that's attached to the agenda. And that reflects all the changes that the council made during your last budget hearing, which I think there were several different motions. I forget the number. However, you already have made one change already. And so that's an increase of $100,000. And so that means the new use of undesignated cash is $2,321,676. I would just, I would encourage the council to try to use as little undesignated cash as possible, because again, just to remind you, your last supplemental appropriation that you just approved for the remodel of the police station was essentially using a million dollars out of our undesignated cash already.

so if we could reduce the use of our undesignated cash that would set us up in a better position in the future absolutely thank you very much for that explanation that makes a lot of sense now that you state that um i had just in my mind had thought that rather than um absorbing this into undesignated cash which it sounds like we're just kind of paying that back at this point but rather than absorbing i would like to see this go to the cip for consideration of use in our capital improvements plan um or i mean in our our two million dollars of deferred maintenance for our park system um our streets that um are deteriorating in every single ward in the city um but it sounds as though this um money being um Actually paying back that the savings that we were able to create which is wonderful Decreases our use of the undesignated cash, so I won't be motioning to move any of that to the CIP But that's what I was originally thinking when I asked the question, so I thank you for the explanation I yield Back to councillor Armstrong

Great. And to give other people some insight to what I did is I reached out to the directors just to see if we were missing anything, to get things on the radar for either 2027 or 2028. And these are not in any particular order other than the fire department. Human Resources was asking for approximately 22,000 in additional funding. for some professional services. It looks like 3938 and 18500 for training and education. I do think we have somebody from the human resources department here that can speak on that as well.

Did you want her to speak on that?

Is that what you're requesting? Does the council need some further clarification on that or some questions? The point of this exercise is basically to flush out anything that we might need to do. I believe it's really important that we fund our departments. $23,000 doesn't seem like it's a lot of money, and if it can give our staff some more training and education, I just think it's worth a discussion.

So Councillor Meyer is on, has the, are we, you have more comments? Councillor Meyer, the floor is yours.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I'll talk about one thing that's in the proposal, and maybe Director Dame, if you could give some insight. Something that is proposed is a potential principal project manager position. And these are Councillor Armstrong's words, so I can't take credit for this. But to give some insight, airport boards considering a principal project manager position to help with $100 million terminal expansion, and it sounds as if The money is already in the airport budget, which is an enterprise fund. And so I don't know if it's you need approval to increase wages or what that looks like. But if this is something that will help the project and your budget can absorb it, I don't know if there's something tactical we can do, but happy to help you get where you need to go.

Director Patrick Dane from the Rapp City Regional Airport.

Mr. Mayor, Councilwoman Meyer, as we went through, we budget pretty early in an effort to get stuff to the board You know as we've been working through the terminal project piece of it One of the things that you know we're juggling the current project that's going on with project one moving towards project two We did discuss this a bit with some board members late last year in terms of it and based under the question of What is something that we regret essentially not putting in our budget at this point? That position is one of them. As we look at, we've got a considerable amount of major capital coming through. We're trying to juggle the projects as a management team right now. So each of us has a bit or a piece of a pretty major project in the $70 million project one. So as we move into the next phase of the concourse expansion, What we're now seeing is the complexities between the start of our budget to today, with the concourse being constructed in the middle of essentially an active aircraft apron, that it's going to take a little bit more horsepower for us in a number of years as we move through this project. And then as we look at one of the questions that came through from one of our board members, Caleb Arsenault, you know, what's the longevity of the position, but when we look at the long-term capital projects that we've got in line for the airport being, you know, the terminal is a multi-year project. We come out of the terminal and then, much like I've shown you guys with our capital plan, you know, we're looking towards the environmental for the runway, which will be the next major capital project. There's gonna be a decade worth of projects going on that are pretty substantial at the airport, so.

Thank you. Maybe this is a question for Daniel. Since it's in there, it's something they can absorb. I don't know do we need to approve or should I make a motion to create the position and what the proposed salary is or move dollars into their wages line. I don't know what the best way to do this is.

Director Ainsley. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. There are two different ways you could do that. If this position would be housed entirely 100% within the airport, then you would want to increase the salary and wages as well as the associated social security line item medicare line item retirement line item and health care line item and life insurance line item for within probably airport admin for that because the position was not included in that budget and so all of those positions would need to be increased looking at our current a project manager that's currently employed a senior project manager the current wage on that is a hundred nine thousand seven hundred and seventy two and so the Social Security would be eight thousand one forty seven life insurance sixty five and Medicare would be $1,592. Retirement would be $6,586. And then healthcare... No, I'm not sure where they came up with that number. And then it would be 60-806, most likely. It depends on what health insurance, but you'd want to increase health insurance by at least that amount.

So can I just make a motion to approve $125,000 for personnel and let you guys do the math?

Because you started talking, we'll have to have that motion by somebody else. You can second it. All right, a motion by Maher for $125,000 added to the personnel line items distributed, I imagine. And a second by Meyer. The floor is still yours, ma'am.

Thank you. I yield.

OK. Councillor Tamang.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I respect the airport executive director of the board and my colleagues here. It's just flying a little too ad hoc for me. I like to think about these things a little bit more. So I will be opposing tonight, not because I'm necessarily against it, but because I feel like this requires a further discussion. Thank you.

OK. So the motion on the floor is to increase the airport's budget by $125,000 for a project management position. Councillor Sechrist.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I guess I was just clarifying, is this, this is covered through the Enterprise Fund, so it's not technically gonna adjust our overall budget, or this does impact the overall budget? Okay.

A little bit, rates and charges of the airport. Somebody pays in the end, always.

And I know in the email explanation it did share that this was gonna be presented to the board next month, so is that something that the board can ultimately decide upon and then allocate those funds?

I can answer that real quick. I met with Director Dane today, but the board met and approved it, so the board approval at the airport has approved it.

I guess I'm just curious, I guess, why this wouldn't have been included already or why we're... Okay, and just as the budget was presented from the airport. Okay, well thank you.

All right, Councilor Armstrong.

I just want to direct a question to Director Dame and just clarify the motion. So will 125 suffice for a professional project manager who is going to be able to oversee the terminal project, the runway project and then I believe the parking project?

That as a fully burden would probably be pretty tough. So what number would you say? So I think where the airport board was at fully burdened with including some of the fit up portions for computers, those kinds of things. I think we were looking closer at about the 178 to 180 mark for total cost. Okay.

I'll go back to the motion maker.

All right. Counselor Stroman, the floor is yours, sir.

Thank you, Mayor. I kind of take in the same position as Stephen. I don't necessarily oppose this, but I do kind of oppose the ad hoc, try to hammer this out on the dais type deal. And I have the same concerns that Councilwoman Armstrong has. This doesn't sound to me like a, a $109,000 job. I think we're asking this individual, if we hire this individual, to do a pretty, that's a big ask, that's a big job, and they're gonna have their hands full, and I don't know that we're gonna get the type of person that we need at that level and so i'd like to have some more time to consider that because i i think we're going to be short and i think that patrick's closer at his i mean that's a big number the 175 or whatever i think that's more realistic than 109 by a long shot so that's where i'm at i yield all right back to the motion maker uh counselor meyer

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. My first comment is I should have been a project manager. Is there, I mean, maybe Director Dane can nod or give me a thumbs up, but it's, I think, directionally nice to know for next year if they can hire staff. But if it's something they need now, My intent is this is a massive project, and I would like to see it done well. And whether we do it tonight or table it and come back to it, I think it's something we can make appropriations at any time. I think I just want to make sure. We get this airport staff, which it's an enterprise fund, and so I think it will be fine in the end from a budget perspective. But if we want a little more time, I feel okay with that. I think it's just the intent is making sure this project is done well. So good with pausing. I think Stephen's in the queue, so I'll pause there and see what he has to say.

All right. Councillor Tomei.

Thank you. Yeah, I look forward to approving this as a supplemental down the road after we get a chance to take a closer look. And I appreciate your effort, and I appreciate your bringing it to everyone's attention tonight. Thank you.

So, Councillor Lehman. The floor is yours, sir.

We have something to vote on right now, right, Mayor?

The motion on the floor right now.

I want to jump in after that.

All right. The motion on the floor right now is an allocation of $125,000 to the airport for this position. There's been no substitute motion. The original motion maker, Councillor Meyer, is back in the queue.

OK. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I'm fine withdrawing the motion for now.

Oh, I'm sorry. I gave, oh, that's right.

I'm just a talker.

Boy, I keep giving her credit for your work.

Well, I think Kevin should withdraw his motion. I mean, it was really silly. I don't know why he did that to begin with.

My apologies, Counselor Bar.

But I'd maybe table this or whatever. Whatever the motion maker wants to do, I'll support there. All right.

Well, right now, the motion's still on the floor. We're going to go back to the original motion maker since I have Skipped him. I apologize. Would you like to make any changes to that motion?

I'll withdraw the motion. I support the position. And I'm okay with a little bit more time to figure out exactly the right dollar amount. Thank you.

Okay. All right. So is that okay with the seconder? All right, so the motion has been withdrawn. And so I don't believe that we have anything to vote on then, because we haven't taken an actual vote. So that is withdrawn. Now I'm going to go back to Councillor Layman since I cut him off before.

Thank you, Mayor. I'd like to make a motion to approve first reading as amended. If my colleagues want to bring anything else forward, we can do supplementals with proper planning to do that instead of trying to ram this through.

All right, the motion is to approve item 49 with the amendment as we talked about before with a second by Evans. All in favor? Aye. Any opposed?

No.

Motion carries with two nos from Stroman and Armstrong. All right. Moving on to item 50, a request by Advanced Design Engineering and Surveying Inc. for Black Hills Industrial Center, LLC, for a preliminary subdivision plan for proposed lots seven through nine of block three, lots eight through 12 of block five, lots one through six, and drainage lot of block six, and dedicated right-of-way of Black Hills Industrial Center, generally described as being located at Old Folsom Road. The recommendation is to approve with stipulations. Motion by Sechrist with a second by Maher to approve with stipulations. All in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. Item 51, a request by Advanced Design Engineering and Surveying Inc for BH Capital LLC for preliminary subdivision plan for proposed lots 2 through 10 of block 2, lots 1 through 47 of block 3, lots 2 through 21 of block 4, lots 11 through 16 of block 9, lots 24 through 43 of block 11, tracks B, C, and D. dedicated right away and major drainage easement of shepherd hill south subdivision generally described as being located at noah street noah court aaron street anita court rebecca street and galilee street the recommendations to approve of stipulations counselor secrets the floor is yours

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And just to start with, I approve this project moving forward with the stipulations as listed. I just wanted to make a note on this, the traffic congestion impacts happening right now on Diamond Ridge Boulevard. I've heard from a handful of constituents in the last couple of weeks alone with the increased construction happening at the Homestead Street area as well as Shepherd Hills area so on both sides of Diamond Ridge Boulevard as our as our connector Street right now since we don't have East Anamosa built out we are having heavy equipment up and down that road semi trucks traveling up and down that road and i know i have i have brought this to the attention of our directors um i see them speaking to each other um at the moment but we what is our plan to navigate if we're we open up these additional homes to be built over here and we don't have east andamosa street built out We are continuing to make a major crisis situation for this neighborhood that I happen to have a lot of sympathy for. I've spoke to the people that live in this. I know people who have sold their homes who couldn't stand to live there. The traffic congestion, the studies that we have seen are showing thousands of cars. And those are... hopefully pedestrian cars not semi trucks and heavy equipment being transported up and down a residential neighborhood that is extremely narrow it's just it's a terrible situation what is our plan to address this moving forward i know we desperately need single-family housing i'm excited to see this portion of the shepherd hills continue to develop but if we could go to whoever would be the best person to address this I would love to hear what city staff's recommendations are in addressing this situation. Thank you.

Well, you're just in luck because Community Development Director Vicki Fischer is eagerly raising her hand. I saw that.

Vicki raised her hand. Thank you very much, Vicki.

Director Fischer.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. This is something that staff is aware of too. We get those same phone calls. We're out in the field. We're looking at it. And I think that is in part why we as your staff and you as council approved two separate and that's the construction that you're seeing out there. It's a growing pain. The same developer that's taking lead on one of those TIFs is the same developer that's introducing these 105 lots that's in the same area. So again, it does become a timing issue. However, the steps are going forward as we speak. In the meantime, I must say hats off to the Public Works Department. When we do have issues with traffic at high rates of speed that are using Diamond Ridge Boulevard as an arterial street instead of a local residential street, they are great about going out, putting up speed monitors, and actually spending time in the neighborhood. to ensure that the traveling public is at least, if they're traveling through that neighborhood, doing it so in a safe fashion. So while the other option may be if the city had funding to maybe roll into the strategic growth revolving fund where we took the lead on making these improvements right now, they would get paid back as development in the area occurred. The good news is, though, that we do have TIFs approved, that funding source is in place, and it's just waiting for those projects to get synced.

Thank you, Director Fischer. And I have definitely had that on the radar. But to tell people that they're going to be waiting years for this situation to be resolved is disheartening. And it's extremely hard living there in the moment. Is there any way we can restrict semis and heavy equipment from utilizing this road at the very least in the meantime? and I would hope that the city can be looking into what we can do right now. I know we're in design phase, according to, I believe, our director. Tice has updated, design phase is happening right now, and we are looking for a fall of 2020 construction of East Anamosa Street Connection. We know that construction takes time, though, and that's gonna take one, two years to see that project through. I just think we have to do something now before an accident happens, before we have a critical situation. The city is aware of this vulnerability. It's a liability. What are our options? And I'll yield with that. Thank you.

Director Fischer, did you have anything to say about that?

Thank You mr. Mayor excellent comments I think that with the construction of homestead to Valley Drive we're going to see some relief off of Diamond Ridge Boulevard and that really is the residential street that's really getting the bulk of this traffic it won't alleviate everything but it will alleviate a significant portion of it so that's happening right now and that will probably happen We can count those on months, not years, as to when that is going to come forward. Those that are driving trucks in the area are typically those that are doing work in the area. It is not on a HAL route approved Route throughout the city, there are some streets where you as a truck driver can go from point A to point B. But if you're a truck driver and you're performing services into an area, then all residential streets can be used. So while we do see truck traffic from time to time, it's truck traffic that's being utilized for some construction project in that area.

OK, Councillor Evans. I just want to comment that I was happy to hear Ms. Fisher mention the way we do things. And we're trying to move toward a new model. As you know, I've been harping about that for seven or eight years. And it's amazing to me when I visit Billings, for instance, how their arterials are built. you know miles out beyond where the development goes so they don't have that problem because we've had the you know the cart leading the horse for our entire existence as a city and we need to move away from that and to know that the fund is slowly being developed i think is a really positive thing so these things won't be happening in the future but we're kind of living with the legacy of how we've done things so i'm glad to hear you bring that up thank you

Well as a reminder that's what the strategic growth revolving fund is for and I look forward to planning that in the future. I'm still in need of a motion folks. Motion by Tamang with a second by Biberdorf to approve with stipulations. All in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. That takes us to public hearing items 52 through 63. We will open the public comment or public hearing for items 52 through 63. I do have some speaker request forms for item 63. First up, Tammy Hop.

Thank you and good evening Council Members and Mayor Salomon. I'm Tammy representing the Rapid City Disability Awareness and Accessibility Committee and the Black Hills Works Foundation. I'm here in support of Ordinance 6726's second reading. This ordinance does something simple and overdue. It lets people with disabilities and the providers that support them to request reasonable accommodation for their housing without being forced to disclose private information in a public hearing when requesting a conditional use permit or zoning variance. It also gives the city a clear, consistent administrative process reducing legal risk of an ADA or FHA violation. But I'm also here to say thank you. Thank you to the Department of Community Development for their work on this ordinance and being responsive to public input. You already carry out this work every day and help shape the process that is now written into this really good ordinance. Thank you to Assistant City Attorney Groot, whose years of research on this issue helped inform city staff and council. And thank you to the homeowners who took the time to review, question, and comment. Those comments and that time made this ordinance so much better than even the first reading. So please pass 6726. We've done the hard work. I'm grateful to all of you. Thank you.

Next up, Barbara Horton. Hello, Ms. Horton. Welcome.

Thank you. I am here representing our homeowners association. I live at red rock estates and I am late to the party, I guess, because we really didn't know about this ordinance until just recently. And we had our attorney Richard Huffman do some research and I, he said that he sent a letter that I'm holding. front of me to all of you that I would like to read a few of the items from it because he knows he's talking about when it comes to the legal issues so he says first of all this is not just a federal Fair Housing Act and title to issue if you pass the current ordinance amending title 17 of By allowing an administrative action, you will be depriving your residents of notice to allow them to enforce property rights created by years and years of residential covenants. I have been called by many of the entities and people that I have advised over my 50 plus year carrier as a real estate attorney on covenants for residential real estate developments and the questions involving around the city proposal to make approval of Oxford Homes only subject to city staff approval. I understand that current and hopefully fully consideration applications must go through the city council, and it should stay this way, thus giving the citizens an opportunity to both be heard and to protect their property rights. I live in a neighborhood with many covenants, and we're concerned that some of our covenants will be Ignored, first of all, we are a single family residential neighborhood. Secondly, we have parking covenants, which are very strict. Street parking is restricted to emergencies, deliveries, and guests, and provide that no automobile should be parked or left on any portion of a lot other than inside a garage, and shall not be visible unless it is in operating condition with current license plates. The other thing that we have is we don't allow businesses to participate out of our neighborhood. And Mr. Huffman believes that the Oxford House is considered a business. The city needs to assist its citizens and should require any application for an Oxford House needs to be submitted to the city with a title search including copies of all covenants attached and in that case since the city does not enforce covenants the issue needs to go to the council and notice needs to go to each HOA office and the immediate neighbors. So we are just asking that our covenants be heard and that they be followed before

Thank you, Ms. Horton, the time is up.

All right, thank you very much.

Thank you.

Three minutes goes fast, doesn't it?

It does go by fast, yes ma'am. We will now close the public hearing for items 52 through 63, and I'll entertain a motion to approve items 52 through 61, unless the council has an item to separate from the ballots. Motion by Lehman with a second by Sechrist to approve items 52 through 61. All in favor? Any opposed? Motion carries. That takes us to the end of the consent public hearing calendar. And we will move on to non-consent public hearing items 62 and 63. Item 62, second reading of ordinance number 6738, an ordinance amending section 17.06 of the Rapp City Municipal Code. A request by Renner Associates LLC for Sweet Creek LLC for rezoning request from General Commercial District to General Agricultural District for property generally described as being located at 136 Krebs Drive. The recommendation is to approve in conjunction with the plan development designation. Motion by Sechrist with a second by Layman to approve. All in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. Item 63, second reading and recommendation of ordinance number 6726, an ordinance amending title 17 of the Rapid City Municipal Code to create a reasonable accommodation procedure. We've got several comments in the queue here. We will begin with Councillor Temang.

I will be abstaining, thank you.

All right, duly noted. All right, Councillor Armstrong.

Thank you, Mayor. Permission to ask the Community Development Director some questions?

Absolutely.

OK. Ms. Fisher. I want Ms. Horton's statement and concerns to be addressed. What is the likelihood of a house like this going into a place that has an HOA and how would the city handle something like this?

All right, with that we'll go to Community Development Director Vicki Fisher.

Thank you Mr. Mayor and great question. So there are covenants throughout many subdivisions in Rapid City. There may be some uses currently existing in those homes that the city would permit that the covenant does not. The city does not We do not have the authority to enforce our covenant, nor do we prevent them from enforcing the covenant. So there was an incident out at Red Rock Estates with some of the original developers, and the Zoning Board of Adjustment granted a setback variance. The property owner came in and said, I don't want to maintain that eight-foot side yard setback. I want to take it down to four feet. They made a good justification to the zoning board of adjustment and it was approved. The homeowners association representatives reached out to the city and said, the covenant does not allow for a reduced setback. The city had no authority. And with the help of our attorneys, there was some great conversation about, no, we followed the legal procedure as set forth by city regulations and state law. But if they breached your covenant, then you can, take that property owner before your homeowners association and whatever action that's needed to take to ensure that that construction doesn't happen or that use doesn't exist. And again, while we don't have the authority to enforce it, we don't prevent them from enforcing it.

And hopefully that addressed Ms. Wharton's concerns. And thank you, Director Fischer. I yield.

Next up, Councilor Maher.

Yes, I've really struggled with this ordinance because I believe in full disclosure, transparency to the neighborhood, to the people, and so I understand. I've met with city attorney. I've seen the lawsuits. We don't have any choice. We have to accommodate Oxford houses. because of ADA and FHA rules. If we don't, we will be sued. So I'm okay with the whole thing with Oxford Houses. My concern is it really bothers me that we're not willing to notify the neighbors. I don't know why we can't just tell them, hey, this is gonna be an Oxford House. Doesn't mean you can stop it, but at least you're notifying the neighbors. That's transparency, and so I will not be able to support this, thank you. All right, next up, Councilor Strowman.

Thank you, Mayor. Can I make a substitute motion?

Absolutely.

I'd like to make a motion to amend the proposed ordinance to include notification to neighbors and also a process that is similar to the CUP process rather than an administrative process to deal with these issues. And if I can get a second, I will retain the floor, please.

All right, we have a motion by Stroman with a second by Maher. Can I restate it just for clarity's sake? To include notification to neighbors and to develop at least a CUP-like process to the ordinance.

that's fair thank you sir um and i um and i appreciate the comprehensive analysis that kinsley from the city attorney's office has done i've read the materials that she's provided not the most exciting reading but appreciate it just just the same um i understand where she's coming from and the opinions that she's or the or the position she's taken that she believes that she would be uh... it saving the city from a potential litigation if uh... we did anything other than what this ordinances i do believe we do have to have an ordinance and we do have to have uh... something to uh... to address these concerns, I don't think it has to be an ordinance that is absent of notification to the neighboring landowners, and I don't think that it has to be a process that is strictly administrative, handled by someone in city hall rather than a board or some, at least have some criteria that's similar to a conditional use permit where they go through and they look at all the different criteria and they say yes it meets it doesn't meet it and so forth i don't think that's necessary i don't fear litigation i don't think that by passing this ordinance we're preventing any litigation i think in fact we probably could be seeing more litigation if we do this without having a notification element to the process and the CUP type process of evaluating these uses. And so I agree with what Ms. Horton was saying. I saw the letter that Rich prepared today. He may not have gotten it sent to the, I didn't see it in the agenda. He was supposed to have it sent to Kinsley, so everybody had a copy of it. But Ms. Horton wasn't able to read all of it in her time. But it basically sets forth that there are other property interests here that at least rise to the level here and we can do what we need to do to have this process for these people to have their equal property rights, whoever they are, whatever their station in life is. But at the same time, we can protect and at least notify the adjoining land owners. So that's what I propose that we do.

Okay, and for clarity's sake, there was no other motion, I believe, so that's the only motion on the floor right now. All right, Councillor Evans.

Yeah, I'm a firm believer in artificial intelligence research. I think it digs deep. That's not to say I love data centers, but I did, you know, propose this with the ordinances that exist in surrounding cities and asked what would happen if somebody challenged the policies of Sioux Falls, of Casper, of Bismarck, of Harvard. And Sioux Falls passes, no lawsuits. Bismarck and Rapid City do not. And I'm gonna trust its research, because it has access to all the law books in the world. And so whenever you get into ADA law, it's a little bit complicated. And I don't think personally that this addition by Mr. Stroman sounds particularly abusive, but somebody in the room that might know a little bit more, are we doing a special classification to people that singles them out again and opening this up to problems? So maybe Kinsley wants to come up and address that. Thank you.

We have our deputy city attorney, Kinsley Group.

okay thank you mr mayor um yes one of the big issues that we see is we're looking at other types of uses that don't require conditional use permits we've already talked about it in a past meeting vacation home rentals that's a similar type of a use where the concerns are noise and potential traffic issues with parking, similar type of a use does not require a conditional use permit. So when you have that, when you have home occupations that are allowed by right without having a conditional use permit, or you have daycares and family homes for seven to 12 children, it's a similar type of use. Again, parking issues, maybe some noise that the neighbors might complain about. Those are the things that, I mean, unfortunately, those types of uses could be used against the city because there aren't conditional use permits that are required for those. If an entity like Oxford House wants to sue the city, they could point to those and say, hey, you're discriminating against those with disabilities and requiring them to get a conditional use permit. So you'd really need to look at those other types of uses. And there might be others out there that we haven't thought about right now and change those. But realistically, the big picture here is the concept of creating a decision-making environment that guards against this discriminatory community pressure that may infect a reasonable accommodation zoning decision. And we're trying to guard against that and make it so that it's an administrative procedure. Staff will still have access to feedback, and if we need to get more information, we will be able to look at that. It'd be a decision that's made when we're looking at all of the different cases that might be available for reasonable accommodations that courts have decided upon. That's a very important thing to our office. Realistically, there is a big risk of lawsuits. Oxford House is an entity that is... Has lots of cases out there. So we're trying to guard against that discriminatory discriminatory community pressure in these types of instances Did you have anything else council servants, okay next up councillor Armstrong

Thank you. I commend Mr. Stroman trying to find some sort of compromise to address not only his concerns but Councillor Maher's concerns, Ms. Horton's concerns, and the other concerns that are being brought forward. My understanding when we had these meetings and through the discussions through the Disability Awareness Committee, we were going to do this by a case-by-case basis. So given Mr. Stroman's motion, can you elaborate on how this might help or hurt the city?

All right, with that, I'll go to Community Development Director Vicki Fisher.

So currently, there is a process in place that if someone that has a disability wants to use a home in the same manner as the rest of us, and they don't meet the definition of family, that's in place right now. That requires public notice of the neighborhood. So in essence, you don't have to amend this ordinance, you would just be denying it or tabling it, and we could go back to what we would require today, which is they would need to come in and get a variance to the definition of family And that would be because they're protected by Title II ADA and the Federal Fair Housing Act that says these individuals that have a qualifying disability are deemed a family. So that means anyone that has family members that are more than five Live in Rapid City if we're going to require them to get a variance. We have to require everyone to get that variance We've got to be fair and consistent across the application of family and all residential structures so what we've acknowledged through this reasonable accommodation is that these folks are not related by blood or marriage and But they are protected. They are deemed to be considered a family. And through this administrative process, which we really have tightened down what that looks like, how many others would be having input into the final decision, and we would keep those in public record. There's been some comments about, well, if we don't require a conditional use permit or a variance, we at least need to let the neighborhood know. well that notification of the neighborhood is momentary in time what happens when someone sells and moves on time goes on but that house continues to be used the same way oxford is and and granted i don't think that any of these reasonable accommodations for most all other uses trigger this discussion it really is those sober houses that causes the angst, I think, in the neighborhoods. Of the six Oxford homes that are currently operational in Rapid City, there is one neighborhood that we've received concerns about. We've received zero comments from the other five. Zero comments. But they all know they're there because there is a great transparency amongst these sober agencies to ensure that the public is aware that these homes are used for this location, whether it's male or female and how many occupants. They also list a house manager and give that phone number for anyone to contact. Saddled then with the reasonable accommodation administrative review and approval, we would have a public record that has the detailed operational plan, that shows exactly what those parameters are, because we would approve it with limitations specific to what they were submitting, so that again it would have that opportunity to share information with the public if there was a concern, if it was noticed that this home may not be functioning as a single family residence. And that's how we would work closely with those agencies to ensure that we are protecting those with qualifying disabilities.

Councilor Armstrong, the floor is still yours, ma'am.

One more quick question. You mentioned there's six Oxford houses in Rapid City. Are any of them in HOA developments?

Mr. Mayor? Yes, ma'am. I can't, without answering the research, doing research, what I can say according to the address is Most of them are in older neighborhoods and those that probably, I would say maybe two, the rest of them probably do not have those covenants. One is just down the street from me. We had covenants when we first platted, those have expired. Any more additional comments?

Okay, then I yield, thank you.

Okay, so for clarification's sake, the motion on the floor is Councilor Strowman's motion, which included the amendment to include notification to neighbors and a development of a CEP-like process. That's the motion on the floor. No other motions are there. So with that, Heidi, would you go to a roll call vote?

Lehman? No. Maher? Stroman?

Aye.

Armstrong? No. Sechrist? No. Beberdorf? No. Tamang?

Abstain.

Sorry. Evans? No. Meyer? No. Motion fails.

Okay. Second. We've got a motion by Lehman with a second by Sechrist to approve item 63. All in favor? Aye. Any opposed?

Aye.

Motion passes with two noes from Maher and Stroman. All right, that takes us to the bill list. With that, we'll go to Finance Director Daniel Ainslie.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. The bills for Main Street Square as well as Visit Rapid City total $192,125.40. Motion by Biberdorf with a second by Tamang. All in favor?

I didn't hear anybody. All in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries with one abstention from Meyer. Item 65.

The remaining bill list totals $16,884,467.17.

Got a motion by Meyer with a second by Beaverdore. All in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Aye. Motion carries with one opposition from Councilor Stroman. Do we have a motion to adjourn? All right, we got a motion by Lehman with a second by Meyer to adjourn. All in favor? Aye. Any opposed? We're adjourned. Thanks everyone.