Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Okay, we're good to go. Did we get the okay from Pete? I see. Yes. Okay, perfect. Yes.

All right, let's go ahead and call to order the uh October 9th, 2025 plans commission. And uh can I go ahead get a roll call? Brandy. Yes. Albby here. Dolly here. Alletki present. Spire here. Kay's here. Kakachek here. And Tate Khane and R and Dargas Johnson are absent. We have a quorum. And this is just the um majority in the affirmative. So four three four four four for a passing vote.

Four for a pass. Yep. And this is all by voice vote. Um I'll go ahead to this time. Is there anybody at this time if you have anything that you want for public comment if you would provide that to the staff and we can address that at the uh back end of the agenda. Uh having said the agenda, can I get a motion to approve the agenda? I'll make that motion. Can I get a second? Second. Any discussion? Having heard none. Um voice vote to approve to say all say I. I. Any opposed? Okay, agenda passes. Uh, minutes from the last meeting. Can I get a motion to approve the last meeting minutes? Motion to approve the minutes from last meeting. Okay, second. Second.

Okay, got a motion, a second. Any comment or discussion? Haven't heard none. All in favor? I. Any oppose? Abstain. Abstain. Okay, one abs. Uh, minutes approved. Um, Randy, let's go ahead and move on to the regular agenda. Item A.

Okay. Thank you, Spy. So, this is a reszone request for the property at 812 West Kemp. Um, we have currently two parcels. The one that is zoned C3 Highway commercial and then the one to the west that is zoned R2A, single family attached residential. So, there's a existing dwelling on the R2A lot. how it's shown to be reconfigured for the desire to have additional storage for the lot with the commercial business um is still going to be conforming the the residential lot. So that will that will be 5,952 ft and in the R2A district you for a single family dwelling you can have 4,500 square ft. So it's still exceeding the minimum lot size. Um and then the C3 lot exceeds the 20,000 square foot uh minimum lot size requirement and with this addition additional piece will be 32,17 ft. Um, you know, we appreciate that it's being reszoned and that it's being brought into conformance, uh, because the desire is still there to utilize the house and so the additional storage space for the business will be zoned correctly and then and replatted and then the residential zoning designation will remain for the house. Um the there is uh utility services. The gas I got to keep them all straight. The uh the gas that services the house runs through this property that will be that is will be replatted if this resoning is approved. So we will make sure that uh

to encompass that within utility easements over any utilities that are existing there in case the properties are ever in separate ownership today. They're owned by the same person. So with that, I'll stand by for any questions. Any questions from the uh planning commission staff? Brandy, you said the utility easement would be captured. I don't see that on the uh plans today, but that would be captured as part of the platting process.

Yes. Yep. So, we have the exhibit and then when we get the the replat will be Oh, and we have that on there, too. Yes. We will we we'll get that amended because the replat can actually be administrative. So, in working with utilities and reviewing it, that's where that came to light, which was after the agenda was posted. So, we will get that taken care of before the plat is recorded. Uh, Brandy, is there a screening requirement in C3 for storage areas? Yes, when it abuts residential districts. And the applicant, I believe, does plan to fence this area in.

Thank you. And actually has to, but I believe he planned on it anyway. Uh, there anyone here on behalf of the application? Yes. Come on up. Identify yourself and your address, please.

Yes. Uh, my name is Doug Walsh. I'm with the innovative adjusters. the owner of the commercial property and the adjacent property that we're speaking of today, 812 West Kemp Avenue. cleaned up that particular area cuz it was pretty bad for 50 years with overgrown brush trees and we cleaned it up quite quite significantly. Um it just come to light with the times that we need that area for the commercial side of our business. So that's why I'm here requesting that you give us this variance to let us use this uh particular area and fence it in. Meet all the requirements of the six foot fence. And and

so so now you cleared it out. Is there going to be any structures added to it? Is it just going to be vacant space? Just vacant space. Just open. So you're just adding other than the fence. There won't be any structures on it. Okay. I just want to clarify too. So this is a a reszone, not not a variance request. You just I just wanted to be clear on that that you're going over my head there. You're uh you're bringing everything into conformance, so you're good. Yes.

Okay. Any other uh planning commission questions for the applicant? Okay. Thank you, Mr. Walsh. Is there anybody else here to speak on behalf of this request? Anyone to speak in opposition to it? No one online. Okay. We'll go ahead and um is there can I get a motion uh for this request? Motion to approve. Okay. Dolly motion second. Second. Okay. Second. All right. Uh amongst the plan commission, do we have any discussion further on this Mr. Chair? Go ahead, Mr. D. Yeah. Um

I'm I'm supportive of the C3 zoning at this time. However, I will just go back to a comment that I've been making for 20 odd years. I think C3 zoning on this stretch of Kemp is an inappropriate zone. I don't know if we have an adequate C2 zone that would accommodate the uses. I do think it's something that we as a community should be looking at. Um, you know, if we're zoning things C3, that's a block and a half off of a highway and it's a highway commercial district. Maybe there's a a need down the road for a substitute commercial district. I'm fine with the C3 and this request at this time, but I think it's again, it's a bigger and if I'm here for another year, it might be something I would like to see done. So, I concur with that. I think in this case I it makes makes sense for this property and makes sense to replat it as as one contiguous

lot. Amongst the all those in favor of the motion I I. Any oppose? Not opposed. Okay, that passes. Go ahead on to item B.

Okay. Thank you, Spy. So, this is an annexation and zoning request for what will be known as the Burger Third Edition. This property, this is 26.8 acres on the east side of town, um, just east of Titan Machinery along Highway 212. And it's honestly, I mean, pretty straightforward other than I guess they do they are within um the Sue Rule Water Territory. So, Watertown Municipal Utilities will um work with the property owner on um getting that taken care of upon the resolution and plat being filed if this is approved. And then they also will work within the electrical territories between Cington Clark and Northwestern um electric territory. So there um the applicant is aware of that as well as WMU is prepared to um assist through that process. Um there's also a trunk sewer assessment cost recovery that the applicant has been made aware of um and that is for the trunk sewer within Highway 212 because that is what and that that was put in previously and um the city has held the overhead. So then when properties develop that are adjacent, we recover those um outstanding cost recoveries. Um and then that's where they will connect to sanitary sewer. There are three legal voters living on the property. um within the legal description today. Um as far as the city goes, once the property is annexed and zoned, uh we will plat it and then we just will not issue and that's um add it that's verbiage in the resolution, the

annexation resolution that uh additional building permits will not be issued until the existing dwelling unit is removed. And that is because they are going to be zoning this C3 highway commercial. So the dwelling unit then is legal non-conforming. Um and looking at our regulations, we can plat because the everything of the lot size meets the requirements of title 24, but we would want to see the lot be brought into conformance before we would allow additional building permits. and that would even go for if they wanted to make modifications to the house. The only permit we will be issuing will be a demolition permit. Um, and there is no timeline as far as the city goes. It's really just upon when they would like to start with development that they would get the the house removed. And with that, I'll stand by for any questions.

Okay. Any uh commission questions for staff? Go ahead. Yeah, Mr. Chair. Okay. About the house. So, are they going to make that they're like split out the house and have a different legal description the whole thing? And then you're going to allow them to keep the house as long as they want to. So, and they won't be able to make any improvements, get a building permit or anything for any improvements to the house. So, that's correct. And as far as the fact that they are annexing and zoning it, I feel as if the house is not the use that they're looking to to continue.

Okay. I I'm just making sure that, you know, the applicant knows that you can't do anything to your house. You know, you can paint maybe, but Yeah. Yeah. There's certain things. Um but no, I do um the fact that it's being annexed and zoned. Um is the house going to be connected to city utilities also? It so it is the house is and so then they will go through the proper inspections of capping the water and sewer connections. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Chair. U Brandy, not water, just sewer. I saw a bird's face. Sorry,

Brandy. Did we have any discussions at a staff level? I know it's our our current policy has been, but any outreach to the county highway superintendent because that is a county road, not taking the entire right away only to the se middle of the road. I know we've been talking about that as we start looking as the city starts to grow and we start annexing property in and we start taking other township and county uh right away and then we start sharing right away um the you know and and talking about maintenance agreements and all those things. Have we had any conversations with the county regarding that stretch which you know it will be almost a quarter mile long of how how we how are we moving forward on that? It's it's it's gerine to this annexation, but it's also uh along the looking down the road too is how we continue to work with township and county uh entities as we start taking pieces and parts of their roads.

Yes, and that's a a great point where we can open that discussion up. It's just always practice that we take it to the center line, but when we do have a situation like this, um, you know, when we annexed in the Endrris property here, we ended up taking the entire right of way, and that is just to clean things up because the county isn't cleaning one side and the city's cleaning the other. That just doesn't make any sense. So, um, we will continue that discussion then before it would go further. I mean like we can get that buttoned up before um council would ever take action and the second reading because you know there's the first reading and the second reading where that's gives us some time.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I have a question. Okay, Brandy. Now across the street there's 1114, 1122 and 1202 and then just south of there there's more acreages that are single family dwellings. Were they notified? Yes. Oh, okay. Good. And nobody said anything. Everybody was happy with it. Yeah. The only discussion that I've had is just on the house. Okay. Thanks. So, one one additional question here uh in terms of the reszone extending to the middle of the the rightway. Does that go all the way to 212 then with the access road that exists on the north side?

That's already right away, but the the Yes, the resone will. Yes. Yep. Just make sure Commissioner Dolly, I don't know if I was thinking same thing or not. The little plot of land north of the what we're looking at uh that that's going to be also annexed as well. That's an HTO. Yeah, that's highway. So, this what I'm highlighting here that will the the zoning will extend to that. Okay. Thank you. Okay. Any further questions from the commission? Okay. Haven't heard none. Is there anybody here on behalf of the application? Yes, sir.

Uh David Strait. I'm the attorney for the current owners. Uh this property maybe hold on. Maybe restate your name just so that it's in the microphone for the record. Uh David Strait. I'm the attorney for the current owners. uh there is a contract for the sale of this property for a significant development and that's why we're trying to pave the way to have that development take place. So once we get the property next zoned and uh the buyers are going to come in and take the house out, that's how this is going to work. Any questions from the commission for the applicant or representative? Okay. Thank you, sir.

Sure. Okay, close. Is there anyone here to speak uh further in on behalf of this? Anyone speak in opposition? Okay, I haven't heard none. Uh can I go ahead and get a motion? Motion to approve. Second. Motion and a second. Uh any further discussion amongst the commission? Okay. All those in favor say I opposed passes. Moving on to C.

Okay. Um and then did you do action on both the annexation and zoning? Zoning. Okay. I got to separate those. Yeah. So we do the uh annexation first. My motion was for the annexation. Yeah. Sorry. Okay. So let's just go ahead. Uh motion to annex the uh the lot to zone the zone a lot. Excuse me. Zone a lot. All those in favor? I second. I need a second on the motion. Oh, I'm sorry. Second. Second. Okay. All those in favor? Any oppose? All right. It passes. Hi, Dave.

Okay. Um so this is an ordinance amendment that is cleaning up what we have discussed prior. Um and the planning commission had asked staff to look into the accessory structures after um a variance was brought forward and actually multiple variances where we're within the range of 200 square feet. So let me get that pulled up. Um, so there we we added a clerical change. I just want to point that out as far as the RG and the RS district to make those consistent with other residential districts. Um, because we don't call out 25 ft, it's always 24 ft. Um and then for the residential storage that is because um when you get um the attached garage in a residential district you can go up to 35 ft. Um and then otherwise this is just changing that a so a residential lot can have two accessory structures. One can be over 200 square ft and that all depends on your lot size and the percentage that's allowed and then one can be under 200 square ft. And so what we're proposing is that that just change to 240. Um, and the thought with that is we would rather see people store things inside and there has been um, you know, there are larger sheds that are um, prefabricated already and so just the

ability to have a little more flexibility there. Um and also be able to um yeah really to just have things indoors and not be in that middle ground between 40 square feet. And we have just seen that that size increase as far as um the the pre-fabricated structures. So that is Oh, then um we are changing. Sorry, I kind of forgot that this ordinance was on here to be honest. Um the for the accessory structures entering an alley. So the purpose there is that an alley functions it that's not the pedestrian way. So the front yard is where you have at a 25 foot front yard setback mainly because you have a sidewalk in the front yard and you don't want cars on the driveway encroaching over the sidewalk. Alleys do not have sidewalks and that is really for vehicular um movement. So, the idea with this of allowing it if the garage door is opening uh parallel that it allow the garage to be 4 feet off of the property line and then if it is opening perpendicular that it be 9 ft. And 9 ft is because then you still can get a car parked parallel off of the alley. Um, and this is the typical use for alleys, and I don't know when when it exactly changed of pushing it back 20 feet when it's in an alley. Um, but

that actually does a lot of these areas are zoned R2A because alleys are an older trend and these and the R2A is the reserved district of the older neighborhoods because the setbacks don't conform with today's standards. So, this just really gives the ability for people that have these properties to be able to have the, you know, add a garage and also still have a backyard without having it set back so far and still not obstructing um any it's not creating any danger um to pedestrians because the alley is used for the vehicular movements. Um, and I believe that covers it. So, I'll stand by for questions.

Brandy, can we pull up the section for a that talks about that entering from the alley? Yeah, because I think there may be a typo in the the language here, I guess, in your in your new text for the proposed language. Okay. Okay. So, and I do have the track change um on the agenda.

Yeah. Yeah, I'm just reading the one that's included in the agenda and it looks like in describing both the 4ft and 9 ft it it specifies entered perpendicular for both of them. Oh, so one of them should be Yes. or parallel. Parallel is the 4T. Yep. So I will get that changed. Okay. And Mr. Chair and Brandy generally alley w that's how it is today.

Sorry. Generally alley widths are are are generally 12 feet wide and now with two four foot encroachments. We don't have any issues with snow removal and putting plows and stacking of snow in those alleys if we were to encroach closer than the 9 ft. I mean uh do highway super the the deal the street department has no issues. Um they actually just use like a truck blade. Truck blade. Okay. So it's easier to Okay. not have issues of pushing snow up against the structure. Yep. Thank you.

Nope, we not yet. Okay. Can we go ahead and get a motion? I'll motion to approve with the subject to the changes that I mentioned. Okay. And can I get a second? Second. Okay. Any further discussion or comments to commission? Okay. All those in favor of the motion? I. Any oppose? Not heard. It passes.

We're not done. There's a second page to the agenda here. So,

okay. Thank you, Spy. So this one uh the residential storage district was created earlier this year when we brought forward a um a large ordinance amendment to title 21. So the attention to detail I can say was not there or thinking about really the applicability. A lot of it was copied from the RG residential garage district. So then actually having time to kind of look through and with a fine tooth comb and think about the applicability of having this zoning district. If we have it, we want it to be usable. And the idea behind creating a district as this um as such is because right now storage units are only allowed in commercial districts or um R3 which is multifamily residential and it's also known that storage units are good to have within close proximity of neighborhoods and it also has been stated that um storage units are better neighbors than apartments. So, um I I like that one. Um so, the thought is when you have somebody coming forward to do storage units, they have to zone it R3 and then there is the fear of what it could be when truly it is just for storage. Um but then storage units are also usually made or um the exterior is usually metal material, not residential siding. And how they're constructed is um conducive for the metal the like the metal sheeting. Um, so the language that came out of the RG, residential garage district, that requires it to be residentially sided,

which that does make sense because that is within residential districts that um like intermingled with it. So, and you know that it is just a singular garage where these are actual storage units. Um, so just just some thoughts there of of why the following proposals are being made. Um, but still wanting to also protect the adjacent residential districts by requiring screening or fencing um to really separate the the use just because um storage units. you could have traffic lights, you know, later in later hours or whatnot. So, that is just to really um diffuse any any uh issues that it would have on adjacent residential neighbors. The other thing is that this will have to this this zoning district has not been applied anywhere. It's new. So, that would require a reszone. So the neighbors would be notified and there would be public hearing opportunities. So with that, I will stand by for any questions.

Commissioner Kate, u two quick questions. Storage shop, storage unit, storage facility, indoor, does that mean shipping containers? No. Um other quick question is what if I was to use 10-ft sidewalls? What is my minimum sideyard setback? Um then you would be 10 uh 9 and a half ft. Yours just says here just I'm just Is there another section which establishes a setback less for less than 12T? Oh then you would follow the chart which I believe is 9 ft. 9 ft. Okay. I um but you know what let me read let me take that back. When you say about shipping containers I think that we should add that to say that shipping containers are not allowed

are prohibited. Yes. Yeah. because we don't have anything an ordinance like that yet. I would I would I would encourage that just from the perspective that it's still a little bit ambiguous and nebulous there. Yep. No, that's a great point. Any other questions from the commission for staff? I do. Randy item F on here. Uh can you talk about what that means and why that's part of the proposal?

So in residential districts you can only have one principal permitted structure. So the thought here is that if they have say two storage buildings, storage unit buildings, um you know that that is allowed because otherwise this this ordinance does state that you can only have one primary structure. Okay. So same use but they're splitting it up into multiple buildings on the same lot.

Yep. And on the screening, do we need to be any more specific on the density or the the type and size of the the screening? I did consider that um and that's I mean unless we want to say if you're I mean with vegetation and the fencing I mean six maybe we say six foot because because we do in some of the other districts we do and I just remember when we built my building up north um I was I was either to build a fence or have you know

a vegetation but was at the whim of the adjoining land owner of what I was to put up because I was infringing on their already established development. So, but you also had a conditional use. Pardon me. But they that was a conditional use. This was a condition use. But but then again, this is something where we're talking about a budding established residentially zoned property that more than likely is already established prior to the development of this zone. And I agree. You know, you know, I'm sure we're gonna use shoe box lighting and that sort of a thing. Yep. Keep to keep the lighting down. Is that a standard that we need to put in here? Nope. Okay.

So, I think what we could do is because I agree vegetation isn't really fair because it takes so long to uh grow. So, I think that but I also don't like to give um the neighbors the uh because you also might have multiple neighbors and trying to coordinate that because I do think that the property owners should have the right to decide what they want for their property as long as we have it consistent in ordinance and planning commission and city council has approved that.

I think Mr. here. My my my preference is that if we could do living vegetation always is to me better than um hard fencing. Uh if it works, I understand sometimes fencing is better if it's loud and people are there at different hours of night and then neighbors would maybe like fencing, but if you did BMS with trees or shrubbery and those types of things, you can still get the same effect. And so I don't want to walk away from, you know, greener sort of

maybe we just put a six foot barrier. Um, and then that can be fencing, vegetation, burm. I can add burm to this list and then but just say that and then leave it to you to to work it out. But and then we'll find out down the road. Yeah. Whether or not what what the public's going to want after we do one or two of these things. Yes. Yeah. Yeah. And I was more wondering, you know, in terms of the vegetation if we have to say, you know, the amount of density um 20 ft apart versus 9 ft apart or I I think that I think if it's vegetation, it needs to create a fence effect. Yeah. Yep. You know, and whatever they're choosing what the spacing needs to be.

So, the way I read it right now is there's um there's no limitation on the size of the storage unit. It's just in proportion to the size of the lot available. Correct. And no more than 80%. No more than Right. Right. So you could have a very large shop in in a residential area adjacent to a residential area based on a lot size. Is there a minimum amount of area that if I want to reszone something to this? Is that um 10,000 10,000? So and and then there's no um no prohibition on you know having this spot zoned in the middle of all R1. is the way it's written right now.

I mean, we can increase the the size. I think to me a 10,000 is what 75 by 150 is our or whatever. I mean, I'm just I'm just saying right now there's nothing in the language. And then as far as materials go, it could be all steel, could be steel sighting, steel roof, uh, you know, look very much like a a a shop in adjacent to or in the middle of a residential area the way it's written right now. Correct. Let's do the acre limitation like we do for RG. And is is this is this in the intent to be private or is it commercial? commercial. All commercial.

If if it's a storage shop, that is private storage. So then that is not commercial. That doesn't fall. Okay. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Good. Did you have a question? Okay. Mr. Vice, uh, so Brandy, would they have the the ability to build, let's say, like an office on the front of the storage unit facility that they put in there? No. No. Okay. Unless like it was, you know, ancillary to the storage facility, like somebody running it, but not like to rent it out for a different business.

Yeah. Kind of my thought for running the the storage units, but then what limitations do you have on that? Because you you know, you could build a pretty big office with some small storage there and run a different LLC out of it or, you know,

Yeah. Um, we would look at that when they would apply for the building permit and but yeah, if they were doing an office that would only be able to be a like ancillary to the storage units and yeah, if something happened down the road, you know, there's only so much zoning can regulate. So, yeah. Okay, Mr. Chair. Okay. What are they going to have? Will they be allowed to have running water and sewer? Storage shops can. Storage units do not. Um, we kind of Yeah, we have the different definitions of them.

Um, so basically the storage shop can Let me go let me go to it here. Maybe I just want to see the uses because if they don't have like a sewer then you don't have garbage pickup. Yes. And but they also have to have a commercial hauler. So um storage units are not required to have water and sewer. Storage shops are. And then storage shops are for personal storage. Storage shops are commercial. Uh Brandy, if if these are looking at just being residential storage, then is it basically an as reported situation for enforcement of these not being used as more commercial shops? because I, you know, I if I'm understanding this is for your boat, for your extra things that don't fit in your house, but um I know a lot of shops have turned into places where people gather or people um run their business out of them. So, I'm I'm guessing that actually them not having water or sewer would probably be beneficial to preserving that use of residential storage because you're not spending time there. Yes, you're spot on. And and I'll and so it's storage units can not have without water or sewer. So, but yes, then it would just be the um by complaint basis and you would imagine if it's adjacent and you know you see enough storage facilities adjacent to residential

districts today and so but it would just be the the complaint basis and probably more people holding them accountable when they're they're in their backyard or you know nearby. Mr. Sure. So, let's say Doug Mog wanted to do what he did along, you know, west of 19th Street and and I say it was vacant today. This would be something that he could do in that situation. He could reszone that to whatever we're calling this and then he could build those units. That's the type of thing we're talking about.

Yep. because he wanted to do a garage at one time. I remember that. And we said off of 13th and we he wanted to he wanted to build a garage off of 13th or something on the end of one of those to run it and I think we turned them down because it was going to be a more than just storage. Thank you. So this ordinance doesn't require any primary structure. It could just be a sole storage unit on a lot if it's RSz zoned. So unlike today primary, that is a primary. Okay.

All right. And I apologize if it uh was answered earlier when I wasn't um when I was thinking about something else apparently. But um is there a maximum size per bay within those lots? because that will also kind of speak to the uses a bit whether you know is it going to be do you have a maximum maximum size per bay a minimum size per bay anything like that to kind of preserve the intended use I don't have anything in there like that um but in other districts we do say that it cannot exceed 600 square feet Mr. share.

Yes. But if we're going to allow for a 16 foot sidewall, then we're basically along for somebody that can wants to put a fifth wheel or drive. So you're going to be you're going to need more than you're going to need more than 600 square feet to make that work. So again, I think it's I think this is a better step than what we've got. I think we you test run it and if it runs into the ditch, we we bring it back out and you change it, right? and that it is an ordinance today.

It's It's better than what we got. I agree. And I think as long as we address the storage shipping containers, that that was my biggest heartburn. And as long as you decide what staff thinks if you know what come up with whatever that landscaping standard is between now and then, I think you understand where we're at. Yep. So I think just in your motion to just include uh prohibition of ship uh shipping containers.

Uh yeah, prohibit shipping containers. Add language as discussed for the landscape or the screening requirements and add the minimum acreage require requirement. So, I was going to save this for discussion after an emotion, but here here's my concern is you could have um on Broadway in 7th a home that's up for auction, buy the lot, demo the home, knock it down 10 grand, and put up a soul shop square in the middle of Oldtown. It takes up that whole lot and park your RV. It doesn't conform to the neighborhood aesthetically, and it right now it's prohibited. You can't do it. So that that would be something this would allow without any variances, without any conditions to go forward and do. So

you get an acre, you'd have to buy four lots. Yep. Oh, the original. Yeah, that's right. You'd have to buy and you would still have to do the reszone, right? Yep. And the neighborhood would still have the opportunity to object. Okay. And or refer the decision to a public vote. Yeah. I like that. M. Are you ready for a motion? Yeah, I'm ready for Do we have the public hearing open? Um, is there anybody here to speak on? I'm sorry, everybody online. Thank you, Blake. Yeah. Okay. Haven't heard none. Uh, go ahead and close the public hearing. Uh, can I get a motion, Mr. Chair? Yes, sir.

I'd like to make a motion to recommend approval to the city council to adopt uh the proposed changes as described with the amendment of prohibit the prohibition of shipping containers in this zoning district. a minimum of one acre for the minimum lot size. The um direction of staff to come up with uh screening standards uh that we will leave with the city council to determine. And was there one more

shipping containers screening acreage? I think that was it. That was it. Can I get a second? I'll second. Got a motion. Second. All those in favor? Discussion on the motion. Discussion on the motion. All those in favor? I. Any oppos? All right. Motion passes. Do we have any uh open comment period? Did anyone come forward for any open comment issues? No.

Okay. All right. any uh new business I from today's meeting or anything anyone wants to bring forward? Um I believe on new business we have the review of the South Dakota open meeting laws brochure which Alan Stagger our city manager will provide you some information on on this item.

Thank you Brandy. Uh, Mr. Chairman and commissioners, I'm filling in today for Lisa Carico, our city attorney, who is not able to be with us. Um, in the legislative session last year, a a measure was passed requiring uh each body that is subject to the open meeting laws in the state to go through a training uh training session once per year. Today's uh intent is to provide that training. Uh attached to your agenda is a brochure that has been published by the Attorney General's Office uh in partnership with the South Dakota Media Association that goes into quite a bit of detail on the open meeting laws in the state. Okay. Um essentially the open meeting laws require that all business that a body such as a planning commission or board of adjustment uh conducts will be done in the open. We have requirements under statute to provide uh an advanced agenda and notice. We have a 24-hour requirement which which our staff has been meeting. Um just point out that uh non-compliance has penalties in statute including uh the possibility that uh an action that you could take could be nullified um based upon not uh not following the open meeting laws. So as stated applies to all boards including this commission. Um also comment on uh it applies to electronic and and telephonic gatherings at any

time that a quorum is involved and caution you that a quorum could also be a quorum of commissioners communicating by email. And so you'll see that we do as a staff oftentimes if we are merely disseminating information uh we will produce that information with with you on blind copy so that you can't inadvertently start a discussion with your fellow commissioners and then create a quorum of the commission. We do have the ability if the communication is merely to establish a time for a meeting, you could have some back and forth dialogue and discussion via email without creating a quorum of business. However, we caution you not to do that because you could inadvertently start to slip in discussion and then have a meeting that uh meeting that was not noticed. Does that include texting too?

We haven't specifically address texting. We would advise against it. Um, as previously stated that your commission does have a 24-hour notice uh requirement that staff has been meeting on your behalf and we do post notices physically on the council chambers as well as distributing the notices to the media and also electronically to to those who've signed up. Couple of other points. Um, as you have done and as your bylaws now state, you do take public comments um at meetings and provide a reasonable time limit for the public to comment. That is is required. Uh, members of the public may record uh both audio and video recordings of the proceedings. So long as they do it without disruption and they do it in the open. I'll talk about executive sessions just briefly. I don't know that this body has ever had the need to go into an executive session. The brochure does establish the reasons that you could go into executive session. And the one that I could see as a possibility for this particular body would be uh a matter of public safety or security concerns with a potential matter before your body. If there is ever a situation where an executive session may be required, we would have plenty of advance um notice to be able to work with our city attorney and staff to establish the criteria to do so. And if you were to have an executive session, any action you would take would have to be done in the open following the executive session. Finally, um

just call your attention again to the brochure that you have and this does uh does meet the requirements of our annual review uh with this body. Be happy to try to take any questions you might have. You have to give this to all the other boards and commissions. Uh actually our city attorney has so this is my one commission that I get to do. So she has helped us out. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. Believe that's the end of the new business. Do we have any old business? Any old business? I don't believe we do. N

um I don't have any uh need. Do we have any need for an executive session? Nope. No, I don't believe so. So, I'll go ahead and call the meeting to adjourn. All right. All right.

Thank you guys. I'm not a little