City Contracts with New Natural Gas Company

Date:

by Carrie Moritz, Gazette

The March 2, 2020 meeting of the Garretson City Council had some concerns for the proposal to increase snow removal fines, approved a new company for natural gas management, and approved a day-use site in Split Rock Park that eliminated a campsite.

The meeting began with the approval of natural gas prices, which went up one cent last month but had not yet been received for March.

However, later in the meeting, the council approved a motion to enter into a 2-year contract with Clayton Energy to provide natural gas. Currently, the City is contracted with Centerpoint Energy, and they are subject to the rise and fall in prices that are seen throughout the winter and summer months.

Clayton Energy had been on the agenda for February but was discussed in executive session and closed to the public.

After a request for clarification from the Gazette, Mayor Greg Beaner explained that the company, based out of Nebraska, purchases long-range amounts of natural gas for municipalities and manages it. This allows the company to buy in bulk, lowering prices overall. It also allows pricing to be stabilized, similar to how the “average energy bill” works for Xcel Energy, since amounts are averaged over a period of time. This means it is much less likely for the community to see increases of 7-10 cents per unit during January and February, such as it has seen in the past with Centerpoint.

“He’s never come into South Dakota,” said Mayor Beaner. “They have places all over in Iowa that they manage. We checked references, we visited with him.”

After the meeting, the mayor also assured the Gazette that they had checked references not on the company’s list, and found nothing but positive reports. Clayton Energy is also looking to contract with other municipalities in the area such as Crooks.

If the city is satisfied with the performance over the next two years, a longer-term contract of five years would be sought at renewal.

Campsite Eliminated for Day Use Site

In Committee Reports, the Garretson Park Advisory Committee presented a request to install a day use site on Campsite 21 at the northernmost end of the park, eliminating that campsite. It had been brought to the Park Board at their last meeting by council member Tom Godbey, who was willing to spearhead and pay for the project.

This would see a small shelter built over a single picnic table and a standing grill, which would allow park visitors and families to have a smaller space for picnics. This project will be separate from the larger picnic shelter planned next to the playground.

While the Park Board brought the campsite up for recommendation, it also recommended consideration of the knoll across the road from the water spigot in the electrical camping area, as it would be more visible. After a discussion regarding what the day use area would look like, campsite use, parking, vandalism, and space, the council voted to change campsite 21 to a day use site. Further day use sites will be considered by the Parks Board in their long-range planning.

The council then approved a setback change request for 604 Canyon Ave. The original house had a devastating fire a few years ago, which required it to be torn down. Tim Mader had purchased the property with the intent of building a new home, but the width of the new house required an extra 9 inches toward the alley. The council approved the variance.

Request for Proposals to be drawn up by Mayor, Uhl

Moving on, the council looked at several examples and templates for Requests for Proposal for the community center. The preferred template by Mayor Beaner was an example from Custer State Park, which spelled out what they were looking for.

“While this spells out what we’re looking for, I don’t really think we know what we’ re looking for, right?” asked council member Richelle Hofer.

“I think you’ re right,” said council member Bill Hoskins “And yet, we do. I think we want someone to help us as a council and community to look for sites, we want someone to help us refine the scope of the project. I think we’ re looking for someone to help us master plan, or put together a concept, and what would be the best site for that concept.”

With several different potential uses available, Hoskins would like to see planning and brainstorming meetings with the public, but he believes an architect would help facilitate that the best. With an RFP, they would be able to see who’s interested. The council was unable to fully agree on what the RFP should look like, which led to the mayor asking the council if he and Anna Uhl (City Finance Officer) could draw one up and present it at their special meeting on March 16.

The council agreed, and tabled the item until the special meeting.

Snow Removal Fines Results in Two Tie Votes

They then addressed snow removal fines. Uhl had worked closely with Code Enforcement Officer Scott Dubbe to create this resolution, which set fines at $125 and a misdemeanor if snow is not removed. In years prior, the City only charged the amount of cost for the snow removal, which was $50. The increase in price was to encourage community members not to violate the ordinance.

The removal of snow helps public safety, so community members can continue to use the sidewalks during the winter months.

Council member Hofer asked about violations during times of high wind, such as happened a few weeks prior. She had received a violation notice, despite having scooped her sidewalks a few hours earlier. Uhl discussed the difference between the door hanger notice, and the violation administration. The warning notice is given when an attempt to remove snow had obviously been made, and does not come with a fine. If an attempt is not even made, then the fine would be leveled and the snow removed by the City. However, the City wanted to again remind the community that contacting the Code Enforcement Officer if there’s a problem with snow or ice removal on your property and a violation is issued is the best method.

Council members Hoskins and Godbey felt the fine of $125 was too high, and suggested a reduction to $75. The first vote, which set the fine at $125, ended in a tie, and the tiebreaker vote by the mayor was nay. The second vote, setting the fine at $75, also ended in a tie. This time, the mayor’s vote passed the resolution. He suggested that the council re-visit it in the future if the lower fine presents an issue with increased violations. However, it does still retain the misdemeanor status.

Camping Fees Increased

Next on the agenda was camping fees for Split Rock Park. At the February meeting, the council had given the go-ahead to pursue on-line scheduling with RoverPass and to absorb the cost of the $5 administration fee instead of passing that on to the camper. The Park Board had been asked to come up with their recommendations for pricing for 2020 due to this, and were recommending a full $5 increase for tenting, but only a $2 increase for electrical sites.

This recommendation was because of the $2 increase that had been approved for 2019. The Park Board felt another $5 increase, to $23, would be too much of a jump.

The council looked at current Palisades State Park pricing and found it to be higher, at $26 for electrical and $22 for non-electrical sites. However, the State Park has better facilities such as showers and flushing toilets. At Split Rock Park, the Park Board recommended that tent sites be $15, and extra tents at each site will be $10 each.

Park Board Advisor Jodi Gloe pointed out that overall, at $20, the City would only be eating $1 of the cost if the increase from 2019 was taken into account.

After some discussion, council member Dave Bonte recommended setting the price for electrical sites at $22, so that the RoverPass fee is fully covered, plus $1 to go into the park improvement fund. The remainder would be retained by Bruce Rekstad, the campground manager who leases the park from the City. The council approved the amendment and passed the resolution.

Truck Weight Violation Fines Set

The second-to-last item on the agenda discussed the fine for violating the truck ordinance regarding load limits that had been passed at February’s meeting. Violation fees were set at $50 for driving a truck over 10,000 pounds on a street that is not the truck route, and $75 for exceeding the load limit.

The main concern by council members Hofer and Bonte was enforcement of the ordinance, and the council assured them the sheriff should be doing that.

Bonte, however, has concerns about how well the sheriff’s office is serving the community, noting that several requests in the past have gone ignored, or only enforced for a short time before relaxing again.

“They’ve been given the benefit of the doubt long enough,” said council member Greg Franka.

“I agree with that,” said council member Bonte. “For 75 grand [per year], they better be doing something.”

“Maybe we need to be a bit stronger on that point,” said council member Hofer. “Because I always get the impression they don’t want to quote/unquote ‘piss off the community.’ They don’t want to make the community upset, and they’ re afraid of losing the contract by making the community upset. I feel like maybe we need to be stronger on that point.”

After noting that the fine is the same as Brandon’s, it was pointed out that once load limits and fines are set, word starts getting around. At that point the City is likely to see a reduction in the number of trucks off of the truck route regardless.

In the end, the council approved the fines without any amendments.

They then discussed a first reading on a change to the animal ordinance, removing licensing for kennels and breeding. However, the council opted to leave the ordinance as is, and to take all requests on a case by case basis. A home-based kennel would be considered a small business, and would require a variance to operate, so it would have to be brought in front of the council anyway.

At that time, the council entered executive session, and the meeting was adjourned.

The next meeting will be a special meeting that includes the equalization meeting. It will be held on March 16 at 6:00 p.m. at City Hall.

The next regular meeting of the City Council will be on April 6 at 6:30 p.m. at the Legion.

Share post:

spot_img

Related articles

City talks Dog Park and appoints Matthew “Jake’ Jacobson to fill Tom Godbey’s seat

            Garretson may have a dog park within the next few years, if the vote taken at Monday...

City Council moves forward with off-road vehicle ban

In an unpleasant surprise, City Councilman Tom Godbey passes away post meeting by Carrie Moritz, Gazette Ward 2 Councilman dies...

Steinhoff and Potter elected to Youth Advisory Council

by Carrie Moritz, Gazette             The City of Garretson will be adding two GHS students to its city council...

City continues voluntary annexation and hears proposal on dog park installation

Carrie Moritz, Gazette             On Monday, the Garretson City Council met in regular session, holding the first reading on...

Log In

Latest articles

Celebrate our Veterans next Monday

Mark Williamson to be featured speaker             Veteran’s Day is next Monday, and there are two veteran’s Day Programs...

City talks Dog Park and appoints Matthew “Jake’ Jacobson to fill Tom Godbey’s seat

            Garretson may have a dog park within the next few years, if the vote taken at Monday...

Once a hospital, now a Garretson home

by Jill Meier, Brandon Valley Journal Addendum below             When Brandon Schweitzer purchased a massive house in 2016 that was once...

Trunk or Treat Fun

The Trunk or Treat in Split Rock Park and Downtown was plenty of fun for all last week,...

Mayor’s Desk for November, 2024

            I am going to deviate from my normal monthly column this month. I want to talk a...

Will GHS VB get that sweet 16?

UPDATE 11/7/24: Garretson Volleyball will be playing Baltic in Baltic at 7:00 p.m. on Thursday, November 7. The...
s2Member®