[0:43] Call to order for a Watertown City
Council meeting for August 17th of 2026.
[0:49] Please rise while our good friend and
Watertown Fire Rescue Chaplain Hank
[0:54] Rosso leads us in prayer.
[1:01] » Thank you.
Our heavenly Father, as we come to you
[1:04] this evening, we say thank you first of
all for your many blessings. We take so
[1:08] much for granted.
Our good health, our families, um a
[1:12] loving
uh environment here where people are
[1:15] safe and they can say hi to one another
and you don't have to worry about
[1:18] getting mugged or your car carjacked.
And we overlook those things and there's
[1:22] other parts of this country that aren't
so pleasant. And so we say thank you.
[1:26] Thank you for law enforcement,
firefighters, paramedics to keep us safe
[1:30] at night, watch over us in the darkest
of times. Thank you, Lord, for the city
[1:34] services we enjoy as well.
Things we take for granted. And um we're
[1:39] so blessed tonight. I thank you for the
common bond that we share, the love of
[1:42] community. It's a pretty rich here as
well. God, we ask for collaboration and
[1:48] and uh dying to ourself and good wisdom
and insight in decisions and the work to
[1:52] be done here tonight. And we say thank
you. In Jesus' name we pray. Amen.
[1:57] » Amen.
Okay, before we go straight into the
[2:00] pledge,
I'm just going to do a moment of silence
[2:03] for Dan Miller.
Dan was a
[2:07] If you don't know who Dan is, you
probably haven't lived in Watertown in a
[2:10] long time, but uh a guy who really made
an impact upon Watertown
[2:16] and the community. So, just a brief
moment of silence.
[2:29] All right, thank you.
I pledge allegiance to the flag of the
[2:34] United States of America and to the
Republic for which it stands, one nation
[2:40] under God, indivisible, with liberty and
justice for all.
[2:46] » [clears throat]
[2:50] » Finance Officer Bob Zein, please call
the roll.
[2:52] » Okay. Lawyer?
Absent. Pauline?
[2:56] » Here.
>> Mormon?
[2:57] » Here.
>> Jurgens?
[3:02] » Here.
>> Peters?
[3:03] » Here.
>> Shutty?
[3:04] » Here.
>> Allen?
[3:05] » Here.
>> Thank you.
[3:07] » Quorum is established. I'll ask if
anyone has a conflict of interest
[3:11] tonight.
[3:16] Hearing none, can I get a motion to
approve tonight's agenda?
[3:20] » Second.
>> Motion made by Councilman Shutty,
[3:22] seconded by Councilman Peters.
All those in favor of approving the
[3:27] agenda, please say aye.
>> Aye.
[3:29] » Aye.
>> Any opposed say nay.
[3:31] Motion carries.
We're on to open forum. If there is
[3:34] anyone who would like to address the
council, now is your time to do so.
[3:39] Just please identify who you are and
that's about it.
[3:47] Uh is the light on?
[3:50] Shh, maybe press the button to say your
name. There we go. There we go.
[3:53] » So, thank you, Mr. Mayor. My name is
James Simmons. Thank you, distinguished
[3:56] council members.
I had a few issues I wanted to bring up,
[3:59] but I'll limit it to just one for the
sake of time. I think the one that might
[4:02] have a time-sensitive nature to it. I'm
not 100% sure.
[4:06] The issue regarding is is regarding
a system that's used by the Watertown PD
[4:11] known as automatic license plate readers
or ALPR for short.
[4:15] This is For some reason this has been a
hot topic on social media for the last
[4:19] couple months. I don't know why. It's
been near and dear to me for quite a
[4:22] while now.
And I don't mean to pick on you, Chief
[4:25] Toohey. I got nothing but respect for
you. Chief Toohey was was
[4:29] very generous with his time, sat down
with me, and answered a bunch of
[4:31] ridiculous questions that I had for him.
So, I appreciate you for that. So, this
[4:35] is timely because
these systems have been in the news here
[4:38] in South Dakota for the last
over this past week. There was two
[4:41] different things that came out. One from
the state attorney general,
[4:45] Attorney General Jackley, who said that
he made a public statement acknowledging
[4:49] that these systems are
susceptible to abuse and misuse. And so,
[4:55] he's going to be implementing statewide
policy to try to curb that.
[4:59] You know, that sounds
That sounds good and all for the people
[5:02] who pay attention on social media, but I
think it's personally too little, too
[5:05] late. Um
Any statewide policy or even any
[5:08] department level policy is only going to
limit how these gentlemen here utilize
[5:13] the system. And to be completely
transparent, I don't think we have an
[5:16] issue with
with the officers here in Watertown PD
[5:20] or with the
deputies at the county sheriff's office.
[5:23] I think we have pretty good officers. I
think they're not misusing the system.
[5:27] My concern primarily resides with what
happens to the data that these cameras
[5:32] collect
once it goes off to the third-party
[5:35] company that
houses that data. You know, we use Axon
[5:39] cameras here in Watertown, which I'm
sure everybody here is aware of that.
[5:43] Axon is headquartered in Um, Scottsdale,
Arizona.
[5:47] So, all the data captured by these
cameras goes to Scottsdale. They have
[5:50] it. They have possession of it. They can
do whatever they want with it. They can
[5:53] analyze it any way they want. They can
share it with whoever they want, and
[5:55] there's nothing we can do to prevent
that.
[5:58] And so, that's really the primary
concern that I have. There's no
[6:00] state-level policy that can restrict
that. And so, I think the state the
[6:03] state's attorney's um
policy is perhaps, like I said, too
[6:07] little, too late.
Another um
[6:10] public uh announcement that came out
this week was that the South Dakota
[6:14] DCI, which is the Department of uh
Criminal Investigations,
[6:19] um they made it publicly aware that they
are rolling out a statewide
[6:23] ALPR program.
Um, and this only came to my attention
[6:27] because the mayor of Aberdeen posted to
his personal Facebook page uh that
[6:33] Aberdeen was approached by the state DCI
to have the city uh participate in the
[6:38] statewide program. So, the mayor of
Aberdeen posted to his personal Facebook
[6:42] page and said, "Hey, Aberdeen, let me
know what you think." And boy, did he
[6:45] get some some feedback. Uh I can tell
you the comments were about 20 to 1 in
[6:50] opposition of the uh of the program. And
so, he said, "Hey, you know what?
[6:53] Message loud and clear. We will not
participate in the program." So, hey,
[6:56] way to go, Aberdeen. Good for y'all.
Uh but here we are in Watertown. We
[7:00] already have the Axon ALPRs here in the
system here. So,
[7:05] um
I suppose what I would like to see is or
[7:08] I'd like to understand at least if
we are being approached by the state to
[7:13] participate in the statewide program. I
assume it's naturally
[7:16] that we are being approached to uh
participate in that program.
[7:20] I would ask, what does that program
consist of? You know, the state's
[7:23] spending like 300 grand to buy new
equipment. Does that mean we're going to
[7:26] have more cameras here in Watertown? If
we are participating, maybe we're not, I
[7:29] don't know. But, uh
if we do participate, well then
[7:33] who does that open the door to gain
access to this information? Uh what are
[7:36] they going to do with the system? What
the what the uh what the data collected?
[7:40] So, again,
the biggest concern is what happens to
[7:43] the data, who has access to it once it
leaves Codington County. And if we
[7:46] participate in this program, all that
data automatically leaves Codington
[7:49] County. So, what's happening to it?
That's the big concern that I have. So,
[7:52] are we participating in that statewide
program?
[7:55] Who has access to that data? Does that
involve any additional technology, more
[7:59] cameras in our community? Like, what are
those answers? So, and then I would like
[8:03] to wrap up with maybe a request, if I
could.
[8:06] There's a So, there's a meeting in
Brookings tonight
[8:10] talking about this exact topic. Um,
Brookings has Flock cameras.
[8:15] Codington County Sheriff has Flock
cameras. Sioux Falls has Flock cameras.
[8:18] Sioux Falls is having a meeting on this
topic Friday night. Um, I would ask that
[8:22] we in Watertown also host some kind of
public forum to discuss it. I'd like to
[8:25] invite, you know, the chief and the
sheriff and maybe the mayor, city
[8:30] uh city manager, maybe the Codington
County um commissioners. Let's all get
[8:33] together in a room, invite the public,
and let's just have an open civil
[8:36] conversation about it, and let's see
where the public sits and you know,
[8:40] where the
the people who oppose and and object to
[8:43] and the people who advocate for the
system, let's see where we all sit and
[8:46] if it's right for the community or not.
And I'd be happy to facilitate and
[8:49] coordinate that type of a forum in any
way I can. So, that's all. Thanks for
[8:53] your time.
[8:56] » Thank you very much, Mr. Simmons. Is
there anyone else who would like to
[8:59] address the council?
[9:03] I will close open forum.
[9:09] And we'll go to item 11A, which is a
first reading of an ordinance amending
[9:13] chapter 7, Bicycles and Other Personal
Conveyances, of title 19, Traffic, of
[9:18] the Revised Ordinances of the City of
Watertown.
[9:22] We are going to our Assistant Chief,
Ryan Remmers.
[9:29] » Thank you, Mr. Mayor and members of the
council. Um, as you recall, 2 weeks ago
[9:32] I was here and we did a different first
reading um for this same topic, but the
[9:38] language has been slightly changed after
hearing some feedback from members of
[9:43] the council and in conversing with city
manager Stager um
[9:48] so what you have in front of you today I
believe is a
[9:51] second first reading.
Another first reading just to keep it
[9:55] less confusing. Um, what I'd like to do
is just highlight some of the changes
[9:59] that were made in an effort to make it
more palatable for the council and the
[10:03] community.
Um, in that first version we used the
[10:08] kind of some canned language in the
existing ordinances that defined
[10:14] business district and just for further
clarification that business district in
[10:19] the existing language is includes 1st
Avenue North, 1st Avenue South East as
[10:23] far as 2nd Street and then West as far
as 1st Street West.
[10:28] Um, the feedback that we got was that we
don't necessarily have a known problem
[10:33] with wheeled vehicles on 1st Avenue
South, 1st Avenue North.
[10:37] Um, so um, what we did is we changed the
language a little bit here to go away
[10:43] from that business district language and
just include where signs or other
[10:48] notices
say that you cannot ride them.
[10:52] Um, so that gives us the flexibility to
change
[10:55] uh, without having to change the
ordinance. Um, that may sound scary to
[11:00] some
but it's not a situation where we just
[11:03] go up and put up a sign and make a
change. What we would be proposing to do
[11:07] is to run those locations through our
city's traffic safety committee. And for
[11:13] those of you who may not be aware of
what that is is it's a a group that
[11:16] meets quarterly.
Uh, we take feedback from the community
[11:19] throughout each quarter and then create
an agenda based on the comments that we
[11:24] receive from the public, concerns about
speed limits here, turning lanes added
[11:29] there, stop signs, yield signs.
And uh they get put on an agenda and
[11:34] then it's the the the committee is made
up of city manager Stager, uh the police
[11:39] department, the street division, the
city engineer's office.
[11:43] And uh we all get together collectively
and and uh look at those individual
[11:47] items. This would potentially be one of
those items that we would look at in
[11:51] that group to try to decide where
exactly we would want to prohibit
[11:56] wheeled vehicles. And I can tell you at
first glance without meeting with that
[12:00] committee, but the feedback that we've
heard is that we're primarily concerned
[12:03] with the most densely pedestrian heavy
areas and that would be from the again,
[12:09] this is just initial thoughts from
Unkefer Avenue, from Foundation Plaza
[12:14] over to Broadway.
So, we're essentially um this would be
[12:18] making a change instead of having the
entire downtown business business
[12:22] district to just potentially changing it
to something as small as that.
[12:27] Um
that's really all that I have unless you
[12:30] have any other questions about some of
the changes that were made from the last
[12:33] time 2 weeks ago.
>> Well, we will ask you to stand by for
[12:37] any questions, but Council, this is a
second first reading as the assistant
[12:42] chief said, but uh we encourage
questions. Does anyone have any?
[12:48] Councilman Shetty?
Thank you, Mayor. Thank you, assistant
[12:52] chief. So, if you could repeat which
section you're considering, of course,
[12:56] this if this were to pass,
you would you would we wait until it
[13:00] goes to the committee to really properly
vet this? Is that would be the proper
[13:05] protocol to do this?
>> That would make the most logical sense
[13:08] to me. That committee just met 2 weeks
ago and it meets every quarter, but it
[13:12] wouldn't take much effort for us to have
an impromptu meeting of that committee.
[13:16] Nothing that binds us to the once every
quarter
[13:19] thing. So, if we wanted to or if if you
guys wanted us to, we could move faster
[13:24] on it than
uh I'm sure there's going to be a a
[13:27] little waiting period before the
ordinance goes into effect, but that
[13:30] would give us enough time to to meet and
sit down and look at it logically. Where
[13:34] do we want to do this?
>> And the reason I ask follow up is, you
[13:38] know, it's we get feedback from the
community. As a council, we get feedback
[13:42] on certain topics. But there's always
wisdom in
[13:45] breathing for a moment and thinking it
through and and having the committee
[13:49] work through it and not just a knee-jerk
reaction. So
[13:53] I really appreciate the direction we're
going on this wording so we can maybe
[13:56] just have it fit certain areas. So I
would recommend you that we just have
[14:00] the committee get together whenever the
time is right to
[14:03] to do this.
However, if we if it passes, um my other
[14:07] question I guess would be then what was
the You had mentioned
[14:11] What sections were you at least was on
the radar, I guess, for this
[14:14] potentially?
>> Sections of the ordinance proposed or
[14:17] the geographical locations of the
>> locations for the walk your bike
[14:21] scenario.
>> Right. What we've heard um feedback from
[14:23] a couple of council members and we think
that makes logical sense as a starting
[14:27] point would be
everything just on Camp Avenue
[14:31] in a restricted area of Camp Avenue from
Foundation Plaza, so we'll call that I
[14:35] think that's Third Street that T
intersection there at Foundation Plaza.
[14:39] Over to the west would be Broadway.
>> So in front of the uh Foundation Plaza
[14:46] is considered as walking your bike in
front of the plaza or would it be
[14:50] » Those would be the restricted zone, but
there again that would be something that
[14:53] we would have to take feedback from you
and from the community, put it in front
[14:57] of that
uh that traffic safety committee and see
[15:01] what the various entities want for that
restriction.
[15:04] » Which geographical area?
>> The reason I bring that up is, you know,
[15:06] we we put that park downtown and it's
going to draw, you know, bicyclists and
[15:10] stuff like that downtown.
I believe, and maybe I'm wrong, is the
[15:14] issue more in front of certain
businesses with pedestrians and
[15:18] businesses and coming in and out of the
businesses or alleys. So So, would tell
[15:20] me that maybe the park road doesn't have
to be walked because it's not really
[15:25] that's not the issue. But, that's just
one man one guy thinking it out with
[15:29] with direction. So, that's why I think
with with feedback you get, you know,
[15:32] having our committee work on it and I
look forward to what we what we come up
[15:36] with. So,
>> Yeah.
[15:38] » One of the other advantages we thought
of with that area is that there for all
[15:41] we know there might be a another
location a year from now. Just
[15:45] completely speaking in hypothetical
here, but you may have the Lake Lake
[15:49] Erie Tech might that they want to make
the sidewalks around their campus. So,
[15:54] this would be handled via that committee
signage, but we wouldn't necessarily
[15:59] have to change any ordinance this way.
And and Lake Erie Tech has not
[16:04] approached us. I'm just speaking
hypothetically.
[16:07] » Councilman Peters.
>> Just a maybe a couple quick questions to
[16:10] piggyback off what Dan said. So,
what about like
[16:16] residential areas? And what is this
committee gets together quarterly? What
[16:20] what are they looking for? Is it vehicle
counts? Is it, you know, population
[16:24] density? Like what are the
qualifications to say
[16:27] this is a highly trafficked area? What
what is that defined by?
[16:31] » We haven't addressed that yet. Typically
at at present the issues that are taken
[16:36] upon by this committee are generally I
wouldn't necessarily call them
[16:41] complaints, but maybe concerns of
citizens where they say, I would like a
[16:44] stop sign at this intersection or I
would like the speed limit reduced from
[16:48] 35 to 25.
So, instead of knee-jerk reacting at
[16:52] those, what we do is we bring those in
front of this committee and it's again
[16:56] made up of the engineers office, police
input, streets,
[17:01] city manager, and we sit down and we we
each have our different hats on and why
[17:06] why this makes logical sense to make
this change or to leave it as is.
[17:11] So, it's typically parking issues and
stop signs and speed limits and turning
[17:16] lanes need to be added here. Can we
reconfigure a stoplight to cycle in a
[17:20] different format?
>> Got it. Okay, that's helpful. And then
[17:23] where I was going with that is if we
have one side of the community that
[17:26] says, "Hey, we don't want these things
here." And they pass the sniff test of
[17:31] vehicle counts or whatever. And
you know, 300 ft over, this
[17:36] neighborhood's like, "Well, yeah, we're
okay with it." And we're now we're
[17:38] checkerboarding all these areas of where
we can or can't have bikes. And And how
[17:42] do we monitor or how do we manage that
appropriately? So, thank you for that.
[17:46] » Yeah.
>> Councilman Allen or City Manager Steger,
[17:50] did you have something to
>> I I did. I was just going to point out
[17:53] that one of the benefits of utilizing
the committee is we are looking at the
[17:58] traffic system for the community as a
whole. And the traffic system wouldn't
[18:03] flow appropriately if we had the
checkerboard you know, neighborhood A
[18:08] versus neighborhood B. And so, we do
take changes very seriously.
[18:13] And and even reversing changes, we
consider very carefully because you
[18:17] don't want people to have the muscle
memory of where a stop sign is and to
[18:23] flip and flop on that stop sign uh
meeting to meeting. So, I I wouldn't
[18:28] anticipate ever having a checkerboard
type of of system in place here.
[18:35] » Thank you, Councilman Allen.
>> Thank you, Assistant Chief. Um
[18:40] Can you talk a little bit about the
uh
[18:45] We have a relatively long list of
personal conveyances.
[18:49] And what was your thinking about that?
Cuz it's I mean, skateboards and a lot
[18:54] of things that I don't think probably
are really
[18:58] as much of an issue as electric
scooters, electric bikes. So.
[19:03] » Right. So, the list that is in the
current proposed ordinance is
[19:08] essentially the same list that's been
there for quite some time. Um so it
[19:13] would have been council members long
before you guys were here that would
[19:17] have created that that list. Now we did
propose changing there's some just some
[19:22] like um
we're using inline skates instead of
[19:25] rollerblades cuz rollerblades is a
brand. Um I guess I would equate it to
[19:29] like Kleenex or or Pop-Tarts. Um it it
just makes sense to using the generic
[19:35] term as opposed to a
um
[19:38] a specific brand. Other than that, I
think it's basically largely unchanged
[19:43] as far as what the
the list is.
[19:46] Um
>> Cuz I guess carts, I don't know exactly
[19:49] what a cart is or or a toy vehicle, what
>> I'm I'm assuming what a toy vehicle
[19:56] would be is like those little tiny
police cars that little boys and girls
[19:59] ride
>> controlled stuff.
[20:01] » maybe maybe it's that, but I don't I
don't think it'd be a radio controlled
[20:04] thing because it's not going to be
you're not riding in that. I'm assuming
[20:06] we're talking about like little kids toy
vehicle. I think somebody mentioned it
[20:10] on the council last week like a or a
couple weeks ago like a little battery
[20:14] powered toy cart or toy car that
somebody rides on.
[20:17] » seen those little
convertibles or tractors or whatever
[20:22] kids riding on that are electric.
>> I've never written a ticket for that so
[20:26] I
I spent a long time and haven't run
[20:29] across that.
>> Yeah.
[20:30] » They They existed sometime in the
ordinance so
[20:32] » Yeah.
I mean I I don't have a particular issue
[20:35] with the number of personal conveyances,
but it it uh
[20:41] um
I guess I'm just interested in being as
[20:43] simplistic as possible and and my bias
is that I think if people just used a
[20:48] little common sense,
um
[20:51] probably we'd be better off than we are
right now cuz I'm sure you don't want to
[20:55] be writing a lot of tickets
uh for you know
[21:00] somebody not walking their skateboard or
whatever, but I
[21:06] Yeah.
>> I know that it's it's our goal at the
[21:07] police department this would be a
voluntary compliance thing more than it
[21:11] would be a I mean we don't want to be
writing tickets to people for riding
[21:14] their bicycle or their scooter. We we
feel that if you were to prominently
[21:18] display signage and the other passersby
on the road would maybe give somebody a
[21:24] sideways look if they're and and before
long they would hop off and just comply
[21:28] with that out of respect for everybody
around them.
[21:31] » Yeah. I would hope so. Thank you.
Thank you. Any other comments?
[21:36] I would just like to thank the everyone
at the police department who has been
[21:40] working on this, members of the
community, members of our staff.
[21:44] I think we're getting very close to a
good solution and I'd like to say that
[21:49] from what I've heard from at least a
couple business owners downtown is that
[21:54] the conversation that we have been
having over the last couple weeks has in
[21:58] and of itself made a difference in
raising awareness
[22:02] and that is a good thing.
Um
[22:05] I also like the flexibility that this
proposed ordinance has. The one concern
[22:12] that I had with the old one was it
seemed like so broad with the entire
[22:15] downtown district, but this seems to me
much more appropriate. You're using a
[22:19] scalpel to cut out the problem area
instead of a broadsword.
[22:23] And I approve of that and it also gives
you flexibility
[22:27] because let's say if um
the awareness raises to the point where
[22:32] it's no longer an issue then
the police department can amend the area
[22:39] potentially taking it down or up and
I think that's probably a really good
[22:44] thing. So, thank you for the work that
has been done on this and we'll see it
[22:48] back
in a couple weeks.
[22:51] Thank you.
Item 12A is an annexation and zoning of
[22:56] property to be known as Martin's
addition
[22:59] and we have two separate motions under
there. One is the approval of a
[23:03] resolution initiating annexation of
attractive land contiguous to the city
[23:07] of Watertown.
And item two under there is a second
[23:10] reading of an ordinance 26-29
establishing the zoning designation of
[23:15] R1 single-family residential district. I
will allow
[23:20] conversation and questions on both, but
I think that we need to take two
[23:24] separate actions when the time comes.
We'll go to our community development
[23:29] manager, Brandy Hanten.
>> Thank you, Mayor. So, this is the second
[23:33] reading for the annexation and zoning of
a piece of property that abuts
[23:40] already annexed and already annexed lot
and development to the north. This
[23:45] property encompasses 13,557
uh square feet, and it will connect to
[23:54] as you can see on the map that's pulled
up, that blue hatched area is the
[24:00] lot being proposed for annexation and
zoning as R1 single-family residential
[24:05] district, and then it will be added on
to the lot directly to the north that is
[24:12] already annexed and zoned as it's under
one ownership. So, with that, I'll stand
[24:16] by for questions.
>> Thank you. I will open a public hearing
[24:21] on this item.
Is there anyone who would like to
[24:24] testify?
[24:28] I'll close the public hearing. Council,
can I get a motion to approve item 12
[24:33] A1, which is the resolution?
[24:37] Motion made by Councilman Shutty,
seconded by Councilman Peters. And
[24:40] again, Council, you can talk on both one
and two, but we will be voting on one
[24:45] first. Council, anything?
Councilman Mormon.
[24:49] » Uh just a quick question. Um
community development manager Hanten,
[24:54] for the benefit of the public and for
I've had a few people ask me this
[24:58] question.
How
[25:01] how they're allowed to annex a small
portion like that when typically in
[25:06] Cottonwood County you have to have 35
acres.
[25:10] » Yes, so that is actually why they're
annexing and zoning because
[25:15] they did try to get a building permit in
the county to build the accessory
[25:19] structure.
And they were unable to because of that
[25:23] 35-acre
requirement. So that is why they have to
[25:28] look at annexing and zoning it because
the city for an R1 lot we only require
[25:33] 9,000 square feet minimum.
So that's why they're going this route.
[25:38] » Okay, thank you.
[25:41] Any other questions? Councilman Allen.
[25:46] » So
uh
[25:48] essentially we're annexing because it's
the only option for them because they
[25:53] tried to work through the county but the
county's
[25:57] uh
regulations are such that they're not
[26:03] there's no flexibility for them.
Did they did they try and the county
[26:08] commissioners said no, we're not doing
that or how did that work?
[26:13] » There there is the attachment that has
the
[26:18] um the minutes or the background to the
county's
[26:21] uh action on this on this property.
Um
[26:25] but
it's actually beneficial when property
[26:29] that's directly abutting city limits
is annexed and zoned and regulated than
[26:34] just within the city. And that's
something that the joint jurisdiction
[26:38] ordinance also protects. So
we would rather see that.
[26:44] » I'll review that. Thank you.
[26:48] Any other questions or comments?
Council, the motion in front of us is to
[26:53] approve the resolution initiating the
annexation of the land. All those in
[26:58] favor will say I, oppose nay. Finance
Officer Bobzien, please call the roll.
[27:03] » Okay. Pauline?
>> I.
[27:05] » Mormon?
>> I.
[27:07] » Jurgens?
[27:09] » I.
>> Peters?
[27:11] » I.
>> Schutty?
[27:12] » I.
>> Allen?
[27:13] » I.
>> Motion carries.
[27:16] Item Can I Council, can I get a motion
on 12 A 2, which is the
[27:22] ordinance establishing the zoning
designation of R1.
[27:27] Councilman
Motion made by Councilman Mormon, second
[27:30] by Councilman Peters.
Council, any discussion?
[27:37] Hearing none, we'll go to a voice vote.
All those in favor of approving the
[27:42] ordinance,
please say I.
[27:45] » I.
>> I.
[27:47] » Any opposed say nay. Motion carries.
Item 12 B is an application for a
[27:53] transfer of ownership of a retail malt
beverage and South Dakota farm wine
[27:57] license and video lottery license from
727 Incorporated, Freedom Watertown, 225
[28:02] West Kemp West Kemp Avenue to K&L
Investment Group Incorporated, Freedom
[28:07] Watertown at the same location.
Finance Officer Bobzien.
[28:11] » Okay, thank you, Mayor. Yes, in front of
the council, this will just be a
[28:14] transfer of ownership. So, the location
stays the same. Everything else is is
[28:19] exactly the same. All fees have been
paid. Notices published. Everything's in
[28:23] line. If you have questions, I can
answer them. Thank you.
[28:26] » Thank you.
I will open a public hearing. Would
[28:29] anyone like to testify on this item?
[28:33] I'll close the public hearing. Council,
can I get a motion to approve the
[28:37] transfer?
[28:39] Motion made by Councilman Mormon, second
by Councilman Peters. Any discussion,
[28:43] Council?
[28:46] Hearing none, the motion is to approve
the transfer of ownership. All those in
[28:49] favor, please say aye.
>> Aye.
[28:54] » Any opposed say nay.
Motion carries.
[28:57] Item 12C is an approval of a 25-year
lease renewable for one additional
[29:02] 10-year term with Dynaware LLC on
5,625 square feet of city-owned real
[29:09] property located at the Watertown
Regional Airport on which on which the
[29:15] lessee's [snorts] privately owned 75-ft
by 75-ft hangar will be situated in the
[29:20] amount of $1,125
per year with a 2% annual increase.
[29:27] Airport Director Ian Merryweather is
with us tonight to tell us more.
[29:31] » Thank you, Mayor. [clears throat]
Uh Councilman,
[29:33] um as the Mayor stated, this is 75-ft by
75-ft hangar, um and I do want to note
[29:40] that it is the land upon which the
structure is um so you can purchase it,
[29:47] and that's what happened in this case.
It was taken over by a different entity,
[29:50] and as such, um they are assessed
property taxes. So, this is simply for
[29:54] the land, not the structure itself.
Um and with that, I'll stand by for any
[29:59] questions.
>> Thank you. I will open a public hearing.
[30:02] Would anyone like to testify?
[30:07] I'll close the public hearing. Council,
can I get a motion to approve the lease?
[30:12] Motion made by Councilman Shutty.
Seconded by Councilman Mormon. Council,
[30:17] any discussion?
[30:21] All right. Hearing none, all those in
favor of approving the lease, please say
[30:26] aye.
>> Aye.
[30:28] » Any
Any opposed say nay. Motion carries.
[30:33] 13A is an approval of insurance policies
and authorization for payment for
[30:37] premiums for general liability, auto
liability, and physical damage, law
[30:41] enforcement liability, buildings and
contents, equipment property damage and
[30:45] equipment breakdown, boiler and
machinery coverage, and authorization
[30:48] for the chief financial officer to issue
a special check. We will go to said
[30:53] chief financial officer
to tell us more.
[30:56] » Thank you, Mayor. That was a a long
motion there. Um
[31:00] Nick is going to pull up I have just a
very short PowerPoint. So, um it's that
[31:05] time of year, annual renewal for our
liability insurance.
[31:09] Um I wanted to just go over a few things
cuz we had some conversations last year
[31:14] about this.
Of the 18 first-class municipalities,
[31:18] only one of those is not um currently
part of the pool.
[31:22] Um I've listed all the ones that are
currently part of South Dakota Public
[31:25] Assurance Alliance. We have been a
member since 1991.
[31:30] Um in the last 5 years, the pool has
only had two members leave, um and then
[31:36] one has returned. And re-entry into the
pool does have a 2-year
[31:41] time frame. So, just so we're kind of
aware of that.
[31:45] Um
Our current renewal for 2026-2027
[31:49] came in at just shy of 1.2 million. This
is an increase overall of $1,408,
[31:56] so relatively flat. The majority of that
was due to the property values um up
[32:01] from 373 million to 401 million.
Um otherwise, costs have stayed pretty
[32:07] steady.
The next slide here just kind of shows
[32:11] over the last 3 years where we've sat
between our liability, our property, and
[32:16] then our equipment breakdown.
Um and then on the right side there's a
[32:20] comparative where you can see the
changes. I will say that part of the
[32:25] liability and auto is we did have the
fleet committee go through and look at
[32:31] how we are um
maintaining coverage on certain pieces
[32:34] of equipment, whether that's full
replacement value, or there's just
[32:38] liability, stuff like that. So, after
that review, um we did decrease the
[32:43] liability in auto 11% and then, like I
said, property's up 12.
[32:49] Uh the next slide here
kind of says what's driving those
[32:52] changes. Um the main
change is due to the property
[32:57] valuations.
We are currently receiving a 7 and 1/2
[33:01] uh percent inflation guard. The reason
we're receiving that is cuz we haven't
[33:05] had our full evaluation of our property.
They were here this summer. Um HCA Asset
[33:11] Management came in. They take pictures
of every single piece of property. They
[33:15] write down all the details, square
footage, what the materials are.
[33:19] Um
South Dakota Public Assurance Alliance
[33:22] will be going through that and then we
will sit down with them and we will look
[33:25] at that and there could potentially be
adjustments to our property valuations.
[33:30] Uh
and then
[33:33] yeah, kind of went over the auto, how
the fleet committee did look at our
[33:36] coverages on those.
Um
[33:40] so, last but not least, the city's
portion of the premium will be 866,000
[33:46] and the municipal utilities will be
around 318,000.
[33:50] Um I guess
for us, uh we're looking for an approval
[33:54] of this renewal and then the next steps
that the staff will do is once we do
[33:59] receive that
[34:02] assessment from HCA and South Dakota
Public Assurance Alliance, we'll sit
[34:06] down and kind of look at the replacement
actual cash value and some of those
[34:11] different options for our property.
So, if there's any questions, I can
[34:15] answer them. Thank you.
>> Thank you. Council, can I get a motion
[34:18] to approve the policies?
[34:22] Motion made by Councilman Mormon.
Seconded by Councilman Shutty.
[34:26] Council, any discussion?
Councilman Peters.
[34:29] » I just have a quick question, Kristen.
Thank you for this um PowerPoint. This
[34:33] answered a lot of my questions, but why
would Rapid City not be the pool? What
[34:36] would there What do you think that
they're currently doing? Is it something
[34:40] for us to consider as well, or what's
the reasoning behind that?
[34:43] » I wouldn't know. I'd probably have to
reach out to them. I did reach out to
[34:48] some of the other I Brookings, Aberdeen,
um
[34:53] What was the other one I reached out to?
Mitchell, I think. And yeah, I think
[34:58] others have went out and looked, and
they just never feel like they can quite
[35:02] get the same amount of coverage as what
we get through South Dakota Public
[35:06] Assurance Alliance, just because of some
of the uniqueness to our We even have
[35:11] our law enforcement liability and things
like that.
[35:14] » Got it. Okay. Yeah, I'd be curious to
know
[35:17] who they go with just as another option
in the future, but thank you.
[35:19] » Yep.
[35:22] » Any other
>> I may have
[35:24] » Councilman Johns.
>> Yeah, I have a second.
[35:27] » Yep. Yes.
>> Being in the business doesn't make me an
[35:31] expert.
Um
[35:34] what I do know though is that when I go
through Rapid City and I see hail
[35:38] shields over the top of trailer sales
and vehicle sales, and they're the only
[35:44] city in the state that has uh
extra protection because those
[35:48] dealerships are having difficulty
finding coverage. Uh we can be blessed
[35:53] that they're not in this pool
uh because uh
[35:57] I've had one hail claim in my agency
this week. Guess where it's from?
[36:03] Rapid City.
It's not from Watertown. It's not from
[36:07] Brookings. It's not from Castlewood.
It's not from Clark.
[36:11] It's Rapid. They get whacked every year
out there, so
[36:16] I don't know if I'm understanding
uh this completely, but I do understand
[36:24] uh
I do understand uh where hail claims
[36:28] come in South Dakota and I just have a
hunch we can be blessed that they're not
[36:32] in the pool.
Thank you.
[36:36] » Thank you, Councilman. Any other
discussion, Council?
[36:41] The motion is to approve the policies.
All those in favor will say I, opposed
[36:46] nay. Finance Officer Rob Zine.
>> Okay. Coleen?
[36:49] » I.
>> Mormon?
[36:50] » I.
>> Juron's?
[36:53] » I.
>> Peters?
[36:54] » I.
>> Shaddy?
[36:55] » I.
>> Allen?
[36:56] » I.
>> Motion carries.
[36:58] We're on to item 13B as an approval of
the resolution 26-35, a resolution
[37:04] approving the city manager's employment
agreement.
[37:08] We'll go to City Attorney
Lisa Carico to kick us off.
[37:13] » Thank you, Mayor. As you know, the
there's it's been a year since our city
[37:17] manager has been employed with the city
of Watertown. Pursuant to the employment
[37:21] agreement, you guys then conducted a
performance evaluation.
[37:25] Um it's my understanding that it was
satisfactory. Congratulations.
[37:29] Um
and as a result of the performance
[37:33] evaluation,
we have revised pursuant to the
[37:37] Council's direction, revised the
employment agreement.
[37:40] It should be noted that his probationary
period is over.
[37:44] Um and so that part has been taken out
of the agreement. And the rough
[37:48] highlights, which are also
stated in the resolution and in the
[37:52] agreement that you can read for
yourselves,
[37:54] is um
an increase to the his salary of
[37:58] approximately 5%.
Um
[38:01] a
contribution to a qualified deferred
[38:04] compensation plan
annually at 22,500.
[38:10] And we revised
the section on vehicles to provide for
[38:14] an allowance for use of his personal
vehicle.
[38:18] Um and with that, I can stand for any
questions, but I believe the agreement
[38:21] is as you as council have directed and
is ready for your approval.
[38:26] » Thank you very much, Attorney Carrico.
Council, can I get a motion to approve
[38:30] the resolution?
>> So moved.
[38:31] » Motion made by Councilman Peters.
Seconded by Councilman Shetty. We'll
[38:35] open it up for council comments. I think
uh Councilman Jirens, you have something
[38:39] to say?
[38:44] » Uh
thanks, Mayor. Um
[38:47] really uh
didn't
[38:50] prepare to lead this off other than
>> [laughter]
[38:54] » that um I've made [snorts] public
comments in the past whether that to the
[38:58] media or in in during city council
that um there are some big differences
[39:05] in
who you hire and who you have
[39:09] uh as your city manager and this goes
for every city um that is in this form
[39:14] of government um
I likely won't make comments in regards
[39:19] to nays and yeas uh to that and
comparing ourselves to Sioux Falls and
[39:24] Rapid City, but I will make
uh
[39:27] a quick comment
on the amount of dollars, these are
[39:31] factual dollars uh
just in 12 months
[39:36] that um
the taxpayer in the city Watertown has
[39:41] saved and
we've saved this without
[39:47] I believe even feeling
[39:51] that we've been shorted somewhere.
Uh first position was a position that
[39:56] was made up
um by the previous administration called
[40:00] an assistant city manager
who had a uh
[40:04] payroll and incentives of close to
200,000
[40:08] and I think it's really really
good for all of us to know
[40:14] that
that position has been absorbed by
[40:19] employees, current employees, and the
city manager. That position with
[40:25] incentives is $200,000.
[40:29] Um yeah, we might need
this down the road, but
[40:36] this year
zero of that money was spent to the
[40:41] 200,000. Second thing, there was a there
was a project that came up a few months
[40:45] ago and I was like, "Wow, most of the
time these engineering costs on these
[40:50] highway projects,
you just think,
[40:54] 'You know what? That must be the way it
goes, you know.' Previous
[40:58] administrations, I don't know if they
haven't caught it, but our city manager
[41:03] caught something in the engineering
costs on that big project that's going
[41:07] on in Northwest Watertown right now. And
in the engineering section alone, there
[41:14] was a $140,000
in savings to the taxpayer and to the
[41:21] budget and to the city of Watertown. And
I mean, you start adding the numbers up
[41:27] and you start adding
uh things like no vehicle purchases. In
[41:32] fact, a you know, quick story. Um
the vehicle that was purchased for just
[41:37] under $50,000
um
[41:42] here just a couple years ago, just under
50,000 because it never became in front
[41:47] of the the council. That vehicle is not
being used by the city manager.
[41:52] That vehicle had better use to be used
in the police department. And and I I I
[41:59] admire that. So, the few dollars that
our city is spending for a vehicle
[42:05] stipend um is I believe incredibly fair.
Um so, you know, you start adding things
[42:12] up and all of a sudden pennies become
dollars and you know the old adage and
[42:16] before we know it dollars becomes a
hundred thousand. Um,
[42:21] this this is really really
a good night for Watertown. Um,
[42:28] let's not talk about some of the convert
controversial things that we dealt with
[42:32] um, with the previous council and and
and and it was in regards to travel.
[42:38] Uh, uh, it was so hard because we
couldn't make decisions uh, on travel
[42:45] for uh, putting initials behind uh, you
know, people's names. And I'm all for
[42:50] initials, but I'm really not that type.
I don't care if I have initial behind my
[42:54] name uh, because I'm not looking for um,
all the ACM uh, awards and the the
[43:00] statues and the and and the trophies and
and the room and and pins and plaques.
[43:06] Um,
but the travel budget alone this last
[43:10] year
has had a twenty-five thousand dollar
[43:13] reduction.
Uh, uh,
[43:16] things are adding up here and and and I
had a a text from a constituent.
[43:23] Great great questions. He goes, I cannot
see why
[43:27] the city manager would need a raise. How
does he even know enough after a year?
[43:32] Well,
there's a lot that is known just because
[43:38] of the years spent in in dedicating time
to understanding what
[43:46] we do for a city.
And
[43:49] you know, a comment that I saw on on uh,
crazy book uh, uh, from uh, a downtown
[43:57] business person was, you know, what's
really interesting is to see
[44:01] that at 7:30 a.m.
the vehicles there at city hall and when
[44:07] she leaves downtown area in most nights,
that the vehicle's still there.
[44:13] And
and
[44:15] knowing from questions over the last few
months
[44:19] that
then he leaves
[44:23] the office and spends time
uh studying things like you know, the
[44:27] bankruptcy court that's going on up in
in Fargo right now over the ruins. And
[44:33] and you know, all of a sudden we get
briefed on that. And I mean, we kind of
[44:38] we're we've been kept in the loop. And
and there's so so many
[44:42] hidden things that that we've uh we've
been uh blessed with. Is it perfect? No.
[44:48] Do we need to be questioning?
Absolutely.
[44:52] We we we we need to continue to work
together though
[44:55] uh
while we question and while we have
[44:58] dialogue on on things that are
you know, important to Watertown. Uh one
[45:03] other thing um previously the city
uh was pushed and the council was pushed
[45:09] to approve a $27
million
[45:13] street department facility.
Needed? Yes, but not at $27 million. And
[45:18] we kept talking, "Hey, can we get
something in that seven to
[45:23] $12 million?"
You know what? I I'm I'm here to report
[45:27] that we are working on something that we
feel one day will be important. And that
[45:33] depends on priorities and that meetings
coming up uh
[45:36] uh uh uh soon. And and I'm looking
forward to that. So, those are a couple
[45:40] of things so far here in this discussion
that I wanted to add to uh
[45:45] to what we um what we have in front of
us here. Thank you, Mayor.
[45:50] » Thank you, Councilman Jordahl. Council,
any other comments?
[45:54] Councilman Mormon.
>> Thank you, Mayor. Um
[45:58] I appreciate everything that Councilman
Jordahl had to say. I will be voting
[46:03] against this. Um
and the only reason I'll be voting
[46:06] against it is simply because I believe
that the city manager, his raise,
[46:11] compensation, benefits package should be
equal to that of what the all the rest
[46:16] of the 200 plus city employees were
given. I believe whatever is given to
[46:20] your lowest employ- paid employee should
be good enough for your highest paid
[46:25] employee when it comes to raises and
benefits.
[46:28] This has nothing to do and my my
decision for voting against it has
[46:31] nothing to do with city manager Stager.
Um it's about the position and not the
[46:35] person.
I really appreciate the
[46:39] uh great working relationship I have
with city manager Stager. Um I'm
[46:43] extremely appreciative that. I enjoy
every meeting I have with him and it's
[46:49] uh it's a wonderful experience to sit in
his office and discuss
[46:54] issues pertaining to Watertown and be
able to bounce ideas back and forth. So,
[47:00] I
I thank him for that and I greatly uh
[47:04] greatly appreciate what he is doing for
our city.
[47:08] I know a lot of employees, city
employees
[47:11] are going to be watching this meeting
tonight online or on TV.
[47:16] And I just want to say I remember
working for the city when we had a wage
[47:21] study about
roughly five or six years ago.
[47:26] Um
and I watched as
[47:32] you could use any descriptive word you
want to use. You could use any
[47:35] descriptive phrase you want to use to
describe what happened to morale in the
[47:40] workforce after what I will label as a
100% complete failed disaster of a wage
[47:47] study for anything
for anything to help out recruitment and
[47:53] retention.
So, I understand that. I understand
[47:56] where the city employees are coming
from. And uh
[48:01] I just want I just want them to know
that uh the reason why I can't vote for
[48:05] this is I cannot vote and I never will
ever vote and support something that I
[48:09] know will have a negative impact on
morale of our city workforce. And I just
[48:15] believe singling out somebody, handing
them a lot more money and benefits than
[48:20] anybody else when so many of our city
employees could make the exact same
[48:24] argument about how hard they work and
how much they donate extra um to the
[48:29] city. So, with that, I'm voting against
it. Um you know, what I have to say are
[48:35] my opinions and my thoughts alone. And I
appreciate uh the time to be able to
[48:40] discuss that.
[48:44] » Council.
Any other comments?
[48:48] Now, Councilman Durance has something to
say. I will just add uh
[48:52] little bit of something.
Just to describe to the public in case
[48:57] they were curious as to how this process
worked.
[49:01] I would like to thank Councilman Allen.
He put together a questionnaire that
[49:05] went out to the council where we graded
City Manager Steger on quite a few
[49:11] different performance metrics.
Then we collated those ratings from all
[49:16] the councilmen and
we had a very long, productive
[49:21] conversation with just council members
in executive session a few weeks ago.
[49:27] Afterwards, we brought City Manager
Steger in.
[49:30] We listened to his requests for what he
would like to see revised in his
[49:36] contract going forward.
After that, we broke and uh as per our
[49:42] home rule charter, the deputy mayor,
Councilman Peters and I entered into
[49:47] some negotiations with City Manager
Steger
[49:50] where there was some give and take, but
overall it was very cordial.
[49:56] And that comes from people sharing a
vision for where they want Watertown to
[50:00] go and how they want it to run.
And that is without the animosity,
[50:06] without the vitriol,
and always keeping your eyes on where
[50:11] you want to reach and what you want to
achieve.
[50:16] The job of a city manager is very
difficult. And then after that, we did
[50:21] go back to City Council,
showed everybody what the
[50:26] negotiations resulted in, and that is
pretty much what you see in the contract
[50:32] before you tonight.
The job of a city manager is a very
[50:35] difficult job to fill in the entire
country.
[50:40] The position of a city manager usually
gets filled at a much, much higher rate
[50:44] than what Watertown is currently doing
it at.
[50:48] What you see here is partly bringing
City Manager Steiger into some level of
[50:56] agreement with what other communities
pay their city managers, but we are
[51:01] still underneath that amount, which I
would like to point out is
[51:06] very impressive from what City Manager
Steiger accomplishes because
[51:12] unlike other cities, Watertown actually
has as much if not more than most cities
[51:18] in what is going to fall on the city
manager's job performance or in job
[51:24] description.
I know City Manager Steiger has called
[51:28] it from A to Z.
Start with an airport. Not every
[51:32] community that has a city manager that
pays them
[51:36] a similar amount if not more, not
everyone has an airport. Very few has an
[51:41] airport or have an airport that is as
vital to the local economy that
[51:46] Watertown has.
And has the EAS service and has to
[51:53] analyze everything including what we did
tonight, which is hangars and solar
[51:58] panels over
over the parking
[52:02] lot and things like that.
These are obligations that not every
[52:07] city has to deal with.
You go to Z, which is the zoo.
[52:11] Watertown is justifiably very proud of
Bramble Park Zoo.
[52:17] And I think only two other cities in
South Dakota have a zoo.
[52:22] And that's obviously something we all
know how much that is on the budget and
[52:26] how many people that we hire there and
what that does to the community. So
[52:29] these are things that not every
community has.
[52:33] Then you have like we have more green
space than any other per capita than any
[52:39] other community in South Dakota. That's
all on our parks and rec.
[52:44] We have more roads per capita than any
city in South Dakota.
[52:49] You look at a city of like size in
Brookings, we have 70 miles more road
[52:52] that we take care of
on a on a given year.
[52:56] That's all falling on I mean it's a
team, but it's obviously on the city
[53:00] manager that is at the top of that.
We have a river, we have lakes, we have
[53:05] all sorts of things. So
it is a very hard job to fill and I
[53:10] think the community saw that when it
took us many, many months
[53:14] of hiring in a process that
took applications from across the
[53:20] country.
And I'm very happy with the person that
[53:23] we have filling that role right now.
Um the scores from the council were very
[53:30] high,
very favorable.
[53:33] And that is what you see reflected in
the contract.
[53:37] So, thank you for Watertown for staying
with us in this.
[53:42] I think we've got a very good system of
government and we're looking forward to
[53:47] what more we can achieve.
Councilman, anybody else here?
[53:52] Councilman Shady?
[53:55] » Thank you, Mayor.
[53:58] So yes, just to kind of help hopefully
clarify, help people work through this
[54:02] process in the in the city in our
community and and within within
[54:05] employees of our city.
You know, we have we have employees here
[54:10] that are faced with sometimes a career
choice. Sometimes it's paid, maybe
[54:13] they'll move from
well, maybe from being employed by the
[54:16] city, they'll go work for another agent
another organization, maybe the county,
[54:20] maybe
the private sector. And sometimes the
[54:23] motivation is pay because they can maybe
make a few extra dollars. And I don't at
[54:28] all blame them for we got to make
choices based off you know, where we're
[54:31] at in life. Sometimes that's not the
choice. Maybe it's not pay. Maybe we're
[54:35] working where we're working because we
enjoy the job we're at. There's so many
[54:39] oh, so many things that that that bring
us to why we do what we do as a career.
[54:43] When I look at
current city manager Steiger,
[54:48] you had mentioned here, Mayor, that he's
still underneath the average.
[54:52] I got to believe that with the even
having a year under his belt in private
[54:56] sector,
my guess is city manager Steiger could
[54:59] probably
for more pay, could probably move
[55:03] somewhere and and
that might you know, might motivate
[55:06] somebody. He's under the average, but it
doesn't appear like Al really wants to
[55:10] leave this position, city manager
Steiger,
[55:13] because of pay. And and technically,
he's under probably what the national
[55:18] average or even the state average is for
city manager potentially.
[55:22] So, what my point on that is is
I don't believe he's in this for the
[55:26] money. He's not doing this just to for a
paycheck. I believe his heart's in it
[55:30] and he wants to he wants to serve the
community Watertown. So, I just don't I
[55:34] just don't want people to think that
it's it's because of money that that
[55:37] city man I don't want to speak for city
manager Steiger but just getting to know
[55:39] him over the last year
it isn't the money that motivates him
[55:43] and again
we're we can compare ourselves and and
[55:47] some employees will leave their their
position for for the county because of
[55:50] they're making a few dollars more
working for the county. You know, maybe
[55:53] we need to review maybe not but what
motivates us to work somewhere and again
[55:57] that's you know, we're not losing him
because of that.
[56:00] Um the other thing is why we came about
this particular
[56:04] compensation package was sort of a reset
from from the first the first year we
[56:10] were we decided as a council with city
manager Steiger on
[56:14] on we kind of were under even more on
the lower end of this and and actually
[56:18] city manager Steiger was good with that.
He wanted Watertown he wanted a year to
[56:23] to show Watertown that what he can do
what that he's into this and there was
[56:26] it was below again it was well below
what we maybe would have offered
[56:29] somebody else.
So this year we seen it as a reset to
[56:34] kind of get him to what's what he's what
he's deserved to pay and so we all we're
[56:39] kind of in agreement some of us aren't
but as a whole as a team here we're
[56:42] we're
I think we all believe that the the job
[56:45] performance is is there so it's just how
to properly compensate. So this is a for
[56:48] those of us who have been here a little
bit longer this is a reset
[56:52] um from from the first year.
I believe moving forward as councilman
[56:56] Moorman is saying I'm one too. I'm not
for showing partiality. I don't want to
[57:00] show partiality.
Um
[57:02] I don't I personally don't see this as
as favor showing favor to somebody. This
[57:07] is a position we can't compare it
I mean I guess you could look at the
[57:10] department heads. I don't know if all
the department heads make all the exact
[57:13] same amount. They probably is a range
there.
[57:16] Um we we probably have
um we we
[57:19] trying to be uniform you're going to
have positions that require more
[57:23] responsibility there's going to be more
pay. City manager's at the top.
[57:27] And that position does deserve um proper
pay and compensation. And so
[57:33] um it's it's one thing if we had two
city managers, I guess, working for a
[57:36] city, right? That was one was making x
amount dollars more, but we don't He's
[57:40] This is the the one position that
deserves to be
[57:44] at a at the it's at the
where he's going to be. I believe where
[57:47] we're at is is is fair and just. So, I
just wanted to share those couple points
[57:51] there that this is by no means
um this could this could create Yeah, as
[57:55] Councilman Mormon says, there might be
some city employees that are uptight.
[57:58] I would say to city employees, hang in
there.
[58:02] See continue to to see to try to resist
the temptation to grumble and complain
[58:08] uh because
there's there's a a positive future
[58:11] ahead of us, but it takes the right
person in the job to lead this. It takes
[58:15] the council. It takes city manager. And
then yes, it takes department heads and
[58:18] every single employee. Not one is better
than the other. However, there's certain
[58:23] skill sets that we need to have in in
those positions and properly so, we got
[58:27] the right skill set at city manager. So.
Thank you.
[58:30] » Thank you. Councilman Peters.
>> Thank you, Mayor. Um I don't need to
[58:33] rehash what's been said. I think
Councilman Shetty said it very well, and
[58:36] I agree um with him, and I'm in full
support of this uh
[58:40] this resolution and to increase the city
manager salary, but there's a there's a
[58:45] story, I guess, I want to tell from
earlier today.
[58:48] I had a constituent reach out to me
um
[58:51] and uh she was very much not in favor of
this resolution or approving an increase
[58:56] in salary for the city manager, not
because um she did she doesn't know Alan
[59:00] um has never worked with him, but
because she said her taxes keep going
[59:04] up.
And so, as we had this conversation, I
[59:07] asked her, "Well, what do you mean by
taxes?" And she was referring to her
[59:09] property taxes keep going up. And so, I
wanted to take a moment here just to
[59:13] explain how we, or at least myself, look
at the city budget and our revenues.
[59:18] A very small percentage in the grand
scheme of things actually come from
[59:21] property taxes for the city's revenue.
We are funded, I I say, roughly about 70
[59:26] 70% by sales tax in the city.
And so as I was explaining this to her,
[59:32] she became quite comfortable with uh I
think it's 5% we've been increasing in
[59:37] sales tax. Does that sound close? Um
since last year.
[59:40] And um as I explained this and explained
that the city continues to grow and how
[59:45] it becomes more complex and and you know
we're not yes the the property tax
[59:50] revenue is significant and and we
certainly need it to operate, but we're
[59:54] more focused on growing the sales tax.
And so as I explained that, she became
[59:59] um more supportive of uh the resolution
and more supportive of of ensuring that
[1:00:03] we're more in line with other
communities in the city. So I just want
[1:00:06] to take a moment to share that that yes
we look at everything holistically, but
[1:00:11] we get sales tax revenue numbers and
they have consistently grown month after
[1:00:15] month um and we need good leadership to
continue that. So thank you.
[1:00:19] » Thank you. Councilman Allen, did you
have anything before I go to Councilman
[1:00:22] Jerns? Councilman Jerns.
[1:00:26] » Uh thank you, Mayor. Um
I I believe we should again um talk
[1:00:31] about um and listen to the concerns of
the city employees. The city doesn't go
[1:00:38] anywhere unless we have employees,
unless we have good morale, unless we
[1:00:42] have uh
people that are uh
[1:00:45] really just excited to get to work. So
I'd really like to uh speak to the city
[1:00:50] employees
and ask one question.
[1:00:55] Um
would anyone
[1:00:59] ex- let me rephrase that. Is there
anyone in the city in on the city staff
[1:01:05] that would lose their job if the
citizens of Watertown decided that
[1:01:11] city manager form of government is not
for them,
[1:01:14] strong mayor is.
And and ask yourself, would any of you
[1:01:20] lose your job?
And who would lose their job if that got
[1:01:25] switched
in the next few months?
[1:01:28] Yes, there's only one person who would
lose their position, and that's the city
[1:01:33] manager. So, it really we have to look
at this position way different.
[1:01:39] And and to be honest with you, one of
the constituents that reached out to me
[1:01:44] uh was concerned when I uh explained the
amount of
[1:01:50] uh solid savings that we've seen as a
city over the last year.
[1:01:56] Now, this city employee also said, "Hey,
I think you should talk about this
[1:02:01] tonight. I think people need to know
this." So, really speaking out about
[1:02:06] some of these savings was really
motivated by a city employee who said,
[1:02:10] "I really understand this better now."
So, uh very good dialogue tonight. We
[1:02:14] thank you for this. And there's one
other thing in some comments that the
[1:02:19] second constituent brought up. And that
is, "Glenn, I'm not aware and and and
[1:02:25] they read they read very closely to uh
what we were voting on tonight. I'm not
[1:02:31] aware in there, but I've seen on crazy
book that there's some incentives that
[1:02:36] are in uh this this plan." Uh he goes,
"Ask
[1:02:42] if there's any incentives
or whoever said that if they can explain
[1:02:47] what they mean by incentives. Thank
you."
[1:02:52] » I'm not exactly sure who said that, but
at the very least I think Councilman
[1:03:00] » Willis.
>> Maybe a question for our city attorney.
[1:03:03] Uh it's fair to say that there's no
incentives in this contract or
[1:03:07] milestones or anything like that that
the city manager has to hit for
[1:03:11] additional compensation.
>> Correct. There's nothing in there.
[1:03:17] » Thank you very much.
I think
[1:03:20] » Thanks, Mayor. That's all I have.
>> Thank you.
[1:03:23] Allen might be getting uncomfortable
hearing all these good things about him.
[1:03:27] Allen, did you uh City Manager Steiger,
did you have anything that you would
[1:03:30] like to add?
>> I I'm sure I could think of something.
[1:03:34] I've I've just say this has been great.
I I will also say this, a couple of you
[1:03:39] know who who served on the council
before,
[1:03:42] I'm the world's worst negotiator.
I I sat down, I'm not going to break
[1:03:47] confidence of executive session, and I
don't care if you pay me anymore.
[1:03:51] This this is still fun, and it's going
to be fun, and we're making
[1:03:55] we're making a lot of progress.
But, also in terms of the reset, I want
[1:04:00] to say publicly what I told you
gentlemen in executive session as well.
[1:04:05] This is a reset after the first
probationary year.
[1:04:09] This isn't something we should do
every year.
[1:04:14] Um this is a one-time reset, and as some
of you know,
[1:04:18] I came in with one expectation of
salary,
[1:04:22] and guess what? It was actually $7,000 a
year less than what we negotiated in the
[1:04:27] process.
The whole time the executive search firm
[1:04:31] was mad at me toward the end because I
wouldn't ask for more.
[1:04:36] Remember, gentlemen,
I told you guys I want to be treated
[1:04:41] like any other employee.
And so, I was told everybody comes in as
[1:04:46] step five. Here it is.
Less than we had even negotiated a year
[1:04:51] ago.
So, I appreciate all of your
[1:04:54] perspectives,
all of your kind words, and I appreciate
[1:04:58] you taking the time to make this
adjustment for
[1:05:02] for me and the position.
Um
[1:05:05] I'll also tell you this, I appreciate
Councilman Mormon a lot.
[1:05:10] Um he has the public sector service
employment record.
[1:05:16] And so when he talks, I listen.
He brings me a perspective I haven't
[1:05:21] seen elsewhere. And so I I don't want
anybody to say, "Hey, Brent and Allen
[1:05:26] don't get along over this."
We we do.
[1:05:30] I enjoy
the perspective he brings. It's just a
[1:05:34] different perspective than I have.
And that's okay.
[1:05:38] Um, so again,
thank you. If there's anything else I
[1:05:42] can answer for you, I'd be happy to try.
>> Thank you, City Manager Steiger. I would
[1:05:48] like to say thank you.
And Watertown is blessed to have you in
[1:05:53] your position.
The motion is to approve this
[1:05:56] resolution. All those in favor will say
I, opposed nay. Finance Officer Bob
[1:06:00] Zein, please call the roll.
>> Okay.
[1:06:02] Pauline?
>> I.
[1:06:04] » Mormon?
>> Nay.
[1:06:06] » Jurgens?
[1:06:09] » I.
>> Peters?
[1:06:10] » I.
>> Shady?
[1:06:11] » I.
>> Allen?
[1:06:13] » I.
>> Motion carries. We're on to the city
[1:06:16] manager's report.
>> I wasn't expecting to have to give one.
[1:06:20] But
>> [laughter]
[1:06:21] » no.
Um, a couple of things. Uh, to start out
[1:06:24] with, I'm actually going to turn it over
to City Engineer Peterson to give an
[1:06:28] update on some of our major road
construction projects. So we will go to
[1:06:32] the screen if if Nick, you could bring
up the website
[1:06:36] uh, and the map.
[1:06:44] » Hi. Thank you. Um,
just a kind of a quick update where
[1:06:48] we're at. Um, projects are
kind of wrapping down as towards the end
[1:06:52] of the season.
Um, there's four of them I want to
[1:06:55] highlight. The this area in red, this is
5th Avenue. You may mark it there.
[1:07:00] The other mark in here red is
uh, 4th and Highland.
[1:07:05] Uh, the kind of center area here,
blue area, that's the WMU project. And
[1:07:12] then up here in River, um,
yeah, Northridge
[1:07:17] is is purple. Uh, that's the mill and
overlay. Um,
[1:07:21] the mill and overlay project, that that
was the top lift was paved today. I
[1:07:25] assume they finished already, but that
that should be done today.
[1:07:29] The
this long street kind of here in the
[1:07:32] middle of the WMU project is Second
Street. That will be paved, uh, starting
[1:07:39] tomorrow.
Um, should be done by the end of the
[1:07:41] week. Um, so,
um, the schools kind of right in this
[1:07:45] area, so that should be, uh, good. Um,
uh,
[1:07:51] Fourth and Highland, there was, um,
some spongy material. When we we took
[1:07:57] that out, so we had we did, uh,
what's called a cement treated base.
[1:08:02] They just finished that up. Did a proof
roll
[1:08:05] and it's hard to rock, so we're going
to, uh, start grading that and, um,
[1:08:11] doing conc- uh, curb and gutter
uh, this week and then, um,
[1:08:16] paving is tentatively scheduled for,
uh, September 2nd.
[1:08:21] And then Fifth Avenue, um,
that also is tentatively scheduled for,
[1:08:27] um,
September 2nd. They're are finishing up
[1:08:31] grading and curb and gutter on that as
well.
[1:08:34] Um,
I guess
[1:08:37] if there's any other questions, I can
answer them.
[1:08:42] » Thank you. Back to you, city manager.
>> Thank you for that update. Um, a couple
[1:08:46] of other projects, uh, we have
previously foreshadowed our desire to,
[1:08:53] uh, do a a reseal of 14th Avenue North
including a restriping plan. Um, just
[1:09:00] for full transparency in the budget,
that was not a project that was budgeted
[1:09:04] this year.
We think we can cover most of it with
[1:09:08] the existing street budget. But that is
a project we we likely will have to come
[1:09:13] back with some level of supplement for
the budget. We do think it's an
[1:09:17] important project for the community to
to protect uh the public that utilizes
[1:09:23] the bike path, to protect the road. Um I
don't know if you are all aware, but the
[1:09:28] shoulder we are driving on as driving
lanes was not designed to be the road.
[1:09:33] And even the the confusing pavement
markings where you see the old markings
[1:09:37] and the new ones, from a safety we think
that's important, so there likely will
[1:09:41] be a supplement.
Um
[1:09:44] like to talk about Elmira Township. Um
we have brought forward a memorandum of
[1:09:49] understanding in the past.
Uh the township has made a request that
[1:09:53] we take over
uh
[1:09:56] additional portions of about 1.5 miles
of 26th Avenue Northwest.
[1:10:03] And that is a section that uh the
township argues is used quite a bit by
[1:10:09] city traffic. It's used actually very uh
very little
[1:10:15] um
with township traffic. And so I'll just
[1:10:20] alert you to that. I know that there are
some opinions, sometimes some strong
[1:10:24] opinions on what we take over there. So
that's just a heads up if if you do have
[1:10:28] opinions, I'd be very happy to to hear
them.
[1:10:32] Um school safety speed signs went up
starting today, so watch for those
[1:10:38] signs.
Um
[1:10:41] our next governance policy that we will
be working on in advance of the budget
[1:10:45] year is a policy on our relationships
with external organizations.
[1:10:51] And I say our relationships versus just
funding of external organizations
[1:10:55] because we need to address more than
just who do we fund and how do we fund
[1:11:00] them. I want to take that governance
policy to go as as far as to determine
[1:11:05] how we appoint people to boards of these
organizations. What what are the
[1:11:09] requirements in the memorandum of
understanding? I think that's something
[1:11:14] the public would appreciate having and
even the outside organizations would
[1:11:18] appreciate having that clarity in a
governance policy.
[1:11:23] Um
[1:11:27] one final thing that I'll throw out
this council chamber
[1:11:32] and this addition that that
all of you approved um is rarely used.
[1:11:40] So we use it twice a month for this
meeting and and our citizens have put
[1:11:45] millions of dollars into this and and as
I
[1:11:49] think about government transparency from
a perspective of a citizen and I look
[1:11:53] around at the other units of government
and even
[1:11:57] committees and even our own Watertown
Municipal Utilities and how those bodies
[1:12:02] don't have the same degree of
transparency as we do
[1:12:06] here at the city of Watertown
just like to make this room available to
[1:12:11] all of the other governmental
units in the community. We will find a
[1:12:15] way to accommodate you.
We will ensure that we have the
[1:12:19] recording equipment, the broadcast
equipment, the investments that have
[1:12:22] been made here and we can make Watertown
the most transparent city in the state
[1:12:28] when it comes to open government and
that's the commitment that we can make
[1:12:32] here from a staff standpoint. You know,
I just just today the state's open
[1:12:38] meeting
law task force
[1:12:42] kicked down the road a requirement to
record public meetings
[1:12:47] because most bodies don't have the
recording capabilities. We've made the
[1:12:52] investment here. We have the capability
of doing it. You know, there should be
[1:12:56] no reason that a joint planning
commission with the county and the city
[1:13:00] takes place in an extension building
without a recording for the public. And
[1:13:05] so, I'd like to just make that
available. Uh just contact us here at
[1:13:09] City Hall and we can get a schedule
together for the for the public.
[1:13:14] Um with that, I just uh also like to
thank Mr. Simmons for coming forward in
[1:13:18] the open forum.
Um I've met with Mr. Simmons a couple of
[1:13:22] times. He mentioned he's met with with
Chief Toomey as well.
[1:13:26] Um he's brought forward many of the
privacy concerns uh
[1:13:31] around some of the stationary cameras
um early on in the process that that are
[1:13:36] now being talked about uh on a a broader
broader basis.
[1:13:42] I do feel that we've got great policies
in place with within our our local
[1:13:47] police force and would welcome a
community conversation to show what we
[1:13:51] have. Um I do know that um further
conversations are happening as Mr.
[1:13:57] Simmons mentioned. So, just want to
state publicly we are we are open to
[1:14:01] that and we we thank you for keeping uh
keeping us advised of what's happening.
[1:14:07] With that, I'll turn it back to the
mayor.
[1:14:14] » Thank you. Does any city council member
have an
[1:14:17] topic for a future discussion they'd
like to introduce?
[1:14:21] Councilman Moran.
>> Uh just a quick topic and for the
[1:14:24] public, since we had a discussion about
traffic committee earlier tonight, I've
[1:14:30] had a few people reach out to me about
uh our new football stadium.
[1:14:34] And when you're leaving there at night,
um there's so many people walking across
[1:14:40] 3rd Avenue
with the stadium lights, when it's dark,
[1:14:45] the one street light that is right there
at the crosswalk doesn't come on. I'm
[1:14:49] assuming it's probably got a sensor on
it. And so, we have hundreds with a
[1:14:54] football game coming up.
We have We'll have thousands of people
[1:14:58] walking across that road right there in
basically pitch black.
[1:15:03] And there I'm sure there's three
entities involved between the school,
[1:15:08] municipal utilities, and the city. I I
have no idea who that would fall on. If
[1:15:12] Yeah, if you want to comment.
[1:15:17] » Very quickly. Um
during the varsity football games for
[1:15:20] both GPL and Watertown High School, that
road is closed down. They They put in a
[1:15:24] permanent request. That doesn't fix
soccer and JV football, but for those
[1:15:28] thousands of people that you're talking
about, they close that road down from I
[1:15:33] think it's like 6:00 p.m. until
everybody's gone from there. So, no
[1:15:36] vehicle traffic. It's just pedestrian
traffic. Okay.
[1:15:39] » Thank you.
>> That might be helpful, but we'll check
[1:15:41] into the
the sensors on the top of the light.
[1:15:44] It's probably something that nobody
caught.
[1:15:46] » Yeah, I just noticed, you know, leaving
the soccer
[1:15:49] game
Friday night, you know, there's there's
[1:15:53] anything from the littlest toddler
running across the road to, you know,
[1:15:57] grown adults, and they they're walking
across the in pitch black. So.
[1:16:02] Thank you.
[1:16:05] » Anything else?
>> All right, thank you.
[1:16:09] » Councilman Shetty.
[1:16:12] » Just to put it on the record, someone
has a birthday tomorrow.
[1:16:14] » Correct?
Does the mayor have a birthday tomorrow?
[1:16:17] » someone does.
>> [laughter]
[1:16:21] » Well, happy birthday, mayor, tomorrow.
>> [laughter]
[1:16:24] » Thank you.
[1:16:28] » That's uh something for executive
session.
[1:16:31] » [laughter]
[1:16:34] » Any other topics?
All right. We have no reason to go into
[1:16:39] executive session. I will entertain a
motion to adjourn.
[1:16:42] Motion made by Councilman Allen,
seconded by Councilman Peters. All those
[1:16:46] in favor of adjournment, please say I.
>> I.
[1:16:49] » Any opposed say nay.
Motion carries. Good night and God bless
[1:16:53] you, Watertown.