[{"_1":2,"_109":-5,"_110":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_25":26},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_27":28,"_29":30},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[31,74,86,98],{"_32":33,"_34":35,"_36":37,"_38":39,"_40":41,"_42":43,"_44":45,"_46":47,"_48":49,"_50":51,"_52":53,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":59,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":65,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":67,"_71":72,"_73":72},"mediaId",6487893,"mediaKeyId","5504194-61fc15a6ad9d5e6c6f3a6a90df58ffc1","parentId",5504194,"title","Votes at a glance: Key actions from the Clay County Commission meeting","audioSeconds",3521,"startMs",129000,"endMs",3650000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=5504194-61fc15a6ad9d5e6c6f3a6a90df58ffc1&start=129&end=3650","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5504194-61fc15a6ad9d5e6c6f3a6a90df58ffc1/thumbnail_129000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6487893/Clay-County/South-Dakota/Votes-at-a-glance-Key-actions-from-the-Clay-County-Commission-meeting","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6487893-5876e60b89bc704116dd0aaea64ff2fe/orig.mp4?Expires=1769794965&Signature=DUzFG35zr7mkbrKsCsxxuQo~7I08wrKbP91Zx~vazh2iEk6QMIhQiMZcB9S8IpLFtiWR4cv4tQhimlwT7SzUR7vdOm8Muq20d~OlP~gwejnPJgJLaSlEC2WyxBBYg0cbp-jdmyEnjDkiaICNF9cQE43tDPR1dQByVSBgz6oyfMHzk7VROF03h6hls-xQyk5OTz5FWCND5i-BxTMwJ8nVgX7XBSm192UATQHl~y0BqIhNU0AXNL7iQdBeLckSTvElS5kXTHMpWyYbjwmCzzKW0za4qanYDQSoG-LgNt-aZbcrR2Wz3Uhq41DWGChSpgSSHZu6x5KztRV~MtwFxPS8oA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Clay County South Dakota","date","2025-07-29T21:39:38.173Z","article","At its meeting, the Clay County Commission took a series of votes on administrative, budgetary and permitting items. Key outcomes are listed below. All votes were taken in public session unless otherwise noted.

Votes at a glance

- Motion to approve the meeting agenda and prior minutes: Passed (voice votes).

- Quarterly reports acceptance and related motion: Passed (voice vote).

- Ditch board: Approved mileage and per diem invoices for joint ditch board meeting and approved invoice payment (voice votes).

- Approve driveway/culvert applications: The commission approved a culvert request for Southeast Elevators (north side right-of-way) and a driveway application for Tom Corio near county road locations; both motions passed on voice votes.

- Vouchers and payroll: Motion to pay vouchers and payroll passed (voice vote).

- Provisional 2026 budget: The commission approved the 2026 provisional budget (draft) to be finalized at the September meeting; vote passed by roll call/voice vote as recorded.

- Resolution 2025-21 fund transfer: The commission approved Resolution 2025-21 authorizing fund transfers; roll-call recorded all commissioners voting \"yes.\" Staff noted the document will be reprinted with updated names.

- Assignment of 911 equipment funds: The commission approved assigning the county's designated portion of 911 surcharge revenue to an equipment reserve for future purchases (voice vote, all in favor).

- WIC contract authorization: The commission authorized the chair to sign the WIC contract renewal; motion passed (voice vote).

- Speed-limit sign placement on Burbank Road: Commissioners approved posting a 35-mph speed-limit sign placement to address transitions between posted zones near the development and golf course; motion passed (voice vote).

- Courthouse/safety-center procurement: After an executive-session consultation on contractual matters, the commission voted to move forward with negotiations with Lloyd Construction on the RFB/proposal (voice vote; motion passed unanimously).

- Executive session: The commission met in executive session for legal and personnel matters under SDCL 1-25-2 subsections 1 and 3 and returned to regular session.

Procedural notes: Some items were discussed in committee or the joint ditch board and were moved or approved by the commission on consent. Where roll-call votes were recorded, the clerk read commissioners' names and votes.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","July 29, 2025 County Commission Meeting","oneSentenceSummary","The Clay County Commission approved multiple routine and substantive items, including provisions tied to the provisional budget, fund transfers, public-safety equipment reserves, driveway and culvert applications, and procurement steps for courthouse work.","taxTitle","Clay County, South Dakota","taxId",55676,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_32":75,"_34":35,"_36":37,"_38":76,"_40":77,"_42":78,"_44":79,"_46":80,"_48":81,"_50":82,"_52":83,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":84,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":85,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":67,"_71":72,"_73":72},6487897,"Clay County adopts 2025–2045 comprehensive plan on second reading",186,2544000,2730000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5504194-61fc15a6ad9d5e6c6f3a6a90df58ffc1&start=2544&end=2730","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5504194-61fc15a6ad9d5e6c6f3a6a90df58ffc1/thumbnail_2544000.jpg","/articles/6487897/Clay-County/South-Dakota/Clay-County-adopts-20252045-comprehensive-plan-on-second-reading","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6487897-a51005d3174c04ca7d9dd6b1463f0db9/orig.mp4?Expires=1769794965&Signature=YnYcmzd~qnEtw1pZQaTZyK5zGLIym3Y7xjDqO6ZyO5~BuHZ3XWAyqtbjpq0GmoN-lgSmWBhiBpiyaJHCZLvzGfy0niJ9~dEkqvbiXtdGNtn8UN-5SsHPdgCpMZqsA6eYPeHAx0WBFvmp6fE0y8Gfd26kRlZ0gWyPevPIkqOuNytPUQaUSjMjR4ZE2s3CAqjLm2R06MSZP6gW370So0SiFfD~YcD72HhyNdnPVby9I0~Shiygc21mdqYQwnm7wuA3iyBLPFg65T1iQzbFCiB-aTeHYGnwudX-ReYca-UvxOTKMA4B1sefpjyrnhSLNT9hNjnNPWcALxLbAwhVVnGKCg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Clay County commissioners unanimously approved the second reading and adoption of the county's 2025–2045 comprehensive plan during the meeting.

County staff told the commission the draft plan had been available on the county website since the previous meeting and that the second reading would not add substantive content; staff said changes made since the first reading were grammar and minor edits rather than new policy additions. \"The draft is on the county website. It's been publicly available ever since the last meeting... All it was was doing the enter and backspaces and grammar fixes that we found the first reading,\" a county staff member said.

Commissioners discussed whether the parks section might be added later as an amendment. One commissioner asked if the group could add a parks section in the future; staff responded the commission can revisit the plan at any time and plans to review it annually to capture rezones and other county changes.

The motion to approve the comprehensive plan carried on a roll call vote. The clerk read the roll call and commissioners recorded \"yes\" votes. Staff indicated a resolution formalizing adoption will be prepared and signed.","The Clay County Commission approved the second reading and adoption of its 2025–2045 comprehensive plan after limiting changes to minor edits; commissioners said they will revisit additions such as parks policy in future updates.",{"_32":87,"_34":35,"_36":37,"_38":88,"_40":89,"_42":90,"_44":91,"_46":92,"_48":93,"_50":94,"_52":95,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":96,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":97,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":67,"_71":72,"_73":72},6487900,"Clay County and city split 911 costs; commissioners assign surcharge funds for equipment",1784,1360000,3144000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5504194-61fc15a6ad9d5e6c6f3a6a90df58ffc1&start=1360&end=3144","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5504194-61fc15a6ad9d5e6c6f3a6a90df58ffc1/thumbnail_1360000.jpg","/articles/6487900/Clay-County/South-Dakota/Clay-County-and-city-split-911-costs-commissioners-assign-surcharge-funds-for-equipment","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6487900-523806633693b8731717cf7d77dd9ac5/orig.mp4?Expires=1769794965&Signature=g6UL0cWv9dWTmlMbawSlEgJiMbieM3daueTRtBTMO4czC5eEJTkB-MMjqrP8rURTMpREvyHOKuIKrwvI1N9C3PkmzqYHa2U10Lwi8TA6dJIGyp-CR4w-lD8WKCnJ2lAz968EDdplcsJnUybVXW5S7Nyj~eOiZz2TE0f1EV1GwyxjWn04y4C4PHEwnWmK0G7f4JE2~tFQb5wNGOXSFDZQyA1R~qjlPukUtr38ZxkIFkdsmohDgn5pMAGb6Ihgsi~3kHzz4WWPkb4punMTxLOk4HHn-TbH9~GNG6gsxK8dnV75HTo0f5AwZ70S-Ho4hJz-4FdrvVc7YOJSOdQ5MMswlA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Clay County's 911 Communications director outlined the 2026 budget implications for the county and the joint dispatch center, telling the commission the 911 budget is shared between the county and the city and that the county will resume paying an annual radio-system maintenance agreement of about $29,000.

\"That was $29,000 a year,\" Ryan Anderson said of the radio maintenance contract during his presentation. Anderson said the fee buys priority response, software updates and on-call service from the system vendor.

Anderson told the commission the dispatch budget is split between a dedicated 911 fund and the county general fund because surcharge revenue alone does not cover operations. He said the local 911 surcharge typically produces between $115,000 and $120,000 per year; staff later described county general-fund support amounting to roughly $263,000 (the county's half after fund splits presented at the meeting).

Commissioners approved a motion to assign part of the county's 10% portion of 911 surcharge revenue to an equipment reserve so the county can build toward future major purchases for the dispatch center. \"Each year, whatever 10% of that 911 surcharge revenue is that we assign that, which essentially sets it aside for future equipment purchases so that it builds up over the course of however many years,\" a county official explained during the meeting.

The commission approved the assignment on a voice vote with all commissioners voting in favor. County staff explained that setting the funds aside will create a balance for future equipment replacement rather than asking for large one-time appropriations when equipment needs arise.

Anderson also described other modest budget changes: the county will assume responsibility for Internet service for the building (previously shared), will add a backup Internet feed to avoid outages, and will include a reintroduced professional services line for radio maintenance that had previously been purchased in advance. Anderson said there were no large equipment replacement requests because the new dispatch building will have most equipment new at move-in.

The commission's motions included assigning the 911-related funds and approving the provisional budget later in the meeting; staff noted the final budget will be adopted at the last meeting in September and may be adjusted before then.","The county heard a detailed 2026 budget presentation from 911 Communications Director Ryan Anderson, approved assigning a portion of 911 surcharge revenue to equipment savings, and confirmed the county will resume an annual radio maintenance agreement that adds about $29,000 to the budget.",{"_32":99,"_34":35,"_36":37,"_38":100,"_40":101,"_42":102,"_44":45,"_46":103,"_48":104,"_50":105,"_52":106,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":107,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":108,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":67,"_71":72,"_73":72},6487902,"Clay County commissioners authorize negotiation with Lloyd Construction on courthouse, safety-center work",1779,1871000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5504194-61fc15a6ad9d5e6c6f3a6a90df58ffc1&start=1871&end=3650","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5504194-61fc15a6ad9d5e6c6f3a6a90df58ffc1/thumbnail_1871000.jpg","/articles/6487902/Clay-County/South-Dakota/Clay-County-commissioners-authorize-negotiation-with-Lloyd-Construction-on-courthouse-safety-center-work","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6487902-7ef1a13ae7a6ba320c0ab4aa5e873113/orig.mp4?Expires=1769794965&Signature=KnR6dsP1SxIH5iIUhQzkKEBDO4qmaxBOKknj~GvqdrMypEONZvseFWaI0-QBcPLRjBkOZN848Lok-5Gzgsw~UKOYIJ~d~oKG9T3ml6G8UUMO65rd3cOtZTygJIvfe3JrizsghoAT0lOTOQKd83DHtPljwQkUBCYpLLaML-CzvW0zvbrv6pT6707~3ygUtY299cJswiM~JbIumc4okyCVC3V0hllrrn73VywWNIkK3TrDtJvNY1bkqytieoagnwpVeWeFix9uAuf5f-2tHtqGfvdFEwI-qjot-uFsGImZ2H6zx-0oLayxtisLH-bpTKwt8C3V6r60JjLZtt3gpDTWbw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Clay County commissioners voted to proceed with negotiations with Lloyd Construction on a design-build renovation of the county courthouse and the proposed safety center, after the county's selection process ranked Lloyd as the recommended firm based on a combined score-price metric.

County staff told commissioners the procurement process produced two responsive proposals and that the selection method — a qualitative score combined with price — produced a lower cost-per-point for Lloyd. \"Everything was handed into Carrie. She did all the math, totaled everything up, came up with their scores for these three areas, and came up with their average score,\" a county staff member explained during the presentation.

The vote followed an earlier briefing that described the county's design-build procurement procedures (adopted by the commission in March) and outlined the county's options under that policy: negotiate scope with the selected firm or reject all proposals. Commissioners also discussed breaking the overall work into smaller pieces, postponing some items or re-scoping finishes to reduce cost.

According to figures presented at the meeting, Lloyd's price for the courthouse portion was read aloud as $405,348 and its price for the safety center was read as $780,006.93. Staff said L and L Builders submitted higher prices for both scopes (the transcript records a higher courthouse price read in the meeting and a safety-center price of about $1.6 million). County staff cautioned that the total project as proposed exceeded the county's available budget and explained that portions above the courthouse security grant threshold would be a county obligation.

Commissioners discussed options to trim scope and to negotiate clarifications of design criteria and work scope with the recommended firm prior to contract award. The county's adopted procedures for design-build procurement state that at the time of award the county \"may negotiate changes clarifying the design criteria and scope of work,\" and that the county reserves the right to reject all proposals.

The commission moved the item to executive session to consult legal counsel on contractual matters and returned to public session. After executive session, a commissioner moved and the body approved a motion \"to move forward with the proposal for Lloyd's RFB bid.\" The motion passed with all commissioners voting in favor.

Next steps described by staff included negotiating the scope and price, identifying scope items the county could delay or remove to fit budgetary constraints, and presenting revised contract terms for final approval. Staff also noted the county may seek to limit the initial contract to discrete work (for example, courtroom work) if negotiations cannot produce an acceptable total price.

Commissioners did not adopt a final construction contract at the meeting; they authorized continued negotiation with Lloyd Construction under the county's procurement policy.","After scoring and price review, the Clay County Commission voted to move forward with negotiations with Lloyd Construction on renovations to the courthouse and a safety center, with commissioners directing staff to seek scope and cost reductions before final contract.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Votes at a glance: Key actions from the Clay County Commission meeting

Clay County adopts 2025–2045 comprehensive plan on second reading

Clay County and city split 911 costs; commissioners assign surcharge funds for equipment

Clay County commissioners authorize negotiation with Lloyd Construction on courthouse, safety-center work