[{"_1":2,"_123":-5,"_124":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"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","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87,99,111],{"_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,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6425778,"mediaKeyId","5906144-d250e4cf43467c1fd064803ebe8712d5","parentId",5906144,"title","Residents urge Vermillion to revise on-call residency rule as lineman faces disciplinary action","audioSeconds",1159,"startMs",199000,"endMs",1358000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=5906144-d250e4cf43467c1fd064803ebe8712d5&start=199&end=1358","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5906144-d250e4cf43467c1fd064803ebe8712d5/thumbnail_199000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6425778/Vermillion/Clay-County/South-Dakota/Residents-urge-Vermillion-to-revise-on-call-residency-rule-as-lineman-faces-disciplinary-action","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6425778-03618e9a1d18f03de46e23b8d93ebd98/orig.mp4?Expires=1771226548&Signature=gC4CI02ev7Bzdyvh8Mu3iKAlAeI4jkgtBXPekERvpoKqB1ZybEn6aFbLfVKm34Y6tqd3N1A7Q52JWnol1x-Z6cG9dNrFa7ytlZM61hpyixgHUlIlDmUYAxbk8YtsYXgkaGOfGGKRwDvjZseVR~0H98NtBBZnX-hw0vA1Pgc~64gQ7g2GCuQrJZ-xmQpimR6hLPzQfdsBaFrJdGCgp5~GhNpDzTtKr069wEUKzBLgIoR7gOH6bom1kjwNw8B-OkKo8f9LflQ7Axk7AzVg4xU3N1O87WQeV6tQ6TMMOA49ddLO1UqAILPWKysolNVuPqQ-5UTSQVv3NWX7djGuhVHYFQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Vermillion City Council","date","2025-10-07T05:14:26Z","article","Family members, union representatives and other residents told the Vermillion City Council on Monday that the city’s current on-call residency rule is too strict and urged officials to revise it before taking employment action against lineman Brandon Steenick.

Jordan Defenbaugh, representing AFSCME Local 1052 and Council 65, said Steenick has long stayed at his sister’s house while on-call and “Extending the on call response time to something reasonable like 30 minutes would maintain public safety while respecting the personal lives of the people who serve Vermillion.” Defenbaugh told the council that the arrangement has allowed Steenick to respond “quickly and reliably” and asked officials to align the rule with neighboring communities’ standards.

Why it matters: Public commenters said the rule, which staff indicated is measured in a short time window and enforced strictly, could cost the city an experienced lineman and undermine morale. Speakers framed the request as a public-safety–neutral change that would preserve rapid response while recognizing modern realities, including employees who live outside city limits or travel for work.

In testimony, Brandon’s relatives and supporters described multiple long-term arrangements that placed him close enough to respond when needed. Ron Jupiter, who identified himself as a contract auditor and Brandon’s brother-in-law, suggested measuring by mileage rather than a fixed distance or an extremely tight time window: “I think a mileage approximation is a lot better metric. Additionally to that, policy is supposed to be reviewed and updated on an annual basis.”

Resident Brian Summerveld said Steenick’s alleged infraction was a “2 minute violation of an on call response window,” and argued the city had previously accepted the employee’s residential arrangement. Christina Steenick, Brandon’s wife, described his decade of service as a lineman and a veteran and urged councilors to consider his performance record: “Brandon is a good employee. Brandon is a good person.”

What the city said: Mayor (name not recorded on the record) acknowledged the comments but cautioned the council that the matter is legal in nature and not on the evening’s agenda. “Being it’s a legal matter, we can’t obviously discuss it here and it’s not on the agenda,” the mayor said. The mayor added the council was listening and would take the remarks under advisement.

Details and clarifications: Commenters said the employee has used his sister’s residence for roughly six years during on-call shifts and has not missed calls; that the city’s current metric is a short time window and referenced a 15-minute standard in testimony; and that supporters proposed a 30‑minute response window or a mileage-based rule. Speakers also said Steenick procured hotel rooms, at his own cost, when necessary during severe weather to ensure availability.

No formal action was taken. The council did not debate or vote on policy changes during the meeting; staff and elected officials said they would consider the public testimony outside the open session.

Community context: Speakers traveled from Vermillion and nearby towns, and several noted the effect on recruitment and retention of public-works employees. Commenters warned that strict enforcement of residency expectations could deter families and workers from locating or remaining in Vermillion.

Looking ahead: Council members and staff signaled they would review the policy and brought the public comments into the record; no ordinance, motion or timetable for a formal policy review was set during the meeting.

","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","2025-10-06 City Council","oneSentenceSummary","Family members, union representatives and other residents told the Vermillion City Council on Monday that the city’s current on-call residency rule is too strict and urged officials to revise it before taking employment action against lineman Brandon Steenick.","taxTitle","Vermillion , Clay County, South Dakota","taxId",55677,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6425772,"Council upholds planning staff on veterinary clinic appeal; ordinance rewrite planned to separate clinics from kennels",2279,2120000,4399000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5906144-d250e4cf43467c1fd064803ebe8712d5&start=2120&end=4399","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5906144-d250e4cf43467c1fd064803ebe8712d5/thumbnail_2120000.jpg","/articles/6425772/Vermillion/Clay-County/South-Dakota/Council-upholds-planning-staff-on-veterinary-clinic-appeal-ordinance-rewrite-planned-to-separate-clinics-from-kennels","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6425772-2be9d195c54b91c6bbf16d42eeda9007/orig.mp4?Expires=1771226548&Signature=L4pKRU36k-8mYeNKPVmHxgrBqtZoo1GZDPepvpjWoRbI19RXzucDUv5Rk-SadFd2b8tSUTU8HDMHbZxQLjFtUgeFC5jTpBnAIym3LLYWA3A2nyKJjIT7tCwIh1TdIue1F0TedluJoZGD8XXSA-M6nJYym7ciNTcY~XhfjxK9jD0eflXf-escj0V5QzPSq9LfURWP-gK5ehuZj1o0FypH6FjYAssOvP9YTX0cDgL9W2JLDadNerNEgjxTr-u-f-fKc8g3DH4lYt9whGwN1Vxz-P3r4itQJpJUXEl9GRhXKVEt11rmXATgQ2p5sNNrSnMqzjjpRr7wbcyzVV8L~bQjaA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Vermillion City Council on Monday voted to deny an appeal of a planning staff decision and thereby block immediate approval of a conditional use permit (CUP) for a small animal veterinary clinic at 306 Bauer Street.

Why it matters: The applicant and supporters said the clinic would restore veterinary services to Vermillion and would operate as a satellite clinic with limited hours, no overnight kenneling and no surgeries. Planning staff and several council members said the application failed to meet the city zoning ordinance’s 150-foot separation requirement measured from outside wall to outside wall, and that the council’s appeal authority is limited to claims of illegality under the code.

What the council decided: Councilor Price moved to deny the appeal; Councilor Hellwig seconded. After discussion the council voted to deny the appeal, upholding the staff determination that the proposed unit is within 150 feet of three residential buildings and therefore did not qualify for the conditional-use review before the Planning and Zoning Commission. The denial leaves in place the ordinance’s measurement requirement and staff’s original decision; council members then discussed next steps to enable a clinic in town.

Applicant and public testimony: Supporters including Jim Peterson (VCDC), property owner Donnie Stewart and residents Steve and Mary Waller urged the council to allow the clinic, saying Vermillion lacks local veterinary services and that the proposed tenant, Dr. Greene of Lewis and Clark Vet Clinic, intended a limited, satellite operation. Peterson said other suitable units are under contract and this location best fit the clinic’s needs.

Staff and legal explanation: Jose (planning staff) explained that the zoning code requires a 150-foot separation for veterinary uses and that measurement is from outside wall to outside wall; he noted the Planning and Zoning Commission cannot consider a conditional use that does not meet the ordinance standard. City attorney counsel explained that an appeal under section 155.100 looks for illegality in a staff decision—a factual measurement dispute (150 feet) is not a clear legal error—and therefore reversing the staff decision on appeal is not the appropriate route.

Next steps: Council and staff agreed to pursue an ordinance amendment that would differentiate veterinary hospitals and overnight kennels from limited satellite veterinary clinics (no overnight boarding, no outdoor kenneling). Staff said an amendment would go to the Planning and Zoning Commission on Oct. 20 and to council for readings thereafter; council members discussed an accelerated schedule to shorten the effective date if possible so the clinic could proceed more quickly. The council also noted that if the ordinance is changed, the applicant would still need to follow the conditional-use process before the Planning and Zoning Commission.

Vote and procedure: The council denied the appeal on a motion by Councilor Price, seconded by Councilor Hellwig; the council left the staff zoning determination intact. Because the appeal was denied, the planning staff decision stands and the applicant must await any ordinance change and then the Planning and Zoning conditional-use review.

Background and clarifications: The proposed clinic would be located in a strip mall; supporters emphasized no overnight kenneling or surgeries and initial limited hours. Planning staff noted other units in the strip mall that would meet the separation requirement; one desirable unit is under contract. The code section cited for the appeal procedure was city ordinance §155.100; the 150-foot separation requirement is an existing element of the veterinary/GB zoning rules.

","The Vermillion City Council on Monday voted to deny an appeal of a planning staff decision and thereby block immediate approval of a conditional use permit for a small animal veterinary clinic proposed at 306 Bauer Street.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6425767,"Council approves engineering amendment for Tom Street lift station but removes contingency funding",880,5434000,6314000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5906144-d250e4cf43467c1fd064803ebe8712d5&start=5434&end=6314","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5906144-d250e4cf43467c1fd064803ebe8712d5/thumbnail_5434000.jpg","/articles/6425767/Vermillion/Clay-County/South-Dakota/Council-approves-engineering-amendment-for-Tom-Street-lift-station-but-removes-contingency-funding","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6425767-a2e7484d326724c98e4b55f49dc73ff4/orig.mp4?Expires=1771226549&Signature=EEVoHu0EsBz5cXasl1G9hTbwIeXxShMqoPxQW6mQ6BezhdF-1UEBR6Ba01JYTSYo-89PqN0v3DL~b4ONbdD8YK1BurwR5YkuWHxTSCj3uEZH76TX~GGuoh0FLYGF34T2Whq8f-M8YOTq3PqmUrHZUsSSwNmvsllomJdgvnOZY486Uq38m0nga1vnSHWlQOSFM9N2O4ybrdmXB-xXd3GCmItZJrF~5~sL29T~Zjt8WUrFhghuvT4LHK6g6xvzVyp9KbRcRXlDUIM6FyjxRx0eC~yqThXpnhMIy3wRGbsRugWkEaVHEP-GSVZ664FfYzHXYQqyv3TZNHw0uDdeB0Nm0g__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Vermillion City Council voted Monday to approve additional engineering work for the Tom Street lift station project but removed a $15,000 contingency from the amendment after council concern over lengthy construction delays.

Staff background: City staff said Banner Associates was contracted in February 2022 to design a new Tom Street lift station for an engineering fee of $112,200. In May 2023 a construction contract was awarded to H & W Contracting for $1,553,066.45 with a substantial completion date of June 1, 2024. Staff reported the project is currently 494 days beyond its scheduled completion and that liquidated damages (LDs) being tracked total $666,900 as of the meeting.

Amendments requested: An earlier contract amendment approved March 3, 2025 increased Banner’s contract by $26,762.30, bringing the engineering total to $138,962.30. Banner proposed a second amendment with four items tied to ongoing construction administration and observation: construction administration ($15,684), construction observation ($9,176), remaining effort/closeout tasks ($19,500) and a contingency ($15,000). Staff recommended approval of the second amendment in the full amount.

Council action: After sustained concern from council members about the project’s duration and accountability, Councilor Toller moved to approve the three specific expense items for construction administration, observation and remaining effort but to remove the $15,000 contingency; Councilor Lieber seconded. The motion carried. Councilors stressed they expect Banner and staff to press the contractor to finish work; the council also discussed the difficulty of forcing a contractor to perform and noted LDs as the primary contractual remedy.

What the votes mean: The council’s approval funds the additional engineering close-out and oversight work Banner must perform to finish the project but denies the additional contingency fund Banner had requested. Staff said the accumulated liquidated damages may offset some of the city’s additional outlays and that the amendment’s purpose is to close out the work left undone because of construction delays.

Costs paid to date and next steps: Staff reported $138,931.05 in engineering fees already paid and approximately $714,323 paid for construction to date; a construction pay request of $21,599.69 was included on the meeting consent agenda. Banner and staff indicated the contractor planned to resume final connection work immediately and that additional close-out work would follow; staff said they would continue to monitor LDs and contractor performance.

","The Vermillion City Council approved additional engineering fees for the Tom Street lift station project tied to construction delays, but removed a proposed $15,000 contingency. The contractor is more than a year behind schedule and the project has accumulated sizable liquidated damages.",{"_33":100,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":101,"_41":102,"_43":103,"_45":104,"_47":105,"_49":106,"_51":107,"_53":108,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":109,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":110,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6425753,"Votes at a glance: Vermillion council actions on ordinances, permits and appointments (Oct. 6, 2025)",7023,64000,7087000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5906144-d250e4cf43467c1fd064803ebe8712d5&start=64&end=7087","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5906144-d250e4cf43467c1fd064803ebe8712d5/thumbnail_64000.jpg","/articles/6425753/Vermillion/Clay-County/South-Dakota/Votes-at-a-glance-Vermillion-council-actions-on-ordinances-permits-and-appointments-Oct-6-2025","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6425753-f3a154b5864f7c1e871d2fc0d77f4829/orig.mp4?Expires=1771226549&Signature=NdgrS6IIBRBg-TeotHXmzc~RUKkH9Y249ET-O8EoYKVdUDvjMe6L1wUaITWAbvFjf8mLWfHsXgbpsmaGO1-XmAsk7np8rUzy286-IyZNUGzUWewLhvr01rPjyCQt5~fRQEMfHS-cH6HowZJZowzfYKsTrbkT482nItcG4J4dlYITImbxRtGBOf~62zX-eRyJ~8s~0GSXJQ-Xzr3DvANKTVcyUQvkcjirgdFsHAnBuWiyGJZClCq-5lAUNnqjYaH2mcwfmgGWvIA29~ViShWjCRe4REZS8PvWow7d7Vr1XT9pVrx6kNLD0XMWjJyfKL5084vK0GRkKW91uZf3iSiEEw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Here are the key motions and formal outcomes from the Oct. 6, 2025, meeting of the Vermillion City Council. Where a mover or seconder was provided in the meeting, it is recorded; where not specified, the entry lists the outcome and notes that details were not specified in the public record.

- Minutes approved: Council approved previous meeting minutes. Motion to approve made by Councilor Myers and seconded by Councilor Lieber. Outcome: approved.

- Agenda adopted: Motion to adopt the meeting agenda by Councilor Price; second by Councilor Hellwig. Outcome: adopted.

- Nuisance abatement special assessments: Administration presented a resolution listing properties and associated abatement charges; after finding no additional information, the council adopted the resolution. Outcome: adopted (motion carries; specifics in staff resolution packet).

- Special event noise permit (Radagon Platts, Vermillion Rise / No Kings community sing-along): Motion by Councilor Lieber, second by Councilor Price. Fee paid was $25. Outcome: permit approved.

- Ordinance 15‑45 (rezoning 1200 West Main Street from Natural Resource Conservation (NRC) to R‑1 residential): First reading advanced. Motion to advance by Councilor Holland; second by Councilor Price. Outcome: advanced to second reading (no final vote this meeting).

- Appeal of zoning administration decision (conditional use permit for small animal veterinary clinic at 306 Bauer Street): Motion to deny the appeal by Councilor Price; second by Councilor Hellwig. Outcome: appeal denied; staff determination upheld (see separate article for details).

- Consent agenda: Motion by Councilor Murrah, second by Councilor Price. Outcome: adopted (included routine payables and other consent items).

- Ordinance 15‑41 (rezoning 1313 West Cherry Street from General Business to R‑3 residential): Second reading and approval. Motion to approve by council (mover unspecified), second by Councilor Holland. Outcome: ordinance adopted on second reading.

- Ordinance 15‑42 (add platted properties to rural service district near Highway 50 / Princeton Avenue): Second reading and approval. Motion by Councilor Price; second by Councilor Murrah. Outcome: ordinance adopted (roll call: 9 yeas, 0 nays).

- Ordinance 15‑44 (revise ward boundaries to include recent annexations): Second reading and approval. Motion by Councilor Price; second by Councilor Cheeseman. Outcome: ordinance adopted (roll call: 9 yeas, 0 nays).

- Engineering amendment (Tom Street lift station, Banner Associates Amendment #2): Council approved specific additional engineering items but removed a $15,000 contingency; motion by Councilor Toller, second by Councilor Lieber. Outcome: approved (contingency removed). Details: staff reported the project is significantly behind schedule and LDs are being tracked.

- 2024 audited comprehensive annual financial report: Motion to accept by Councilor Cheeseman; second by Councilor Price. Outcome: accepted. Fee reported to Williams & Company: $96,995.

- Storm drainage fee resolution (3% increase): Administration recommended and council adopted a 3% increase in the storm-drainage fee; example given in packet: single-family 10,000-sq.-ft. lot annual fee would increase from $37.88 to $39. Outcome: adopted.

- Appointments: Historic Preservation Commission (Dennis Falakos) — motion by Councilor Genowind, second by Councilor Hellwig; outcome: appointed. Tree Board (reappointment of Russell Olson) — motion by Councilor Toller, second by Councilor ???; outcome: reappointed. Business Improvement District (BID) board (appointment of Joseph Teninger) — motion by Councilor Hellwig, second by Councilor Price; outcome: appointed.

Notes and next steps: Several items advanced to later dates (e.g., Ordinance 15‑45 second reading scheduled), and council directed staff to draft an ordinance amendment to clarify veterinary clinic/kennel distinctions so an applicant may pursue conditional-use review if the code is changed.

","The Vermillion City Council approved several administrative and land-use measures on Oct. 6, 2025, including rezoning and annexation ordinances, a special event noise permit, adoption of the consent agenda, and a handful of board appointments. The council also accepted the 2024 annual audit and adopted a small storm-drainage fee increase.",{"_33":112,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":113,"_41":114,"_43":115,"_45":116,"_47":117,"_49":118,"_51":119,"_53":120,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":121,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":122,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6425760,"Blue Peak tells Vermillion council fiber expansion is complete; company to upgrade customer Wi‑Fi and address outages",518,4911000,5429000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5906144-d250e4cf43467c1fd064803ebe8712d5&start=4911&end=5429","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5906144-d250e4cf43467c1fd064803ebe8712d5/thumbnail_4911000.jpg","/articles/6425760/Vermillion/Clay-County/South-Dakota/Blue-Peak-tells-Vermillion-council-fiber-expansion-is-complete-company-to-upgrade-customer-WiFi-and-address-outages","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6425760-c92c413ebf69dd442ba41029b07b9432/orig.mp4?Expires=1771226549&Signature=My~kG1rt6RzSHnFPlYJPqwcVWtz22tLOZ3nuY4cvFfwcNj96LB1JXmd7tK66oROwFLOP7kfRSMjpGI2VTbxGzuqzJGsxrFEvhEOyU5BW6MgTRSbLeSO8L6sdvoMB6xJxdor9-2izmFJh-UhlsmgtFhGAe7ZOr4uPwnHxO4uy56sp8NtRtxgQ20QmQ0i3Q-7kzIQwOTvzWrJx2qd2NS338oTq7WSCYpgCDQyolHejul4jAGw-4E6l74JmjTM2UiXHIEto60KLJeu4NdkOCIG-F1gnAT8r-i-huGYA~Fsclw2x7yWHvuc53Ap~uNJ6uZLhXdMHho02R5DSLo1DlA7Xug__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","A Blue Peak representative briefed the Vermillion City Council on Monday about the company’s network expansion, local investments and planned customer equipment upgrades.

Key points: Blue Peak said it completed the Vermillion expansion early last year at a total investment of about $8.3 million to build the fiber network and connect customers. The company said it is upgrading customer premises equipment to support Wi‑Fi 7 on higher-tier plans (two‑gigabit and five‑gigabit packages) so customers can use more of their broadband speeds over wireless.

Community investment and services: The company said it has directed about $27,000 in local sponsorships and memberships in the most recent year and over $75,000 since expanding in the area, including chamber activities, the Clay County Fair, and school booster support. Blue Peak also offers television service delivered over the Internet in tiered packages, including a local package and larger packages with sports channels.

Resident concerns: Councilors raised two recurring issues from residents: (1) how long temporary overhead cables remain before being buried (a councilor reported a temporary line remained for several weeks and requested a faster timeline to reduce hazards), and (2) outage frequency and reliability on residential connections. The Blue Peak representative said typical burial times are three to four weeks depending on locates and contractor availability and offered to follow up on specific addresses; the company also said it tracks outages and would investigate causes and remediation.

No council vote was required. The council thanked the company and asked staff to refer specific citizen complaints about temporary lines and outages to Blue Peak for follow-up.

","Blue Peak told the council its Vermillion fiber expansion cost about $8.3 million and the company is upgrading customers to Wi‑Fi 7 hardware for higher wireless throughput. Councilors raised concerns about outage frequency and the time it takes to bury temporary service lines; the company pledged to investigate individual reports.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Residents urge Vermillion to revise on-call residency rule as lineman faces disciplinary action

Council upholds planning staff on veterinary clinic appeal; ordinance rewrite planned to separate clinics from kennels

Council approves engineering amendment for Tom Street lift station but removes contingency funding

Votes at a glance: Vermillion council actions on ordinances, permits and appointments (Oct. 6, 2025)

Blue Peak tells Vermillion council fiber expansion is complete; company to upgrade customer Wi‑Fi and address outages