Commission approves microsurfacing bid and revises 5‑year road plan amid debate over paving Kaiser Road and 434

The Yankton County Commission voted March 11 to accept a low bid for countywide microsurfacing and to approve a revised five-year road plan that shifts some work because of a proposed wind‑energy project in the northeast part of the county.

Highway Superintendent Mike presented the county’s microsurfacing bid and explained the treatment is “not an overlay” and “not a chip seal” but a lower-cost method to fill small imperfections and extend pavement life. He said this year’s program estimated roughly $55,000 per mile (compared with about $56,000 per mile last year) and that three bidders competed; Aztec submitted the low bid. Commissioner Dan moved to accept the bid; Don seconded. The motion carried on an affirmative vote of the board.

The board then considered a change to the five‑year road plan. Superintendent Mike said the original plan included roughly 12 miles on County Road 294 but that, because a wind‑tower project may use that corridor, the county would delay double chip sealing that segment and instead apply funding to other roads including County Road 434, County Road 303, Kaiser Road and Deer Boulevard. Commissioners said the reallocation was intended to avoid paving a road that might be torn up if the wind energy project proceeds.

Public comment focused on County Road 434 and Kaiser Road. Resident Larry Leader described frontage he measured and said he counted roughly 60 parcels with frontage on Kaiser and 80 mailboxes in the corridor; Tom Curran, another resident, said a local business (a bed-and-breakfast) generates seasonal traffic that may not be reflected in a November traffic study. Highway staff supplied traffic counts: a seven‑day average daily traffic (ADT) on County Road 434 was cited at about 76 vehicles per day; other counts for nearby routes were discussed in the room. Mike also provided maintenance cost history: the county spent $71,944 on work on County Road 434 in 2024 (shoulders, graveling), compared with $36,000 the year before.

Debate centered on how to distribute costs. Several commissioners said the county can ask property owners to contribute (“skin in the game”) and noted the West Eleventh Street project was funded in part by residents. Commissioners and the highway superintendent discussed methods used on earlier projects (petition, committee, partial assessments tied to frontage or valuation) and asked resident volunteers to collect names and gauge willingness to participate. The board asked Larry and others to return with names and commitments; the highway superintendent and equalization staff will calculate per-property assessments if the project moves forward.

Commissioner Dan moved to approve the modified five‑year plan as presented, with the board and staff to pursue resident contributions for Kaiser/434; Commissioner Don seconded. Commissioners agreed to try to secure contributions from area owners and to ensure any assessment proposal would be applied evenly to all properties along the affected segment. The motion carried by the board’s affirmative vote.

Ending: The board approved the microsurfacing contract and the revised five‑year road plan and directed highway staff and area residents to work together to produce a funding proposal and name list for possible property assessments. No final assessment or financing method was approved at the meeting.