Neighbors press county over safety, dust and stop-sign enforcement at 81 project; commissioners move to pursue enforcement and state follow-up

A Yankton County resident told the commission Aug. 5 that heavy truck traffic and dust tied to the Marquardt/Pitt 81 project have created unsafe conditions near his home and that measures promised under the project's conditional use permit have not been enforced. Resident Richard Bellick said he had video evidence of trucks failing to stop at a township stop sign and that promised dust-control measures and flagger placement had not occurred as described to neighbors.

County staff reported a sheriff's office log documenting patrols around the site; the record shared with the commission indicated deputies had patrolled the intersection on multiple days but logged limited hours overall. Captain Meyer of the sheriff's office urged residents to call dispatch when incidents occur so the department can document calls for service and increase patrol presence. "If something happens, call dispatch," he said, adding that recorded calls generate the response and tracking the sheriff's office needs to intensify patrols.

Commissioners heard from staff that some enforcement matters fall to the county's planning-and-zoning processes while traffic-control commitments for the project were connected to state work and contractor obligations. Commissioners discussed whether the county had conditioned the CUP on specific dust-control, noise or stop-sign enforcement measures and whether those items were part of the original motion approving the permit. County counsel noted the county could not retroactively enforce conditions that were not part of the original approval.

In response to the public comment, commissioners directed staff to move the zoning complaint forward through the planning-and-zoning complaint process so there is an official record and a hearing if warranted. They also asked the county attorney or state's attorney— to send a letter to the state project engineers seeking confirmation that state-planned flagging and traffic control are being provided as described in state correspondence. Commissioners encouraged the resident to submit his video to dispatch and to file a formal CUP complaint with planning and zoning to support any enforcement action.

The commission did not take immediate punitive action at the meeting; rather, members said they wanted a clearer record (formal complaint, planning-and-zoning review) and verification from state officials or the project engineer about promised flaggers and signage. The chair said staff would follow up with the parties involved and with the sheriff's office about increasing documented calls for service if incidents recur.