Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Municipal Finance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents and developers urge council to drop proposed frontage maintenance fee
Summary
Public commenters and developers pressed the Dell Rapids City Council to pause a proposed frontage maintenance fee and new $15 surcharge, arguing it unfairly shifts costs by lot frontage, risks legal challenges under state constitution rules, and burdens residents during slow growth.
Public commenters told the Dell Rapids City Council the proposed frontage maintenance fee and an additional $15 surcharge would be unfair and legally risky. Mark, a resident who spoke during public comment, illustrated the equity concern: two homeowners with similar home values but different frontage would pay different amounts under a frontage-based charge. “It's the most unfair, dumbest thing you could possibly do,” he said.
The concern was echoed by several speakers who urged the council to prioritize core infrastructure projects and use other funding mechanisms. Chad Andrews said residents are willing to pay more for necessary infrastructure but cautioned against adding fees during economic downturns. Tom Kriski, who identified himself as a Ward 2 resident, urged using a sales-tax-backed bond or a State Revolving Fund loan instead of surcharges, noting the city's constitutional 5% debt limit on general obligation debt.
Legal risk was raised explicitly by Seth Bandoff, who cited a 2011 case (Hubbard v. the city) and the South Dakota Constitution’s requirement that money collected from everyone for a general public purpose be levied as a uniform property tax based on assessed value. “If a city collects money from everyone for a general public purpose, like maintain city streets… it must be levied as a uniform property tax based strictly on the assessed market value of the home,” Bandoff said, and he warned the city would likely lose a lawsuit if it proceeds with a non-uniform fee.
Councilors and commenters also discussed prior use of surcharges for the Southeast infrastructure project and noted surcharges are often designated to specific debt and may end when that debt is paid, in contrast to a permanent maintenance fee. Multiple speakers urged the council to pause adding more fees and to consider the long-term debt picture and alternatives such as bonds or SRF financing. The council did not take a formal vote on the frontage fee during the recorded proceedings; the discussion remained at the public-comment and staff-review stage.
