By Dave Baumeister, County Correspondent

            SIOUX FALLS – Last week, Oct. 18, mainly three items took up most of a record three hour and 40 minute Minnehaha County Commission meeting.

            And this week, one of those items was brought up again with the same result as it would have had if it went through to a final vote on Oct. 18.

            On that day, to start regular business, commissioners heard a briefing on items that had been previously discussed at several building committee meetings concerning renovations to the 53-year-old Minnehaha County Juvenile Detention Center now in use.

            Even though the commission had been looking at this, Oct. 18 was the first time the issue was brought out and explained to the public at a regular meeting.

            Although no action was taken at this time, costs and other concerns were presented to provide “food for thought” as to what the next steps should be.

            Numerous security issues were presented, including the need for more beds, a private Sally port for prisoner entry, long, narrow hallways that several potentially dangerous parties needed to travel at the same time, and extremely small courtroom sizes, among other things.

            Surprisingly, the different proposals for renovation and building new came in at very similar costs, but as both choices are still very expensive, commissioners expressed the need to hear from others, and the time to digest information before deciding the next step.

            Both options looked at using the existing JDC property at 4200 S. West Ave. in Sioux Falls.

            Renovating the existing facility to meet current and future needs would cost just under $50 million, while building new would be right around $51.3 million.

            However, a big difference would be in the size of the buildings. Renovating the old would result in 57,000 square feet, while a new building would net 67,000 square feet.

            Susan Beaman from the auditor’s office explained that whatever option, if either, would be chosen, it would necessitate calling for a $50 million bond issue. She said that would result in an increase in $63 annually on a $300,000 home.

Rumble at Wall Lake

            The next two issues, which had the commission meeting room overflowing with spectators, on Tuesday, Oct. 18, dealt with how to use two properties on the eastside of Wall Lake.

            Both items came before the planning and zoning commission in September but were now coming to the county commission for the reversal of a denial and the appeal of an approval.

            The conditional use permits were for two properties on East Shore Dr. owned by Jacqueline Thoms.

            The first property, which the planning commission had denied, called for an “Airbnb” for six people to be established on the current property.

            Airbnb is a national organization that provides a clearinghouse to rent short-term vacation spots.

            Both Thoms and her son Christian Louder explained that this land had been in their family for generations, and they hoped it would eventually become retirement property for them, but for now they were hoping to establish rental facilities there for times they weren’t using it.

            Kevin Hoekman of the county planning department explained that there was nothing specific for Airbnb- or Vrbo-type facilities in the Minnehaha County Zoning Ordinance, so they felt it best to fit this in under provisions for a “bed and breakfast,” even though no meals would be served by the owners.

            Commissioners were somewhat upset that neighbors could mobilize their efforts and fight this as they had never done anything to create a neighborhood home-owners association that would have stopped this kind of use without it ever having to come to the county.

            But three of the five commissioners, Heiberger, Jeff Barth and Gerald Beninga, did consider neighbor concerns about the lack of on-site owners, influx of short-term renters, possible noise issues, increase in sewer use and traffic and voted to uphold the planning commission decision and deny the CUP.

            In his opposition, Commissioner Dean Karsky pointed out that to keep the Airbnb as a desirable facility, the owners would want to maintain the property well and reduce possible conflicts, so he did not see a problem with allowing it.

            Heiberger also said she didn’t see some of the issues against it being a problems but that she felt uncomfortable voting against the desires of 80% of the neighbors there.

            She also said she felt the same about the next agenda item which was to allow an Airbnb on the adjoining property, also owned by Thoms.

            Since the planning commission had originally approved this conditional use permit, the people living around it brought it to the county commission to be overturned.

            The CUP for this property involved two things. First, to demolish an existing, older cabin on the property and install a new manufactured three-bedroom home, and then to establish an Airbnb rental there.

            Loudner, who again spoke as a proponent, thought since the first property had already been turned down that this smaller property would be a good way to show neighbors they would be good stewards with this rental.

            Also, he said, that since the property to the south would not be an Airbnb, the land in question was now more insulated from having others with concerns about renters and noise issues.

He added that the only other neighbors adjoining that property did not have an objection and did not sign the opponent’s petition.

            When the opponents of this permit spoke, two of the three voiced concerns about moving 16 people onto that land, between the cabin and the manufactured dwelling, even though the memo from the planning office clearly stated the cabin would be torn down.

            However, with one exception, commissioners said they were just going to repeat their votes concerning the property use.

            And that led to the matter being deferred until this week’s meeting.

            Barth had to leave the Oct. 18 meeting at 11 a.m. to attend a campaign event in Watertown, as he is running for the South Dakota Public Utilities Commission on the November ballot.

            Normally, this would have worked out, as regular meetings seldom go past 11 a.m., but this time it left the commission at a 2-2 split, and commissioners thought it was best to defer the issue.

Wall Lake Redux

            This week, although Barth was back, Gerald Beninga had to recuse himself, as the Thoms family had retained the services of an attorney that Beninga worked with, and that again left the commission with an even number, and possible tie for the vote.

            But a tie vote would still allow the original planning and zoning commission decision approving this CUP to stand.

            However, new information did come out at this public hearing continuation.

            Chiefly, more details were presented on an existing Airbnb-type rental at Wall Lake. While located on the opposite side from the Thoms property, the existing “vacation property” there was reported as twice the size of the facility on the Thoms property.

            And while it was said the existing property had been in operation for four years without incident, it was discovered the owners had never gone thought the county’s permit process and now would have to do that.

            In the end, the Thoms’ conditional use permit approval from the planning commission was upheld for their smaller property, and they will be able to move forward with their cabin demolition, the installation of a manufactured three-bedroom home, and listing that as a short-term rental property with Airbnb.

            The two commissioners who would have settled this last week, Karsky and Jean Bender, voted to approve the CUP, and those two votes would automatically uphold the previous approval.

            Heiberger, who would have voted against it the week before, changed her vote to “yes,” because, as she said, her vote wouldn’t have mattered.

            Barth voted to deny the CUP, but on a 3-1 vote, it was upheld.

            The next meeting will be Tuesday, Nov. 1, at 9 a.m. in the third-floor meeting room of the Minnehaha County Administration Building at 6th and Minnesota in Sioux Falls.