PUBLIC BRINGS POOL, HANGAR, SIGN CONCERNS TO COUNCIL

    Several community concerns were brought to the forefront during Monday night’s Britton City Council meeting, ranging from swimming pool hours to campaign signage. 
    Layne Henning questioned why the city swimming pool is only open from 1 to 5 p.m. and asked about the number of lifeguards available and how many hours they are allowed to work.
    Mayor Clyde Fredrickson responded that the current pool hours reflect the budget set by the council last year. “If we spend more money on the pool, we have to take it from somewhere else,” he explained.
    Henning also expressed concerns about the condition of city streets.
    Later in the meeting, Corrine Zorn asked about the financial impact of a proposed airport hangar and how much revenue it might generate.
    Fredrickson explained that the airport is self-funded and does not rely on local tax dollars. He noted that the city receives federal funding and is obligated to maintain the airport to a certain standard.
    “We’ve already seen revenue from the fuel system that was put in, and 95% of the hangar’s cost would be covered by a federal grant,” he said. However, no decision has been made yet, and costs are still unknown. Once those figures are available, the city plans to approach Horton and other parties to see if they would commit to using such a hangar and move forward from there.
    A discussion about political signage laws was again brought up during a regular agenda item as resident Kim Johnson urged the city to adopt an ordinance to clarify and reinforce state law.
    Johnson referenced South Dakota Codified Law 9-30-3.1, which outlines when and where campaign signs may legally be displayed. The law permits signs on private property in zoned areas adjacent to a transportation right-of-way beginning ten days before absentee voting starts and requires their removal within seven days after the election.
    She pointed to a Trump sign currently displayed on the west side of town, saying she and others believe it violates the law. To see how other communities handle such matters, Johnson said she contacted Aberdeen’s code enforcement office and noted that officials there are actively removing campaign signs that don’t comply.
    Fredrickson responded by referencing constitutional protections for freedom of expression and expressed concern about the city becoming involved in potential lawsuits. “The city does not need to pass a redundant law,” he said, encouraging citizens to contact the state’s attorney or attorney general with concerns.
    Discussion followed on whether the sign in question qualifies as a “campaign sign” as defined by the law and whether the county sheriff has the authority to enforce state law without a city ordinance. Johnson said she had spoken with County Attorney Victor Rapkoch and found there was some uncertainty on the issue.
     City Attorney Justin Scott weighed in, saying that adopting an ordinance that simply restates state law would be unnecessary. He added that he had spoken with the Aberdeen City Attorney, and both agreed that if Britton were to move forward, it would need to adopt a more comprehensive sign ordinance—one applicable to all signs regardless of content.
    Mayor Fredrickson asked council members whether they wanted to pursue an ordinance. Councilmember Norm Mack responded, “I don’t know why we would if we have a state law that already addresses the matter.”
    Johnson concluded by emphasizing her goal was simply to educate the public about existing law. No motion was made on the issue, but Fredrickson said he would be open to discussing it further with the state’s attorney or sheriff.