Special meeting
April 17th, 2007 by 
Alica
The Brandon City Council will hold a special meeting Monday, April 23, at 6 p.m. at City hall to discuss changes in the application for ambulance service and changes to Ordinance #381.
The council may or may not take action at this meeting. If not, the next regular meeting of the Council is Monday, May 7.
I wonder what changes the Council is considering for the application. They just passed it in January.
Please contact your Council representative before these meetings to voice your opinion. It would be good to show up at the meetings too, but contacting them ahead of time is best, because it will give your Council representative time to think about your comments. Please, also post your thoughts here. I suspect Council members are reading the blog even if they do not post. (Or maybe they do. We don’t know who the screen names belong to.)
Contact information for the mayor and City Council members can be found on www.brandoninfo.com. Look under the “Welcome To Brandon” section and follow the links to city government.
Posted in Uncategorized, Ambulance | 
April 17th, 2007 at 11:25 am
A spicial meeting for what? The council needs to make the changes as they see fit then bring their proposed changes to a spicial meeting. This is not the way it should work.
April 18th, 2007 at 6:14 am
Always listening, how should it work?
April 18th, 2007 at 6:58 am
The council, being the city leaders should make changes as they feel based on the public’s in put that they have heard, as well as changes where they themselves said changes should be made. They should complete the entire process before they have a meeting. They need to change the ordinance as they see needed, address the application process and establish who is going to oversee the entire process. The city’s safety committee is not qualified.
Too many questions need to be addressed before a public meeting.
I’m afraid that a meeting this early after the election with no changes is going to lead to a big fight. After attending the fourm’s, the differences between the pro’s and con’s are to great. I just feel the council should make the corrections as stated and then have a city meeting for all to then review, or better yet whoever is going to over see the service.
April 18th, 2007 at 9:31 am
Always you say the city’s safety committee is not qualified, what makes our city council comprised of a race track owner, a real estate agent, a liquer store owner, a teacher, and what the others do qualified to write an ordinance to govern an amubulance as well as create an application for an ambulance? What makes the most sense is that a committee of medically and legally qualified individuals with no real or preceived relationship with the members of the coucil memebers or medstar bring the qualifications and application criteria before the city council and public. Oh OH wait - Better yet lets have Jay Masur (medstar owner/Steve Rubin employee)work with city administrator and attorney to create the application and criteria (nov 2004 city meeting minutes).
April 18th, 2007 at 9:49 am
Point made, none are qualified perhaps.
April 18th, 2007 at 12:33 pm
To ‘just a citiezen’. I believe Brandon did have a recommendation from a medically qualified group at one point in the process leading up to the passing of 381. For reasons that are not clear to me, our city council, then, saw fit to modify the recommendations leading up to their approval of 381 (Mostek voted no).
After the April 10 election and canvassing last Monday, we now have an ambulance ordinance that, technically, prohibits Rural Metro from providing service within Brandon city limits. Our city attorney, the one seen sleeping in Monday’s city council meeting, assures us that Rural Metro will serve us until we have a licensed ambulance provider (i.e., MedStar). Hmmm.
I suggest that those concerend enough to post on this blog attend upcoming city council meetings and ensure that promises made prior to the election to improve the ordinance are kept by our city council.
I will be there simply because a promise to arrive at my house within a very few minutes is no guarantee that those on board the ambulance will be prepared to provide quality medical care. I find it hard to believe that with the relatively few 911 calls in Brandon, Masur’s paramedics will be sharp and on top of their game. I’d hate to be the one they’re practicing on….
April 18th, 2007 at 1:42 pm
Hopefully the council will have been checking other non-competing ambulance services (other than Med-Star and Rural Metro to prevent any bias) in other parts of the state to see what a “qualified” ambulance contract should contain. However, I assume the contract will be tailored so Med-Star can meet criteria. You are all correct, people need to attend the special meeting, and all others. Is there any advertising of the meeting being planned–like signs on the major streets to let the public know–part of the trouble in Brandon is that it takes so long for the word to get around.
April 19th, 2007 at 7:06 am
Grateful, I would seriously doubt that there is any organized activity such as signage. The Challenger does a good job of informing the public. Beyond that, I’d suggest that all interested get on the phone and talk to your friends, have your friends talk to their friends, talk to your councilperson, and so on.
Whether you voted for or against 381, we are all in this together moving forward. Therefore, we citizens don’t want to be blamed for apathy, as one of our councilmen stated in a pre-election forum, if we don’t like the outcome of the ordinance and license application.
April 20th, 2007 at 12:04 am
Can you say CORRUPT city government? Come on people this is not “let the little guy try” anymore! We as residents need to get the states attorney involved at this point. The lives of our friends and family may depend on it! We can not and should not settle for sub-standard care (aka Med-Star!)
Does anyone realize what this city gov is doing to us? We are in the process of losing a skilled and compentent 911 provider (Rural Metro) which has a diligent oversight board…and we are not paying a dime! We are headed to new taxes and poor care! This is a matter of life or death…we are just going to be on the death end of it if we allow Masur and his crew of yuppies to care of us! Personal interest and gains of Steve Rubin and Jay Masur should not be the deciding factor to which the care my friends and family recieve!
April 20th, 2007 at 7:54 am
I can truly say that it is unfortunate that people in Brandon are not more involved in the way that their city is run. All it takes is going to a city meeting every once in a while or talking to your council representative every now and then.
The ambulance issue is going to be a major issue, I’ve been told that it is right now being rewritten again by city council people, not qualified. Monday there is a meeting that needs to be attended by all. The city is very smart in the way they set meetings up. The only advertising is through this site. If they really wanted to get the message out, they would of set the date so that it could of been put in the paper. As it is the paper will tell us about the special meeting two days after it has occured.
Another good point on how our city is run. The council approved the retire/rehire issue last monday. What it means is that a city employee can retire at their earliest possible date, draw their check and then be rehired with the city to continue working at the same rate of pay. The employee can then keep working and build another retirement check. The council and Mr. Olson simply stated it as the city would follow the State Of South Dakota Retirement Plan. The council vote was 5 to 1,. I’ve talked to alot of people about this issue and no one agrees with it. Our council and administration seem to want to take care of things that they like, not what the people like. The best interest of the citizens of Brandon are not the intentions of this council. All most everyone on the council is there fore ulterior motives, realistate, buddies or future elected offices, Mr. Mostek appears to be the only one truly interested with the city. Unfortunatly it is not going to change as people vote with their hearts and not with there minds.
For that same reason the meeting monday will come and go with no great effort as people will not get involved to the extent that will mnatter.
SAD!
April 20th, 2007 at 8:50 am
Always listening. Please see articles in both the Challenger and Argus Leader (April 18) that ‘advertises’ this Monday’s special meeting. This is 6 days’ advance notice. I’m not sure what more you want. Tax payer dollars spent on advertising? I think there already is plenty of info out there.
Regarding the “rewrite” of 381, why don’t you wait to see the results of the city’s efforts before you criticize. I’m sure the end result won’t make everyone happy but opponents of 381 DID, afterall, ask for changes to be made.
Regarding the retire/rehire issue, you left out an important piece of the SD Retirement Plan. That is, the retiree is only rehired if s/he is the most qualified and runs the risk of losing their pension should any evidence arise that indicates a gentleman’s agreement to rehire preceded the retirement. Doesn’t sound like a risk I’d take with my pension. Where did your Mr. Mostek come out on this vote? Hmmm.
Opened eyes. Are you aware that the voters of Brandon approved Ordinance 381? It’s done. Now efforts should be directed at improving it so that public safety is assured. Finally, I’m no attorney but I’m sure the state AG would look into any possible wrong doings by members of the council if anyone had any evidence of such. No evidence, no investigation.
April 20th, 2007 at 9:39 am
To Always Listening:
As a newly elected member of the City Council, I want to tell you that I am listening. I check this blog daily and I hear your concerns. I don’t have any ulterior motives nor do I have any plans to seek future elected offices. I also appreciate the fact that you take the time to attend City Council meetings and stay involved. For everyone’s reference, the City Council meets the first and third Mondays each month at 6:00 pm and has briefing meetings the Thursday before the council meeting at 5:30 pm.
There was no nefarious motive in setting a special meeting on the ambulance ordinance this coming Monday. The Council made assurances that it would make changes to the ordinance if it passed and it is important to get that process moving. Whether you were on the “yes” or “no” side of the vote, the fact is, the ordinance passed. Now we have to go about the business of addressing the issues that were raised concerning the ordinance. The Challenger that came out this week had a very large article talking about the meeting next Monday. Hopefully those who are interested will be in attendance.
As for the retire/rehire issue, I think its important that the readers of this blog get the full picture. Brandon City employees are covered under the South Dakota Retirement System. A question was raised at a previous city council meeting regarding whether a retired city employee was eligible to be rehired by the City, either in their same position, or a different position. The City Council’s decision on Monday was simply to make it clear that the City would follow the South Dakota Retirement System policy and procedure for rehiring employees who had retired. You can find that policy at http://www.sdrs.sd.gov/files/documents/publication/Retire-Rehire%20Provisions2005.pdf.
By the way, the policy is set by State Law and can also be found at SDCL 3-12-81.1. In short, the policy mandates that the employee be completely retired, that there be NO agreement in place when the employee retires that he/she will definitely be rehired, and that the City go through the normal hiring process. If the city determines that the retired employee is the best candidate for the position, the policy allows the city to hire them back - but it certainly doesn’t guarantee anyone anything.
I personally believe that adopting the policy set forth in state law and by the South Dakota Retirement System is better than making it up on a case by case basis. Adopting the state policy makes it clear and transparent to the citizens in our community, the retired city employee and the City Council what steps must be followed before a retiree can be rehired.
Again, I appreciate your comments and the fact that you take the time to stay involved. I have no doubt that I will cast votes during my term that some people won’t agree with. It is simply a fact of life that you cannot please everyone everytime. There are many differing opinions in this town about what is best for our City -as evidenced by the ambulance vote. I just want you to know that I do listen, I do pay attention to this blog and I do care about what’s best for this City.
April 20th, 2007 at 10:38 am
Kathy, glad to hear you read this blog–I hope you will be an independent voice for Ward I and the city. I hope you will independently do your reasearch and not be afraid to do what is right. I hope quorum laws will be upheld and that city decisions will be made at council meetings–and I hope you let your fellow council members know about this blog.
April 20th, 2007 at 10:48 am
Kathy,
For the record, it is absurd that we are re-writing an ordinance that has gone to a vote. This ordinance should have be re-written BEFORE it went to a public vote. The rewrite could be entirely different and then what was the point of the vote? Let’s just vote on a form with blanks and fill them in after the vote next time. It will save a lot of headache. Sorry, this ordinance and the way it came about is a joke. The council will have to live with it and that’s not really fair to you
April 20th, 2007 at 12:17 pm
Grateful: I appreciate your comments and want you to know I have every intention of being an independent voice for Ward I and the City. Although they may not choose to comment, I do think many of the council members are aware of the blog.
Regarding the quorum laws, I agree that these issues should be aired in public. I will not participate in any meeting that violates the quorum rules. If I do have independent discussions with individual council members, it will be in an effort to be fully informed myself of all sides of an issue, or to explain my position to that other council member.
Citizen: I completely understand your points and your frustration. Regardless of how we got to this point, however, we need to move on and take steps to fix the issues with the ordinance. I will be fully informed and prepared on Monday to make recommendations and to cast my vote on proposed changes. Obviously I cannot guarantee any particular outcome as I am only one vote, but I am hopeful we can make some positive changes.