Veterans speak out as Lincoln County moves ahead with Memorial Plan

The Lincoln County Commission met Tuesday, April 14.

The first order of business was a first reading for an ordinance of Lincoln County, SD, amending the Code of Ordinances of the County by changing the zone of a portion Approximately  acres of the property described as the East 318.5 feet of the South 372 feet of the South half of the Southeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter S1/2 SE1/4 SE1/4 except Lot H-1 thereof of section 15, Township 98 North, Range 49 West of the 5th P.M., Lincoln County, South Dakota from the C Commercial District to the A-1 Agricultural District and amending the official zoning map of Lincoln County. The second reading and public hearing on the matter will take place on Tuesday, April 28.

David Locke of Stockwell Engineering presented a presentation on the Justice Center Veterans’ Memorial design options and board action to proceed with the project which has an estimated cost of up to $285,000. 

“At the last meeting there was some discussion in regard to the full concept in regard to the amount of landscaping and different types of paving. We went back and met as a team and some of the changes that you see here in this updated design is the removal of the landscaping around the outer edge of the Veterans Memorial. The location stayed in the same spot in the Southeast corner of the building, the layout of the monuments stayed the same and as you come into the space there is a welcoming monument in the center and a separate monument for each military branch. The center area where the military branch monuments would be will now be rock mulch which matches the rest of the site and complement the military branch monuments. We kept the benches and the trees as well as the pavers around the outer edge for donor opportunities,” he said. 

Henry Carlson provided a price for the project of $235,000. 

Chairwoman Tiffani Landeen opened the floor to public comment on the less expensive option. Linda Montgomery stood to speak. 

“I am a retired Master Sergeant, 23 years retired from the US Army Reserves. I speak against this particular placement of the Veterans Memorial. I had sent an email with every picture of the counties throughout South Dakota’s memorials. I was given this proposal this morning and it is very difficult to read or see what could have been done and should have been done,” she said. 

Montgomery showed a photo of a memorial in Sioux Falls telling the commission it was her favorite. 

“I can’t sit at that memorial and not shed tears. A Veterans Memorial is about the veterans and the veterans weren’t allowed any decision in this design or choice of designs. Nothing was done to make this a veterans project, but you talk about fundraising. Fundraising for the Veterans Memorial should be done by the veterans and money should be available before there is any broken ground,” she said. 

Bill Kortemeyer also stood to speak. 

“When I first came to Canton within the first few days, I found the memorial behind the courthouse and my first thought was why did they hide that behind the courthouse? I came home from Vietnam in 1967 and went to Northern Airforce Base in California where I processed out of the service. I stayed in quarters off the base, I was advised not to wear my uniform off of the base because of the protesters. That really put me down. I went from very proud to very down in a couple of days. Unfortunately, that was my mindset for decades. Then I went to the Vietnam Vets Memorial dedication in Pierre in 2006 and Governor Rounds’ first words were “Ladies and Gentlemen, this is long overdue but welcome home,” and I cried, just like I’m about to do now, and that changed my heart. Once again, in a matter of moments, I was proud to serve. The crowd roared when he said that and he didn’t have a chance to speak again for four or five minutes. Every time I drive by a veterans memorial I stop if I have time. If I don’t have time, I salute as I drive by. I have not seen the memorial behind the courthouse for a couple of years until I looked at it again this morning driving up here and I still wonder why it’s hidden back there. I’ve heard about the new memorial to go by the new facility and my thought is why are they trying to hide this worse than the one they had behind the courthouse,” he said asking for the original memorial to be placed in front of the courthouse for better viewing. 

Five others echoed the opinion of placement and veterans approval and urged the commission to reconsider the motion. Commissioner Jim Schmidt addressed the room. 

“If you remember Burdell Coplan, many of you do, he was the commissioner. Burdell and I went the to VFW and to the American Legion and offered to move those things from the back of the courthouse to the front. We have made repeated offers to move all of that to the front. And each and every time we were told that this was their memorial and it is their memorial, but they are the ones that decided to put it there. That was not a commission action, it wasn’t anything, it was their decision,” Schmidt said. “A Veterans Memorial to me is something that we are deciding to do as commissioners to honor those people, men and women, who gave their lives and their time and their blood so that we were able to argue this morning over this. I’m still liking what we see here, if you say you have to drive up to see it, I understand that. but the other part you need to understand is we don’t know what’s going to happen to the old courthouse. We haven’t decided that yet, it’s an issue that is yet to be taken into consideration,” he continued. 

“The veterans have come here today asking to be heard, asking to be listened to and anybody who’s every been in the military knows, there’s process and part of that process is having to meet with stakeholder groups and get their buy in which may take a couple of meetings. I get that it’s difficult to schedule meetings and get people to come and participate, but we’ve got 20 some veterans and their family members here this morning who are wanting to participate in the process, just like they signed their lives on the dotted line to participate in the military,” Commissioner Joel Arends said.  “Veterans fight for democracy. They fight for the opportunity to participate in government and they’re being told this morning that participation is not the primary component of the process. They’re being told get it done. There’s no compelling or critical need to get this done right now, this minute,” Arends continued fighting back tears in his eyes. 

Motion was made to approve option B for no more than $235,000 by Otten, seconded by Schmidt; motion carried 3-2 with Arends and Putnam being the nay votes.

 Airport Manager, David Myers requested the commission consider a motion for Helm & Associates to provide professional services for the development of the South 20 acres at the Lincoln County Airport for $302,117.81. 

“As we move forward with improvement at the airport and trying to move forward, moving the needle to being revenue neutral, development of the South 20 acres is really important. Part of this is with Helms Associates professional services and the taxiway construction of two new taxiways and also the hanger area where we will be building new hangers,” he said. 

Chairwoman Landeen asked for public comment on the agenda item. Scott Montgomery stood to give his opinion. 

“I hope in this plan that we’re going to build the hangers for ourselves and charge these people rent,” he said. Motion to approve by Schmidt, seconded by Otten. Motion carried 4-1 with Putnam being the nay vote. 

Highway Assistant Superintendent, Jared Narum requested the commission consider a motion to authorize the chair to execute right of way acquisitions and temporary easements for structure number 42-142-058. 

“Currently this is not our structure. It is a Dayton Township structure on 274th Street that they lost in the last flood. They went through the mitigation process for this and they are going to be opening up bids for this structure on Thursday, but since we’re going to be taking ownership of the structure due to its size, we figured we would run the acquisitions for the H lots,” he said. 

Arends questioned if there was a cost to the county or the township and Narum responded there would not be. Motion was made to approve by Otten, seconded by Arends; motion carried unanimously.