Sturgis Citizens for Change

10/23/2025

Wow! That means more crime is a’happening!

10.22.2025
Meade County South Dakota

At the MCSO, our duties extend far beyond what many see on the surface. One critical yet often overlooked responsibility is the service of civil paperwork—a cornerstone of our judicial system. This work represents an increasingly high demand of our attention and effort.

What is Civil Paper Service?
It includes serving documents like:

Civil Papers (e.g., summons to appear in court)
Distress Warrants (authorizing seizure of property)
Executions (enforcing legal judgments, such as payment orders)

Serving these papers is essential for ensuring legal proceedings run smoothly and fairly. However, it’s often confusing, time-consuming, and can be dangerous.

Why is it dangerous?
People sometimes react with hostility or try to avoid service at all costs. The work can become increasingly risky as hostility grows, especially since many of these documents involve contentious situations.

Our Deputies do not take sides—they are simply enforcing the law and ensuring the justice process continues.

Civil Papers "served" increased from 1,618 in 2020 to nearly 2,000 last year, with numbers rising again this year.
Distress Warrants have nearly doubled, illustrating growing activity and tensions.

We are here to serve in a professional, safe, and respectful manner. We’re always willing to meet at our office to serve papers.

If you have questions or need to discuss legal papers, please contact us. We’re here to work with you, and it’s important to remember—our role is to enforce the law, not to decide outcomes or offer legal advice.

Thank you for recognizing the dedication and courage of our Deputies who perform this critical function every day. Your understanding and cooperation are essential to maintaining a safe and fair community.

Be Safe Meade County!

10/20/2025

It was brought to our attention that Meade County also used Condrey & Associates for their recent wage study. The problem? Condrey is clearly using cookie-cutter reports that don’t reflect local realities. With Forrester’s long ties to Meade County, this is a serious conflict of interest. City of Sturgis and Meade County employees should challenge these studies with outside legal counsel.
1. No Independent Comparison
When multiple local governments use the same consultant, the results are no longer independent. If Condrey uses the same formulas, benchmarks, and assumptions across all three, it creates an echo chamber, where each entity’s data “validates” the other, even though it’s all based on the same flawed model. Instead of learning how Sturgis compares to Meade County or Spearfish, the studies become self-referential and meaningless.
2. One-Size-Fits-All Data
Each community has unique costs of living, tax bases, staffing levels, and public-service needs. A cookie-cutter approach ignores that. If Condrey reuses templates and “regional adjustments,” it flattens out real differences, causing pay scales to be artificially aligned rather than fair or competitive. In short, employees get misclassified, and taxpayers get misled.
3. Lack of Transparency = Red Flag
Where is the backup data for these reports? If no one demands the full dataset surveys, sample cities, weighting, job descriptions, there’s no way to verify whether Condrey’s conclusions are supported by facts or just plugged into a template. Without the raw data, we can’t know …. a. who was surveyed b. how “comparable” positions were defined c. whether local market wages were even included.
4. Conflict of Interest & Influence Loops
When the same consultant keeps getting contracts in the same region, especially under the same leadership networks (like Forrester’s), it creates institutional bias. The consultant learns what each client wants to hear and delivers accordingly. That’s not analysis, that’s consulting theater.
5. Policy Consequences
The danger isn’t just bad data, it’s what gets built on top of it. If three major local governments base their wages, budgets, and tax decisions on the same flawed framework, the entire regional pay scale becomes distorted, either inflated or deflated. That means higher taxes, hiring problems, and long-term economic damage.
Bottom line: Forrester, who worked and retired from Meade County and Jordan a life long government employee, seems determined to turn Sturgis into Meade County 2.0, same consultants, same mindset, same insiders calling the shots. The same small crew has been running both Meade County and Sturgis (and we all know who they are), and they’re dragging this town down the drain while pretending it’s “progress.”
Tell your council representatives: Do NOT approve this study. Demand transparency. Ask for the data. Meade County employees, PM us if you want to talk to a really good attorney.

10/18/2025

Sturgis Citizens we wish we were making this up. Here is the Spearfish Wage Study pass by Speafish in August 2025, done by the same company Condrey & Associates. The Sturgis “Final” Report appears to be a copy-and-paste template from Spearfish’s earlier study, with only minimal changes.
With what is being presented by the Jordan and the City, there’s no sign of new research or wage data specific to Sturgis employees. Sturgis citizens paid nearly $40,000, and staff spent hours supporting the process, and we have a template study.
WTH. We paid for a "custom study" that was mostly recycled from another city’s plan.
Who is looking out for the citizens of Sturgis? Contact your council representative and ask them to wake up! Please use these FB posts and compare for yourself.

10/18/2025

😩😩😩

10/18/2025

Sums it up in a nutshell "No such records exist."
From the City of Sturgis letter to the citizen requesting all documentation pertaining to the wage study ....
I guess they forgot about Jordan's presentation to the City Council and the approval of the Sept. 2, 2025 minutes that states ...
Condrey & Associates Wage & Compensation Study Report
City Administrator Jordan presents the Condrey & Associates Wage Study findings with slide show, details possible new positions as well as positions to possibly remain vacant in 2026, and explains
the formation of a health insurance committee to review health insurance options for 2026.
Moved by Jones, seconded by Jensen, to acknowledge receiving the presentation of the Condrey &
Associates Wage & Compensation Study Report.
Members present carried unanimously. No such records exist when they want to hide something - WTH.

10/18/2025

Sturgis Citizens Paid for a Wage Study | City Rewrites it 4 Times.
On October 2, 2025, a citizen formally requested the Condrey & Associates wage and classification study including all drafts, emails, and council records.
On October 17, 2025, the City responded with this three-page letter (posted below). Here’s what it revealed ...
1. The City admitted that three separate drafts existed (April 25 Draft 1 & 2, and June 3 Draft 3).
2. A new “Final Report” dated October 6 appeared only after the public-records request.
3. The City stated there were no memos, no staff reports, and no council presentation materials.
4. They also claimed no emails were ever exchanged between Condrey & Associates and City staff or council members.
***That means this entire $40,000+ taxpayer-funded “study” was revised and delivered with no written oversight, no transparency, and no record of who directed the changes.***
Here’s every version of the Condrey wage study the City released only after a citizen’s request. Each “draft” tells a different story with shifting numbers and new language added along the way. Compare each version for yourself and see how taxpayer money turned into four conflicting non-complete reports.
Version 1 Original Condrey
https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.1237185308447007&type=3
Version 2 Silent Revisions
https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.1237188271780044&type=3
Version 3 June 3 Version (Presented to Council)
https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.1237190495113155&type=3
Version 4 “Final” Report Issued After Public Request
https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.1237221475110057&type=3
WHY THIS MATTERS
This isn’t just a report it’s a wage study for City employees, the people who keep Sturgis running every day. While Forrester/Jordan manipulate budgets and rewrite reports, they’ve cut staff so deeply the City no longer runs effectively.
They claim there’s no money to pay competitive wages, yet they continue funding their pet projects, including $25,000 for Sturgis Rally Charities (paying on Monday), along with ongoing support support for the Chamber, SEDC, and Jordan's hefty salary.
If there’s no money for City staff, there’s no money for outside programs. Something is not right and it’s time to ask why.
WHAT STURGIS CITIZENS NEED TO DO
Call or email your Council representative ask them to do their job! Ask them NOT to approve the Condrey study until:
1. Every draft, edit, and communication between Condrey & Associates and the City is made public;
2. Council and citizens can review the full wage-survey data and methodology;
3. An independent review verifies how and why the numbers were changed.
Stay informed, speak up and hold your representatives accountable.

10/18/2025

The October 6 “Final” report includes a brand-new section titled “Table III Cost of Implementation,” estimating a total cost of $434,151 (7.01 % of payroll). This section did not exist in any earlier draft, including the June 3 version. It also introduces new narrative language about providing “equity adjustments” for employees with five or more years of service, wording that appeared only after citizens formally requested the report on October 2. One might speculate these late additions show that the “Final” version wasn’t simply formatted; it was edited to reflect post-request policy decisions, raising serious questions about who directed those changes and why they weren’t disclosed to the Council or public earlier. Jordan presented to the Council on Sept 2, 2025 his version of the June 3 draft that lacked any cost or policy section.
Following the Oct 2 public request, someone (Condrey or Jordan) produced a “Final” report dated Oct 6 2025 that added the new Table III and policy language but left the disputed pay ranges and missing data unchanged. After four versions, citizens still don’t have a complete, transparent, or independently verified report.
Every change raises more questions than answers and every unanswered question is one more reason the Council should pause adoption until the public gets the full truth.

10/18/2025

Here is the 3rd Version ... Still Changing Numbers
Between April 25 and June 3, the City’s pay study was revised again.
Grade Draft 1 Min Draft 2 Min Draft 3 Min
1 $26,912.95 $26,272.16 $25,631.38 $1,281.57 lower $640.78
2 $28,494.87 $27,829.00 $26,928.97 $1,565.90 lower $900.03
3 $29,706.86 $28,999.55 $28,292.25 $1,414.61 lower $707.30
Every revision of the report quietly lowered starting pay across multiple grades, with no explanation or Council authorization anywhere in the document.
Appendix C remains incomplete, still showing spreadsheet errors such as /0! and !. The City Administrator’s salary line is the only one fully filled out, while others remain blank or broken.
No supporting wage data is included. Each draft lists “Salary Survey Respondents,” yet none provide the actual pay figures or comparisons from Belle Fourche, Spearfish, Pierre, or any other city. The so-called “Appendix C Salary Survey Summary” contains only formula errors and missing data.
A formatting shuffle conceals additional edits: positions like Library Director were moved or renumbered, and Certified Ambulance Biller was dropped from the Ambulance list without any explanation.
The pay tables (II-A through II-C) remain inconsistent from version to version, showing downward shifts in nearly every grade with no documented reason or oversight.
COMPARE EACH ONE OF THESE FOR YOURSELF! Your tax dollars paid for it!

10/18/2025

Condrey Report - Version 2 also dated 04-25. Key tables and numbers have been modified, but there is no record of who made the edits or why. Citizens (and City Employees) deserve to know. Did the consultant revise this on their own or was it done at the request of CA Jordan? When we compared Draft 1 (April 25) and Draft 2, the salary tables show clear, unexplained edits the pay ranges were shifted and lowered. These numbers are taken directly from Table II-A in both drafts.
Grade Draft 1 Start Draft 2 Start Draft 1 End Draft 2 End Change (Low) Change (High)
1 $26,912.95 $26,272.16 $40,951.23 $39,976.20 –$640.79 –$975.03
2 $28,494.87 $27,829.00 $43,385.37 $42,384.00 –$665.87 –$1,001.37
Both the minimum and maximum pay levels dropped between versions, with no public explanation or note from Condrey. Someone had these numbers altered after the first draft. If this were a neutral, third-party study, there would be one consistent set of pay tables, not four conflicting drafts.
This is exactly why the Council should NOT adopt this report until every version, edit, and justification is released to the public.
Transparency isn’t optional when taxpayer money and employee pay are involved.

10/18/2025

The Original Condrey Report ... It appears to be the original draft from Condrey & Associates, but it’s incomplete and full of errors.
Missing: comparison data from other cities, clear salary tables, and proper explanations for pay ranges.
Appendix C: only City Administrator Aaron Jordan’s salary is filled out.
Other key positions (like Ambulance Director) show “ /0!” errors meaning the formulas failed. Its marked 4-25-25.

10/18/2025

City of Sturgis Surplus Sale ....
Buy it with your tax dollars. Sell it back to you later. Attend the sale ....maybe you’ll get a “refund.”
Some items on this list make sense for city operations. But most of it never should have been purchased with your tax dollars, and now it’s being “surplused” (sold off) like a garage sale.
The City of Sturgis bought bouncy houses, an inflatable sumo wrestling arena, sticky walls, and toy crates, using public funds.
That’s not infrastructure. That’s not public safety. That’s not economic development. That’s government waste, plain and simple.
And here’s the part they don’t want you to remember:
Forrester/Jordan sat on City Council when much of this was approved. Now, as City Admin, he’s the one disposing of it.
They bought it. Now they are selling it. If that’s not a conflict of accountability, what is?
Some of these items are legitimate (vehicles, equipment, etc.). Some of these items still could be used and shouldn't be surplused. But the rest? There should be a full audit and someone should go to jail for signing off on inflatables, sumo suits, and sticky walls bought with taxpayer money.
Ask the real questions: Who approved these purchases? Who signed the checks? Who is protecting the taxpayers of Sturgis?
Hold them accountable.
Attend the city’s surplus sale, maybe you can buy back what your taxes already paid for. Wait a minute… isn’t that supposed to be called a refund?
Here’s the official surplus list straight from the city.
Read it and decide for yourself who’s really wasting your money and with they are trying to cover up.

Surplus List
● 2017 Textron Stampede Unit 144 (four-seat side-by-side) 3,049 miles (VIN: 4UFT40B8J9003588)
● 2015 Arctic Cat Wildcat Unit 145 (side-by-side) 1,204 Miles (VIN: 40F15NPV7FT306563)
● 2012 Chevy Equinox Unit 40 75,375 Miles (VIN: 2GNFLCEK7C62767790)
● 1972 Caterpillar D8H dozer 7,408 Hours (VIN: 46A28380)
● 2003 Dressta TD25LA Dozer 11,260 Hours (VIN: 73106)
● Orwak Bailing Press 8020 E.F.G. (Cardboard Bailer) (VIN: 07-0062C-012)
● (1) Crate of toy wood blocks
● (1) Colonel Sturgis photo prop
● (22) Metal locking cash boxes
● (2) Corn hole boards
● (1) hand sanitizer station
● (8) jump house fans
● (1) 10’x10’ premium canopy
● (1) inflatable sumo wrestling arena
● (1) inflatable two-lane bungee run
● (1) inflatable custom sticky wall
● (1) gold pallet four-wheel dolly
● (1) purple obstacle course inflatable
● (3) inflatable bouncy houses
● (2) Bauer Rainstar E4-125-400 plus reel (VIN: 0198-26777)
● (2) Bauer RainStar E125-400 plus reel (VIN: 0199-28298)
● 6” Irrigation Pipe & Fittings
○ (4) 90 degree
○ (3) -5 degree
○ (3) 6 to 8 reducers
○ (5) misc fittings
● 10” Irrigation Pipe & Fittings
○ (2) 90 degree
○ (2) 45 degree
○ (5) Couplers
○ (1) Cap
○ (1) Reducer
○ (1) Bonet
● 12” Irrigation Pipe & Fittings
○ (16) Pieces
○ (1) Bonet
○ (4) Couplers
○ (1) 90 Degree
○ (1) 10 to 12 Reducer
○ (88) pieces of Yellow Mine Pipe (1768 LF)
● 2007 Dodge Durango 120,040 Miles (VIN: 1D8HB38P07F537329)
● 2005 Chevy Tahoe 188,787 Miles (VIN: 1GNEK13V25J198831)
● 1996 International Bus 193,265 Miles (VIN: 1HYBBAAP9TH374109)
● Lifter Pramac GSW 22 generator 969 Hours
● 2014 Nova SL12 Tilt Trailer - 12-foot, single axle - (VIN: 57MPT1218FA000577)
● 12’ trailer single axle trailer with the wooden box from the army tent.
● Kyocera Taskalfa 3501i - Business copier
● Brother MFC-L2700DW All-in-one personal copier/scanner
● Brother MFC-J497DW All-in-one personal copier/scanner
● (3) Computer Monitors, No HDMI - VGA/DVI connections only
● Clear View c magnification reader - appears new and never used
● (4) Old Vacumax EVO 605 portable suction devices
● (10) Old Lifepack AEDs - all have bad batteries
● (1) Manual Stretcher Striker EZ Pro
● (2) Manual Stretchers Striker MX PRO
● US Army Surplus Tent Tan 20’x20 feet’ aluminum frame with full floor and insulating layer
● (8) Folding cot/litter/beds from inside US Army surplus tent
● (8) Privacy partitions US Army surplus tent
● (4) Old wooden desks
● (2) Old metal desks
● Lenovo ThinkCentre M710e (SN: MJ09Z92V)
● Lenovo ThinkCentre M710e (SN: MJ0B3Y9Z)
● Lenovo ThinkCentre M710e (SN: MJ0B3YAX)
● Lenovo ThinkCentre M710e (SN: MJ0B3Y8N)
● Lenovo ThinkCentre M710e (SN: MJ0B3YA2)
● Lenovo ThinkCentre M710e (SN: MJ09290J)
● Lenovo ThinkCentre M710e (SN: MJ0B3Y9J)
● Lenovo ThinkCentre M710e (SN: MJ0B3YBD)
● 2023 Harley-Davidson FLTRX / Road Glide 130 Miles (VIN: 1HD1KHC11PB652804)
● 2024 Harley-Davidson RH975 Nightster 492 Miles (VIN: 1HD1ZH116RB308063)