We got recent news that the snowgate petitions have been verified, and they are good. City clerk Hogstad will be making a presentation on Tuesday about it. Now it will be up to city council to call a date of an election. We are not sure where they are going with it, but they bascially have two choices. Spring 2013 or 2014. We hope they choose this Spring.
What is not clarified is if the Public Works department will test them properly this year. But we have been organizing a crew of volunteers to watch, video tape and photograph city snowplows using them. It’s 1984 all over again, except it’s the other way around.
I also have word that Henke (they make the Hi-Gate, the best snowgate in the business, that we are testing this year) is willing to come to SF and help the operators maximize their usage with free consulting. They also contend that after a snowplow operator is properly trained on the equipment they can run the plows up to 20 MPH.
Pathetic when government must be videotaped to insure they conform with the law and mandate from citizens.
The both brands are being used this year. If your neighborhood is in the test, make sure you notice what brand is being used. You should see a difference in cleaning.
I have talked to many people who didn’t know about the petitions until after they saw it on the news. So hopefully the Mayor & Council understand there are far more citizens who want snowgates than the 8,000+ that signed the petitions.
If they have an election, I believe requiring snowgates will pass by a large margin.
I don’t feel like mowing the city-owned boulevard in front of my house any longer. Anyone care to sign another petition?
I’d love to see the discussion at the informational meeting. Unfortunately, as of 4:15pm there is no link to the live video on SIRE.
Lamb Chislic – I believe you still own that land and the city merely has an easement on it (for underground utilities etc) just as you own the sidewalk but the city has legal rights to it (and to force you to maintain it). If the city widens the street in front of your home, you will be compensated if you lose that land – which they would not do if you didn’t actually own it. I know a lot of people hate this blurry area, but it is what it is.
However let’s play along. Mowing the boulevard really isn’t the same as the snowgates because they are pushing all the snow from the street onto your property. I think we all agree we don’t own the street in front of our homes even though we pay an assessment on it, so why should they be allowed to push that snow in front of us when it is illegal for us to push it right back out where it came from? You know why the city says you can’t blow your snow back into the street? Safety. So it is ok to push it into a driveway, but not ok to push it back? Odd.
The grass in the boulevard isn’t a safety issue like the ridge is. If someone needs to get out of their home to go to a hospital, that ridge could stop them. If a home healthcare worker needs to deliver medicine to a patient, that ridge could stop them (or at least slow them down). I don’t think a bit of grass is going to prevent anyone from gaining access to a home, but let me know if I’m wrong.
Finally, this isn’t just about the ridge in front of private (home) driveways. This is also about ridges in intersections, ridges in front of businesses and sidewalks, ridges in front of clinics and pharmacies and every other business or facility you can think of. It is a safety issue, and if we are honest it is about quality of life. We build public parks and pay for Events Centers and we spend millions on river greenway improvements… why can’t we spend money on something that benefits 100% of the city residents rather than something that only benefits a select group?
You definitely don’t own the land (like the boulevard). The city does – well sort of. Its a dedicated right of way so no one really ‘owns’ it. When the lot and subdivision is platted, the right of way is dedicated for public use. The state gives municipalities the power to ‘regulate’ the right of way, and Sioux Falls chooses to regulate it by saying in code that the adjacent land owner has to maintain it (good or bad). If the city widens the road and they need some of your property (meaning there isn’t enough dedicated right of way) you’ll get paid for the few feet of YOUR land they bought. This happened on W 26th street a few years back when they widened it. In a few places the dedicated right of way wasn’t big enough so they bought a few feet of a few properties.
Craig does make a good point about snowgates and access to your driveway is not the same as not maintaining the boulevard (i.e. mowing or tree trimming). Councilor Staggers probably has suggested the best option I’ve heard, which is the city could perhaps rebate or do something for us homeowners who take care of property we don’t own. And maybe improve the customer service, procedures, and treatment of landowners when there is an issue (tree trimming for example) in the boulevard.
I’m with Craig wholeheartedly on the fact that we seem to have endless sums of money for quality of life items that arguably and in many cases undeniably only benefit small segments, but we just can’t seem to muster the will to do something common sense that will benefit virtually everyone. Puzzling.
Kermit also advocated that the city foot the bill for replacing cracked or heaving sidewalks a few years back (about the same time he was cited, as I recall). If they ever go down that path, then I’ll expect the city to shovel all of the sidewalks in front of our houses, too. Maybe we can put that to a vote?
It was fascinating today to watch seven City Councilors debate whether OR NOT they intend to honor the wishes of thousands of registered voters who signed the snow gate petition……
A council debate based on COST……
And then, just a few minutes later, most of the seven reveal that they support building an indoor swimming pool……at a COST that will exceed 20 million dollars with unknown operating expenses.
It is clear that Entenman, Aguilar, Erpenbach, Karsky, and Rolfing do NOT support holding the snowgate vote in May 2013, even though the Mayor and Public Works will already have provided the final test results in March of 2013.
As Councilor Jamison stated, this is no longer in the hands of the Mayor or the Council, it is now up to the voters. It is only a matter of when that vote will take place…..May 2013 as the voters wish, OR April 2014 as the Council wishes.
We have a group of 5 pathetic wannabes who don’t understand or remember what is like to struggle either with money or ability. They are in their life bubble of privilege and it shows when watching them discuss how they will ‘allow’ the little people to do things.
What a bunch of jerks.
Just finished watching a recording of today’s Informational Meeting. Jamison and Staggers were the ONLY councilors making any sense of the issue at hand – give the petitioners what they want, a Spring 2013 election. What is so hard about this decision?
Entenman repeatedly said that he “needs more information to make this decision” referring to needing the results of this season’s third Snowgate test. What?!? The only decision he needs to make is when to hold the election. Voters will decide the fate of Snowgates.
I should note that Rolfing was absent (again) and Karsky sat in silence (as usual).
The effort to destroy the acceptability for snowgates is in the works full steam ahead. LC is right, the only decision anyone needs to make right now is to hold the election in 2013 or 2014. The vote of the city council to hold the election does not reflect the validity of the vote. like I have said before, Diamond Jim and the kids are pathetic.
I hate to say it, but I think they are going to vote down the spring 2013 election. Why? Because they hate community activism and populists. This is the greediest group of councilors I have seen in the 10 years I have been covering this BS.
LC – Rolfing has an ‘incident’ that is all I can say.
As reported in today’s Paywall Leader, “Street Fleet Manager Galynn Huber told councilors the city owns five motor graders — which the snowgates can attach to — and leases 32 and has 11 contractors that provide 26 for snow removal. Half of the machines would need snowgates.” This make 58 total graders, it is reported the city currently owns 6 snowgates. Huber says half the 58 graders need to have gates installed. Half of 58 is 29, so 29 graders need to have a snowgate installed. Total new snowgate purchases would be 23 to cover our fair town.
No the additional equipment needed will cost at an installed cost of $5,000 each (as reported earlier) creating a one time expenditure of $115,000. As terms of the contract with the snow contractors, the city will direct their snowgate equipment be installed to participate in the process. It is real simple. To accept the terms of the contract with the city you do the requirements of the contract.
Now for the real issue the meeting was about. The only thing needing to be discussed on Tuesday was the petitions from the people demanding a spring vote. There was no need to bring up anything about snowgates, plus or minus. The people asked for a timely vote. The politics of the debate happen after the date for the vote is set. There is no leadership on the council. The leader of the council should have limited the discussion to only the yea or nay of the request at hand, when to vote. The vote is going to be held, the question / debate on the table is when.
The ‘powers’ on the board are clueless as to their responsibilities and duties. We have seen this many times.
“My mom and dad and grandfather, grandmother told me forever you need to weigh in, consider your expenses, what the actual costs are,” Entenman said. “We were elected by the citizens to make the best decision we possibly can with the information at hand, and we don’t have that information … there’s a lot of unanswered questions.”
diamond Jim. What a joke in view of the projects he favors
Poly, I was going to add your quote, glad you did. What a joke he is. I am sure glad the city spent $25 million dollars to give him city sewer and water services a few years back for his bike business to relocate.
I wonder what his family would say about his specialness…
Seems several councilors are still confused about what they are voting on. This is about when to hold an election – this is not about them getting to tell us how to vote.
Hold the vote in 2013. There is absolutely ZERO excuse to delay a vote for over a year just out of spite. It is time they started representing the people – even the ones they don’t like.
This Council had no problem rushing the EC to a special election at a cost of $40,000+. They set that date in August 2011 and we voted in November 2011 (3 months later). With Snowgates we are talking about combining with a scheduled school board election (limited extra cost).
Council will set the date next week. Go with May 2013 and we still have 5 months to learn all we need to know. Postpone until 2014, and this issue festers for yet another year. Why is this decision so hard for these so-called leaders?
Great points, this is simply sour grapes on the part of the council. As stated their opinion or their getting educated no longer matters (and please, its a front – their mind is made up on the issue). Its up to the people. The people have spoken, they want an election. Its amazing the lack of self awareness on the part of most of the council. They were more than happy to let the voters decide on bonding the event center, easily the biggest financial decision in the city’s history, a decision which will have a massive impact on the budget for the next 30 years (at least) but suddenly we’re not sure the voters should be trusted to make a decision on a frankly gnat’s rear end financial issue compared to the event center. Suddenly they’re concerned we don’t have enough information to make an informed choice. As far as having enough information, that’s up to the proponents to make the case to anyone who wants more information. I think this comes down to a group of councilors who have totally forgotten who is really in charge – whose arrogance and power has gone to their heads. I take no joy in saying it, but I can’t deny what seems to be right in front of me.
One more thing, let’s just say we were talking about putting up a large water fountain/water feature that had the exact same capital outlay on the front end and the same operating costs going forward to keep it functional. Does anyone seriously think the council wouldn’t approve it – and enthusiastically? Seriously. If you aren’t sure what the answer is, you haven’t watched this council.
Greg – You should give this speech next Tuesday in Public Testimony, and you should bring friends. IMO, if 5 of the councilors want to vote down this election, I would like to see them do in front of a packed house.