“We have to have rooftops before we have retailers…” Yea right… Mr. Craig Lloyd, is this why you want your gift from the city (the TIF) to now NOT include retailers? If you are promising to grow downtown, you better suck it up and have empty retail space ready to go. You made the promise, now follow through.
You have received so many special deals, for so long, you now can have a ‘chat’ with anyone in city hall to have another freebee.
How much more did you promise the mayor to get him in your video?
I noticed that in a meeting this week (maybe the land use meeting?), there is a presentation about TIFs which seeks to formalize the process. Essentially, they are constructing a process whereby developers can apply for TIFs, and setting criteria by which to judge them.
Let’s think about this for a second. We’re setting up a standardized process to hand out TIFs, which we at least used to pretend were special case scenarios, used only in circumstances where unique conditions in prominent locales forced government intervention. Now, this is just another tool in the toolbox (another hammer, with every property as a nail).
The end result is that the City of Sioux Falls is now an institutionalized funding partner for private developers. External funding for the TIFs is ‘preferred’, but it’s the taxpayers full faith and credit which will likely be backing everything from gas stations to apartments all over the city. Who knows how large these shadow obligations will become, with the $400M in standard debt the City is already carrying.
I’ve never laughed so hard as I did at 00:20 with this classic double-entendre:
Craig Lloyd – “Believe it or not, a lot of our tenants are showing off their units.” … “Because they’re proud of it. Proud to show it off and have people see what they have, and experience it.”
So – now you DON’T want Planning to “work with” property owners? Or is it only Large-scale (as in bigger than yours) property you don’t want the city to work with? Study that double entendre really idea close now. (My property is much smaller than yours and so I am really, really, PO’d.)
It was the Land Use Committee meeting held July 16, 2013. See siouxfalls.org.
Darin Smith and Brent O’Neil did a presentation on how the City is going to update the TIF process.
Darin outlined the history of SF TIFs. During the first 20 years of the program, there were nine TIFs.
In the past three years, there have been nine additional TIFS. Seven of those nine TIFS have gone to two developers:
Dunham: 3
Lloyd: 4
Tom H. on 07.17.13 at 11:43 am
Let’s think about this for a second. We’re setting up a standardized process to hand out TIFs, which we at least used to pretend were special case scenarios, used only in circumstances where unique conditions in prominent locales forced government intervention. Now, this is just another tool in the toolbox (another hammer, with every property as a nail).
The end result is that the City of Sioux Falls is now an institutionalized funding partner for private developers. External funding for the TIFs is ‘preferred’, but it’s the taxpayers full faith and credit which will likely be backing everything from gas stations to apartments all over the city. Who knows how large these shadow obligations will become, with the $400M in standard debt the City is already carrying.
One of the bullet points in the presentation was:
PERFORMANCE MEASURES/CLAWBACKS
• City may require performance measures and implement
clawback provisions in the Development Agreement.
I was at the meeting to give public input regarding this bullet point. I was NOT allowed to do so.
TIF #18 involves property that adjoins Phillips to the Falls. The property borders the west side of Phillips Avenue and has already received the benefit of multiple TIFs.
At the June 5th 2013 Planning Commission meeting, Craig Lloyd appeared to request a conditional use permit for the property. It is currently zoned C-3 which allows mixed use with residential ABOVE the first floor. He asked for consent to develop a four story building with the first floor consisting of 4,416 sq. ft. of commercial space and 17 TEMPORARY dwelling units.
The reason for his request became clear as he was questioned by the Commission. The Vice-Chair of the Commission, Jessie Schmidt, clarified with Lloyd that the property had originally been planned as ALL commercial on the main floor, but a conditional use permit is being sought because of financing issues.
This is Craig Lloyd’s response, “Right now DT has more than enough office and retail space VACANT, right around 250,000 sq. ft. vacant DT, and our lenders are not comfortable with having to put a whole bunch more retail. We went through this process at Uptown, the one that we are just finishing on Main and that’s got residential on the main floor EXCEPT FOR WHAT FRONTS MAIN AVENUE. We also have the Tri-State Building, by the end of next month most of that main floor will be vacant and the lenders just require us to build residential as much as we can because they can finance it and we can take it to a secondary market, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac who is our secondary market WON’T ALLOW ANYMORE THAN 20% OF YOUR BUILDING TO BE COMMERCIAL, so we’re trying to meet the requirements in those areas. Looking into the future, because I don’t know how long this will all take to happen, but that’s the reason we’re putting 14 ft. high ceilings on the main floor so that we can convert this at some point in time when the market turns around and the demand turns around to build office space. We can make a lot more money on commercial than we can residential, BUT IT DOESN’T FIT INTO THE FINANCING PROGRAM.â€
Sioux Falls taxpayers have invested millions of dollars in Phillips to the Falls. It is designed as a gateway to our City’s namesake and to one of South Dakota’s major tourist attractions. It was NEVER intended that there be residential housing at ground level along this important street. The vacancy rate for commercial property is obviously high in the DT area and it does not appear this is going to turn around soon. So, this is hardly a TEMPORARY request for a conditional use permit.
It is not the taxpayers responsibility to modify our City’s Vision for Phillips to the Falls so that Craig Lloyd can secure financing for his project!
I’m gonna play this over and over on the digital billboards ad truck. What’s sad is they’re to stupid to realize how much damage they’ve done to their image. The best negative advertising is what they themselves created. Steve Hildebrand had a few clips. He was smart enough to not rap. If he supports Lloyd, I’m thinking Jamison for mayor.
Take back some of the TIF for rails on the bridges so drunks don’t fall into the river. It takes all of the SFFD to rescue them. Uh, you can walk across this toxic stream and hardly make a splash. If they fall into their beer vomit, it’s time to activate the National Guard.
This piece is a very ingenious way to attempt to unite the Democratic vote for 2014 by having Huether and Hildebrand apparently promote the same overall agenda, whether they do or not.
OOOOHHHHH PLEASE CRAIG….. Tell us again how great these TIFS are. How does that sang and dance go again , they cost us nothing and they always benefit the public?
He must be waiting for the talking points from his employer.
Whats truly sad is not a peep from the lame stream media in this town. Ellis I know you read this blog. You keep telling us how you are hard hitting news at the Argus. Need a start? Look for all the soil cleanup being done at the Costco project. NONE.
LJL – Not that I am a defender of the COSTCO TIF, because I am not, but I don’t think they had to ‘clean’ anything at that site. As I understood it, they were going to put down a proctective plastic.
I don’t. I think all along, Fresh Produce, the AD agency who put this together put this up on YouTube to get feedback, they probably got it, and are probably tweaking the video. My suggestion is to edit winky Mr. Potter.
I found out the video was made for a private internal meeting, and it making it’s way on YouTube and linked to my site was a boo-boo. Or at least it making it’s way onto YouTube. 🙂
I also found out last night the video had 1000 hits before it was taken down. One of the TV stations actually requested it be taken down because they used footage, and they only had permission to show the video privately. I also found out that local DJ Absolute did the audio. Pretty cool.
“We have to have rooftops before we have retailers…” Yea right… Mr. Craig Lloyd, is this why you want your gift from the city (the TIF) to now NOT include retailers? If you are promising to grow downtown, you better suck it up and have empty retail space ready to go. You made the promise, now follow through.
You have received so many special deals, for so long, you now can have a ‘chat’ with anyone in city hall to have another freebee.
How much more did you promise the mayor to get him in your video?
Yeah, why is Huether, in his duties as mayor, in a promotional video for a private developer? Do I smell an ethics complaint?
I’ve never been so embarrassed to live in this city. An ode to a developer?
They have cut the clip of Darrin Smith pulling his head out of Lloyd’s butt, or was it Cooper, or maybe Schmidt? Crowded place is my guess.
I noticed that in a meeting this week (maybe the land use meeting?), there is a presentation about TIFs which seeks to formalize the process. Essentially, they are constructing a process whereby developers can apply for TIFs, and setting criteria by which to judge them.
Let’s think about this for a second. We’re setting up a standardized process to hand out TIFs, which we at least used to pretend were special case scenarios, used only in circumstances where unique conditions in prominent locales forced government intervention. Now, this is just another tool in the toolbox (another hammer, with every property as a nail).
The end result is that the City of Sioux Falls is now an institutionalized funding partner for private developers. External funding for the TIFs is ‘preferred’, but it’s the taxpayers full faith and credit which will likely be backing everything from gas stations to apartments all over the city. Who knows how large these shadow obligations will become, with the $400M in standard debt the City is already carrying.
I’ve never laughed so hard as I did at 00:20 with this classic double-entendre:
Craig Lloyd – “Believe it or not, a lot of our tenants are showing off their units.” … “Because they’re proud of it. Proud to show it off and have people see what they have, and experience it.”
Oh my, oh my, oh my gosh … it’s huge.
So – now you DON’T want Planning to “work with” property owners? Or is it only Large-scale (as in bigger than yours) property you don’t want the city to work with? Study that double entendre really idea close now. (My property is much smaller than yours and so I am really, really, PO’d.)
DL, it was Metli’s
Ruf – Go away.
LC – That is f’ing hilarious
Tom H
It was the Land Use Committee meeting held July 16, 2013. See siouxfalls.org.
Darin Smith and Brent O’Neil did a presentation on how the City is going to update the TIF process.
Darin outlined the history of SF TIFs. During the first 20 years of the program, there were nine TIFs.
In the past three years, there have been nine additional TIFS. Seven of those nine TIFS have gone to two developers:
Dunham: 3
Lloyd: 4
Tom H. on 07.17.13 at 11:43 am
Let’s think about this for a second. We’re setting up a standardized process to hand out TIFs, which we at least used to pretend were special case scenarios, used only in circumstances where unique conditions in prominent locales forced government intervention. Now, this is just another tool in the toolbox (another hammer, with every property as a nail).
The end result is that the City of Sioux Falls is now an institutionalized funding partner for private developers. External funding for the TIFs is ‘preferred’, but it’s the taxpayers full faith and credit which will likely be backing everything from gas stations to apartments all over the city. Who knows how large these shadow obligations will become, with the $400M in standard debt the City is already carrying.
One of the bullet points in the presentation was:
PERFORMANCE MEASURES/CLAWBACKS
• City may require performance measures and implement
clawback provisions in the Development Agreement.
I was at the meeting to give public input regarding this bullet point. I was NOT allowed to do so.
Most recent TIF #18: Craig Lloyd
TIF #18 involves property that adjoins Phillips to the Falls. The property borders the west side of Phillips Avenue and has already received the benefit of multiple TIFs.
At the June 5th 2013 Planning Commission meeting, Craig Lloyd appeared to request a conditional use permit for the property. It is currently zoned C-3 which allows mixed use with residential ABOVE the first floor. He asked for consent to develop a four story building with the first floor consisting of 4,416 sq. ft. of commercial space and 17 TEMPORARY dwelling units.
The reason for his request became clear as he was questioned by the Commission. The Vice-Chair of the Commission, Jessie Schmidt, clarified with Lloyd that the property had originally been planned as ALL commercial on the main floor, but a conditional use permit is being sought because of financing issues.
This is Craig Lloyd’s response, “Right now DT has more than enough office and retail space VACANT, right around 250,000 sq. ft. vacant DT, and our lenders are not comfortable with having to put a whole bunch more retail. We went through this process at Uptown, the one that we are just finishing on Main and that’s got residential on the main floor EXCEPT FOR WHAT FRONTS MAIN AVENUE. We also have the Tri-State Building, by the end of next month most of that main floor will be vacant and the lenders just require us to build residential as much as we can because they can finance it and we can take it to a secondary market, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac who is our secondary market WON’T ALLOW ANYMORE THAN 20% OF YOUR BUILDING TO BE COMMERCIAL, so we’re trying to meet the requirements in those areas. Looking into the future, because I don’t know how long this will all take to happen, but that’s the reason we’re putting 14 ft. high ceilings on the main floor so that we can convert this at some point in time when the market turns around and the demand turns around to build office space. We can make a lot more money on commercial than we can residential, BUT IT DOESN’T FIT INTO THE FINANCING PROGRAM.â€
Sioux Falls taxpayers have invested millions of dollars in Phillips to the Falls. It is designed as a gateway to our City’s namesake and to one of South Dakota’s major tourist attractions. It was NEVER intended that there be residential housing at ground level along this important street. The vacancy rate for commercial property is obviously high in the DT area and it does not appear this is going to turn around soon. So, this is hardly a TEMPORARY request for a conditional use permit.
It is not the taxpayers responsibility to modify our City’s Vision for Phillips to the Falls so that Craig Lloyd can secure financing for his project!
The Council has approved TIF #18.
I’m gonna play this over and over on the digital billboards ad truck. What’s sad is they’re to stupid to realize how much damage they’ve done to their image. The best negative advertising is what they themselves created. Steve Hildebrand had a few clips. He was smart enough to not rap. If he supports Lloyd, I’m thinking Jamison for mayor.
Anonymous, thanks for the report. Obviously, the rest of Sioux Falls lacks infrastructure because Lloyd’s special projects get budget funding.
I started it and after 10 seconds – I was done watching. I physically cannot stomach watching bullshit anymore.
Take back some of the TIF for rails on the bridges so drunks don’t fall into the river. It takes all of the SFFD to rescue them. Uh, you can walk across this toxic stream and hardly make a splash. If they fall into their beer vomit, it’s time to activate the National Guard.
This piece is a very ingenious way to attempt to unite the Democratic vote for 2014 by having Huether and Hildebrand apparently promote the same overall agenda, whether they do or not.
This most certainly cost two individuals some votes!!
MMM for Mayor
Steve Hildebrand (possible mayoral candidate)
I enjoyed this video too much! If Huether was Governor would he chase people around for a statewide tv show too?
I would love to overdub a valley girl’s voice over the Huether part, “Like, OMG, it’s Like, Huge.”
OOOOHHHHH PLEASE CRAIG….. Tell us again how great these TIFS are. How does that sang and dance go again , they cost us nothing and they always benefit the public?
He must be waiting for the talking points from his employer.
Whats truly sad is not a peep from the lame stream media in this town. Ellis I know you read this blog. You keep telling us how you are hard hitting news at the Argus. Need a start? Look for all the soil cleanup being done at the Costco project. NONE.
Look for the number of TIFs the Council approves to increase dramatically if……..
the railroad relocation deal is finalized.
Corporate Welfare
LJL – Not that I am a defender of the COSTCO TIF, because I am not, but I don’t think they had to ‘clean’ anything at that site. As I understood it, they were going to put down a proctective plastic.
I see the video has been removed. I guess no one wants to see Lloyd’s units anymore.
I find it very interesting that the video has been taken down.
I don’t. I think all along, Fresh Produce, the AD agency who put this together put this up on YouTube to get feedback, they probably got it, and are probably tweaking the video. My suggestion is to edit winky Mr. Potter.
“Protective Plastic” is news to me….. Is that protective plastic layer made up of maxed out credit cards by our local governments…
over 4 million in plastic. That math smells bad.
Pretty sure it was just a joke and will never see the light of day again.
JR, I need to ask some of my connections at Fresh Produce what was up with it.
Johnny Roastbeef on 07.22.13 at 10:11 am
Pretty sure it was just a joke and will never see the light of day again.
Johnny Roastbeef,
That’s the thing about jokes,
best to understand who your audience is, especially if you’re a developer, a politician or a business owner!!
I found out the video was made for a private internal meeting, and it making it’s way on YouTube and linked to my site was a boo-boo. Or at least it making it’s way onto YouTube. 🙂
I also found out last night the video had 1000 hits before it was taken down. One of the TV stations actually requested it be taken down because they used footage, and they only had permission to show the video privately. I also found out that local DJ Absolute did the audio. Pretty cool.