Image: siouxfalls.org

First let’s talk about the mysterious announcement of this top secret committee, the first press release put out about the group was on Monday, September 30, 2013 12:16 PM by Q-Tip Smith. The next press release was put out Tuesday, October 1, 2013 11:32 AM, about 2 hours before the press conference. I guess they felt a need to spring this on the citizens of SF like it is some grand surprise.

In all fairness, the city did say they want our input (just not on the sooper-secret committee);

Over the next 12 to 15 months, numerous opportunities will be available for the citizens of Sioux Falls to provide their input on the future vision of downtown. A wide variety of public meetings, community-wide events, and a number of committees will be established to seek input for the vision of downtown.

Let’s look at the committee the MAYOR has appointed;

Brendan Reilly, Attorney

Daniel Doyle, Attorney

Eric McDonald, co-founder of a medical document company

Gene McGowan, venture capital

Glen Koch, Owner of DT restaurant

Jennifer Schmidtbauer, Director of Development for major DT SF manufacturer

Jerry Nachtigal Public affairs for major SF CC company/bank

Jessie Schmidt, Co-Chair of SF Planning Commission

Joe Kirby, He’s a Kirby (He’s the guy who lives here part-time and tried to sneak a provision in through the Charter Revision Commission to give the mayor more power)

Larry Toll, Co-President of Washington Pavilion

Terri Schuver, Owner of DT gallery

Michelle Erpenbach, City Councilor (I heard she never informed the rest of the council she was going to be on the committee, or at least some of them were unaware of her appointment)

Paul Ten Haken, owns a media company (his company is the one that came up with the new DT parking concept and the motto, “Look for the Gold P.” He also has a problem with his employees talking about political affiliations on their personal FB pages.

Don’t get me wrong, the committee needs to be comprised of SOME community leaders, but it is lacking actual ‘Downtowners’ – people who live, work and own businesses DT (tri-fecta). When a community wants to develop a ‘vision’ about a sector of it’s town, they really need people who have the best interest of all citizens and a deep knowledge of history and the past, moving forward you always want to avoid the mistakes of the past. I would think one of the owners of Minerva’s or the owners of Zandbroz and Vishnu Bunny would have made fantastic members of this committee. Remember a developmental ‘vision’ needs to include ‘the little things’ not just major projects like hotels, condos and insurance buildings. The secret of making our DT even more successful will be by connecting the whole community to this ‘vision’. I am just not sure how many of these members have a connection with downtown as a whole and the kind of people it attracts. IMO this is about making a small amount of people lots of money developing the DT vision, which is fine if the whole community will share in this richness.

The findings will be very interesting, but I have a feeling the rest of us will be left out – maybe they will tell us about it in a press conference.

63 Thoughts on “The DT SF 2025 committee, A Stacked Deck?

  1. What are your ideas for DT?

  2. I will say this about one of the members. He sent out a massive email about ten days ago asking for input/ideas/thoughts/ and actions. Hopefully all of them will do the same.

  3. Pretty sure nearly ALL of those people work downtown. I am also sure most own businesses with a presence downtown. Lastly, you do realize that the owner of Minerva’s, WR Hospitality, is a large corporation that owns restaurants all over the REGION.

    Do a little research.

  4. In addition, you posted this on October 2. The press conference was yesterday, October 1. The mayor addressed citizen input. They will have booths, surveys, etc. available ALL OVER town for citizens of all kinds.

    Take a deep breath and do some research before you spout off uninformed nonsense.

  5. anonymous on October 2, 2013 at 5:52 pm said:

    I wonder if MMM invited Steve Hildebrand to be on the DT SF 2025 Committee.

  6. anonymous on October 2, 2013 at 6:02 pm said:

    Brendan Reilly was one of the individuals who led the charge to have the Events Center built downtown.

    Could this be a gesture on Mike’s part to appease those DT business owners he misled in his last political campaign for Mayor?

    I observed the DT group on several occasions when they publicly confronted the Mayor in the Council chambers over his campaign promise to work to have the EC built DT.

    I believe they were telling the truth.

  7. Yes. The owners of WR have several investors. Duh. I have worked for the company and have several friends that still do. Doesn’t matter, this was their founding restaurant, they know downtown, that was my point. Duh.

    AND, working DT, and having the tri-fecta, is two different things. I have lived and worked DT for almost 20 years, and when I see these clowns show up so they can collect TIFs and development money, I ask, ‘How does this support the common good of everyone in our community.’

    “They will have booths, surveys, etc. available ALL OVER town for citizens of all kinds.”

    Oh, so they will have booths. Wow! I am such a dumbass, they really want my opinion.

  8. Testor15 on October 3, 2013 at 6:55 am said:

    The “Look for the Gold P.” guy can also teach the DT crowd how to play internet hide and seek.

  9. Tom H. on October 3, 2013 at 9:09 am said:

    This is a quote from yesterday’s StrongTowns blog post, about how even when local governments listen, they don’t listen.

    [This] is the disconnect that exists between city government and residents. This disconnect goes way beyond being listened to, which local governments generally do quite well. To really participate in a project, a resident is forced to engage within the ground rules of the city. Participating in public hearings or committees means giving up precious evening hours, standing in front of crowds and being quoted in the paper. Most residents stay away, even if they want their opinion heard.

  10. There’s several Build It Downtown members on that commission.

    As for downtown ideas; I think we should look closely at other peer cities, both larger and smaller than SF and replicate what’s worked for them. I also think the public needs to not only weigh in, but do so from an informed perspective. Sometimes it takes a little more driving and might cost a little more money to eat, drink, shop or simply tour around downtown Sioux Falls versus going to the mall or your closest option to home. One thing that will happen though, is if you do so the money you spend will more likely go to a locally owned business and that is good for our local economy.

  11. For some reason we are 100% against putting any sort of sporting venue that isn’t in a corn field or in an industrial park – (how is that economic development growth going out by the new EC anyway?) – but parking is atrocious out by Howard Wood and the new EC. Can we please contemplate moving the baseball field to DT? That land is now a necessity out there for parking. I hope they will consider this as it could house other things such as outdoor concerts, fundraisers, etc.

    Hey Common Sense – any chance you work for MMM? And where did the ownership of WR start their corporation? – That’s right – DT Sioux Falls. Please do your research. And yes they are collecting public input – but will they actually use it and LISTEN? You can have all the Listen and Learn sessions and run around the SE Fair in a suit with a microphone – but if you don’t listen – what is the point?

  12. Al Anon on October 3, 2013 at 10:50 am said:

    I think candidate Jamison missed a golden opportunity at the press conference (assuming he wasn’t there) to ask MMM why he told the Democratic luncheon crowd not long ago that the Events Center would’ve ruined downtown as he justified his tie breaking vote to locate it at the current site. It seems contradictory to his “no bigger supporter of downtown than me” line.

  13. anominous on October 3, 2013 at 11:02 am said:

    More cigar lounges, thanks.

  14. Poly43 on October 3, 2013 at 11:28 am said:

    (how is that economic development growth going out by the new EC anyway?) – but parking is atrocious out by Howard Wood and the new EC

    Not to worry. There will be plenty of parking spots after the city uses a land grab on the property west of Howard Wood. They will do it in the name of manifest destiny/eminent domain. Just a little ol six story ramp and a twenty million dollar price tag. Peanuts in a town bursting at the seams with tap payer cash flow.

  15. Tom H. on October 3, 2013 at 11:42 am said:

    Sure, they’ll do it in the name of eminent domain, but in the end, it will just be Urban Renewal 2.0.

  16. I’m so sick of hearing about SF downtown all the time I could puke.

  17. I’m sick of hearing about downtown Sioux Falls, too. Everything down there is way too expensive for me. I also feel they are working too much on expanding the downtown area, plus expanding the city with new residential areas. What good does it do to do all of this when there are seniors and disabled people that can’t access these things being they are no longer allowed to ride Paratransit. The city has a good part of their spending all wrong.

  18. If they wouldn’t have torn down 80% of downtown back in the 70’s, they wouldn’t be talking about expanding it today.

  19. Tom – Exactly. This isn’t about making DT a better place for the citizens of SF or even the tourists, this is about the economic opportunities of who will invest DT. Wish I had the money, I would buy space down there in an instant, lucky to have a home close by DT.

    But the bigger point is listening to residents. I would love to see a mural ordinance specifically written for DT to allow artists to paint on some of the businesses freely. I would also love to see block parties every weekend. DT is stuffy, it needs to be more free.

    scott – would agree, my friends who are in their 50’s and 60’s who have lived in SF most of their lives tell me about the travesty of what you are talking about.

  20. Winston on October 3, 2013 at 11:23 pm said:

    Nixon, it was all Nixon’s fault and his damn Urban Renewal Program…. Nixon’s “New Federalism” turned categoric Federal grants into block grants and soon the wrecking ball followed…. Heck, there was even a movement back in the early 1970s to tear the Old Minnehaha County Courthouse down, can you imagine such a thought? This same mind set still exists today, however, I am afraid. It was only a good ten years ago that our County Commissioners tried to tear down the old Coliseum; a historic center which once housed a national political convention (1908 Populist Party).

    As they begin to disturb the history found within the rail yard area, I hope the committee has the common sense to preserve the warehouse buildings, the BNSF Depot, the structurally unique narrow building at 8th and Weber, and even the old Chicago Northwestern roundhouse, which is located north of 6th and Weber. That roundhouse is the last surviving partial roundhouse structure in the city of Sioux Falls.

    I say, build new amongst the history and not on top of it… that way we will better know where we came from and where we are going…..

  21. Bond Perilous on October 4, 2013 at 8:21 am said:

    Nixon?! Urban Renwal ENDED under Nixon. Sure some of the practices continued after ’73, but “downtown planning” at the federal level ended as a policy.

    Your point is not lost on me though… Urban Renewal is now yesterday’s solutions that we’re trying to fix today. I fear this DTSF 2025 effort will be the same.

    Another point… One in three people alive today will live to see the 22nd Century, yet the City is employing antiquated engagement tactics that offers no appeal to the Millennials. Where the broader thinking here? Busch league, IMO.

  22. Why are you “sick” of hearing about downtown? It’s a success story and it should be celebrated. Between the urban renewal debacle where it was “wreck first” and see what happens later to the failed pedestrian Mall to early century industrial and heavy pollution free for all the deck has been stacked against downtown for the last 100 years. As the core of the City grows and becomes a place where people want to live, work, shop and play..it means less of a push into the cornfields between Brandon, Tea & Harrisburg. As we all know, every new square mile of infrastructure is more expensive to put in than the last one. If downtown continues to attract more visitors, they will continue to spend money there that will also benefit the City as a whole.

    Also, Cities that have let their downtowns rot have paid a much higher price than those who’ve had the foresight and vision to plan for their success. Detroit went bankrupt mainly due to massive suburban flight and horrific & corrupt local leadership did nothing to stop it, actually they exacerbated it.

    Some of our poorest neighborhoods are at the edges of downtown, as L3wis notes, the ripple effect is showing in his neighborhood and that’s good for him and his neighbors.

    And be realistic, no one should expect Josiahs to sell .25 cent Lattes, Touch of Europe to sell Happy Meals or Vishnu Bunny to do tats for $10. If you want cheap go to one of the Wal-marts. If you want a unique, local shopping or dining experience, go to downtown.

  23. Tom H. on October 4, 2013 at 9:52 am said:

    @Winston – I once stumbled across an Argus Leader op-ed from the 70s, arguing that they should tear down the old Courthouse for… a parking lot! Because no downtown is complete without acres and acres of surface parking lots.

  24. Winston on October 4, 2013 at 10:59 am said:

    @Bond Perilous, But Nixon’s block grant version of “Urban Renewal” came into its own under Nixon. Empowering local leaders to close Main Street and turn it into a mall area (An open mall atmosphere where all Sioux Falls was missing was Mary Tyler Moore and her hat being thrown-up into the air), which actually destroyed the downtown small businesses’ abilities to compete with the new “Sioux Empire Mall” rather than help them, and the wrecking of many old buildings downtown too.

    Now in fairness to the wrecking ball crowd, there was a school of thought that we had to many jasper stone buildings downtown and there was a concern our downtown looked to much like Hot Springs, South Dakota or Pipestone, Minnesota for a city that strived for major development and progress. But this “wrecking” destroyed much of our historic downtown character, which explains why places like the Railroad Center on 8th Street are so important today, as well as the preserving of many other buildings in that rail yard area.

    I have an idea, let’s bring back Scenic Island and seize Sioux Steel under the auspices of eminent domain. Seriously though, can we really develop expensive condos and attractive office buildings along the “Phillips to the Falls” road, if these potential new developments have to stare out at SS’s big pup tents?

  25. Winston on October 4, 2013 at 11:07 am said:

    I was mistaken, the “open mall” was on Phillips and not Main St.

  26. @ Winston Sioux Steel had made some preliminary plans to move out and redevelop, but they were doing so primarily in response if the EC went in. I doubt ED would be necessary, I’m guessing the Rydons would want to retain ownership and partner with a developer, but you never know…they might just sell if the price was right. They also have a couple buildings that would be worth some kind of renovation or restoration into multi-story, mixed-use, and they have extra land in Lennox that they could move their operations to and build a new, modern & efficient facility like Schoenman’s did.

  27. One other point, a solid program to incentivize some of the industrial users to move out of downtown to reclaim their properties for redevelopment would be a smart move for SF. Even if SF just managed to use the Development Foundation to acquire rail served land close to an insterstate and teed it up for people like Sioux and if we really wanted to go big we’d be actively searching for a site that Morrells could move to.

  28. Winston on October 4, 2013 at 1:25 pm said:

    @Sy, thanks for the info. You are right, “ED” probably would not be necessary, but the restoration of Scenic Island would be fun to see develop, and that’s assuming it’s not too costly. But then again, the SS plant is a classic (absent the pup tents) innercity factory, which would be fun to restore as well. It looks like one of those plastic factory buildings which a kid would place on their “HO” train setting.

    As far as Morrells is concern, why can’t they just put a big front facade on it that makes it look like a modern office building with an unexplainable smokestack…. And the smell, well, we will just claim it is coming from City Hall….jk………

  29. I really don’t care what a tat at tatsonphillips or a latte costs . I can honestly say that I have no idea where to buy a cup of coffee downtown as a new business opens and folds in that area each week.

    If you think we all are going to live in high rises in the urban core, you haven’t been in this part of the country very long. So you really think it’s urban sprawl that turned Detroit to shit. Just what are you smoking?

    Must be close to city election time again. Mikey boy needs more money in the reelection basket and he promises shit to the powerful downtown crowd to fill it. “Do you want to be on the 2025 DT committee? It’ll cost you a $2500 to my elections basket.”
    Folks like Sy easily are suckered by the thought of possibly falling into the DT pot of gold but are never more than just the dancing organ grinders.

    Blame it on tricky dick Nixon, sounds like a winner to me. I bet it was Aldermen or G Gordon Liddy who invented the TIF too. IIIII”MMMM NOT A CROOK.

  30. Winston on October 4, 2013 at 10:12 pm said:

    “G Gordon Liddy who invented the TIF too…” I love it, do you remember back in 2003 when Rounds mistakenly proclaimed a “G Gordon Liddy Day” for the Sturgis Rally, then he rescinded the proclamation….Maybe there is more to all of that than we realize? Personally, I think the creative idea of a TIF matches more the personality type of a Donald Segretti though….. I do know that TIFs are a lot like Watergate though, in that in both cases you need to “follow the money….”

  31. anominous on October 5, 2013 at 10:53 am said:

    More dancing organ grinders, thanks.

  32. Winston on October 5, 2013 at 1:17 pm said:

    @ anominous – Enlighten-up!

    up!http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WnlIWpZSPXU

  33. neighbor on October 6, 2013 at 9:49 am said:

    As neighborhoods go, downtown residents are NOT ENTITLED to more preferential treatment than any other SF neighborhood.

    Many people in SF are becoming very weary of hearing about all of the emphasis and tax dollars which have been invested in the downtown area.

    There are other areas of our town which need attention (and tax support).

  34. Bond Perilous on October 6, 2013 at 10:25 am said:

    I re-read the 2015 Downtown Plan for the first time in a long time. Talk about a Kumbayah lovefest of plattitudes. It has some decent goals, but it misses the mark on truly identifying the problems and opportunities. Worse yet, there’s hardly a smattering of recommended policies or programs to help enrich the downtown. If the 2025 plan is going to be the same format and process, then don’t expect much. It would be a wasted effort.

  35. neighbor on October 6, 2013 at 11:36 am said:

    I am concerned about the makeup of the committee. Especially, if someone like Common Sense is a member:

    #4 Common Sense on 10.02.13 at 4:54 pm

    The mayor addressed citizen input. They will have booths, surveys, etc. available ALL OVER town for citizens of all kinds.

    Take a deep breath and do some research before you spout off uninformed nonsense.

    REALLY, they will have booths, surveys, etc. available ALL OVER town for citizens of all kinds. I wonder, exactly what does——citizens of all kinds—-mean, Common Sense!!??!!

  36. Great, just the crew I want making decisions about what happens in my neighborhood.

    Be weary of this McDonald character. Some would say he’s the devil in sheep’s clothing. He’s too busy playing god, doing exorcisms and forcing the leadership in his company to let him wash their feet. No skin in the DT game for this guy, why have him on the DT council?

    We don’t need a bunch of religo/conservo-freaks deciding what happens downtown.

  37. DT, haven’t heard this about McDonald, but I have heard plenty about the others.

  38. Tom H. on October 7, 2013 at 9:11 am said:

    @neighbor – Actually, since downtown produces by far the most property tax revenue per acre of any neighborhood in the city, I think it probably is entitled to proportionately more spending on amenities than others. In fact, in most successful cities, the trendy (*gasp* gentrified!) neighborhoods often subsidize the poorer ones, even with the more expensive amenities that they command.

    Basically what I’m saying is, even with Sculpture Walk, Riverfront improvements, facade easement program, etc., downtown is still a net payor to the city’s coffers, and helps (or should help, with competent city leadership) improve less fortunate neighborhoods.

    The question we really should be asking is this: If downtown is such a successful neighborhood, why aren’t we allowing other neighborhoods (especially Pettigrew Heights) to develop a true urban character as well? It’s like we think that downtown is the only place in town that is allowed to be walkable and dense.

  39. neighbor on October 7, 2013 at 9:20 am said:

    Tom H., thank you for making my point.

    TOO MUCH emphasis on downtown Sioux Falls, including Pettigrew Heights!!

    For most taxpayers, perception is reality!!!

  40. Tom H. on October 7, 2013 at 11:38 am said:

    @neighbor –

    Sorry, but your last comment makes no sense to me.

  41. When has this blog made sense 🙂

  42. Testor15 on October 8, 2013 at 6:49 am said:

    This blog makes as much sense as the way things work around the San Antonio of the North. A little greasy, a little muddied, a little stinky, a little shady…

  43. Tom’s correct. Like I said, if you’re a city and your core is on a roll vs. rotting away the rest of your city benefits. Ours is indeed on roll, despite the fact some people’s vision doesn’t extend past their own driveway.

    @ LJL, so a shop opens and another closes and that phenomenon has scared you away from downtown forever? Hate to break this to you, but the same thing happens on 41st street, Minnesota Avenue and the Mall area all the time.

    Wal Mart’s never close, so hopefully one of the new ones is close to the end of your driveway.

  44. neighbor on October 8, 2013 at 2:20 pm said:

    As neighborhoods go, downtown residents are NOT ENTITLED to more preferential treatment than any other SF neighborhood.

    Many people in SF are becoming very weary of hearing about all of the emphasis and tax dollars which have been invested in the downtown area.

    There are other neighborhoods in our town which need attention (and tax support).

  45. Tom H. on October 8, 2013 at 3:14 pm said:

    Well, if more people continue to move downtown (and I think a DT residential population of 10,000 is not absurd in the long term), then it will, in fact, be entitled to more preferential treatment than any other neighborhood.

    I’m sorry, but neighborhoods out past 85th street that build at 2 units per acre do not deserve equal public expenditures as older neighborhoods which easily surpass 10 units per acre. Ironically, the former neighborhoods usually require more infrastructure (and public subsidy) than the latter.

  46. The Guy from Guernsey on October 9, 2013 at 5:31 pm said:

    Are cigar lounge owners under-represented on this committee ?

    Or, are there enough puppet strings securely in place ?

  47. Keep grinding monkey. Mikes basket not yet full.

    I think that newly freed area under the rail lines will make a great place for a Walmart.

  48. Or a homeless shelter . . . wait . . .

  49. anonymous on October 11, 2013 at 6:24 am said:

    OR

    a parking lot for Jeff Scherschligt’s Cherapa II!

    Imagine the cost to U.S. taxpayers for each of Mr. Scherschligt’s parking spaces!!!

    Let’s see

    $35 million federal earmark for less than 10 acres of land (that’s on US, folks!)

    a TIF or two (Sioux Falls taxpayers)

    Look for my prediction to come true in 2016.

    Oh, and BTW, what will WE (the City) be willing to sell this land to Mr. Scherschligt for per square foot?!?

  50. We better sell it for $35 million and offer no TIFs

  51. anonymous on October 11, 2013 at 2:01 pm said:

    So, all you mathematicians, how much is that per square foot for those 10 acres @ 35m?

  52. $22.96 per square foot.

    Compare that to the cost to install a Hardwood Floor averages $7.97 – $9.91 per square foot. 🙂

  53. Tom H. on October 11, 2013 at 7:29 pm said:

    To be fair, downtown land is bound to be more expensive, per SF, than greenfield development out by the interstate.

  54. anonymous on October 11, 2013 at 9:31 pm said:

    Not the point, Tom.

  55. Poly43 on October 12, 2013 at 9:10 am said:

    ….Well, if more people continue to move downtown (and I think a DT residential population of 10,000 is not absurd in the long term), then it will, in fact, be entitled to more preferential treatment than any other neighborhood….

    Entitlements?? For who?? Just how much does a 800 square foot bungalow cost DT? Out of reach for 95% of the cities taxpayers. So why should the many pay for the entitlements of the few?

  56. anonymous on October 12, 2013 at 9:38 am said:

    Craig Lloyd is asking over $400,000 for the lofts he is currently building across the street from City Hall.

    His new apartments at 4th and Main have rents that run from $900-1600 per month.

    Poly43 is right. What percentage of SF residents could actually afford either of these locations?!

    So, let’s have all SF taxpayers also “gift” these DT residents with preferential treatment.

    Sounds like a great idea, Tom!

    Tom H. on 10.08.13 at 3:14 pm

    Well, if more people continue to move downtown (and I think a DT residential population of 10,000 is not absurd in the long term), then it will, in fact, be entitled to more preferential treatment than any other neighborhood.

    Try selling that idea to this little city on the prairie!

  57. More expensive! 4x more then other prime development land in SF! Give me a break.

  58. Bond Perilous on October 12, 2013 at 12:43 pm said:

    Anon, Poly, et al-

    You can cherry-pick data representing the high-end of the downtown real estate market if you wish. It doesn’t change the fact that downtown property is the most efficient and product use of land in the City, producing more property taxes per acre than any other neighborhood in the City. Neighborhood investment should representative of that. Cities that abandon there core end up like Detriot, whereas those that invest thrive.

  59. Bond Perilous on October 12, 2013 at 1:00 pm said:

    That is, “…PRODUCTIVE use of land…,” not product.

  60. anonymous on October 12, 2013 at 7:37 pm said:

    Bond Perilous,

    The core of this City amounts to more than just downtown and Pettigrew Heights!

  61. Bond Perilous on October 12, 2013 at 9:30 pm said:

    True. I’m all for supporting the other core neighborhoods. This thread is about downtown though.

  62. Pingback: Coincidence? — South DaCola

Post Navigation