I will let you watch the informational meeting about all the details of the ‘resolution’ process. But a few things are disconcerting, and quite frankly abhorrent;
1) The city rejected the work May 1 and has waited almost 3 months before sharing it with the public and most importantly, the city council.
2) City attorney is STILL refusing to share the consultants ‘impressions’ report with the council and public and media.
3) We will take ownership of the building August 1, and the siding resolution will not be resolved at that time
4) When councilor Staggers asked if the city and public will be on the hook for the fix of the siding, the city attorney could not give an answer
Folks, this is what happens when there is a clear lack of transparency in government. Why couldn’t the council or public be told there was a ‘resolution’ process? When government is not transparent with the public there is a clear appearance of corruption. Not saying anything corrupt is going on, but the appearance is clearly there. Crystal.
Wonder what other ‘secrets’ are being withheld from the public?
I truly believe if councilor Rolfing would not have asked the question back on May 27, the public would still be in the dark on this issue.
A sad, sad, day in transparency in city government in Sioux Falls. In fact, I feel like I have just been punched in the eye.
I still say that MMM or one of the city’s smarties, opened mouth and created a constructive change order. Why would a city attorney not share with at least the council. We won’t see it til the contractor is paid for the rework. I can just see the siding issue showing up casually on a punch list to be done at some point in time, then we will have forgotten the bad mojo and love MMM. I still would like to see the calculations and design documents by the engineers, see if this was a commercial available product which it is, not as installed though, as the correct material would have cost a hell of a lot more. Why won’t the council rip MMM and the legal staff that is allowing him to run the town like a dictator. Maybe time for the council to kick some butt. Oh I forgot they love Walmart and torching neighborhoods with asinine planning by a couple of idiots, maybe one of them did the Constructive Change Order for MMM. A clowns at city hall.
Maybe this will bring MMM down.
Love Michelle’s oblivious comment in this AL article.
http://www.argusleader.com/story/news/city/2014/07/22/city-council-events-center/13013717/
The only thing you are rocking is bullshit.
Erp the burp would have a stupid statement, we expect that from her. Rolfing get control of her, the rest of the council you do not have control of. a clown
my last post was that the council does not have control of the a clown MMM and attorney fiddle faddle
The city can’t sue nor be sued. Civil procedures ordinances are not recognized by courts. Contractor can dismiss any suit. Sadly, citizens will fund this mistake. Favorably, no indoor pool for Huether to the end of his sad miserable term.
And Karsky is worried about the ‘pride’ of the contractor. WTF?! What about the pride of the tax payer and using our money prudently? I also see there is ‘no comment’ from the mayor.
http://www.kdlt.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=37344&Itemid=57#video_player
Aside from afew buckling joints, the bubbling appears to be part of the overall look! Nice looking building, can’t wait to get inside!
The city appears to be refusing to turn over the document on the basis that it is a draft. In most states, drafts aren’t considered records because they aren’t final. Based on the city attorney’s argument, I’m guessing South Dakota is one of those states.
That’s really not an unreasonable standard when applied generally – which is how government has to apply these standards. Otherwise, it would mean that every edited version of every edited document (including email) would need to be preserved, which would undoubtedly be an onerous burden on government. As someone who has filled these requests for work, it would make the search process for requested documents extremely complicated.
Additionally, one must consider that when it comes to open records compliance, the most important factor to the unit of government is consistency. If the city turns over a draft document in this instance but then refuses to turn over draft documents in other instances, the city exposes itself to the risk of lawsuits alleging that it is applying the open records law subjectively and arbitrarily.
Now, if you had evidence that the city was requesting that its consultant purposely refrain from issuing a final document in order to avoid having to release the information therein to the public, that’d be a different story…
I wonder if the report will be final when Judd Allan Group gets paid their $5,000 fee or is the group just going to give the draft document to the city for free?
I watched the ‘proceedings’ last night and heard a lot of lip flapping about how great a job all the city folk had done to get this building to the status it is today. I certainly am a believer and in favor of positive reinforcement of an employee’s job performance but – isn’t that what they should be doing all along? Wasn’t that their job assignment? Isn’t that what they get paid the big bucks to do? 42 days of inspections, aren’t the city inspectors full time employees?
In all the non-answeres that were provided to the council I never once heard mention of the roll that our “At Risk” management team from Minneapolis mentioned. Where were they when the magic pannels were being installed? With all the overseers and inspectors you would think that someone would have noticed the ‘wave effect’ within the first few days of starting the instalation – and say hold on, does this look correct to you? No mention of the roll that the architects played in the selection of this type of siding? Our leagle council only mentioned two players – we the people and the installation contractor, surely there were other great minds involved in the siding selection and installation and if not why not?
I heard no mention of a time line for resolutation – breifly there was a mention of the two new mock ups in October. What exactly will two mock ups do to move us towards a conclusion? Six months from date of non compliance work till someone brings forth a maybe solution? December, January, February, March, sounds like a perfect time of the year in South Dakota to be doing outside finish work hanging 60+ – feet off the ground.
I guess my biggest issue with transparency on this is not that the public hasn’t been able to see the report, my issue is why has it taken 3 months to tell us the work was rejected?
I also find it interesting that NO one has mentioned that the dude that did the report was recommended by Mortenson and is a former Mortenson employee.
Ok57…Aside from a FEW buckling joints, you can’t wait to get inside the building? Put your remote down and go take a good close look at the joints….assuming the goons will let you get that close.
http://thepoliticalcarnival.net/2010/12/15/study-confirms-that-fox-news-makes-you-stupid/
Reflect back over the course of this $183 million dollar project and think of all the times Mark Cotter and Kendra Siemonsma reported to the Council about ALL THE UPGRADES TO THE INTERIOR OF THE BUILDING……..
Meanwhile, Mortenson and the Mayor allowed the defective exterior to be completed……..
P43,were you against the arena when it
was built over 50 yrs ago? I can here ya, “what we need that big building way out there for when we have this beautiful coliseum right here in downtown Sioux Falls”. It’s called progression! In order for anything to grow, it must take someone with vision and foresight like MMM to take us in the right direction.
Oknor, I would agree 100%. A progressive visionary does get things done, but they do it on a doable timeline and they do it right. MMM’s ramrod salesman style is becoming tiresome. I always assumed we would build a new EC, but the siding is a great example of how slapping things together fast and under budget isn’t always the best approach. A REAL visionary makes sure a plan comes together correctly, not just on time.