March 2009

Fork the Argus Leader

Not sure if you have read this ‘catty’ review in the Gargoyle Leader on March 19, but it seems someone woke up on the wrong side of the bed before going to eat, here’s some highlights of the review(?);

The small portions are just right for my appetite, but may be met with disdain by those who favor larger servings, especially considering the cost.

Because golly, who cares about taste and quality these days, I don’t care if it tastes like an old shoe, as long as I can get stuffed on $4.99.

The new décor features orange graphics reminiscent of the 1960s. I wasn’t a big fan then, not a fan now,

And who cares what what a skinny old washed up reporter thinks about interior design? It’s called using complimentary colors and has nothing to do with the 60’s.

Oversized flower arrangements punctuated the space, which offer an organic but slightly jarring feel. Orange poppies blend nicely with brown autumn foliage, but poppies bloom in spring.

Actually plastic flowers bloom all year.

I have avoided writing about the review, because I guess I have never taken the Gargoyle Leader’s restaurant reviews very seriously, ever since Jana ‘Cupcakes’ Farley gave four stars to the Pizza Ranch in Tea, or complained she wasn’t getting waited on at a deli counter. But it seems there has been quite a bit of buzz on the internet about the review, and how truly pathetic it was. The Secret Fork is a blog that has been around for about a year reviewing restaurants, and they rip the review apart, here is some highlights;

Some of you may recall my previous post about the deplorable job the AL and reporter Dorene Weinstein did with a review of Sai Gon Panda.  I swear, they need to start getting it right, or get out of the business of doing this altogether.  ”

Ms. Weinstein stuck a three-pronged fork right in the eye of 26 Grille with her review:
  • The service was a bit lacking
  • The food was “off”
  • The decor sucks

Regardless how experienced individual staff members might be, it takes a while to knock the kinks out of a new place.  Cut them some slack, you idiots.

Now, if you’ll excuse me, I am going to go see how many references I can find to things that are “piping hot”, “yummy”, or “gooey” in a few dozen copies of Food & Wine or Gourmet.  “Piping hot.”  For Pete’s sake.
Have a good weekend.  Fork the Argus Leader.

I write to share my disgust with the food critique in the Link insert.

 

Specifically, I found the Thursday, March 19, article disheartening. I am immediately puzzled with the fact the Argus Leader reviews restaurants above all other business types. You do not publish a plumbing review or a grocery store review. Restaurants are, apparently, a point of fascination to your writing team.

I wish they would – there is a lot of robbers out there, especially some of the arborists involved with the blanket code enforcement and Project TRIM.

could be helpful if it gave the reader a factual description of the business. The reader could then decide for him or herself if the product type, if the price and if the ambiance is the sort that he or she enjoys.

Exactly! That is the point of a review. Tell us the size of the portion and the price, then we will decide if that is too expensive or not.

Why would the Argus Leader opt to publish negative stories about locally owned and managed businesses?

They do it everyday while sucking up to the franchises and big box stores. I have often said about Sioux Falls, “Over 400 restaurants and no place to eat.” Locally owned ones are usually the best ones for quality, and ambiance. Sometimes the service is a little off, but I have never had a bad meal at a locally owned restaurant.

Why not highlight small local business regardless of type and regardless of the product they sell? Why not amend your restaurant review and instead have a local business highlights section? Tell us about the local business men and women that work tirelessly to infuse our community with jobs and keep their door open despite the economy. I understand to write for a “reaction” generates sales. You have, however, lost future sales at my house.

And they wonder why subscriptions are in the toilet . . .

Citizens play second fiddle to big oil, even in South Dakota

epa-foto

Guess who gets to pay for this mess? You guessed it – not big oil

A letter writer from Rapid City points out the hypocrisy of our legislators and protecting big oil from taking responsibility for an oil spill;

This year, SB171 was proposed to provide for a fee of two cents per barrel to be levied on oil pumped through pipelines crossing South Dakota. A fund was to be created by the proceeds of the fee to be used for cleanup in the event of an oil spill or some contamination emanating from the pipeline. A cap on this participating fund would be established at $30 million.

 

Similar legislation in another state requires a higher per-barrel fee. The bill was killed in the Senate State Affairs Committee by a one-vote margin. The current South Dakota pipeline regulations and the testimonies by the pipeline supporters relating to pipeline spills and safety are mostly reassuring.

 

However, there appears to be a deficiency with regard to who will pay for a cleanup in the event that the pipeline company becomes insolvent or is no longer in business. This missing financial recourse is an important consideration, especially when considering the state’s experience with specific gold mining and solid waste operations in the Black Hills area.

Why wouldn’t we want this limited, alternative protection?

Because our legislators protect business first and make the citizens pickup the tab if something goes wrong.

Ah, yeah, sure, you betcha . . . whatever Greg

authentic-drama-queen

I didn’t know about back taxes, honestly!

There is a lot of words I have used to describe city government (oh boy) but I think the most pertinent word is ‘predictable’.

Some prominent Sioux Falls developers and businesses owe hundreds of thousands of dollars in back property taxes, and county officials are at odds over how to collect millions in missing revenue.

Why? Because several of them have political ties (we’ll get to that in a bit).

John Pekas says the County Commission should consider a policy allowing the county to sell tax certificates. Those certificates are bought by third parties – typically investors – who then are in line to take possession of a property if its tax bills remain in arrears.

But that position puts Pekas at odds with other Minnehaha County officials. In the long run, they argue, the local governments that rely on property taxes make more money when the county deals with the issue in-house.

Of course it does. If you follow city, county or state government even minimally you will know that business rules the roost, and even more when those same businesses either fund campaigns or have partners of their companies sitting on elected commissions. (the irony of all this is, not only is John’s idea a good one, he was one of the few Republicans I have voted for in the past election – go figure).

But the story gets hotter than a steaming dog turd from a Great Dane;

In Lincoln County, three development companies called Arctic Land Investment, Site 2 Inc. and Site 12 Inc. had outstanding property tax bills of more than $104,000 at the end of last year. Investors in the development companies include Sioux Falls City Councilor Greg Jamison and his father, former City Councilor Bob Jamison.

Greg Jamison said last week he has a 4 percent share in the family businesses and he has no managerial responsibilities. He said he was unaware of the back taxes.

Sure . . . .

First off, Greg, you cheerleed for developers on the council every chance you get, secondly, the only f’ing reason you have your seat is because of dear old dad and name recognition and thirdly your wife works for the very company that owes these taxes. Either you know about the back taxes or you are dumber then I originally thought.

This goes back to my whole ‘conflict of interest’ issue with city councilors. They should have none, period. What is the solution? Well you can pass campaign finance laws like they are going out of style, won’t change shit (Munson got elected to a second term by skirting the law and playing(?) dumb). The best way to eliminate these conflicts? Publicly fund elections so people with the best interest of the people get elected and not cheerleaders and drama queens.

And Monkeys might fly out of my ass

be754bfd-c823-4f3a-b7ec-64020f90de7a

The Karate Kid buy

Toto, we are not in Kansas anymore – we are in the fantasy world of Sioux Falls

A letter writer asks the city to disclose the full costs of building a new Events Center . . . . bahahahahahahahahw!

What many do object to, though, is the past practice of the city lowballing the cost estimates of such projects in order to gain civic approval. In particular, this time the city must be upfront with the taxpayers about the full cost of a new center, including the planning, financing and bonding costs and interest on borrowing.

Chet, I don’t want you to think I am insulting your intelligence, just your ignorance, by saying this; in order for the city to ‘sell’ this project to us, they must lie, they lied about the Pavilion (told us $21 million, we are at $40 million and counting).

1) They are bad managers of money

2) There solution to every problem is raising taxes

3) They know they must mislead as much as possible to sell us the Event Center

I think the Event Center is a good idea, but I disagree with almost every thing they are doing to get it built. Not only is the planning and cost estimates skewed, their funding solution (raising general retail taxes) is a horseshit way to pay for this thing.

It seems dishonesty in politics is the norm these days – and you can expect it when selling us the Event Center.

The irony of this goes back to that old saying, “Doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.” I sometimes wonder if anyone at city hall knows what that means?