UPDATE: More transparency from city hall on the RR relocation project

by

Here we go again;

A reporter for the Argus Leader tried to attend a meeting Tuesday. BNSF representatives did not object, but Mark Cotter, the city’s public works director, asked the reporter to leave.

Yup, one of the most transparent city halls in history, but hey, when you compare yourself to the previous administration, it may be true.

Ellis did a fine (Part II) story about this today. I await Part II next Sunday(?) which hopefully talks about our current mayor’s role in this matter.

I also see the city council is moving forward with the texting ban. Unfortunate. It amazes me how little our city legislators know about the law.

Posted in: Railroads, Sioux Falls

10 Thoughts on “UPDATE: More transparency from city hall on the RR relocation project”

  1. anominous on August 4, 2012 at 11:05 pm said:

    …and don’t forget to kiss our asses in your next snowgate editorial too.

  2. Tom H. on August 5, 2012 at 5:26 pm said:

    Correct me if I’m wrong, but the new RR proposal involves the City buying the downtown switching yard, without a replacement yard being built. This suggests to me that BNSF has decided that, rather than work with our City officials, they would rather just pack up shop and leave town altogether. I imagine that some in the industrial sector will probably be upset at the loss of switching operations in town.

  3. Dave R on August 5, 2012 at 7:33 pm said:

    There is no good reason to move the switchyard. It would just be a waste of resources. I question the motives of those who want it done.

  4. rufusx on August 5, 2012 at 7:54 pm said:

    If the Feds aloow the city to just buy the yards 0- then BNSF is free wot use that $$ to buy land THEYT want to use for switching – WITHOUT having to jump through all the regilatory hoops that have been the hold-upso far. End run.

  5. rufusx on August 5, 2012 at 7:55 pm said:

    Good grief ny fingers have a mind of their own sometimes.

  6. Pathloss on August 6, 2012 at 11:09 am said:

    I’m writing a letter to the railroad advising the city has no authority since any action they bring will be dismissed by the courts (Code 2-66, Circuit Court 08-2478). It’ll be copied to the Argus and the city attorney. Denying the Argus access into a public meeting is unconstitutional (another objection). Federal money should be recovered and diseminated to the railroad. The city has no authority in this matter and (eminant domain) the railroad (if they choose) can run track right through McKennan Park, over the falls, through the cathedral, or between all the holes at both country clubs.

  7. Pathloss on August 6, 2012 at 11:20 am said:

    Any agreement between the city and the railroad has no legal merit because the city has no access (appeal) into court. It’s been used several times and there’s basis. Some day they’ll return to democracy. It’ll not be a good day considering legal actions that can then be heard. Events Center bond money has already been wasted but the rest will be burned on legal expenses.

  8. Bond Perilous on August 6, 2012 at 2:55 pm said:

    WOW! From Ellis’ report, it sounds like the City really shit the bed on this one. What a bunch of amateurs.

  9. l3wis on August 6, 2012 at 3:09 pm said:

    Yeah, Cotter doesn’t appear in too good of light. I can’t wait to see Part II. Hopefully the rumors about shutting down BID will come out.

  10. cr on August 6, 2012 at 7:25 pm said:

    Dave R on 08.05.12 at 7:33 pm

    I question the motives of those who want it done.

    Dave, just one example:

    Think…..

    Jeff Scherschligt and Cherapa II (yet to be built)!!

    At least the 5 million dollar + landscaping job (Phase I of the river greenway) and the million dollar bridge to nowhere that the taxpayers have already provided him in front of Cherapa I will also cover Cherapa II!!

Post Navigation