Walmart has sent out the above postcard/mailer to get support for their monstrosity they want to build;

The battle for a new Walmart in Sioux Falls continues. After a petition against Walmart, the big box chain is now taking matters into it’s own hands.

Some residents around the area of 85th Street and Minnesota Avenue received a pamphlet in the mail asking them to support the possibility of a new Sioux Falls Walmart.

Over the last year, those opposing the Walmart have been collecting signatures to put the new zoning ordinance to a vote. And in May, it became official that residents of Sioux Falls would be able to vote on the zoning in April 2014. The group collected over 6,000 signatures against the new Walmart.

But now Walmart is collecting signatures of its own, with these new pamphlets. Throughout the piece of mail, Walmart is laying out all of the positives of this new store at 85th and Minnesota.

This mailer is purely political in nature, but carries NO weight. Something several citizens have said to me who have seen this story or have gotten this postcard is;

 “This has got the mayor’s hands all over it.”

First off, the signatures the SON petitioners gathered had to be signed by VALID registered voters who live in the Sioux Falls city limits. Did WM send these to only registered voters in SF? How about Harrisburg? The mailer only lists addresses and not names, so my assumption is that it went to households, whether they were registered voters or not is beyond me. Sorry, but unless you are a registered voter and property owner in Sioux Falls, your opinion on this matter isn’t worth the cheap paper WM printed this PC on. And my guess is that most of the people who shop or work at WM are neither.

They also are asking for people to sign the PC and mail it back to them, but it’s not a BRE (Business return, postage paid). I guess by purchasing a stamp to mail this PC back you can show your support for WM financially also. They ask you email them so you can receive even more propaganda from them.

The mailer also claims it will create 250 jobs (full-time? Part-time?) and that a current FULL-TIME associate earns $12.81 per hour (Starting pay? Benefits?).

My suggestion to anyone who received this postcard is to recycle it. I think WM has had enough EPA violations, we can help them out a little on this one.

67 Thoughts on “Is Walmart using the Mayor’s Playbook?

  1. anonymous on July 1, 2013 at 11:03 am said:

    So, if…..

    the Mayor is involved…

    He is a marketing executive after all!!

    On another note, is $12.81 the starting wage they are currently offering at their two other stores in Sioux Falls?


    Sioux Falls Walmart employees, how many hours per week do you need to receive healthcare benefits?

  2. Testor15 on July 1, 2013 at 11:18 am said:

    You know most of the 250 jobs will not be filled by neighborhood residents. WM is sending out the PR to convince the neighborhood they will be a good friend to the neighborhood. Good for them. This is not a neighborhood fight. Walmart just got thrown under the bus by the Mayor and city official’s PR.

    The Mayor needed an easy win and this was the wrong battle for him. At the same time there was a major change to the zoning rules, a neighborhood full of educated professionals got a Walmart thrown in their lives. It could have been a Super Target and the same fight would have ensued. Now Walmart has decided to make it about them. For all the ‘smart’ people involved, Walmart decided to join the dumb. They are doing the big out-of-stater / 50 mile expert routine. I don’t think it helps the Shape Places fight to have Walmart muddying the water.

  3. Testor15 on July 1, 2013 at 11:19 am said:

    BTW, will Walmart be advocating bus routes and medicaid coverage for their part-time employees?

  4. hornguy on July 1, 2013 at 12:20 pm said:

    I got one and I live south of 69th but about two miles away from the proposed site. Since there’s no name on the flyer I’d almost be willing to bet my house that they sent it to all addresses on certain delivery routes. It’s the equivalent of poor man’s microtargeting.

    I was also surprised to see it, if only because these kinds of efforts almost always hurt Walmart more than help, and because as the council goes, Walmart appears to be firmly in the driver’s seat on this one already. Their best strategy is to lay low. The opposition to their development is highly concentrated in one small area, and most people in the city couldn’t care less one way or the other right now. How does more media attention help Walmart’s cause?

  5. Craig on July 1, 2013 at 12:25 pm said:

    “The group collected over 6,000 signatures against the new Walmart.”

    KELO has this wrong… the signatures weren’t against Walmart – as those who collected the petitions are quick to remind us this was about zoning changes and not Walmart specifically.

    Besides – we all know the vast majority of people who signed that petition had no idea what they were signing and they likely had no idea the impact to Walmart. Yes those collecting signatures had every intention of this being anti-Walmart (regardless of what they try to claim), but the average person signing it? Not likely.

    Either way Walmart can still come with or without the zoning changes… so it is a bit dishonest to suggest all 6,000 signatures were “against Walmart”.

    Now as to the postcard – that is typical Walmart marketing as they try to appeal to those who are unsure how they feel. They mass mail these in an attempt to shift opinion. Whether someone votes or not is of little consequence, because this is meant to get people talking about the positives rather than only hearing the negatives.

    Walmart had to get their voice out there, because right now the only group talking is the SON group… and nothing they say is helpful to Walmart. SON is controlling the message – and Walmart is now reacting. Thus this is good PR for Walmart although I’m not sure they should brag about $12.81 an hour for full time and they most certainly should not require people to use their own stamp to tell Walmart they support them. That was a failure on their end.

    BTW – if anyone believes the largest retailer in the world and the largest private employer in the world needs to take advice or get marketing lessons from a Mayor of a (relatively) small city…. you’re rather naive.

  6. “The opposition to their development is highly concentrated in one small area, and most people in the city couldn’t care less one way or the other right now.”

    I don’t think the opposition is concentrated at all. How do you get over 6000 signatures in less then 20 days from one neighborhood. Not possible.

    “KELO has this wrong… the signatures weren’t against Walmart – as those who collected the petitions are quick to remind us this was about zoning changes and not Walmart specifically.”

    It was specifically about ‘Public Input’ and ‘Walmart’ just happened to be the first major project planned under the new Shape Falls ordinance. If you don’t think there is major opposition to this store outside of that neighborhood, you are sadly mistaken. I have friends all over this city, one that lives by Hobby Lobby, that basically said, “We don’t need another f’ing Walmart in this town. Two is enough.”

    “BTW – if anyone believes the largest retailer in the world and the largest private employer in the world needs to take advice or get marketing lessons from a Mayor of a (relatively) small city…. you’re rather naive.”

    I would agree, I am doubtful WM did this under the directive of the Mayor, BUT, I do know that the Planning Department meets on a regular basis with developers and talks strategy in getting these projects done. And last I checked Schmidtt and Cooper report to Huether (& Lloyd) and if you don’t think the planning office wasn’t somehow indirectly involved with this mailing, you are naïve. It is classic Huether marketing 101, he did it with the EC. Point out all the positives of a project without bringing up any negatives.

  7. Craig on July 1, 2013 at 2:55 pm said:

    “I don’t think the opposition is concentrated at all. How do you get over 6000 signatures in less then 20 days from one neighborhood. Not possible.”

    I agree. Hornguy should have said the “vocal opposition” is concentrated in that neighborhood. There are bound to be anti-Walmart people everwhere, but there are also a lot of people who will sign just about any petition someone shoves in front of their face as they are walking into the county admin building.

    Just look at the results of prior petitions… it is a mixed bag. Merely getting something on the ballot is no indicator of success at the polls, and for every vocal critic of Walmart (the vast majority of which live in one concentrated neighborhood) you have ten people who shop there on a weekly basis.

    “If you don’t think there is major opposition to this store outside of that neighborhood, you are sadly mistaken.”

    That may be – a lot of people don’t care for Walmart, but just look at the numbers of how many people shop there (and thus create a desire for Walmart to add two stores).

    Clearly the fans of Walmart far, far outweigh the critics. It is also silly that people say we don’t “need” another Walmart… opinions are fine, but the market drives the need, and the desires of the consumer are the only reason Walmart wants more stores.

    There is zero chance that Walmart builds a store and it fails, thus the market can and will bear more Walmarts. Until we find a way to convince people to stop shopping there that will remain a truth… and it is far too late to shift mentality at this point. Therefore like it or not – Walmart is going to add stores here.

    So this brings up the point about the image being presented. The SON group has created this image (deserved or not) that they are elitist NIMBY’s who don’t want a blue collar retailer in their neighborhood. Each time one of them posts on KELO or the Argus with another comment about how they don’t want Walmart in their neighborhood they lose more support.

    Those people really need to do a better job of controlling their message. Some of them have even admitted they shop at Walmart and would be ok with one on 85th and Cliff because it has less homes around it. So basically they are admitting Walmart is fine provided it is near someone else’s home and not theirs. That sends the wrong message… and I won’t be surprised to see it backfire against them.

  8. hornguy on July 1, 2013 at 4:55 pm said:

    Craig is correct. I suppose I made the mistake of not being clearer.

    It’s not that you won’t find some people all over that aren’t generally anti-Walmart, for reasons both legitimate or less legitimate. But I’d bet the farm that the 85th/Audie neighborhood is the only area in which there’s any sort of intensity in terms of feeling in regard to this particular development. Most people just don’t care one way or the other – certainly not enough to involve themselves personally or allow their feelings to influence their vote in any significant way.

    I make no judgment on whether they should or shouldn’t care. That’s irrelevant. Fact is, most people are too busy living their lives to get a rat’s behind about what happens on an undeveloped lot on the outskirts of town.

    As Craig noted, and from my own experience working in politics, lots of people will sign just about anything and it’s not indicative of anything in the end. Last spring in Wisconsin, opponents of Gov. Scott Walker turned in nearly a million signatures to have him recalled – over 25% of registered voters – and he ended up thumping his opponent by a greater margin than he won by just 18 months earlier. My point being, let’s never think we can draw hard and fast conclusions based on what 5% of the electorate expresses on a petition.

    I do disagree with Craig, however, in whether Walmart needed to respond. SON is a ragtag group with virtually no social media presence and, as Craig notes, an inconsistent message. They have a website that’s updated infrequently and their Facebook page has a meager 254 likes. They have 8 followers on Twitter. They might be talking a lot, but it would appear that not many people out there are actively listening.

  9. Joan on July 1, 2013 at 5:46 pm said:

    I live across the street from a WalMart, and can’t see any problems. All ages of people live in the neighborhood. I am a senior citizen and there isn’t anymore noise from WalMart’s parking lot, than what I can hear coming off 41st street, or even some of the cars and motorcycles that go on the driveway/parking lot past the apartment building I live in. Today a tiny little car went past with the music thumping so loud, I could hear it with the windows shut and my TV on. I hope the guy driving it goes deaf. This happens at least four times a day. Then there are the cars that go so fast that when they get to the speed bump at the end of the driveway, they must have to do a General Lee.

  10. Joan on July 1, 2013 at 5:47 pm said:

    Oh yes, I also got one of those mailers, and won’t fill it out, because it requires a stamps and I don’t have any post card stamps on hand.

  11. Dan Daily on July 1, 2013 at 6:18 pm said:

    I wrote this letter to Walmart. I suspect they now realize the city nor the citizens can stop them from building here.

    Walmart Corporate Headquarters
    Bentonville, AR 72716-8611

    April 8, 2013

    Sioux Falls SD – New Stores – Special Information & Advisement

    Stores you have in mind for Sioux Falls are welcomed. There’s a base of middle class customers and unemployed citizens who need jobs. I live in Sioux Falls but shop at your store in Worthington. No tax on food or clothing in Minnesota. Some customers from IA, MN, and eastern SD go there.

    Our city is mired with corruption. In 2009, State Supreme Court mandated a change in city civil procedures and ordinances (SD Case #08-2478). The order was ignored. There’s no competitive bid process. City contracts are awarded exclusively by the mayor. Kickbacks are suspected. City government is like 1933 Germany when Hitler took power. You should distance yourself and not appear with the mayor. Preserve your reputation for patriotism and support for the constitution.

    I suggest you agree with city development terms but build as you please. You are eligible for and should go after city TIF monetary support. We (the people) would rather see you get taxpayer funds. The city spends double on foolish projects. We’re not sure how much is going into the mayor’s pocket. His annual salary is 100K but (in 3 years) he has become a rich man.

    The city denies citizen appeals into court via Writ of Certiorari. They attempt taking civil procedure offenders to small claims court. Insist on circuit court because the case is dismissed when you petition the court advising they do not comply with their charter. City ordinances have become unenforceable and obsolete. They cannot collect fines, fees, and there’s no method to force action. What you build now is accepted and escapes future repercussion. Build per your specs. Ignore their idiosyncrasies. You’ll be irritated with city inspectors. There will be dozens with different redundant titles. Keep them away with unkempt appointments. They have absolutely no authority.

  12. Pathloss on July 1, 2013 at 6:32 pm said:

    Walmart is renowned for providing health insurance to even part time employees (20 hours). This is enough reason for them to be here. The two hospital syndicates will stop stealing minimum wage assets if more people have insurance. With 4 stores here, they’ll support their employees and restore democracy in city government. The city has failed to support small business. It favors credit card banks, hospital monopolies, and itself. Mom & pop business thrives but it’s in the outside city suburbs.

  13. OMG…. 11 posts in and Hitler is mentioned. Goodwins law is not just a theory. Thank you Dan.

    I received the Walmart postcard today and laughed my ass off when I noticed Walmart isn’t paying for the return postage. I think Huether is in charge of this PR nightmare because not paying the return postage on your on PR poll is a HUGE BONER.

    Pathloss…So Walmart will restore democracy to our city? Saying completely outrageous things to stir the pot is my job man. I bet if Walmart didn’t pay such huge wages and healthcare for everyone they could afford the prepaid postage.I can’t be for Walmart because the rest of the city says us south siders only shop at Macy’s and Loiu Vutton.

    What a country. Religion is under constant attack and a Walmart on every corner is sign of democracy. I’m sure the folks on the big boats long ago were just looking for cheap socks made in China.

  14. Karma on July 2, 2013 at 9:18 am said:

    We received a postcard and we reside in the VA area. Not quite sure how we fit in here.

    I did have a conversation with a couple of buddies that live by 85th and Minnesota. They were all in favor of the EC at the arena location, but says now the Mayor has gone too far with this Wal-Mart. I politely replied that the Mayor has no morals when it comes to his selfish agenda. He pulled the same lies and tactics with the new EC that he has now pulled with this project.

    I so hope Steve Hildebrand runs for Mayor. He will have no problem exposing Huether and Huether knows it.

  15. My guess is that they targeted middle-income people with this mailer, not a specific neighborhood. You can buy mailing lists that lay out income levels in certain neigborhoods. I also think they may have targeted Republicans, because they are more likely to support Walmart.

  16. Alice15 on July 2, 2013 at 10:52 am said:

    We are? News to me.

  17. Craig on July 2, 2013 at 1:11 pm said:

    Makes sense… Democrats just complain that we don’t have a Whole Foods, Trader Joe’s, or Ikea as they settle for shopping at Target for their Nate Berkus sheets while Republicans line up to ride the power scooters at Wallyworld.

    Think about it… a store that sells guns, Old Milwaukee Light, sleeveless NASCAR shirts, AND American flag silk ties is bound to appeal to a large majority of the Republican demographic.

    Remember kids – most stereotypes are based in truth.

  18. My Republican registration is pure speculation, but I do know that WM has had a National marketing strategy lately to target Middle-income and upper middle-income consumers, and I can almost bet they targeted only home owners that are registered voters (like I said, the Republican thing is speculation) Registered voters tend to be more involved with government. I actually work at a print/mail house, you would be very surprised at how specific you can get with a mailing list, and how current those lists are. The mail list companies bank on their information being accurate and up to date. This wasn’t some willy-nilly list they pulled out of their asses, I can guarantee they purchased a list that would have the greatest return on response.

  19. The great CRAIG has spoken so it must be true. Reblicants drink old mil, watch nascar, shoot guns,ride the fat scooters and wear silk flag ties. SAYATH the CRAIG.

    Can I get a YEEHAA.

    Just one problem…. We recieved a Walmart postcard at our office yesterday and our office has no political affiliation.

    Maybe they put GPS tracking devices in their most redneck items? HMMM.. That sounds more like an Obama tactic.

  20. Yeah, my office received one today, too.

  21. Craig on July 2, 2013 at 4:52 pm said:

    LJL… your satire detector is broken.

  22. Joan on July 2, 2013 at 6:49 pm said:

    I’m neither wealthy, a homeowner, or Republican, so i don’t don’t why I got one.

  23. rufusx on July 2, 2013 at 8:18 pm said:

    Drove by the location in question again today. About 4 blocks of mid-income range houses would be “neighbors”. There are already a few commercial development sites under construction an equal distance from those four blocks to the East. Thinking about the location for Hwy 100 – this is an EXCELLENT site for a Walmart. They will NOT be denied. The 4 blocks of neighbors may end up screwing up the entire rest of the city if “Shape” is defeated, however.

    The 6,000 signatures are more indicative of a general “anti-government” mentality that pervades the community to just sufficient extent to be able to refer ANYTHING anyone wants to petition than anything else.

    Go ahead – pick a topic/issue that comes up before the city – ANYTHING you want. Go get petitions signed for it. Get all the usual semi-pro “activists” that have established themselves in SF over the course of the last 6-8 years or so involved. You WILL get it referred to a city-wide vote. WHAT the issue is – doesn’t matter. They (some of you) have got the referral petitioning process down pat.

    Lot of swagger, lot of pride, not so much serious contemplation, or ENGAGEMENT in issues before the fact. EASIER to stick with being knee-jerk reactive and spend three weeks mindless signature gathering than to attend months and months and months of meetings/hearings.

  24. hornguy on July 2, 2013 at 8:33 pm said:

    Amen, rufusx. It’s much easier to derail a final product you don’t like and b@#$% that nobody told you it was happening than actually put the effort into real, meaningful citizen involvement. That 5% threshold for petitions is ludicrous. You don’t even have to be a *good* community organizer to get 6k names on a petition.

  25. city hall observer on July 2, 2013 at 9:37 pm said:


    I am one of those activists that you so negatively refer to.

    For years, I have volunteered my personal time attending city meetings.

    Just a few examples:

    Thirteen months of 2009 EC Task Force meetings

    Six years of monthly Park Board meetings

    Board of Historic Preservation meetings

    Yearly CIP budget hearings

    Charter Revision meetings

    Council 4:00 Informationals, 7:00 Regular meetings, work sessions

    Council committee meetings: Fiscal, Public Services, Land Use, Audit

    Planning Commission meetings

    Joint Council/Minnehaha Commission meetings

    Most local issues I understand in depth.

    You obviously have never been involved in gathering thousands of signatures, or you would not be making generalized statements about the ease of it!!

    I have great respect for those individuals who are willing to take a stand on something they believe in.

    I also have great respect for the petition and referendum processes which those that went before us had the vision to build into our State Constitution over one hundred years ago!!

  26. Testor15 on July 3, 2013 at 7:27 am said:

    CHO, rufusx every so often adds a perspective to our conversations I find enlightening. It is sad to see someone who has found a way to attain a level of education and decide to use it against the very people he purports to rule.

    There are legally questionable things happening in Sioux Falls government not allowed in Tea, Harrisburg or even Lincoln County. rufusx is only looking from the outside and not actually experiencing what we citizens of Sioux Falls are. If ruf were living here, having to pay the tax load levied due, to the jamm-it-down method of government we have, we might be hearing a different song.

    BTW, Hornguy / rufusx have you ever collected 6,000 signatures? There is a level of civic coordination to attain to collect so many in 6 months. Now consider collecting 6,000+ in two weeks without any professional coordinator involved. A professional would have looked at the 2 week situation and said “Forget it”. We saw a neighborhood group crystallize, organize and collect a thousand more signers than legally needed because their government shut down their concerns. The citizens were shutdown in favor of the big developer once again without respect they deserved. As someone who has collected and organized thousands of signatures for candidates and issues over the past 40+ years, I was impressed by their ability.

    Do not underestimate reasonable people with passion. Do not think you are the smartest person in the room when you are up against this type of citizen organization. This group has education, mortgages, SUVs, kids and likely decent incomes they are out to protect. I respect the Shape Places organizers and their mission. They need to be listened to. The more they are shut out of the process, the more entrenched they will be in their views.

  27. OleSlewFoot on July 3, 2013 at 8:05 am said:

    LJL – The eastside Walmart must be more upscale than the Walmarts you go to. No guns for sale, no sleeveless NACAR shirts, no American Flag silk ties and more craft brewery beers and wines than Old Mil Light.

  28. Craig on July 3, 2013 at 9:53 am said:

    I have to agree with rufusx and several points. Number one, I believe Walmart at that location will be approved because it is well suited for that type of development.

    Number two, the petition drive was likely successful not because of Walmart, but because of an anti-government mentality. Heck – just sit outside the county building and ask people who have just waited in line for 45minutes to get new tags for their vehicle, or ask those who have had to write a fat check for their property taxes and then tell them you need their signature on a petition because the city isn’t listening to the voice of the people. They will sign so fast they will leave burn marks on the petition.

    Do I think this particular vote will be successful in the end? Not really… and frankly it doesn’t matter. Walmart can proceed via the old system and although the process is a bit slower, involves a bit more red tape, and involves a few more meetings – in the end I have no reason to believe they plans won’t be approved if for no other reason than the city doesn’t have any reason to deny them.

    Walmart has the precendent here – we have allowed them to build and expand at two existing locations one of which was originally zoned agricultural prior to them buying it. I sincerely doubt there is any legal way to prevent them from building at 85th and Minn.

  29. rufusx on July 3, 2013 at 9:35 pm said:

    cho – good for you for being interested in governmental processes. How many other people from the community were there ate any of those meeting processes on a regular basis? 10? At MOST?

  30. l3wis on July 4, 2013 at 12:53 pm said:

    Joan – I think the mailer was sent out in blocks. I received mine 4 days after one my friends did who lives only 6 blocks away. I think they did an initial mailing and tried to see what kind of response they would get, and when that was dismal, they flooded everything else. Trust me, I have worked in Direct Mail for well over 15 years, there is meaning to the madness. Some of my mail designs have even seen a few courtrooms. Your first initial mailings are very targeted, and when you don’t get the results you have hoped for, you flood. WM is now throwing mud at the wall and seeing what sticks.

  31. l3wis on July 4, 2013 at 12:55 pm said:

    Yes, WM has a legal right to be there, some of the people in the neighborhood have admitted that. But they don’t want it there, and they have a right to say so. This isn’t about if this is zoned properly, this is about citizens having a say about how their neighborhood is developed, that is all they have ever asked for, and why they stopped Shape SF.

  32. rufusx on July 4, 2013 at 3:40 pm said:

    It’s the same kind of just “listen to me” statement that your mother used to make when you were a kid. It doesn’t really mean just “listen” – what it really means is “I am TELLING YOU what to do. And I am PISSED that you aren’t doing what I am TELLING you to do.” Classic passive aggressive framing of ones own behavior as not being any kind of behavior at all. Form of denial – born of desire to avoid ACTUAL responsibility. Put it all on the other.

  33. rufusx on July 4, 2013 at 3:42 pm said:

    I mean – it’s the city’s fault that those homeowners failed to properly investigate the future development possibilities of the adjoining property. Right?

  34. Testor15 on July 5, 2013 at 2:22 pm said:

    ruf, you don’t seem to understand much about the 85th street issue when you say “it’s the city’s fault that those homeowners failed to properly investigate the future development possibilities of the adjoining property.” Many of the buyers did do their research and understood what the possibilities of development were.

    Just to add to what L3wis said above, they were lied to by multiple authorities and then excluded from the process because their concerns were inconvenient for Lloyd and the mayor.

  35. Ruf – testor is right, all of this happened after the fact.

  36. rufusx on July 6, 2013 at 11:45 am said:

    Hwy 100 has been in the works for what – 15/20 years? It’s 1/2 mile from those houses.

    Here’s a link to the SF comprehensive plan for 2015 – adapted in 2003.

    Look at the issues and considerations for Springdale township (page 97 of the document). This is the area at issue. It clearly states that 85th street will be developed as a MAJOR transportation corridor, and that there will be large-scale commercial development consistent with community needs.

    Sioux Falls has a long history of long-term planning. Beginning in the 1960’s, there have been consistently updated long-term (15-year) comprehensive plans. For you to say that the Walmart development at 85th is a “recent development” and that “the city” lied to the home owners is BOGUS. Perhaps the developer misrepresented.

    Set aside your knee-jerk anti-city biases and identify the lack of responsibility wiyth those to whom it really belongs.

    The only thing happening “after the fact” here is the referral of Shape SF.

  37. rufusx on July 6, 2013 at 11:48 am said:

    Excuse me I miss-typed – the original comprehensive plan was developed in 1950’s, not 1960’s.

  38. rufusx on July 6, 2013 at 11:52 am said:

    BTW – even SON agrees on their own website, that their goal is NOT to assure that the original plan for their neighborhood is flowed – but that they want to CHANGE it from it’s original designation:

    “We want to change the designation of the area at 85th and Minnesota from a sub-regional development to a neighborhood development. The reason is simple: the sub-regional designation was made in 2007 (as part of the 2035 Plan), before an entire neighborhood of single family homes, as well as 4 schools were built.”

  39. rufusx on July 6, 2013 at 11:53 am said:

    Note – the PLAN was in place BEFORE they built their homes. NOW – “after the fact” – it is SON that is squealing.

  40. rufusx on July 6, 2013 at 11:55 am said:

    BTW – testor is WRONG.

  41. I think Walmart would make a nice addition to Rufusx neighborhood, along with a train switching station and a scrapyard. And you can’t say shit about it because in Rufuxs world neighborhoods don’t have a say how it is developed.

    Huge hypocricy to bitch about the cities dealing on other topics but then say the residents must “trust” the cities guidance on this Walmart issue. Does all your moral compasses need calibrating again? Or do you have personnel reasons to shit on people you don’t know? So shut the F*&k up southern Sioux Falls, Rufuxs and company need to be a half a mile closer to a fried chicken and asswipe retailer.

    What nerve some have.

    The south siders will have their day at the ballot box just like those near the proposed swim center. AND BOTH SIDES need to be prepared to live with the final vote tally.

  42. rufusx on July 6, 2013 at 4:32 pm said:

    The 85th street “neighbors” are the late comers. The street has been planned as a major arterial for more than 30 years. The area has been slated for major commercial development for 10 years. Now the late-comers – who FAILED TO INVESTIGATE THE FUTURE USE PLANS of the area have figured out they made a mistake by building where they did. It’s ALL ON THEM. To frame it any other way is simply a lie.

  43. rufusx on July 6, 2013 at 4:39 pm said:

    It would sure be nice if all the reactiionary “activists” were to get up enough gumption to care about the FUTURE oif the city and get involved BEFORE they end up on the wrong side of their own ignorance. Like to see a couple thousand people participate in the planning meetings for rhwe next revision of the comprehensive plan etc. – vs. simply aping the Repub congress’ “stop everything” approach. BTW – The obstructionist congress has an approval rating south of 10%. I call that – 10% – “the fringe element” of governance.

  44. rufusx on July 6, 2013 at 4:56 pm said:

    LJL – FWIW – I currently live 4 blocks from a RR track (with a siding), 1 1/2 blocks from a DT retail center, a block from a school. When the wind is from the NW I have a feedlot about 1/2 mile off the adds its aroma. Then to the South about the same distance, and injection molding plastics manufactory. South winds are also interesting. It’s called small town life.

  45. Interesting… Because I smell bullshit in all of that.

    Get out and rally for a Walmart in your town sir. As I said before you, you have only 1 interest in mind. YOUR OWN. And until you have a vested interested in this city, your input about it means nothing.

    Real high class for someone out of the city to dictate those within the city how to behave. Do you belong and bitch to a blog on Rapid City life? NOT

    As I have said before on this site. If Walmart’s target shoppers are those who commute to this city, move closer to them. The South side of highway 100 is for sale as well.

  46. And before its posted as an original idea. No one in any city should be a slut to sales tax of those from outside as a reason for their decisions. Keep your sales tax and pay full retail in your own cities if you don’t like our decisions.

  47. rufusx on July 6, 2013 at 8:14 pm said:

    Walmart isn’t interested in my town – it’s too small, and it’s off the beaten path – not enough potential customers. They’re interested in yours. VERY interested in yours.

  48. rufusx on July 6, 2013 at 8:25 pm said:

    LJL – grew up in SF. Helped put a lot of the infrastructure in place. Went to college there – operated businesses there. And I nor anyone else is “dictating” anything to anyone. Again – overblown hyperbole – trash talking rhetoric comes from you; not as the SON site itself points out – the truth. The truth that those people living @85th and Audie haven’t just “recently” had a change made by the city foisted on them. the truth is that the plan ALL ALONG has been for large scale commercial development at that site. It is a few newby property owners who decided to ignore what future land use plans said about property neighboring their own and NOW want to change plans that have been in place for decades – that are attempting to dictate to the ENTIRE CITY.

    All I have done here is to point out the LIES that are being written on this site by some posters. LIES.

  49. rufusx on July 6, 2013 at 8:26 pm said:

    Go read the SON site. They are sayiong they are upset that they were “allowed” by the city to build where they did.

  50. Testor15 on July 6, 2013 at 8:39 pm said:

    ruf, it does not matter how long SD 100 has been in the works. If an area is zoned for a type of construction and commercial then a big pocket full of cash comes along are we the people supposed to just sit back and take the abuse? You choose to live in a little town where everything is very close together. The difference here is Sioux Falls is a little bit larger with more distances between the types of development you are experiencing. If we wanted to live in Tea or Puckwana we would, but we don’t choose to. We are told we have ‘planners’ and ‘zoning’ to help us make long term decisions when we buy a home.

    ruf, you seem to think the ‘professionals’ in city hall are able to make all the decisions for us. The Shape Places, snowgate and pool petition drives show a brad range of citizens of Sioux
    Falls want more input in the decision process. I say it’s about time.

  51. As I told a city councilor tonight, the citizens in the SON neighborhood are exactly the model citizens we want in our community, and we spit on them;

    “a broad range of citizens of Sioux Falls want more input in the decision process. I say it’s about time.”

    They know what they are talking about, and that is why city hall chooses to ignore them.

  52. rufusx on July 7, 2013 at 1:03 pm said:

    The SON people are forcing the city to continue to operate under the SAME 23 year-old plan/zoning that they also claim erroneously didn’t allow the city to prevent them from building where they did. Their own statements – on their own web site – specifically state they feel now that they should NOT have been allowed to build their homes where they did.

    Is being allowed to build a home somewhere “lack of input in the decision process”? Didn’t the home owners have near 100% “input” in their decision to build there? Imagine the uproar if the city WOULD have prohibited them from building there (without their “input”).

  53. rufusx on July 7, 2013 at 1:07 pm said:

    Testor – I thought you were opposed to uncontrolled costly sprawl in general? Take away the city planning process and what do you get? Uncontrolled chaotic mindless sprawl – leading to the kind of “neighborhoods” like the one you live in – that were originally “rural residential” development – and are now having difficulties integrating into the community growing around them.

  54. Testor15 on July 7, 2013 at 1:28 pm said:

    ruf you don’t seen to grasp the issues here. we want a planning and zoning to follow their own guidelines any not just what a big developer wants

  55. l3wis on July 7, 2013 at 7:37 pm said:

    “The SON people are forcing the city to continue to operate under the SAME 23 year-old plan/zoning”

    I like how are zoning is ‘old’ now since it has been recalled, but has worked for 23 years. The ‘issue’ they have with Shape SF is ‘public input’, And even members of the Shape SF volunteer review committee admit, that part of the old zoning rules should have remained.

  56. rufusx on July 7, 2013 at 8:45 pm said:

    The SON people also admit that the major arterial street on 85th and major commercial development plans for 85th and Minnesota were in place LONG BEFORE they ever built there – and that they are only now – after the fact – trying to change those plans. It is the SON folks who made the “mistake” here – by deciding to build what they did, where they did. They weren’t “tricked” into anything or excluded from any knowledge. It’s their own FAILURE to do due diligence that has led to this – NOT anything that city government has done/not done.

    Blaming any of this on the new ordinances is what is called a diversionary tactic. Blame-shifting. Avoiding personal responsibility.

  57. Testor15 on July 8, 2013 at 12:30 am said:

    ruf, you don’t even understand the differences in planning for the corner going back several years. It was never zoned for major development like a big box store. Can we repeat it for you slower so you can understand? The area was never planned for a big box, it was planned for smaller sized commercial neighborhood type stores. Had you been at any of the meetings you would now know this.

    These people built their homes based on the long range forecast for the area. The due diligence done by several home buyers all tell the same story, the city planners got sold out by their superiors who are controlled by the developers wanting the land use changed.

    These property owners are pawns in a very big chess game and it appears the developers with the help of their stooges in city hall are ready to declare checkmate. The game continues after the checkmate. The long term wrath of the SON homeowners will spread this word far and wide.

  58. rufusx on July 8, 2013 at 12:28 pm said:

    testor – that’s not what SON says on their own site. On THEIR OWN SITE they say they (the SON neighbors) should not have been “allowed” to build single family hones where they did; because the city KNEW and had plans for 85th to be a major arterial street and that major commercial development was going to occur on that corner. Why don’t you agree with their own words?

    Shape Sioux Falls 2035 Plan

    We want to change the designation of the area at 85th and Minnesota from a sub-regional development to a neighborhood development. The reason is simple: the sub-regional designation was made in 2007 (as part of the 2035 Plan), before an entire neighborhood of single family homes, as well as 4 schools were built.

    Per the city planning department, the sub-regional designation made in 2007 (as part of the 2035 Plan) is similar in traffic volume and “landscape” as 41st & Louise (currently the busiest intersection in Sioux Falls). In the years since the sub-regional designation was made, the city has issued many building permits for single-family homes that were built (along with 4 schools) within approximately one mile of the corner of 85th and Minnesota. If the city continues with plans to create a sub-regional development, it will generate a dangerous level of traffic for the families and students who live and attend school in this area.

    The city made a plan, ignored key elements of its plan by allowing homes to be built in or near a sub-regional development, and is just now trying to follow the original plan without making the proper adjustments. It is unacceptable for city planners to suggest that it is now appropriate for the corner of 85th and Minnesota to be zoned to permit the most intense commercial development. Admitting it was a mistake to allow the houses to be built does not correct the problem. What does correct the problem is for the designation to be changed so that 85th and Minnesota can be appropriately zoned to allow for light retail and office development similar to what was approved for the northwest corner of 85th and Minnesota.”

  59. rufusx on July 8, 2013 at 12:31 pm said:

    The SON neighbors did NOT do their due diligence and now want a “correction” to the original plan in tejrk favor- AFTER – THE – FACT. They admit to that themselves right there on their own page.

  60. Testor15 on July 8, 2013 at 1:35 pm said:

    ruf, there is a nice website where grammet / linguistic errors are made or picked apart. You are a prime example of a reader who is reading more into the website versus actions and facts.

    BTW, why not move back to Sioux Falls so you can use your informed voice at the ballot box?

  61. 54OBSERVER on July 8, 2013 at 5:27 pm said:

    The mailings are still going out. “To Our Neighbors..” received today.

  62. 54OBSERVER on July 8, 2013 at 5:45 pm said:

    The mailings are still going out. “To Our Neighbors..” received today in McKennan Park area.

  63. l3wis on July 8, 2013 at 5:48 pm said:

    They have some serious Direct Mail Madness going on. I am intrigued.

  64. rufusx on July 9, 2013 at 2:18 pm said:

    testor – grammet? The SON statement of the purposes and goals is pretty straightforward. I’m not interpreting at all. All I am doing is putting t there for you to read. You all are the one’s that are “interpreting” what their goals and purposes are – putting your own words in their mouths. I’m simply showing you THEIR WORDS. Are you saying they don’t know how to say what they want to say (what you want them to say)?

    Because the fact is – they are NOT saying what you are saying they are saying. They ARE saying what they are saying. In their own words – not yours – THEIRS.

    They state that the plan for that area all along has been 85th as a major arterial, and that corner as a “sub-regional” commercial development. They also state clearly that they believe it was a mistake (although it was allowed within the zoning guidelines) for the3 city to allow their homes to be built there. they also clearly state that it is SON that wants to change the zoning designation – AFTER THE FACT – not the city.

    Why is this so difficult for you to see – in SON’s OWN WORDS? Why is your consistent effort to spin this into the city not following their own rules – when clearly they HAVE followed their own rules??

    Oooh ooh – I know – troll.

  65. Craig on July 10, 2013 at 9:31 am said:

    rufus is right on this one – there are a few people in the SON group who appear to be off message and have tried to claim the city changed the rules after they built their homes, but that really isn’t true. The actual group admits the designation of that area was made before their homes existed.

    Then again they also claim the designation existed before four schools were built… but I have a hard time how three of those four have anything to do with that location.

    If they are honest, they are really mad at themselves for not paying attention, and they are mad at the developer (Stencil) for turning the entire area into single family rather than allowing a buffer of multi-family along the Southern edge of the development (as it was zoned to allow).

    Then again, I still have a hard time being sympathetic to a group who build next to 85th and then start complaining about traffic. Makes me wonder if those who built against that retention pond also complain about mosquitoes.

    I’d love to see the fireworks when a ‘big name developer’ starts constructing apartments on the East side of Audie. Ouch.

  66. Testor15 on July 10, 2013 at 8:56 pm said:

    I guess we will see what the court system has to say about the legality of the mess.

    Oh grammet, its always something…

Post Navigation