READ THE PETITION:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SIOUX FALLS, SOUTH DAKOTA TO PROHIBIT THE USE OF TAXPAYER FUNDED RESOURCES, THE SPENDING OF MONEY, OR CITY EMPLOYEE PARTICIPATION IN POLITICAL AND/OR EDUCATIONAL CAMPAIGNS ASSOCIATED WITH MEASURES PLACED ON THE BALLOT BY THE CITIZENS OF SIOUX FALLS, SOUTH DAKOTA.
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY OF SIOUX FALLS, SOUTH DAKOTA:
The City of Sioux Falls, its elected/appointed officials, its employees, and all persons serving to represent city government, are prohibited from using taxpayer funded resources for the purpose of a political and/or educational campaign, sharing taxpayer funded resources with outside groups for the purpose of a political and/or educational campaign, or spending taxpayer’s money on political and/or educational campaigns dealing either directly or indirectly in a competitive manner with measures that have been placed on the ballot by its citizens. Elected officials may personally express their opinions on municipal ballot initiatives, but are prohibited use of taxpayer funded resources.
Â
So when the Shape Places referendum comes up for a vote, the city should have no voice. They should not be able to comment/explain an ordinance that was place that a group of citizens wants to repeal. That is plain stupid.
When the City uses over $100,000 TAX DOLLARS to EDUCATE voters on the merits of an indoor swimming pool vs. an outdoor swimming pool, IT IS time to stop city leaders from unduly influencing elections.
With Snowgates, Spellerberg and SON unifying behind this petition effort, look for voters to have the opportunity to decide this issue at the November 2014 election.
OldSlewFoot: The city should not be allowed to utilize taxpayer dollars to lobby against the citizens of this city. The city has their chance to educate the public during the initial presentation of the issue. That is the time when the city officials need to do their due diligence in educating the citizens, involving them in the decision making process, and proactively mitigating any concerns that they might have.
Once any measure is placed on the ballot by the citizens via a referendum or an initiative, it should be in the PEOPLE’s hands. All dialogue pro and con should be provided by the citizens.
I for one do not want one $1 of my taxes going towards the City Parks & Rec Director spending his time “educating” the public to his agenda. I also do not want to see Jeff Schmidt taking paid time out of his work day to plaster his face all over the local media touting how wonderful Shape Places is. Both of these individuals had their chance to educate & mitigate concerns prior to presenting it to the council. It is now the citizens turn to have their dialogue.
I would like the opportunity to sign one of these petitions but living in a security building if they went door to door with it, I don’t have much chance and I’m not too apt to run into one of the petitions any of the places I go or times that I go.
So now the city will have to use our tax dollars to educate us about it’s need to spend our tax dollars to educate us.
I appreciate these folks doing this work, but I think its DOA on the ballot as it will be way too complicated for most to understand and the city powers will fight like hell to keep this ability.
I completely agree, this is one of the most egregious overreaches of our government’s power. It goes along with most anything we see today. Everyone needs to place their editorial spin on issues. How about we get back to: heres the facts, you decide.
LJL says:
How about we get back to: heres the facts, you decide.
All information has been taken directly from the consultant’s report (see siouxfalls.org).
Page 28: This is the scenario the consultant has recommended:
Option 5: Large Indoor 50 meter by 25 yard competition pool with springboard diving and a separate 3,750 sq. ft. indoor leisure pool with current channel, and waterslide.
Page 38: Capital Cost of a Large Indoor Pool
Project Cost $18,519,000 (this has increased to 19.4m per Director of Parks and Rec, Don Kearney-Council Work Session, July 17, 2013)
Attendance
80,104
Operating Costs:
2013
Revenue 355,823
Expense 1,048,552
Operating Cashflow -$692,729
2014
Revenue 364,598
Expense 1,074,766
Operating Cashflow -$710,168
2015
Revenue 373,483
Expense 1,101,635
Operating Cashflow -$728,152
2016
Revenue 382,477
Expense 1,129,176
Operating Cashflow -$746,699
2017
Revenue 391,582
Expense 1,157,405
Operating Cashflow -$765,824
The capital cost of the indoor pool ($19.4m) will require bonding.
What the consultants report doesn’t list is the “economic impact” to park ridge shoe repair and the barber shop.
Thats what I’m talking about, these are your options and this is what all options will cost.
Cost is always the last thing discussed. We spend a couple million on studies, engineering, drawings and so forth before we ever see the cost.
Cotter would make one hell of a used car salesmen.
LJL says,
Cotter would make one hell of a used car salesmen.
Cotter is Director of Public Works and will have nothing to do with selling swimming pools for which I am certain he is very grateful!
The Director who will be out “educating” the public is Director of Parks and Recreation, Don Kearney.
I attended his presentations to both the Park Board and the City Council. Interestingly enough, he began both in the same way defending TSP’s rendition of an outdoor pool at Spellerberg. He spoke extensively about how the language of the petition has limited what they will be able to do with an outdoor pool. What he failed to add is that NO public input meetings have been held to gather information on what the public potentially would want in an outdoor pool at Spellerberg. When Councilor Anderson asked him about this, his response was that there were two days of public input meetings back in 2007 to gather information for the final design of Drake Springs. THAT WAS SEVEN YEARS AGO FOLKS!!!
Obviously, Director Kearney and the Park Board have been listening to taxpayers in their usual fashion. Have they NOT hear the public’s dissatisfaction with how Drake Springs turned out?
We have multiple parks with spray features, water slides, etc. The two traditional pools, Spellerberg and Frank Olson are both slated to be eliminated (per the Ten Year Aquatics Master Plan). These two pools represent exactly what the public is asking for: LAP LANES.
The concept drawings to replace the outdoor pool at Spellerberg contain THREE 25 meter lap lanes, a current channel with water slides and a spray park. NO public input meetings were held regarding replacing the outdoor pool at Spellerberg. EXACTLY WHERE DID THESE CONCEPT DRAWINGS FOR AN OUTDOOR POOL ORIGINATE FROM?? Certainly NOT from public input!!!!!!
And, these are the very concept drawings they intend to use to “educate” the public before the April Vote.
What I failed to mention in my previous comment was there were MULTIPLE public input meetings held to gather information on what the public wants in an INDOOR pool. These meetings were held JUST PRIOR to when the city hired a consultant for the Ten Year Aquatics Master Plan!!