March 2014

Is it even legal to mention Walmart on the ballot for Referred Law 4?

Someone pointed this out to me today, that Walmart is being mentioned on the ballot language for Referred Law 4. Not sure if this will get on the ballot this way (because the city attorney and city clerk are not allowing anyone from the public to view the ballots before they are printed). You have to remember, this is a zoning issue NOT a Walmart issue. In fact, as far as I know, Walmart doesn’t even own the property yet, the Homan family does (Springdale development). And even if it gets rezoned by the vote of the people, it doesn’t mean a Walmart has to be built there. Kinda reminds me of providing the public with indoor pool drawings when an indoor pool isn’t even on the ballot.

ref-4

 

Did you hear? Mayor Mike invented sliced bread

il_570xN_437955541_cevw

As I have said in the past, Mike likes to take credit for a lot of things he really had nothing to do with and Ellis does a little digging on the topic;

At that point Nelson interrupted Huether: “They already had plans for all of that,” she said.

“No,” the mayor replied. “I truly apologize, but no. The investment plans for the new airport, those are things that have been done over the last four years.”

Huether took office in May 2010. But he didn’t get a chance to make his first appointments to the airport authority board until September of 2011, when the terms of board members Hal Wick and Dean Sorenson expired. Both Wick and Sorenson had been appointed by former Mayor Dave Munson.

Wick, Sorenson and three other Munson appointees were on the board when, in February 2011, the board voted to offer an incentive package worth $250,000 to any new airliner that came to the city. Frontier announced a few days later in March that it would begin service that summer. So it was a Munson-appointed board that brought in Frontier.

It reminds me of how he stole the Snowgates idea from Staggers, but ultimately Stehly will be the one to get the job done, but I’m sure somehow, MMM will take credit for it.

The Chamber seems to have it backwards when it comes to Shape Places

So the Chamber admits that some things with Shape Places needs to be fixed;

While the chamber supports Shape Places, board members agree with Save Our Neighborhood on one point. They recommend the city review the ordinance to address concerns about how the new rules would change the opportunities for the public to give input on a project.
Palmer said the best way to ensure that happens is to revisit the ordinance.
“Voting No on Shape Places in April will give the city and interested parties the opportunity to work together to make the necessary changes before it goes into effect,” Palmer said.

Palmer is right, if it passes in it’s current state, there are NO guarantees the new city council and mayor will ‘fix’ those problem areas. There is one way though the public can make sure they do, and that is by voting NO. This will force the city to re-visit the ordinance, and fix those problem areas before passing new zoning rules. Like I said in the past, it is a good piece of legislation for the most part, but there are some areas that need to be tweaked before implementing it.

Only half our debt is bad

half-empty-glass

It was nice of Mayor Huether to allow the financial director of our city, Tracy Turbak, to sign this letter to the editor. Apparently, the city is embracing the glass is half full philosophy;

Nearly half of the city’s debt relates to public utility services — water, sewer and landfill — and is repaid by the users of these services — not general taxpayers.

While I thought Mike Turbak made some good points about the differences between city and state debt, this statement above by Tracy Huether had me a bit concerned. So almost HALF our city debt (around $200 million) is for things other than infrastructure? That was the whole point of Ellis’ column, the fact that the city should stop borrowing and creating debt for entertainment/recreation. But obviously in the midst of campaign season, that went right over Turbak’s head, uh, I mean, Mike’s head.

SF Chamber’s Silly Business

snowgatesilly2

You mean the use of snowgates actually helps local business?

Not sure what to think of the Chamber’s endorsements for the election. While the Walmart and Shape Places thumbs up doesn’t surprise me, their stances on the other two citizen ballot initiatives seems a bit silly;

The chamber also is pushing for a “no” vote on building an outdoor pool at Spellerberg Park. If they get their way, the city will move forward with plans for an indoor aquatics facility there.

Their board took no position on the fourth ballot measure, whether the city should invest in snowgates to keep snow from piling up at the bottom of people’s driveways.

So they are supporting an indoor public pool that will be subsidized by taxpayers and will compete with private indoor swimming providers. Doesn’t this go against the free enterprise nature of the Chamber? Do some of the Chamber members provide indoor swimming? Very odd.

And saying nothing about the snowgates is probably a relief to either side of the issue, but you would think the Chamber would endorse a public service that benefits many businesses throughout our community, not just in cleaning out the inlet’s to their parking lots but in worker productivity and lost time (if an employee is late because they were blocked by a snow berm and had to scoop it away before driving to work.)

Once again, the Chamber proves who they stand up for, and it really isn’t their members or local small businesses. No surprises here, just lots of the same old silliness.