The task force created to establish criteria to use with any future City-initiated annexation in Sioux Falls has set its meeting schedule.

The task force includes three City Council members as well as four members of the community who are potentially impacted by proposed annexations. City employees from Planning, Project Management, Engineering, the City Attorney’s Office, and Finance will provide information and be resources for the task force members. The task force will convene for five sessions with a goal of developing recommendations that will provide a consistent way forward for future annexations. The public is welcome to attend.

The meetings will take place from 2 to 3:30 p.m. in Meeting Room B of the Downtown Library, 200 North Dakota Avenue, on the following dates:
• Tuesday, April 11, 2017
• Tuesday, April 25, 2017
• Tuesday, May 9, 2017
• Tuesday, May 23, 2017
• A final meeting date that will be determined by the task force

“Since Sioux Falls was founded more than 130 years ago, all growth has occurred through the process of annexation. It is a rather simple process when a property owner has an interest in being annexed but can quickly turn complex when the city grows into areas where the property owner is not interested in annexation. Additional challenges occur when the city boundary begins to surround a large, rural subdivision. In a growing city like ours, we need a consistent process to move forward with needed annexations,” says Mike Cooper, Director of Planning and Building Services.

The task force will be given information on the many state laws regarding annexations, some historical information to illustrate how annexations have occurred in the past, an update on the current Engineering Design Standards, and discuss the financial impact of an annexation on both the property owner and the City, along with other topics. The group will then make recommendations regarding how to move forward with annexations in the future.

As updates and more information become available, it will be posted at

The City of Sioux Falls Planning Office has formed a Task Force to address various issues surrounding annexation. When the city’s boundaries begin to engulf a property that is not annexed, and does not plan to annex, there are challenges that result from that.

The goal of the Annexation Task Force is to make recommendations regarding the following questions.

  • Under what circumstances should the City move forward with a city-initiated annexation?
  • What criteria will be used to prioritize the annexation of those properties deemed to be annexed under the city-initiated process?
  • Will the City move forward with a petitioned annexation request if the annexation requested creates a pocket of unannexed land within the city limits?
  • What infrastructure design standards will be required as annexation occurs?
  • What financial contribution will the city make towards any required infrastructure improvements due to a city-initiated annexation?


Councilor Rick Kiley
Councilor Marshall Selberg
Councilor Greg Neitzert
Matt Metzger – Citizen of Lincoln County
Tena Haraldson – Citizen of Sioux Falls
Greg Starnes – Citizen of Sioux Falls
Jeff Davis – Citizen of Minnehaha County
Support/Resource members:
Mike Cooper, Director of Planning and Building Services
Albert Schmidt, Urban Planner
Debra Gaikowski, Project Manager
Chad Huwe, City Engineer
Tracy Turbak, Director of Finance
Danny Brown, City Attorney


Topic #1 – Annexation law and the requirements and limitations imposed by those laws.
Topic #2 – The history of city-initiated annexations including the design standards the property owners were held to.
Topic #3 – A review of all unannexed property within the city that is currently completely surround by annexed land and the amount of development that exists on the surrounding land.
Topic #4 – A review of all recently completed CIP projects or CIP projects programmed in the near future that are adjacent to unannexed property or directly impact unannexed property.
Topic #5 – Assessment law, the rights of the city, and the rights of the property owners.
Topic #6 – The financial impact of annexation on a property owner including property tax changes, financial benefits, and the cost of infrastructure improvements.
Topic #7 – The impact on the property owners and the community if Engineering Design Standards are lowered in order in an effort to get unannexed property annexed. Review current ADA requirements.
Topic #8 – The impact on development if limitations are imposed on property owners wanting to annex land but a pocket of unannexed property is created by that annexation. Examples to be provided.
Topic #9 – How often should the established annexation criteria be reevaluated and by whom?
Topic #10 – Notification and Communication Process

12 Thoughts on “Annexation Task Force meetings set

  1. This shouldn’t be this hard. When land on three sides of a parcel is annexed in, the holdout should be annexed automatically.

  2. Warren Phear on April 7, 2017 at 5:43 am said:

    I do not watch or listen to all the media outlets in this town. Maybe I missed it somewhere along the line. Has something as life altering as this been given it’s proper air or print time?

  3. matt johnson on April 7, 2017 at 6:30 am said:

    Greg Starnes is not a citizen of Sioux Falls- he lives on an island

  4. Serve the People!!! on April 7, 2017 at 9:23 am said:

    With most of these affected homeowners working to pay their taxes, it seems only fair that these meetings be held in the evening so they can attend.

    ….More self service and convenience for those on the city council. ……More rules for citizens, the peons whom they are supposed to serve.

    ….Time to clean house next election.

  5. The D@ily Spin on April 7, 2017 at 11:58 am said:

    Anyone annexed gets screwed. There’s reasons they live unincorporated. When a group of self righteous unelected numbskulls gets together, it’s an indirect way to deprive people their constitutional rights.

  6. Concerned Citizen on April 7, 2017 at 2:42 pm said:

    To LJL:
    Sir or Madam. It is hard. I live on one of these islands. I was insulted that the mayor would even suggest we are taking advantage of city services. Each island has their own unique set of circumstances. Here are ours. True, the city has annexed property around three sides of us. That annexed land was zoned light commercial and residential at least 15 years ago. They even got a rudimentary start with roads. Storm drainage lines were even installed. Not that sure about sewer. After 12 years of no development, they ripped out all they had done to that point and started the road project over again, with a completely different layout. This time they even completed the roads to final grade. Guess they thought it would spur development, but to this day that annexed land on three sides of us is doing nothing but growing weeds.

    Those city services we take advantage of? The sheriffs department patrols our neighborhood a lot better than the city ever would or could. We have our septic systems that work just fine. We maintain our own roads and our streets are cleared of snow within hours after a storm, not in days like it is measured in the city. The township fire department handles our needs in that respect. All of these amenities paid for with our county tax dollars. The city fire department also has standards to meet as far as response times go. To meet that accreditation, a response time of 5 minutes 12 seconds is the standard. Where current fire stations exist, that standard cannot be met. You prepared to spring for another fire house, equipment, and manpower?

    There is one amenity we have decided to accept from the city. City water lines are now hooked up to our existing main trunk. Where city residents pay $4.20 for 1000 gallons of water, we get to pay $7.10 for that same 1000 gallons of water. We also enjoy paying 6.5% sales tax, just like you city folk. Are we taking advantage of city services? Think about it.

  7. SF Citizen on April 7, 2017 at 6:52 pm said:

    This annexation push is all about bringing in more tax money for Huether to spend on his pet projects.

  8. What does sales tax have to do with this? Are you trying to say your half penny means your paying your share? Do you understand how city infrastructure is paid for? Also, do you understand we both pay for the same county services? Seriously, whats so hard about this?

    Where does it end? I’d like to shop use the parks, drive on nicely paved and managed roads without paying city taxes. I’ll clear my own sreet and call the sheriff rather than city cops. Take me off city taxes please. What if all those new homes which are about to be built around you were to install septic service rather than city sewer?

    You wanted all the amenities of living next to a city but did not want to be apart of it. Thats fine. But you need to be ready to move in order to continue your lifestyle. I to long ago lived in a small community that took care of ourselves. It just cant happen anymore when “progress” has surrounded you.

    I’ve thought about it. Once the city grows out to you, you have 3 choices. Buy a lot more land and halt the growth, move or join. With no standard and too many lawyers, the hand full of islands today will turn into hundreds in no time.

    Seriously! I pay the same county taxes and half cent sales tax. I don’t want to be in the city anymore. I don’t want to move so un-annex my 2 acres please.

  9. The D@ily Spin on April 7, 2017 at 9:45 pm said:

    Concerned Citizen, you got crowded into a town with megalomaniac strong Mayor Charter. I realize your plight. LJL brings in subjective matter relavent for people who work in Sanford cubicles. You must realize by now you can’t win when you can’t be heard in this oligarchy. When we’ve had enough, it’s time to move to Minnesota where there’s democracy.

  10. The D@ily Spin on April 7, 2017 at 9:58 pm said:

    Don’t use money on lawyers fighting for your property rights when it’s better spent on moving expenses. The mayor here is a Nero. The majority on the city council consider him an enemy of the city. He should resign but he’ll play his fiddle (or tennis) while Rome is burning.

  11. Concerned Citizen on April 8, 2017 at 9:12 am said:

    Do you understand how city infrastructure is paid for?

    Do you understand how city infrastructure is paid for?
    I understand. Do you understand how that infrastructure money is spent and who is, and who is not held liable to pay for it?

    In another city annexation power play, the city has spent $8,840,000.00 to get sewer lines to the ghost annexed island known as Foundation Park. The city will spend an additional $28,890,000.00 in the next couple years to finish the sewer project for that same park. The city has spent another tens of millions of dollars to get storm drainage, water, and an electrical substation to foundation park? Who is paying for that? The occupants? What occupants? The future occupants? Don’t think so. Infrastructure and the many tens of millions of dollars spent on it is a freebie the city will throw in if companies bring their $13 an hour jobs to foundation.

  12. Concerned Citizen on April 8, 2017 at 9:25 am said:

    What if all those new homes which are about to be built around you were to install septic service rather than city sewer?


    Then my friend you have a scoop. Call the Argus. Call the developers who have been trying to develop this part of the “city” for the last two decades. Not one home has gone up and the growth on this annexed part of the “city” is flatlined. The only thing growing in this part of the “city” is weeds. The streets that have been added and the infrastructure already installed has been rotting for decades.

Post Navigation