February 2018

UPDATE: Mayor gets called a stupid S.O.B. at the council meeting tonight

Mike’s new theme song?

Oh, and he wasn’t called it just once, but twice. The person also didn’t abbreviate like I did in the headline.

While it was good theatre while it lasted, I would agree it probably wasn’t good decorum from a long time public inputer. Sierra has commented several times on crime going on in town, especially sex trafficking. She has had a volatile relationship with the mayor for quite awhile.

So how did it happen.

Public input started and I went up to speak. I went to sit down, and the mayor pulls this trick where he says quickly, “Anybody else, okay.” then quickly signals to the clerk to read the alcohol permits.

David Zokaites who had a PP presentation ready went up to the podium to speak but the city clerk had already started reading. So David stood there until she finished. Sierra stands and yells, “Let him speak, public input isn’t done.” and Mike asked Jamie, the alcohol licensing agent with the city to continue. Sierra lost it, walked toward the podium and told the mayor he was a stupid son-of-a-b*tch, and as she walked for the exit she called him that again.

Then David, who was still standing there asked if he could speak, and the mayor skirting his duties as usual, asked council chair Kiley if David could speak, and Kiley said NO. David apologized for not getting up there in time.

I think the whole incident is unfortunate because they are going to use it to change public input once and for all instead of just banning the bad apple.

But I will say, while I don’t approve of Sierra calling the mayor names (though I did laugh) it really comes to his continual effort to stifle public input by cutting people off before they even have a chance to standup. He has said in the past he wants people to stand in line and ‘be ready’. Sorry, if the mayor gets to sit during the meeting, we should to until it is our turn to go up. Some people are also disabled so it takes them a little time to get up there.

The mayor played more games tonight, and he may finally win, but trust me, not without a fight.

UPDATE: Belfrage talked about the incident this morning on his show. Many people are confused about what public input is and how it is handled, including Mr. Belfrage.

• There is already a time limit of 5 minutes. (Minnehaha County has NO time limit on their public input and I have seen people talk for over 20 minutes, in fact the mayor himself talked for over 11 minutes one time asking for a government handout for a drainage issue on his private lake home). I would be okay with changing it to 3 minutes.

• It was suggested that maybe it should be like the SF school board where you have to sign in to talk at public input and write down your item. I don’t agree with that. Freedom of speech is exactly what it is supposed to be FREEDOM to speak about whatever.

• It is often discussed that this is an inconvenience for the council and mayor. Excuse me? If anything it is an inconvenience for the public to show up on their own time to plead their grievances, this is the only opportunity they can. The mayor and council get paid to sit up there. They chose to run for office and serve after being elected. We pay their wages, it is the citizens TIME and MONEY being expended at the meetings. There is also NOTHING in the charter that says the meetings must be limited to a certain time frame. In fact there are provisions in the charter that allow for recesses or deferring to the next day if a meeting is going to long.

• Same people different topics. Many complained on the show that it is the same people that show up. Well guess what, I try to share something different every time I speak, I am NOT redundant, unless of course it has to do with the trains 🙂 I will NOT apologize for being passionate about our city government, I am very proud of the fact that I speak out against government corruption in this community. If not me, who? I also found it ironic that several veterans showed up last night asking for a land donation from the city and I overheard one of them say they were not registered to vote after refusing to sign a municipal candidates petition. So you served our country bravely as a soldier but once you got home you didn’t participate in something truly patriotic? Hmmm.

• The 1st amendment is very clear, it is a protection for all citizens to tell their government what they think of it. Sometimes it gets a little messy, oh well, you deal with it and move on. Let’s talk about who is being a snowflake. Like I said above, it is unfortunate that Sierra said what she did (in public) but I have heard much worse name calling of the mayor from prominent businessmen, politicians and current and former city council members. His attitude that the public serves him and not the other way around is complete BS, and it finally boiled to the top last night.

Legislative Update from the Advocacy Project

Advocates,
These are among the bills that are very important, if we hope to continue to be able to exercise our citizen rights to initiate and refer laws.
================= 
ALL Rep’s will vote on these in a floor session. I expect it will be tomorrow(Tue), starting at 2:00(1:00Mt), because amended bills usually go to the floor 2 days after they pass out of committee.   
Phone message to rep’s: 605-773-3851
================= 
 
OPPOSE
HB1177 would make it incredibly difficult for grassroots groups to utilize the initiative process. Every petition circulator would be required to have his/her name and phone and email on a small handout to give to every signer, not just info about the measure itself and its sponsors and whether you are a volunteer or paid, but your personal contact info.  In other words, every petition circulator would need a PERSONALIZED handout, each verified by the Sec of State. Imagine working with 100 volunteers. Suddenly, you need 100 different handouts prepared, different for each one. Clearly, a logistical mess. 
      Plus, requiring volunteers to disclose their personal contact information to numerous strangers would have a chilling effect on volunteer participation.  (Maybe we could ask legislators to imagine if one of their daughters wanted to circulate a petition for some good cause. Is this a requirement they would want placed on her?)
     If necessary, HB1177 could apply only to paid circulators. Leave the volunteers alone. Requiring you to disclose your volunteer status should suffice.
[You can thank these who opposed it in committee: Bartling, Hawley, Rhoden]
 
OPPOSE
HB1196 is similar to HB1177 In that the amount of information it requires people to disclose is excessive. It might sway people away from participating in the process. 
    Also similar to HB1177, this proposal could possibly be acceptable by amending it to apply only the paid petition circulators AND to paid circulators of candidate nominating petitions as well.
      1196 would require you to disclose more info to the state to gather a signature than is currently required for you to but a shotgun. The depth and breadth of personal information required from circulators, whether paid or volunteers, is absurd. Ballot question committees should be expected to verify residency of their paid circulators, of course. But the personal questions for volunteers in HB1196 cross a line and, intended or not, would chill political participation.
[You can thank these who opposed it in committee: Bartling, Hawley, Lust, Rhoden]
 
You can comment on two together for House floor. There are more coming up in some committees.

The Pavilion is NOT comparable to our Parks System

I still haven’t figured out exactly if this editorial by the Argus is about anything, but I certainly found this line troubling and extremely inaccurate;

It is a valuable city asset akin to our parks system, one that enriches those of us who already call Sioux Falls home.

It is NOTHING like our parks system when it comes to value. Many things in our parks system are FREE due to the taxes we pay. What is free at the Pavilion? Nothing. I suppose you could sit in the lobby and take a nap on one of the benches. The Pavilion use to offer many free events and a free visual arts center. Not any more.

And that is another reason why you cannot compare our parks system to the Pavilion. Taxpayers take it in the shorts on many fronts with the Pavilion. We NOT only subsidize operations, but the city also robs the 3rd penny entertainment tax to make upgrades to a building that really isn’t that old and went almost $20 million over budget. The 3rd penny should really be used to promote tourism and FREE public art programs in our community.

The Pavilion doesn’t give any cultural value back to the community UNLESS you pay for it, TWICE. Once in your tax bill and again when you buy a ticket.

Do we need the Pavilion? Most definitely. But I think they should bring back some FREE programming so we can truly compare it to the city’s GREATEST asset, our Parks System.

Sioux Falls City Council Agenda MONDAY Feb 5, 2018

A reminder that the city council meeting will be MONDAY this week instead of Tuesday. The council is going to Pierre Monday night after the meeting for Sioux Falls day at the state legislature on Tuesday.

City Council Informational Meeting

There will be a legislative update and municipal election update.

City Council Regular Meeting

Item #2, Approval of Change orders. The city has decided to ADD almost $350K in changes to the administration building. Would really like to know what was added that wasn’t in the original plan.

Item #44, 1st Reading on financing bonds from past years. This is a pretty long document, so I asked councilor Neitzert to break it down for me a bit;

This refinances the series 2007B sales tax bonds

Originally financed for 20 years

Quality of life bonds (library, parks, drake springs pool etc)

15.8 million balance remaining

Current average APR 4.58%

Refinance projects rate less than 3%

Reduce interest and principal payments by 2.6 million dollars over 10 years

Reduces 2nd penny obligation (payment) for the next 10 years

Soon we will have the amount (if any) of the 2017 capital surplus

We could use those dollars to pay down the principal and take out a smaller loan during the refinance

That will be the council’s option, to either pay down principal or do something ‘shovel ready’ now, that is TBD, we need to see our options

Actual refinance would happen in about March

As I understand it several councilors are looking at just paying off the principal instead of re-financing (if the money is there in surplus). I find it interesting the administration is bringing this forward BEFORE the council has seen the end of the year finance report and what surplus there is. I think the administration has those numbers right now and are not sharing them (SHOCKER!). I predict this re-finance is in conjunction with some kind of spin game the administration is going to play with the amount of debt the Huether administration racked up, how much has been paid down and slumping sales tax revenue. This outta be good.

Item #46, Resolution for the City to gift land for a state veterans cemetery. I have changed my mind on this one a bit, while I don’t take issue now with the city donating (some) of the land, I think they should take a different approach. After talking with a veteran I work with who volunteers countless hours assisting with veteran burials throughout the region we both came to the conclusion that maybe a small portion of land set aside for a mausoleum may be a better idea. More and more people are choosing to be cremated instead of full body burial. I think such a facility would not only be more economical, it could also be used as an example of what a veteran’s mausoleum could look like. It would also be easier to maintain by not taking up as much property. I also think that in light of the fact the Glory House had to pay for land and that the state legislature has yet to weigh in on the topic are contributing factors in rethinking this project.

Item#48-50, Resolutions for annexation.

Item#53, New Business, Naming the first set of nominating judges for the SIOUXPERHERO Award;

Councilor Rex Rolfing

Councilor Greg Neitzert

Councilor Pat Starr

Councilor Marshall Selberg

Jim David, City Council Office

Jami Gates, Big Brothers/Big Sisters of the Sioux Empire

Jessie Schmidt, Better Business Bureau

While I don’t take issue with MOST of these people, I think there should be more members from the community and maybe only two councilors at a time. I also think it is ODD to have the founder of this idea to sit as a judge, Selberg.

Planning Commission Meeting (Wed, Feb 7)

Besides your normal run of the mill rezones for housing and retail, Item#8 addresses expansion for the Sanford Sports Complex. The map is interesting because it shows the possible expansion for a new school also (but not rezoning yet). As I understand it, the SF School board voted to leave an OPEN option to accept the land, but not to accept that gift until they decided what kind of school they will build and if the location is appropriate. Once again, cart in front of the horse.