November 2019

Sioux Falls City Council Agenda, Dec 2-4, 2019

Audit Committee Meeting • 4 PM • Monday, Dec 2

They are planning to play a little catchup by planning on doing 12 audits in 2020. Two audits are follow-ups and four are carry-overs.

External Audit Discussion

Landfill Licensing Audit

City Council Informational • 4 PM • Tuesday, Dec 3

Events Center Campus Study Report

Presentation on the transit situation. I have not got an update on what happened at the meeting on Monday, but I hear they have been having troubles getting a contract with a technology contractor.

City Council Regular Meeting • 7 PM • Tuesday, Dec 3

Item #7, Approval of Contracts, another $700K to Pavilion. This place is constantly bleeding money. I heard recently one of the main reasons they have been able to break attendance records is because they would put on a frequent FREE event at the arts center. Imagine that, letting people in for FREE would increase attendance. Who knew? Maybe they should try that – wait.

Item #29, Deferred license for C-Store by Dudley House. I’m not sure how this will go. You know my feelings, we should not have allowed the shelter to be built at that location.

Item #36, Williquors is applying for a a delivery license. I wonder if other liquor stores have this? For instance, when you order grocery delivery from Hy-Vee can you get a bottle to?

Items #45-47, 2nd Reading, Ordinance. This is the Railyard Flats purchase. I find it interesting that the name of the developer and the project has been left off the agenda description. Why?!

Item #50, 1st Reading, Ordinance. Here we go, the first of a series of bonds for the water reclamation plant upgrades. Isn’t it fun watching the city borrow millions of dollars, it gives me kind of a tingly warm feeling inside. NOT!

Item #51, 1st Reading, Ordinance. Here we go with farting around with our old skool system of liquor licensing. Even with a reduced price, it really still leaves no room for family businesses to compete. It think the city should take a more proactive approach and lobby the legislature to change the system, and the Lincoln and Minnehaha County Commissions should jump on board to.

Item #57, City will approve a preliminary plan for Sanford Sports Complex expansion. I wonder if they want to put up any more nets?

Item #58, Annexation agreement. I find it a little ironic that the city would choose to make this the last agenda item on a very long meeting. Remember when they wanted to shove public input to the end of the meetings because ‘business’ needed to be taken care of with ‘business’ first? Funny how these things work.

Planning Commission Meeting • 6 PM • Wednesday, Dec 4

Item #5-A, Planning commission is recommending denial. Not sure what is going on.

Why is the City of Sioux Falls seeking bids for private property upgrades?

To tell you the truth, I couldn’t answer this question, I post this out of curiosity;

The City of Sioux Falls, SD, requests formal bids for Minnehaha Country Club and The Country Club of Sioux Falls Pond Improvements.

Now I know the city has helped with retention and detention ponds in the past on private property, but I’m NOT sure how the costs are worked out with the property owners. I’m really kind of clueless how that works. But I find it interesting that the city would be using decorative course ponds as detention ponds. I guess you are killing two birds with one stone. But also remember, these are private recreational clubs who benefit from having those ponds. It reminds me of the massive levees we built with Federal and local tax dollars conveniently along the country clubs.

Hopefully someone from the city will explain how this all works.

A few reasons why communities are fighting 5G

Here is a great article from August in the WSJ explaining why cities are fighting 5G;

But since then, the FCC has rolled out its 5G Fast plan requiring cities and states to approve new 5G antennas within 60 or 90 days. It also limits what government leaders can charge carriers for the real estate on which the new infrastructure will hang—be it a utility pole, streetlight or even building facade.

This was one of many arguments I had against 5G. Local government entities should have the right to charge a reasonable amount. The telecoms are going to make billions from the technology. Why shouldn’t the taxpayers who own the poles get a piece of that pie?

City leaders say their power to zone and regulate infrastructure is being abridged. More than 90 cities and counties have joined together in a lawsuit, currently before the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, arguing that the FCC has overstepped its authority. A decision could happen as early as in the spring, but it could also take much longer.

Here was another concern. How can we allow a private industry to tell us where and how they are going to install their technology. Heck, in Sioux Falls, you even have to have a permit to ‘place’ a tool shed in your yard. And the telecoms will be spending millions to fight this – they could possibly drag this out so long that we will have 10G by the time it gets resolved.

This sort of thing could happen in other cities, despite FCC rules that say permits are automatically approved after 60 or 90 days, says Mr. Liccardo. “There are lots of ways for local bureaucracies to make it difficult even when the federal government says they must,” he adds.

Blair Levin, a fellow at the Brookings Institution and a former chief of staff for FCC chairman Reed Hundt, said, “What the wireless guys are asking is for cities to treat them totally different than every other entity asking for construction permits. I think it will backfire because, in the fullness of time, instead of a cooperative relationship you’ll get a hostile relationship.”

I don’t think we will have a ‘hostile relationship’ because I think most people want this – even though most don’t even know how it works. My issue is with how this got approved and the overreach of the Federal Government. But what is even sadder is that those who are supposed to be representing us, the Mayor, City attorney’s office and City Council rolled over like old dogs, and the mayor was out cheerleading the effort while his head was up Ironic Johnny Thune-Bag’s ass. I wonder if there was any room for the pom-poms?

Rapid City tries to push for voter suppression, foiled for now

As we all know, in Sioux Falls, this has already occurred due to a quiet decision by the school board a few years ago. They tried to do it in RC and got caught;

In February 2019, Rapid City police chief Karl Jegeris and School Superintendent Dr. Lori Simon met privately with Pennington County’s new Auditor, Cindy Mohler, and directed her to find new polling places for the ten voting precincts that currently use public schools. The elected School Board members were never informed or consulted as to this change of policy, learning about it eight months later when it—along with all elements of this story—was revealed in greater detail by the Rapid City Journalin its November 3 and November 19 editions.

As you know in Sioux Falls, not only have they eliminated polling places at most schools, they went to super precincts where they pretty much eliminated the entire Northern part of the city for the $300 school bond issue. So here is a little tidbit of interest;

No school shootings or violent incidents in connection with a polling place anywhere in America have been documented.

Yet we are often told this is about the ‘safety’ of the ‘children’. Hogwash! This has been about voter suppression. When you don’t have a precinct in the entire Northern part of your voting district, that speaks volumes of the intent, but they fall back on the excuse ‘What about the kids?’

Most Rapid City voters drive to the polls, and roughly one-third vote early at the Auditor’s office. Some low-income people lack transportation, and walk to the polls or depend on a ride to get there. If a large percentage of voters are suddenly re-directed to a new, less accessible polling place, there is the fear that a lower turnout will result.

And that is what has happened. The SFSD has devised a way to get the people who can afford a property tax increase to the polls and eliminating those who may be opposed. It’s a brilliant scheme. It also gives them the excuse to hand count ballots as a cost savings measure and instead of using mostly volunteers they used employees who work in the finance office. But RC said, no way!

At two Rapid City School Board meetings in November, citizens from across the political spectrum, myself among them, pleaded with the board to allow voting to continue at the schools. Rep. Tina Mullally (R-Rapid City), described the proposed change as voter suppression. Her colleague, Rep. Tony Randolph (R-Rapid City), commented on the negative “optics” of removing voting from the schools at the same time that a $189 million bond issue (the largest per capita school bond issue in South Dakota history) is coming before local voters. Several speakers pointed out that, at a time when schools are teaching less “civics” and students are graduating without a strong understanding of government and democracy, watching adults come to their schools to exercise their franchise can be a positive experience. Ramona Herrington, a local Native American activist, commented that she could not believe that she was on the same side of the issue as the ultraconservative Citizens for Liberty.

This outpouring of support led board members to adopt a resolution sponsored by Curt Pochardt in support of leaving polling places in the schools.

I have often said it is a sad time in our democracy when we have to constantly sneak around to figure out what our elected officials are up to behind closed doors. Voting rights are the highest level of an open and transparent government. Rapid City dodged a bullet – for now. It looks like they are going to try to do a reach around with the County Commission. I feel that the ones pushing for a school bond in RC saw the immense opportunity to only get those they wanted voting for the bond to the polls. They saw the soviet like election results in Sioux Falls and how they pulled it off. I guess the other school districts in South Dakota do learn things from us 🙁