South DaCola

Editorial Cartoonist from South Dakota

January 2020

Mayor TenHaken Paul Ten Haken racism SF City Council Sioux Falls

TenHaken says, ‘No Haters’!

l3wis 19Comments

I first want to say that I think this resolution is a good idea;

Mayor Paul TenHaken next week will introduce a resolution to the city council condemning hate, a move endorsed by the city’s Human Relations Commission.

“Hate has no place in Sioux Falls,” TenHaken said in a news release Thursday afternoon. “I’m proud to stand with the Human Relations Commission and condemn bias, discrimination and hate in Sioux Falls.

“With this resolution we reaffirm our belief that hate has no place in Sioux Falls and remind the public of ways to report discrimination to the City,” he added.

We should all disavow hate. I am actually embarrassed that in 2020 we have to pass resolutions to tell people to stop being racist jerks.

But this resolution has many procedural and intent problems. It’s nothing but some feel good reach around more than anything else. I also find it ironic that this resolution is being proposed right after the human relations attorney with the city announced he is running for State’s Attorney.

Kawinky-Dink? I think not.

So what are the issues;

1) It has no teeth. It just basically says that the city doesn’t like people being racist. Well Lah-De-Dah. I guess I am unaware of ANY city official, whether elected or employed who thinks it is a good idea to be racist. And in my personal life I ‘try’ to stay away from these people. So basically this is just a ‘memo’ or ‘sticky note’ from the mayor’s office.

2) The mayor should not be legislating. As I have told you fine folks in the past, according to charter, the city council is responsible for legislating and the mayor should run the city. As I mentioned above, this is just a campaign hat trick for the city’s human relations attorney, Daniel Haggar.

3) The mayor avoids gay pride events. I can’t tell you if PTH thinks gay peeps are ‘Icky’. Many have suspected that he does, but I have never seen him say anything publicly about it except at Dem Forum when he was running for office in which he stated that he was not ‘homophobic’. But what I find interesting about this resolution is that it did not include the LGBTQ community, or many other minority groups, like people of Muslim or Jewish faith that are discriminated against consistently. If we are going to pass a resolution disavowing hate, shouldn’t it cover all the bases?

This isn’t a Paul TenHaken issue, it is a bigger issue with politics in general starting with the top down, it’s all about ‘image’ instead of ‘substance’. If we really want to take a stand we need to pass ordinances that has teeth, otherwise this isn’t worth the paper it is written on. On top of that, hate speech is protected by the 1st Amendment, so is this a violation of our constitution?

We make change through education, and teaching people how not to hate. A more fitting resolution would be for the city to set up a grant program that funds seminars on teaching people about different cultures, creeds and sexual preferences. I have often told people that moving to a suburb of Seattle from a farm in South Dakota when I was 16 to live with my dad was the best cultural education of my life. I will sum it up really quickly, everybody has the same hopes and dreams as you do, no matter their color or creed. The city needs to educate people about cultures instead of handing out back rubs, sticky notes, lapel pins and pens.

Developers Development Downtown Sioux Falls Sioux Falls TIFs

We would accrue more property taxes if Sioux Steel project doesn’t receive TIF

l3wis 6Comments

We have heard the argument already, if we give the $21.5 million dollar TIF the property will have a tax worth of $1.6 million a year. But folks those tax payments don’t occur until 20 years from now as Joe Sneve’s story pointed out.

So if we give them the TIF, for the next 20 years they will be paying $56K a year. So in 20 years they will be paying a total of $1.12 million in taxes for a $185 million dollar facility. Hardly anything.

BUT, if we don’t give them the TIF, the value of the project would be approximately $163.5 million (flat parking lot) with an annual tax bill that they must pay on day one of about $1.4 million a year with no rebate, a value of $28 million in collected taxes in 20 years.

Common sense would tell us that getting $28 million over the next 20 years in property taxes as opposed to $1.12 is a better deal for city coffers.

Also look at the economic impact argument. They said they would have to forgo the parking ramp if they don’t get the TIF. How many jobs does a parking ramp provide? ZERO. Whether they build flat parking or a ramp, there really isn’t a economic impact either way.

Not only could this project still be successful without the TIF, the property tax revenue is over 20X more if we forgo the TIF. On top of that, the owner and developer of this project could sell at the end of TIF and get all the benefits of the tax rebate without ever paying a 100% of the tax bill. It is a windfall for them, and little else.

Not sure who is doing the math at the Planning Department, but this TIF is anything but an economic impact. They will be voting on the first hurdle tonight at the 6 PM Planning meeting.

County Commission Minnehaha County

Wall Lake Bike Trail idea has very little buy-in from residents

l3wis 4Comments

When this was first proposed to the Minnehaha County Commission, it sounded like a great idea. But, as we all know, great ideas die really fast when you don’t get buy-in from the residents. I was actually pretty surprised when I watched the MCC meeting on Tuesday that the group proposing this trail never got buy-in from the residents of Wall Lake.

Huge Fail!

Let this be a lesson that when you have a good idea (I still think it is) that you do your research and get everyone on board, or at least a majority on board.

Let’s face it, most people don’t like change, but I think this has more to do with privacy. People live on Wall Lake for a reason, they like the solitude, that’s a given. I wish this would have been more thought out and planned so the residents could still get their privacy while having a great quality of life project around the lake.

1st Amendment Alex Jensen Dan Lederman Elections Republicans SF City Council Sioux Falls Theresa Stehly

Sioux Falls City Councilor Stehly was on the attack yesterday, and it was the ‘Good Fight’

l3wis 17Comments

First, the obvious – The First Amendment DOES not protect free speech when comes to using tax dollars to promote a political candidate. This doesn’t even take a Constitutional scholar to figure it out. This is why Trump was impeached in Congress. He was withholding tax dollars to help his presidential candidacy.

While I understand a local entrepreneur casually mentioning a city council candidate he is helping out in an article funded by two institutions that receive some tax funding (state and city) may seem not as grand as what our president did, it is still worth talking about and correcting.

I was extremely irritated that some elected officials on the council chose to defend this obvious violation of free speech rights and state law.

Just because you violate campaign rules ‘a little bit’ doesn’t make it alright. That essentially was their argument.

While what councilors Brekke, Stehly and citizen Bruce Danielson said may have been uncomfortable, it was very appropriate to say and the right time to say it, in a public meeting. No one was advocating to arrest anyone, no one was going to throw some one in jail or fine them. This was simply an effort to ‘nip it in the butt’ before it became common place. People make mistakes, we get it.

Over the past day, I have told several people that Matt Paulson (Alex Jensen’s quasi-campaign manager, treasurer and fundraiser) did nothing wrong, neither did Siouxfalls.business. Stehly wasn’t attacking them, she was simply telling the Sioux Falls Development Foundation (and I guess DSU) that moving forward they should not promote certain candidates because they receive public money.

This isn’t an attack, it’s a fact, and many journalists and citizens agree.

We know what’s going on here, and we have been seeing this across the state for several years. The Republican establishment (a very small elitist group) has controlled our State House for almost 50 years, and they are trying to take control of our County Commissions, State’s Attorney offices and other non-partisan government entities like city councils and school boards. I want to clarify, I have voted for ‘good’ Republicans (like Stehly, Brekke, Staggers and Jamison) on these non-partisan bodies, because they have integrity and want to keep party affiliation out of politics. The group I am referring to is a very small group of ‘know it all’ elitist, establishment Republicans that want to control their business interests, and they see an opportunity here, though their actions look more like ‘amateur hour’.

I have said it already, they are using candidates like Jensen for city council, Cynthia Mickelson for school board and State’s Attorney candidates like Haggar and Bengford to stack the deck and implement their pro-corporate welfare of government, these are NOT Republicans in the sense of tradition, these are elitist greed mongers that only pray to one God; money. Don’t believe me? Why else would the South Dakota GOP Chair, a Jewish Iowa businessman lobby for an Islamic theocratic government? Because party doesn’t matter, only money and greed.

So yes, Stehly was on the attack yesterday. She was attacking greed, corruption, partisanship, lack of integrity and lack of open government. And not just ‘a little bit’ but a lot.

Development Elections SF City Council Sioux Falls

UPDATE: Just How does the Sioux Falls Development Foundation use our money?

l3wis 19Comments

Just for clarification on the video below, it may have been Rick Kiley who actually said ‘More Fabrication’ and NOT Neitzert, but we are uncertain.

UPDATE: Stehly questioned the head of the Development Foundation today at the informational meeting about this. It was a good discussion. I think Brekke and Danielson explained the reason why this isn’t protected speech;

Councilor Janet Brekke as well as civic watchdog Bruce Danielson countered, though, saying because the Sioux Falls Development Foundation receives public funds, it is held to a higher standard when it comes to political speech.

State Law on this is also very clear;

Universal Citation: SD Codified L § 12-27-20

12-27-20. Expenditure of public funds to influence election outcome prohibited. The state, an agency of the state, and the governing body of a county, municipality, or other political subdivision of the state may not expend or permit the expenditure of public funds for the purpose of influencing the nomination or election of any candidate, or for the petitioning of a ballot question on the ballot or the adoption or defeat of any ballot question. This section may not be construed to limit the freedom of speech of any officer or employee of the state or such political subdivisions in his or her personal capacity. This section does not prohibit the state, its agencies, or the governing body of any political subdivision of the state from presenting factual information solely for the purpose of educating the voters on a ballot question.

Source: SL 2007, ch 80, § 20.

I was happy to hear the head of the Development Foundation say that the board will look into this.

The taxpayers of Sioux Falls have donated millions of tax dollars to the SFDF for supposed workforce development. So how do they spend their money? They buy an article on Siouxfalls.business about the treasurer of Alex Jensen’s council campaign, Matt Paulson. Can you say possible conflict of interest?

This paid piece is sponsored by the Sioux Falls Development Foundation.

While I don’t take issue with them paying for an article about Paulson, he has many achievements, I take issue with an organization who receives tax dollars from us (even if it is coming out of a different ‘pool’) on a person who is currently engaged with at least one city council race (maybe two).

The SFDF should have steered clear of this possible conflict. I do think they are a decent organization that does some good in our community, but when you are receiving tax dollars and other special incentives from the city and citizens, this just looks bad.

« Previous Page — Next Page »

You Missed

1st Amendment Code Enforcement Downtown Sioux Falls SFPD Sioux Falls

Code Enforcement ALERT!

1st Amendment Veterans Day

Jesse Ventura Sounds off

1st Amendment Public Utilities Public Works Sioux Falls

The POOP Hole Crew

1st Amendment Developers Development Mayor TenHaken SF City Council Sioux Falls Trump

Was the Sioux Falls City Council blackmailed by Sally Tomato?