Sioux Falls Districting Commission ask about the expansion of Central District

I’m really not going to take sides, (FF 42:00) but some of the members of the board brought up some good points about expanding the Central District. Jeff Schmidt, who basically has been drawing these maps for years and getting the rubberstamps from the commission really did quite the Mexican Hat Dance. I do think though the Commission is going to push on this once the actual census numbers come out (late August) and I agree that Central District should encompass most of the Central part of Sioux Falls. In the 29 years I have lived in Sioux Falls I have only lived out of the Central District a few times and it truly is the best part of our city, once we can get rid of the trains.

Speaking of the trains, City Hall moles have been telling me there is a push by the administration and downtown developers to move the trains out of Downtown! Bravo! While I totally support this you have to keep some things in mind;

• You should really involve the public so they help put the pressure on the Railroads and Feds. Trying to secretly negotiate with the RR’s will get the same result as the RR Redevelopment project . . .

• This should have been negotiated to begin with when the last mayor gave $26 million to the RR for $2 million in dirty land that the Federal Taxpayers probably owned anyway, but he failed, one of the biggest failures in negotiating in the history of the city, but what do expect from a low life credit card peddler?

• Which brings us to the most important part, this is Federal Easement land which means Thune, Rounds and Dusty will have to get involved, as well as the transportation secretary Pete and possibly even Congress itself, or even a signature from Sleepy Joe. Moving RR tracks is kind of like pulling King Arthur’s sword from the stone. I wish them luck, but I have a feeling I will be sleeping in my basement for years to come.


#1 "Woodstock" on 06.14.21 at 9:57 pm

“YES!!, YES!!, you know what this all means, right?!”…. “We are finally going to get those high speed trains to come to the Brandon vicinity!”….. “YES!!”….. RIGHT ON!!…. Another win for Mayor Mike!……

#2 Very Stable Genius on 06.14.21 at 10:00 pm

If there is a finite number of districts, but the population is growing, then doesn’t that automatically force the hand of those who are plotting the new district boundaries to make not only the central, but all of the districts geographically larger?

#3 D@ily Spin on 06.14.21 at 10:37 pm

The Feds will never give up railroad right-of-way. Not gonna happen. However, there’s potential for a subsidized rail mass transit system. Huether thought he could build on federal land. The Yards was a huge blunder. BNRR is still laughing about that. He did build on VA property (Aquatics Center) that’ll eventually revert to veterans therapy. I’m hoping the present administration doesn’t spend into thin air as did Huether.

#4 RR Funtimes on 06.15.21 at 8:56 am

When challenged the Supreme Court has not invalidated property rights of fee simple ownership of the land the railroads have used. Very little western American and especially RR land in South Dakota was ever purchased fee simple. The land was to be used only by the railroads, for railroad purposes.

Once the railroad abandons the land, it reverts to the property to which it was originally was platted. Once the railroad is no longer using the land, the railroad cannot sell it, it is legally abandoned so the original land plat is enforced.

Whoever owns the original plat now, becomes the owner of the the land the RR once used, not the the state of South Dakota, city of Sioux Falls or the railroads.

Huether gave the Fed’s money to the railroad to build another yard on the edge of town and give up some of their right of way easement in downtown Sioux Falls. The idiot in charge of the the Sioux Falls side of the project did not understand how the railroad works in Sioux Falls or the south yard would have been included.

The Feds gave a $27 million bonus to BNSF through the publicity starved mayor in order to make the property deal seem like a legal transfer.

#5 Mike Lee Zitterich on 06.15.21 at 11:05 am

I do recall, much of the land on each side of the River were “homestead land grants”. If that is true – then the east bank would resort back to the Western Town Company whom were the original patent holders, a investment Trust Group from Dubuque, IA who staked out land, to build future towns, It was this group that created the Town of Sioux Falls, so would this place the land in the hands of this “group”…

As for the west bank – a group of investors that formed the Dakota Land Company homesteaded and claimed the land along the western bank, this investment trust were a group of individual who owned and operated the St Paul and Omaha Railroad lines, which today is known as the BNSF, and they held the land patent until 1877 when one of the members of W.T.C by the name of W.W Brookings purchased 37 acres of land today known as Seney Island of whom then ceded the land to the State in 1902 to allow the very same investors of the Dakota Land Company to build their railroad connection.

Lets also remember, under the South Dakota Constitution Article 22, Section 2 – all lands not held by South Dakota, and of which any American holds land patent claims to the land, mostly 80 or 160 acres, and of where the land was Exempted from future taxes as per the 1862 Homestead Act (federal law) – shall be tax exempt and forever owned by the “Patent Holder”.

IF this is all true – then the East Bank has always been occupied, owned, and operated by the “Town of Sioux Falls” and the original or current patent holders still own the land and can do as they so wish on the land; and whereas the West Bank has always been owned and occupied by the Investors of the St Paul, Omaha, and Santa Fe Railroad Companies whos investors formed the Dakota Land Company and occupied 160 acres of land situated between 6th Street north to 1st street.

We got to get our hands on a copy of the land patent to understand the terms set forth, the conditions agreed, and to discover and locate the heirs to the land today.

Also keep in mind these two Land Claims predate the State of South Dakota, so who ever owns this land, most likely holds a huge vested interest in forming the State of South Dakota as well, since it was the “LAND OWNERS” who got together to form the State in 1889.

Nonetheless, I love Trains, I love watching them, I love the fact they are still going thru Sioux Falls today, ‘we’ are a prairie city, and trains are what made this city. I would hate to see them completely removed from the city. It does not bother me to hold up and wait for them to pass thru, cause I enjoy watching them, and so do tons of people in Sioux Falls. I love the fact that you can walk through out the city and discover former places where the tracks used to be, and I love going downtown to see the trains, Please do NOT remove them.

#6 RR Funtimes on 06.15.21 at 4:12 pm

All of the land in Minnehaha county where there were rail lines had been homesteaded. None would revert to the land companies. There is a need to find out how the land proceeds are to be legally divided now.

#7 Very Stable Genius on 06.15.21 at 5:40 pm

Why would there be heirs if the initial plots have been petitioned out and then sold to others, who then sold it eventually, or passed it on to their own heirs, who might have then sold it overtime?

#8 "Woodstock" on 06.15.21 at 5:44 pm

“I love trains, too”…. “Does anyone else remember Joyland Park, like I do?”….. “Choo Choo!….. “…. “Then later we would all go off to ‘Luey Left a Gift’ to get some treats”….

#9 Mike Lee Zitterich on 06.16.21 at 5:35 am

VSG — What both Myself and RR FUNTIMES are saying,,

ALL the land at one time was ‘homesteaded’ under the 1862 Homestead Act at one time or the other. Who ever homsteaded the land, and received the land patent signed by the President between 1862-1902 which most the land in Minnehaha County was most likely purchased between, has a PATENT associated with the land. As I stated prior – the land in question was homesteaded by Dakota Land Company (west bank), and the Western Town Company (east bank).

IF you really wanted to find the true land owner, as listed on the Patent to the Sioux Steel Property, you have to do a title search and trace back all the way to the beginning, and I believe the last known “Patent Holder” of that particular land was W.W Brookings, while his heirs are the next in line. “HE” ceded a part of this land area to the State to allow for the Investors of the St Paul and Omaha Railroads to build their massive railroad lines thru the property.

Also Note: One who holds the Patent does NOT pay property tax.

IF, if Sioux Steel held the patent to the 37 acres of land as they claim they do, why are they paying Property Tax, as the 1862 Homestead Act makes the land “tax exempt”.

The STATE would only be allowed to “tax” only any lands not exempted and fully within the control of the State.

RR FUNTIMES –> correct me if I am wrong, much of these Land Claims (patent holders) most likely ceded their land to the State sometime between 1929-1939 after the 1933 Federal Emergency Banking Act where the Congress passed the law allowing the Federal Govt to go insolvment, in doing so, many Americans most effected by the “Great Panic of 1929” were taking out huge loans from the Bank, meaning they under laws passed between 1929-1939 had to surrender the ownership of the property to the State, while the “STATE” took temporary ownership rights to the land, placed a lien on the land in the name of the Bank. problem is, once that lien was cleared, the State was suppose to surrender the ownership rights back to the “real land owner”.

However, since then, “WE” have decided to allow the state to own the land, pay property tax on the land, and reap the benefits of Tax Subsidies, Grants, and Monetary Funds from the huge tax revenues.

TIFS came out of this so called “war on land”

So we play this game of cat and mouse over who really owns the land.

A section of the 1933 Federal Emergency Act – a resolution agreed to says “IF YOU CALL YOURSELF A U.S CITIZEN, you own no property rights to land, real property, tangible property, yourself, for that ownership right has been handed over to the State in return for tax benefits, privileges, immunities”.

#10 "Woodstock" on 06.16.21 at 10:14 am

“All I want to know is: Can my nest, in theory, be repossessed?”….. “Also, since my nest is attached to a tree, and that tree is embedded into the ground, then is my nest real or personal property?”…. “And if it is real property, then wouldn’t the term be seized and not repossessed?”….