UPDATE: Mayor TenHaken to announce re-election campaign a day before trying to sneak in a tax increase thru resolution?

UPDATE: This is NOT a fee increase, just an annual notice that the fee exists and renewed, it has since 1992.

City Council Members and Council Staff,

Good afternoon. A resolution (per City Ordinance 96.033) will be presented at Tuesday’s City Council
Meeting to levy an annual front foot assessment fee for street maintenance and repair. The special
assessment funds are used to partially fund the highways and streets operational budget for the
repairs and maintenance of our city streets to include pothole patching, asphalt surface
maintenance, and street sweeping.The front foot assessment fee has been in place since 1992.
The front foot assessment fee will be $1.00 per foot for 2022 and has not changed since 2009.
Attached is the resolution and on the back is the amount that has been collected for each respective
year since 1992.
Thank you, Mark Cotter


It looks as though Mayor Poops is finally going to announce he is running. The irony of this is astounding when you consider that on Tuesday night he is trying to push an over $9 million dollar tax increase thru resolution (item 21) which is legally dubious since tax or fee increases normally go thru the ordinance process of 1st and 2nd readings AND a presentation to the council in advance. Some councilors I spoke with didn’t even know it was on the agenda.

According to the math (thanks Mike Z – I updated his numbers);

Looks to be a new tax being created assessed on the residents of Sioux Falls, is this true?  $1.00 Per foot per property along our ‘streets’. If we have a total # of 900 centerline street miles in this city (1,800 if you include both sides of the street), and each mile is roughly 5,280 feet, this tax generates $9,504,000.00 for the city to be used to maintain and resurface highways, streets, and roads in the city. With a $654,000,000 million revenue stream, is a new tax really necessary?

Once again Paul is showing us his lack of transparency and his dark hatred towards open government. Most government’s would have put this thru a vetting process with it’s public works department, the city council and the citizens. Not to mention in the same night there will be a property tax increase (item 15). You also have to remember we spent most of the $50 million in Covid money on play things and gave away $144 million in tax rebates this year. It looks like we will be heading into the dark abyss for another 4 years unless Paul gets one heck of a challenger.



23 comments ↓

#1 D@ily Spin on 09.12.21 at 12:33 pm

Isn’t the normal method to assess property owners for individual street projects? This would be a tax without defined construction. It’s a sophisticated trick for funding TIF’s that smells unconstitutional.

#2 Mike Zitterich on 09.12.21 at 3:03 pm

Explanation I got is this is the “Frontage Tax” that property owners have been paying annually, so I may have been wrong, this may not be a new tax, but the frontage tax assessed to the square footage of where your property abutts road, which pays for Pot Hole repairs and street sweeping.

But it is coincidence that this tax raises about the same dollars as the MOTOR VEHICLE FUNDS.

#3 Steve on 09.12.21 at 4:33 pm

Nothing surprises me with slickery Mayor no-tie. I’m sure that since he is under the thumb of so many developers, they’ll be lining up to fund his campaign. Let’s throw in a donation by Daugaard as well. Would be great if someone with ethics could be well funded to run against him. We all know that won’t happen!

#4 Mike Zitterich on 09.12.21 at 6:51 pm

Yes, I got an explanation on the funds, I thought it was a new tax, its not a new tax, these are the “Frontage Tax” that we collect every year.

According to my source, they use these ‘fees’ to pay for Street Sweeping, Pot Hole Repairs, Maintenance of Streets.

It is good though that “WE” are talking about the TAXES we paid, I love this discussion.

How many people knew this fact -The CITY OF SIOUX FALLS generates revenue from:

MOTOR VEHICLE FUNDS:
1-South Dakota D.O.R………………$2,019,977.00
2-Minnehaha County…………………….841,307.00
3-Lincoln County………………………….656.279.00
TOTAL MOTOR VEHICLE FUNDS…..$3,517,563.00

For 2021 – The CITY is on pace to collect $4,005,720.00

Motor Vehicle Funds as per SDCL 32-11 are used to maintain, service, and repair City Highways, Streets, and Roads.

So – what do you think? Could we use the M.V.F’s for the same thing as we use this 1% Per Foot Property Assessment?

That could be a great discussion for Tuesday, what do you say Scott?

#5 Fear & Loathing in Sioux Falls on 09.12.21 at 7:36 pm

It’s imperative that we further research the Knobe/Schirmer race of ’74. Knobe’s candidacy started that year as a DJ’s prank, but then it snowballed into success. I believe Mr. Zokaites is the perfect Rick for ’22. The zombies are some baggage, but nothing a good spin master can’t handle. Perhaps, we should fill the upcoming Zombie Walk with bloody characters in plaid jackets, blue jeans, and who are wearing luggage tan wingtips with white marshmallowy soles. And what about walking tombstones which follow, that replace the engraved letters “RIP” with “TIF”? AND maybe these bloody plaid characters – with camping gear in hand – could be chased by rainbow flags.

#6 "Woodstock" on 09.12.21 at 7:37 pm

“I am going to move to Taupeville just so I’ll have access to a convenient voting box for that election”….

#7 l3wis on 09.12.21 at 8:09 pm

Mike, doesn’t matter if it is an existing tax or fee, all changes to those ordinances must go thru the proper process.

#8 Mike Zitterich on 09.13.21 at 11:02 am

Scott, I agree. and you are right.

I guess the question is what is the “Resolution” asking for and what is it doing.

And you also may be right, if the CITY expanded its total miles of ‘streets’ from 800 to 900 miles, I would in fact call that a “tax increase”.

Like you, I am not even quite sure if this $1 per Foot tax is a direct representation of the service itself.

I still think the MOTOR VEHICLE FUNDS would be a better representation of this Service, since, the “DRIVERS” are using the roads, abusing the roads, etc.

#9 Erica on 09.13.21 at 11:39 am

Aren’t housing property owners taxed enough already in this city as it is?! When do homeowners get a TIF? This city has become overly greedy and my family and I are now seriously planning to move as soon as our son finishes school now rather than make this city our forever home.

#10 Reliable Voter on 09.13.21 at 2:18 pm

The Mayor is running for re-election to a job he dislikes and complains about as a drain on his time and emotional well-being in hopes an opening for another political job that he will dislike and that he has neither the temperament or training to be anything more than a middling back-bencher will become available. It’s “carry yourself with the confidence of a mediocre white man” and “hey men, this is cowboy country” R leadership.

#11 name thankfully no longer in quotes on 09.13.21 at 3:13 pm

Infinitely better than Not My Man Mike, and definitely better than Biotech Jo would have been.

#12 Very Stable Genius on 09.13.21 at 4:28 pm

“I didn’t sign up for this, but please support my re-election effort”….

#13 "Woodstock" on 09.13.21 at 6:17 pm

“Anti-quotation boy just further proved that he works for the city.”

#14 Mike Lee Zitterich on 09.13.21 at 6:59 pm

FACT: Since adopting the new form of City Government in 1994, we have had 3 Great Mayors, or should I say “legendary mayors’ and each mayor regardless of how you feel about them, has served two terms.

1994-2002..Gary Hanson = Phillips to the Falls Project

2002-2010..Dave Munson = Expanded the Downtown Libary, Balanced the Budget, Never Overspent.

2010-2018..Mike Huether = Tripled Our Debt and is Responsible for $20,000,000 New Parking Ramp.

2018-Present = Paul TenHaken = Reconstructed Fiscal Policy back to a More Conservative Approach, Became the “Partnership Mayor” signing Awesome Deals, Very Quiet, Laid Back, and Friendly Community Leader, and the Most “Transparent-People Friendly Mayor”.

#15 Name thankfully no longer in quotes on 09.13.21 at 8:20 pm

So, the fact that Mike was a self serving sh***y mayor and Jo would’ve been worse proves that I work for the city? How exactly?

#16 Dennis on 09.13.21 at 10:18 pm

Are there any other candidates for any of the local positions or are we in for business as usual?

#17 l3wis on 09.13.21 at 10:33 pm

Dennis, great question, but I am afraid no one knows. Paul of course has only one challenger, David Z. Currently no one has put their hat in the ring for SE or Erickson’s at Large. There are also NO challengers to Brekke or Soehl. Now I have heard that Soehl will have at least 2-3 challengers. I also have heard they have recruited people for SE and Erickson’s seat. I also have heard they are trying to find someone to run against Brekke. But nothing solid I can say right now.

#18 Dennis on 09.13.21 at 11:01 pm

stehly running for something would at least force a debate

#19 Theocratic Republic of SD on 09.14.21 at 9:14 am

4 Years from now it will be Congressman or Senator TenHaken from South Dakota. How about Governor TenHaken?

#20 Mike Lee Zitterich on 09.14.21 at 10:43 am

I thought of running for 2022 for the At Large Seat for experience, but mostly to push for open debates. I think all of us should throw our name into the hat, it matters not if you win or lose, what matters most is that “WE” force certain topics, areas of discussion to be debated, the point to get on the ballot is to force incumbants to ANSWER to their voting record, and let the chips fall where they fall.

If I were to run, I could only run on the two open At Large Districts – one to replace Erickson’s seat, and the other to challenge Brekke.

I rather run and get elected in 2022 in my district when Neitzert becomes termed out, its a much smaller district, and I know more people in that district, and it costs less to campaign in the local districts.

But – I do feel that ALL OF US sould petition to be placed on the ballot, I like to see 10-20 people on each spot, but quite frankly, to run for At-Large you have to spend $50,000 and more vs very little for the local districts where you simply need to go door to door and walk your neighorhoods to meet and greet people.

That is why I proposed to the Charter Revision Commitee that we discuss changing the City Disricts from 5 to 7 Districts and getting rid of 1 At Large.

I feel 7 Districts and only 2 At Large would move the Council more closer to the people and with smaller sized districts, it places more emphasis on getting to know people.

It is a lot easier to get elected when have Small 20-28,000 populated districts, you know each other, attended the same schools, live in the same neighborhoods, have the same business interests, attend the same church, your kiddos play together, you attend the same neighborhood events.

All that collective attachment to district means you do NOT have to spend a lot of money, if any at all. Just enough to pay for Campaign Signs, Literature to provide people your ideas, morals, values, and faith.

So the only reason for me to run for At Large would either to challenge Brekke to hold her accountable to her voting record or to run for the vacant At Large Chair to force those candidates to ask tough questions.

The point being said, when you run only in a small populated district, where you are restricted who you can vote for, meaning “YOU KNOW THE PEOPLE” those who reside outside your district should have NO INFLUENCE in the debate, nor can vote for you, just those who share your common values, morals, beliefs, business interests, land and development interests, etc. So you narrow the field scope to less dynamics.

Will I place myself on the 2022 Ballot for an At Large Seat, not sure, have until January to think about it. Do I expect to win? Maybe not in 2022, but the “Experience” will be great, and getting to know people, and them getting to know me would be exposure for 2024

Did RON PAUL campaign for President 7 times knowing he had a chance to win? No – he campaigned for President to challenge the status quo, hold them accountable, and to force certian topics to be addressed. Did he expect to win? NO – but he did it to allow the people to have a “VOICE” and to make that voice be heard, and he enforced the Constitution to be adhered to.

Did his plan work? Well – it may have helped lead to the Presidency of Donald Trump, the more Ron Paul talked, challenged, and discussed topics, the more people were turned away from politician lies and fibs, and more they were touting for change, to elect a more common man, and that man risen to fame in 2016 – Donald Trump.

If I were to run in 2022 – it would be for experience, to get to know more people, to get exposure, and to force several important topics to be heard, discussed, and to force candidates to discuss the hardcore issues of today:

City Spending

Taxes

Streets/Roads

To Limit City Government in Our Lives

To Enforce Transparency, Honest Governing, Public Discussion, Input

To Expose the Growing List of Taxes We Pay

To Expose the Debt Being Taken on by the City

To Expose the Amount of Federal Dollars we Accept

To Discuss Changes Needed in the Governing Process

To Make Incumbants, Candidates Answer to their Wants, Needs, and Goals, and Voting Record.

Mike Zitterich
For HONEST GOVERNMENT

#21 D@ily Spin on 09.14.21 at 7:14 pm

I’m wondering how the dollar per street foot would be collected. Certainly it wouldn’t be part of county property tax. This is sounding like another traffic camera scheme. When the city sends you a statement, as for camera tickets, don’t pay it. Let it ride. The city will have to put a lien on your property. It’s easy to prove their judicial process is unconstitutional with half a dozen court cases. They’d be foolish to sue. Indeed, make the collection process cost them more than they collect. The accounting will be a nightmare.

#22 D@ily Spin on 09.14.21 at 7:32 pm

Mr. Zitterich I hope you’ll reconsider running for council. Strong Mayor Charter prevents change you mentioned. You’ll have to accept bribes for your vote or city mafia will find kiddy porn on your computer. What must happen is a new constitutional charter with honesty, transparency, checks, and balances. Meanwhile, the council and mayor are puppets for a few lords who control everything.

#23 Mike Zitterich on 09.14.21 at 10:58 pm

Daily Spin, thank you for the kind words, I am working on getting the Charter Revision Committee to revise the “charter” to create 2 new Local Districts, while getting rid of 1 At Large. This gives the people 7 Districts or 1 VOTE Per 28,000 People.

I proposed: Downtown-Business District, a Central East District, Central West District, along with a NORTH, SOUTH, EAST, and WEST + 2 At Large.

I do not want any At Large Reps other than the Mayor, but, the Land Owners/property holders will want some protection on the council, which is the true purpose of the At Large Representative Chairs.

IF you go back to last weeks 9/8/2021 Charter Revision Commission Hearing, you will see my presentation and you can pull up my documents, Scott also speaks during Public Comments.

Currently, the Central District only has 1 vote on the council, while the outer 4 districts can out vote the city core 4-1 while you have the 3 At Large Votes.

IF I can convince the Charter Revision Committee to accept my proposal, the city core will have 3 votes to the 4 outer votes plus 2 At Large votes.

Keep in mind, even “MY” Proposal does not steer us away from the Strong Mayor System, it simply “Separates” the Mayor Office from the Council.

9 Council Chairs means the COUNCIL shall always have the Tie Breaker, and the Mayor never breaks a tie.

The Mayor can keep his VETO power, while the Council can always override the Veto with a 3/4 Vote.

If you are curious on how the discussion went last week, you may watch the discussion on the city website ‘recent meetings” My presentation begins @ the 40 minute mark, and it created some pretty interesting dialogue.

Because my concept effects Charter Sections 2.02, 6.02, and 9.05 – it will be discussed at all 3 Hearings, so you may participate next month if you wish to.

My goal is SMALLER DISTRICTS, MORE VOICE for the People, and More “Honest Government” and “Transparent Government”. And you get that if you have smaller districts.

You will never take true power away from the Land Owners, Property Holders, Business Owners themselves, in reality – the true voting power is vested in “LAND” and who owns that land has the power. “WE” can attempt to balance that out by how ‘we’ construct the City Council back together.

I encourage everyone to run for City Council in the 5 Local Districts, the Land Owners are always going to put forth their man or woman for At Large Candidacy. That is just how the system is set up.

However, with smaller districts, we can take some of their power away, if we can create small districts of 28,000 or less, which effectively creates more districts.

The U.S Constitution favors a 1 VOICE PER 30,000 Legislative Apportionment.

Today, the people of Sioux Falls have a 1 VOICE PER 40,000 and if we do not change that, as the CITY grows, expands, and grows larger at the rate it is going today, by the year 2050 the people will have of nearly 1 VOICE PER 50,000 which is equal to some of the cities with populations of 500,000 people.

Smaller Districts is the way to go to get a city operated in the best interests of the “Common Man”