South DaCola

Editorial Cartoonist from South Dakota

November 2021

Corona Virus Dr. Charles Chima Health and Human Services Healthcare Healthcare reform Mayor TenHaken SF City Council Sioux Falls Socialized Healthcare

Did the City of Sioux Falls Health Director ask for a vaccination mandate for city employees?

l3wis 6Comments

I don’t know the answer to that question because obviously there has been NO mandate at this point, and I don’t expect the city’s top employee manager, Mayor TenHaken, a (closet) right-winger, to mandate one. I believe he could do so by executive order, but lacks the spine to do it.

Several of my city moles have told me that Dr. Chima, the Health Director, did ask that the city has a vaccination mandate. If that is true, he was obviously denied, which is no surprise.

I have also heard from people visiting Falls Community Health that many people working at the clinic don’t wear masks even though the CDC requires a clinic receiving Federal money should require the employees to wear masks. Supposedly one person working at the clinic was asked wear their mask was and they said, “The mayor said I don’t have to wear one.”

I wonder how the CDC and Medicare would feel about that and future Federal funding of the clinic?

I find this concerning, because this place does receive Federal and Local tax dollars, and common sense would tell you that when working in a medical clinic you should be wearing a mask. The private clinics require it and follow CDC guidelines. Heck, Burger King employees even still wear masks.

I fully support vaccination mandates for taxpayer funded employees. As major employers like Sanford and Tyson Foods have proven, compliance is over 95%. Mandates work and the handful of employees you would lose wouldn’t be missed. Maybe the city has $49 million laying around for severance 🙁

Downtown Sioux Falls Property Taxes SF City Council Sioux Falls Taxes

Does the Sioux Falls City Council already have the power to give property tax cuts?

l3wis 6Comments

As l learned on Wednesday there is probably going to be proposed legislation next year that could change TIFs to apply to residential housing. But does the city have to wait for Pierre to make a move?

I don’t think so.

There are already things the city has been doing or are planning on doing;

• A home buying program for police officers and firefighters

• The city can give property tax rebates to homeowners, I think the last mayor to do this city wide was Hanson

• The mayor gives yearly tax rebates to dozens of developers and big employers

• Community development loans either low interest or no interest and federal grants associated with the program

• Councilors Pat Starr and Curt Soehl are exploring elderly property tax rebates

The city council only likely has the power to rebate the city’s portion of the property tax, but over a period of 5-10 years, that is significant savings.

I don’t think the city has to wait for state law to change, I think they have the power right now to start a city property tax rebate program for people who want to buy a home in our core that needs rehabilitation, in fact they could have started this program 20 years ago if they wanted to.

I have been a proponent for over a decade that the city engages in a pilot program in our core that rehabs entire neighborhoods with a combination of public works (streets, sewer, water, lighting, sidewalks, curb and gutter) and individual property owners with fixing up their property with the use of Federal grants, community development loans and city property tax rebates.

So why doesn’t the city pursue this? I don’t have that answer, but if I had to guess it has to do with developer greed and the elite structure of leadership in our city.

So when someone tells you it is hard to rehab poorer neighborhoods in our city because of ‘laws’ I just don’t believe them. The city council in conjunction with the mayor’s office and planning department have all the tools they need to start on a pilot program like this, but their hatred of the working poor is getting in the way of their handouts to the welfare developers.

SF City Council Sioux Falls

Sioux Falls City Council Agenda, Nov 16, 2021

l3wis 4Comments

Informational Meeting • 4 PM

Presentations on October financials and City Council legislative priorities for the 2022 legislative session (notice the City Council continues to support TIFs without any evidence of their economic benefit since NO independent study has been done).

Regular Meeting • 6 PM

Item #7, Approval of Contracts, Sub-Item #12, Centralized Facilities, Public Works Street Division Administration Building Remodel; Agreement for professional services, Stone Group Architects, Inc., $143K (So now we are already remodeling a brand new building? How about we get payment on the de-funk HVAC system first? Or are we still not supposed to be talking about that?)

Item #28, 2nd Reading, Ordinance, AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF ITS WASTEWATER SYSTEM REVENUE BOND, $123 Million.

Item #30, 2nd Reading, AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SIOUX FALLS, SD, AMENDING CHAPTER 57: GARBAGE AND RECYCLYING OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY PERTAINING TO THE COLLECTION REGULATIONS. (This is going to be a S-Show. I would suggest leaving it as is, and if people want to kindly take their cans down to the end of the driveway, let them. No matter how this goes, the garbage companies have already vowed to raise rates due to inflation, gas prices, labor costs etc. The irony is we can save on all that stuff if we just mandated hauler zones so we don’t have 27 different hauler company trucks driving down the same street on a Wednesday to pick up one can from one house.)

Item #32, 1st Reading, AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SIOUX FALLS, SD, AMENDING THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY BY AMENDING CHAPTER 111: ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES. (Due to the Census, this stuff gets changed, or something like that. Anyway, I found it interesting that they increase the initial license fee for full service restaurant $157 and the initial license fee for On-sale dealers $48,286. Huh? I guess you can’t get as drunk at a restaurant? And we wonder why no one wants to get a MJ Med dispensary license in Sioux Falls?)

Item #39, 1st Reading, AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SIOUX FALLS, SD, APPROVING OFFER TO PURCHASE REAL ESTATE FROM THE CITY. (Another fire sale to the city’s favorite welfare developer, and this time cleverly done behind closed doors . . . wait. Who appraised this property? Kassidy Peters? Nope, it is THIS COMPANY, interesting that the city used the same appraiser that has the developer buying this as a regular client;

Private Individuals who own apartment complexes, businesses and other independently managed organizations such as The Lloyd Companies, Costello Company, Hefty Seed Company, Sioux Steel Company

That shouldn’t throw up any red flags . . .

South Dakotans State Funding State Legislature Taxes

The Truth about SD Trusts

l3wis 8Comments

(H/T to a SouthDacola Foot Soldier who sent me this)

I will admit I learned a lot about SD Trusts listening to Terry Prendergast in this podcast. While Terry points out many great things about trusts that the media hasn’t mentioned, he still can’t convince me that they are good for the average South Dakotan.

While they do create jobs, can be held by anybody with wealth or inheritance, are free from state income taxes and help feed the Federal coffers they still leave me with a lingering question, “How does have $500 billion of someone else’s wealth in South Dakota benefit the average South Dakotan?” It doesn’t. And in a round about way, Terry brings it up. He does admit it is a legal tax shelter (not evasion) does benefit the state with bank financing fees, but also admits there is no actual tax dollars coming into the coffers.

While I appreciate him clearing up a lot of questions, even to go so far as saying nothing nefarious is going on (which is true) I have to disagree with him on the benefit of having them here. While SD Trusts are not illegal, and are being ran with the highest standards, at the end of the day I ask why the state legislature is so eager to pass laws beneficial to a select group of people that live out of our state while having very little benefit to South Dakotans?

If the state legislature really wanted to make an impact with legislation, they would focus on its citizens instead of Kings, Drug Traffickers and Dictators (legally) hiding their money in South Dakota (and an occasional farmer).

« Previous Page — Next Page »

You Missed

1st Amendment Downtown Sioux Falls Elections SF City Council Sioux Falls Vernon Brown

The more things change, the more they stay the same

1st Amendment Developers Development SF City Council Sioux Falls

UPDATE II: Sioux Falls City Councilor could be facing ethics violations after tonight’s vote on Tre Ministries project

1st Amendment Developers Development Planning Commission religion SF City Council SFPD Sioux Falls

UPDATE: City Council Agenda (Dec 2-3)

1st Amendment Sioux Falls snow removal Snowgates Uncategorized

Seems we are a we bit behind on snow plowing