March 2023

What happened to David’s Granite Pedestal?

As I have pointed out several times over the years, I am still wondering where the original pedestal for The Statue of David went in Fawick Park, Downtown Sioux Falls?

In this article I wrote in 2002 for Etc. magazine, I mention the removal of David in 1997 and how the city fought to bring him back because they needed a new pedestal. My question all along is where did the original pedestal go?

No doubt that the structure of the original pedestal probably needed to go away, but it had granite inlays.

Over the years I have pressured current and former city staff where the inlays went. Nobody has said a peep. The closest I got to an admission they were taken was a person said to me, “Let’s just say some VIP in town has quite the treasure.”

I have also heard the granite placards were returned to the Fawick Family.

Either way, it would be nice to know where they went. Probably the same place the images to the Bunker Ramp mural went.

UPDATE: Sioux Falls City Council Consent Agenda includes expenditures for the Zoo and Indian Mound retaining wall

Sometimes you have to peruse the city council’s consent agenda a few times before you catch stuff (Item #6).

Sub-Item #14, Great Plains Zoo Master Plan; Agreement for professional services, CLR Design, $80K (as pointed out to me, non-profit’s subsidized by the city usually pay for their own master plans, at least the Washington Pavilion Management Company has in the past for theirs. What is even more troubling about asking city coffers to pay for this is the new the partnership the Zoo has with the Butterfly house. Is the city gearing up to becoming a bigger owner in the Zoo’s capital? I’m all for long range masterplans, but instead of a study on penguins and butterflies maybe the city council needs to have a masterplan for the long term growth of the city.)

Sub-Item #22, Indian Mound Retaining Wall Rehabilitation – Bank Stabilization – Evaluation and Preliminary Design; Agreement for professional services, Infrastructure Design Group, Inc., $52K

UPDATE: This is a different retaining wall closer to the bike trail by the Country Club.

UPDATE: 6th Street Bunker Bridge becoming more complicated and messy

UPDATE: As it was pointed out to me over the past couple of days, there are some interesting rumors coming out;

• The savings on the mobilization may be just a late fee that was padded into the bid that they no longer have to be concerned about since the project date is being extended. It reminds me of the Event Center siding settlement where the city was given a million dollars of it’s own contingency fund.

• Would have other contractors bid on this project if they would have known about the time extension and could it be broken up into separate bids?

• This may be about utilities. The rumor is Cherapa II cannot open to tenants until more water, sewer and other utilities are hooked up.

Remember when we had to get Phillips to the Falls done right away because developers were ready to start on the adjacent property. The city sat on the land for 11 years for these developers, tax free.

The reason this project is becoming more complicated is because the city is trying to cover up what is really going on.

If you tell the truth, you don’t have to remember anything. – Mark Twain

While most might think saving over a $1 million on the project is a good thing, some may wonder why this is being told to us now (Item #6, Consent Agenda);

• Extend Completion Date – By moving the interim completion date from November 18, 2023, to August 2, 2024, and final completion date to September 6, 2024, SFC Civil is willing to reduce the mobilization on the project by $850,000.
• Cherapa II Contribution – The Cherapa II developer has offered to contribute $250,000 towards constructing right?of?way elements (sidewalk, approach and streetscape) between 6th Street and Cherapa buildings, which reduces City cost.
• Scope Reductions and Substitutions – While still in review, there is approximately $350,000 in additional savings to be realized through scope reductions or substitutions.

Most, if not all of these discounts could have been offered to begin with. There have been many engineers in the city who have expressed with me and other reporters that the mobilization and staging fees were questionable to begin with so I doubt the discount is hurting the general contractors bottom line, but we may never know.

Scope reductions are just a couple of fancy words saying there will be less expensive decorative elements.

While I am glad to see Cherapa will be kicking in some dough, they really will be benefitting the most from this project with extensive off street parking and a proposed quiet zone;

• Four prepayment invoice agreements with Wilson & Company, for approximately $40,000 each, represent the costs for required utility inspection and roadway worker?in?charge services associated with the boring under the BNSF railroad and each individual utility in the shared casing pipe.
• Another prepayment invoice agreement will be coming later, as well as a Construction & Maintenance agreement with BNSF. This agreement will outline the cost and conditions of the signal and rail crossing construction done by BNSF as a part of the project. Details are still being finalized, but it represents an important step in progress towards the future whistle reduction zone downtown.

I think these costs should be shared with BNSF (maybe they are?) when it comes to utilities but as for the quiet zone, not one single penny of city tax dollars should be used. Remember, the Railroads sit on Federal Easement land owned by Federal taxpayers. If any government money is used for the quiet zone it should come from Federal grants, the State DOT and the railroads. And if we are already spending money to evaluate the quiet zones we might as well review it for all DTSF crossings including the two between 12th and Avera on Cliff Avenue. There is a Federal DOT grant program for quiet zones.

I also think the developers of super expensive condos next to the tracks should pony up since this would most likely benefit the residents in this area.

The project just began a few weeks ago and the change orders are already rearing their head. With all the money we are spending on this project, it makes you wonder if the bridge will be gold plated?

Sioux Falls City Hall still pushing for a Full-Time Arts coordinator

At the informational meeting this Tuesday the mayor’s office is still pushing for this position after the council has already denied the position last year;

A. Arts Task Force Update on Arts Coordinator Position by Jeff Eckhoff, Director of Planning and Development Services; and, Janet Brown, Arts Task Force

If you read the attached documents you will see the position would work with the VAC (Visual Arts Commission).

After watching the Bunker Ramp mural debacle, I am even more confident that this position would give the administration the upper hand in making final public art decisions and as a position in the Mayor’s office they would do the bidding of the mayor making the VAC almost obsolete.

While I agree with most of what is being said when it comes to public art coordination I believe it takes an effort from multiple non-profits, artists and other stakeholders. An actual public art commission or committee would make more sense helping guide these organizations.

I’m not sure the council has changed their mind on the position, but with this renewed vigor, even after the failure of the mural, it makes you wonder what kind of deal is being cut with council leadership (Council Chair Soehl was the biggest opponent when first introduced).

I’m sure an argument will be made that the failure of the mural process is a reason we need a person making these decisions.

The mural didn’t fail because of the process, in fact I fully commend the artists, VAC and the SFAC for their due diligence and incredible work they did to bring forth a candidate. It was their first go around at doing this, and they checked all the boxes. The mural ultimately failed because ONE person was offended and that is NO way to institute public art.

Is the city data mining with the FREE dump pass?

The city has already been using a private contractor at the recycling center that uses the special software to scan your driver’s license and they will deny you if you abuse the dropoff;

The Sioux Falls Regional Sanitary Landfill now will scan driver’s licenses or state ID instead of collecting the free passes. It’s still one load per household address and up to 10,000 pounds. The goal is to start the digital approach April 3 and allow residents to use the pass until the end of the year.

While I agree mailing out postcards can be costly and apartment dwellers deserve the passes as well, I think they are making this more complicated then it needs to be. You simply keep a data base of all adult residents residing in Sioux Falls with their address and when they present their ID (not scanned) at the dump, their name is searched and removed from the list after utilizing the opportunity. This could be done in under a minute by simply doing a search of the name in the data base.

Many residents have reached out to me telling me they don’t want there DL scanned and this may be an attempt to data mine more information from citizens.

While this kind of information gathering is allowed by law where it gets grey is if this information can be shared with private political campaigns or candidates. As I understand it, it can be. Mayor TenHaken learned thru his Bloomberg connections how to data mine on citizens, but what is stopping him from using this data personally to run for higher office?

The rumor mill says that Marion Mike Rounds will likely run for governor leaving a Senate seat and Congressional seat open. Dusty Johnson will likely run for Senate (with maybe a primary challenge from Noem) and TenHaken is gearing up to run for Congress (you know, the guy who hates politics and isn’t a politician 🙂