UPDATE: I started to think about this yesterday. If the owner of this lot had a half a brain he would LEASE the land to a developer and rake in the Federal Subsidies. This is a great lot for either business or housing because it sits in an OPPORTUNITY ZONE. When I found out that I am in the same zone, I researched what I could do with my property, but unfortunately I am in the middle of the block and zoned residential so it would be hard for me to use the zone, but the MX Liquor lot would be perfect for a project in this zone. Some peeps just don’t get it.
Many people have expressed to me today that I should be delighted that the city is finally cleaning up this mess. I am. I want to thank several councilors former and present who helped get this ball moving.
As you know I complained about this property over 10 years ago where I was reassured by then code enforcement manager, Matt Tobias, that they were moving ‘thru’ the courts on this property.
So if you do the math, that complaint would have originated well before 2017. According to Forum’s article this all started in 2017. So what happened to all the complaints and violations prior to 2017? Obviously thrown in the trash.
I have been researching different code enforcement cases and I have been finding an interesting trend. When management or officers leave code enforcement (especially management) past violations or cases they are working on disappear. The MX liquor property has been in disrepair for almost 20 years, so what happened to all the violations prior to 2017?
I know that the city hasn’t done anything until now because the owner of the property has skirted code enforcement for years! I think he still thinks all the properties were going to be saved. Even though the owner was noticed on September 30 he waited until the dump trucks showed up this morning to move his antique tractor collection from the building in which he moved to the backyard of one of his house properties (that will eventually get torn down to). This tells me the owner of the property has figured out how to skirt the city’s code enforcement office for years basically because they are incompetent and never thought they would show up this morning.
The good news is I won’t have to look at this property ever again and that Councilors Barranco and Sigette are actively working on making code enforcement better and more timely.
I also found it interesting that the city’s public works team is doing the demo. Obviously the property owner will have to pay for demo either directly or thru a lien on the property when it is sold but why is the city handling this and not a private contractor?
Keep in mind, the property holder and the city have a relationship in working together. Mr. Gilbertson provides his services to the city in helping to repair sidewalks. I am sure a deal was struck to work together to demolish the building in return for services rendered back to the city. Hence, the Public Works Dept providing the labor here. It is the old common age example of trading labor for labor.
That site always looked like the movie setting for Baldwin’s ‘Rust’.
Oh, and the mention that…. “It is the old common age example of trading labor for labor” is what we used to call the slave market… By the way….
Property Rights are above and should always be protected against any city code. The City should not be in business to ruin your property. Mr Gilbertson was a nice man, he provided his time to this city. This is awesome building that should not be torn down. The homes can be refurbished. This is bad news for residents here. Could have had a nice little car lot and repair shop here. Now the building will be gone for good. It is ashamed we live in such a tyrannical political climate.
Made me think of city council:
https://youtu.be/0LvEHimzjt8?feature=shared
Uh, Mike, I believe Gilbertson ruined his own property through years of neglect. It was beyond repair. And, by the way, the last thing this city needs is another used car lot. There are plenty of asphalt jungles sitting vacant and available on West 12th Street.
My Mistake Mike – again the government should never be in the business of forcing people to do anything with their property. PRoperty Rights are sacred, and Mr Gilbertson is a nice, processional guy. I know him personally. Him and I formed a partnership in 2018 to buy and sell cars, and he is a very profressional person. He did not deserve to have his property taken as it was by the city. This is a tyrannical government.
From 8 years fighting the city over a 6’ x 18’ piece of concrete not addressed in codes, the city motive is to ruin someone. They have millions in public money they’ll spend to litigate and torture you. Unless you’re Lloyd or Sanford, you’re susceptible. The worst thing you can do is comply. They come back with something else that’s not a violation. The only way to proceed is ignore them. Make it last 20 years and you’ve got enough income to walk away and write off your loss. Suspiciously, the city and/or an inside developer wants this land but wants to buy it on the courthouse steps for a dollar. This region is a prime location and healthy economy. Businesses coming here should build outside city limits and give employees mail boxes at the plant so the crime syndicate known as City of Sioux Falls can’t use sales tax revenue to make private attorney contractors rich.
MLZ, you couldn’t be more wrong. If Mr. Gilbertson wants to be a bad neighbor, go find a tract of ranch land and move to the middle of nowhere. As citizens, we have a responsibility to respect one another. I drive around Sioux Falls and see too many properties in severe disrepair, weeds several feet high, etc. It’s unhealthy and downright dangerous in some cases. Just tonight, I drove by homes at 33rd & Norton and 33rd & Phillips that are screaming for code enforcement. It would suck to be their neighbor. Honestly, if we’d crack down sooner on the petty offenses we wouldn’t get to the point 10 years later when we have to pay city employees to take this unfortunate but necessary action. End of rant.
I know for a fact, Mr Gilbertson was not a bad neighbor. He was a citizen, a business owner, and a landowner. His buildings were in fact grandfathered on prior existing law, and as long as he owned them, there was nothing the city could do. The newer ordinances could not force him out, nor into compliance with the new rules. He, and other property holders have equal protection under our state constitution. He had plan to fix up the houses, and the building, but due to the high cost of inflation, it set him back, and the two democrat presidencies under Biden and Obama did not help. things were looking good under Trump, but democrat party cheated to get him out. These structures could have been saved, remodeled, and leased out. But, now, since the city cowardly caved to big money, properties such as these are be demolished and replaced with new fancy toys….Your property values will keep going up and up….
What about 33rd and Duluth? That house has been like that since last March or February. What I was told is that a vehicle hit it and threw it off its foundation. That’s one of the oldest homes in that neighborhood, too, and probably started out as a farmhouse. You can tell by its 19th-century roof design and the long and narrow windows. So, there probably wasn’t much to hold it to the ground or its crawl space(?)…. #HelloZoning!!!
Very Stale Genius, ALL Old properties, businesses, homes are ‘grandfathered’ in to the very laws and codes they were built under. Just cause government amends or adopts new laws, they are not forced to comply to the new rules.
S.D Constitution Aritcicle 6, Section 12 (Bill of Right) – Ex post facto laws–Impairment of contract obligations–Privilege or immunity. No ex post facto law, or law impairing the obligation of contracts or making any irrevocable grant of privilege, franchise or immunity, shall be passed.
Ex Post Facto Laws are defined as: Retroactively changes the legal consequences or status of actions that were committed before the enactment of the law,
Meaning, his properties are governed by the laws on the books at the time that they were built, last updated, let alone, the owner consented to such to such law. Because “YOU” must fully “Consent to Be Governed as Such” the government cannot force you to do so against your will. Mr Gilbertson was perfectly within his rights to manage his property as he so chose. He simply did not consent to the new rules. And he was perfectly within his rights.
I spoke to Mr Gilbertson a while back, and had asked him of his feelings towards the city’s ruling….He just told me, it is what it is, with his health symptoms, and age, he just is tired of being harassed by the city. I doubt he gives up the property, but he is allowing them to tear down the buildings at their cost. Mr Gilbertson is a great man, who is being targeted by the city, cause they, we expect have an agenda for the land itself.
But Mike, there’s a difference between a prior act and a continuous act. Something that is still being done or going on can be subjected to a new act with that act being constitutional. I also once had a zoning officer tell me that no one is really grandfathered in, rather they just apply a new standard, or law, to new construction. But once you mess with prior construction – which was prior to any current or newer ordinances – then that prior construction becomes new construction, and is then subjected to the current or new laws or ordinances. #IAmNotALawyerButIPlayOneOnTV
Also, that house at 33rd and Duluth is a nuisance, and even if the nuisance law was passed after the house’s initial construction, a nuisance statute applies to it because the nuisance is contemporaneous with its current and or new founded blight and laws that are applicable to that issue.
( and Woodstock adds: “Say, what about the Bunker Ramp?”…… “Isn’t that a nuisance?”……
…… )
i’m pretty sure that property was trash when trump was president, but blame biden if it makes you feel better mike.