Update: I guess there was a HS cross country event at Paisley park today, so why can’t they run on unmulched grass? The Romans used to run races barefoot. So now I guess we fund HS sports thru parks tax dollars.
FIRST, THE POSITIVE: The Sioux Falls city council and Minnehaha County Commission restored 2026 funding for the Siouxland Librairies at their joint meeting today. Guess how much the mayor was cutting? A whopping $250K!!!! Yeah, a lot of coin for us mouth breathers but NOTHING to the city when you consider they have $80 Million in reserves (they are only required by ordinance to have about $50 Million cash on hand), but Poops has been stowing away money for his wet dream convention center). I was glad to see funding restored since all Poops cut was temp help wages.
I find it ironic that the mayor insists on nickel and diming citizen services while blowing MILLIONS on projects no one asked for (Sanford Wellness purchase and Jacobsen Plaza for example).
NOW FOR THE NEGATIVE: As I was commuting to work I decided to take the bike trail today and as I was riding thru Paisley Park I noticed the lawn had been freshly mowed. There were windrows (these are the piles of un-mulched grass that accumulate in ROWS) in the lawn. It was visible but NOT thick and would easily just disintegrate into the un-mowed grass with the next rain. So what did the Parks Department decide to do about these windrows? So there is this guy who drives down the bike trail with a tractor and a small blower he tows behind and he blows debris off of the trail. It’s a nice amenity and I appreciate it, just like the plowing of the trail in the winter. So this guy wasn’t blowing off the trail he was driving back and forth, North to South in the lawn blowing the windrows towards the East fence. My guess this would have taken at least 3-4 hours. So when the mayor talks about cutting essential services, maybe we need to cut the Parks budget, because apparently they have too much money to spend if they have a parks employee blowing grass around our parks (well, at least he was actually working unlike the parks worker who waters trees while reading a novel).
Also at thejoint meeting tonight if you FF to the end where there is public input, it is worth the watch. A woman came up, and very politely and professionally addressed them about property taxes, and she read them the riot act. It was amazing. She needs to come back to the city council meeting and do the same speech since the city’s TIFilicious desires are raising our taxes. She also recommended that TIFs and OPT-OUTS should only be approved by voters. DAMN TOOTIN! She was cut off by Dean Karsky (him and Beninga need to retire) because she called out Commissioner Joe Kipley personally* (you know, Mr. Conflict of Interest double dipping from taxpayers) and a comment he had made, and it was a doozy.
To be honest with you, public input really doesn’t matter anymore you might as well be talking to a floating turd in your toilet, you would get more of a response. The County, the Council and the School Board all have their votes in line and mind made up before they walk into that meeting, no amount of pleading or shaming will get them to change their votes. There have been on occasion a councilor will change on the fly, but not because of testimony. I felt sorry for the folks over the last few weeks who have shown up to speak for the first time about important issues like deportation and the homelessness only to get patronized by the mayor. Deaf ears folks.
*The council and commission have a rule(?) at their meetings that no one at the podium can call out elected officials or public employees by name or individually. Let’s just say it is a contrived rule probably in Roberts, but as far as the 1st Amendment is concerned, you can call out anyone you want to at the podium and all they can do is cry.
(FF: 51:00) The LCC discussed removing an evening meeting that they recently started. The ‘excuse’ two of the commissioners made (Schmidt and Otten – they had a change of heart at the end of the discussion) was that the winter weather could make it dangerous to attend the evening meetings. Commissioner Joel Arends tore into them about it, also during public input a legislator also chewed butt about the stupid excuse. First off, the meetings are for the PUBLIC not so you can be comfortable attending. Secondly, if you feel the weather makes it unsafe to attend the meeting it should either be postponed to the next day OR you can attend by telephone. Also, the public doesn’t have to be in the chambers. They can watch it LIVE instead of on replay (morning meetings) and they would not have to leave their homes but get to watch in real time on YouTube. I am just astonished by how much our local government bodies fight openness and transparency and then wonder why the public is so misinformed they don’t bother voting in local elections. The commission voted to keep the evening meetings, but it should not have even been up for debate UNLESS they were considering on making ALL meetings at the evening. More closed government Bullsh!t!
*The end of the discussion is the best where Arends calls out the chair and the other commissioners for promoting closed government.
We knew Joe was running, and as I have mentioned in the past he has the best resume. I have been telling folks lately though I am seriously looking at ALL of the mayoral candidates since they all have great qualities to be mayor, they also have their faults, but it will be interesting to see who will rise above those obstacles.
Erickson no doubt is the favorite, mainly for her exuberate personality, and this will be a hard to combat. Also, with likely being the ONLY woman running, she may garner a lot of female support. I did hear her on a podcast recently and she leans MAGA and seems to be supporting deportation efforts in Sioux Falls. If she continues the ‘Trump Talk’ I’m not sure this helps her, except amongst those mouth breathers, and when you are campaigning to 7% of the voting public in Sux, it’s wise to stay on a clear message.
I have no doubt if Jamison decides to run, he will have a polished campaign that is consistent on policy ideas, I also have NO doubt Joe will do the same. Couldn’t tell you much about the Smith campaign since it seems their strategy so far is let’s keep it a secret he is running and when individuals reach out to you for help or promotion you just ignore them. If I had a dollar for every DEM that told me about the unresponsiveness of his campaign, I could fund his campaign. Not a good look. I do like Jamie though and believe he would be the most populist candidate wanting to get things done for the citizens and not just for the Developer Welfare Queens (though working in Real Estate may present conflicts). Also, his unresponsiveness may be a sign of how he will do as a mayor.
If any of the candidates tell me they will end TIFs in this city (or at least make them only for affordable housing) I would support the candidate, hands down. TIFs are straddling our city with uncontrollable infrastructure needs and no way to pay for them. It also hurts our county and school district with property tax dollars they have to make up for from the state (which withholds crucial funding). I think if there is a candidate that addresses property taxes and TIFs they will have a good chance of winning. In fact, if any of the candidates running put property taxes as part of their campaign agenda they would at least get people interested in your other campaign promises.
This next city election will be about the economy, hands down, and by election time next year, it will likely be in the toilet. The candidates will need to talk about kitchen table ideas, because swimming pools and event centers are a thing of the past.
Any and all documents permitting the City of Sioux Falls or their contractor businesses, giving permission to modify the flow of the Big Sioux River and the falls in downtown Sioux Falls between 2015 to current.
I have been reviewing the materials received from the CORPS over the past month. The PERSONAL names of any parties involved have been redacted BUT, all other pertinent information was provided. What disappoints me the most (but not surprised) is that a constituent had to go to the Federal Government to get information about how the city is handling a local project. Since the city is working within a waterway controlled by the Feds this information really should be also provided by the city to the public, but was NOT. I don’t think it is the responsibility of the Feds to inform local constituents on projects our city is doing in concert with their pre-approvals. To get to this point took decades, and the public wasn’t really brought along on the process, as you will see in some of the docs I reviewed.
Some major concerns about the project;
• Who is funding this project? How much will it cost and what ‘fund’ is this coming out of (Ex: Jacobsen Plaza or Parks Department or Planning Department). I couldn’t figure out what city agency is handling this project. It seems to be Planning, but their is NO clear agency.
• Will it work? I find it troubling that this area has been almost the same for 100 years, and while Falls Park does flood almost yearly, you wonder if this will be a good flood control measure or will it just back water up towards the South and the East?
• How was historical and environmental mediation handled? (there was opposition to the project at first, but a solution was presented, just not sure what it was or how they came to the conclusion to proceed).
• It seems the project must still go thru final approval with the Feds once the project is completed and up until this point the only thing the city has gotten is pre-approval to proceed. In other words the Feds could institute major changes to the final project once the inspection is completed, or could have a ‘wait and see’ approach to see how it handles major floods/rains, etc.
These are images of the original ‘plans’ for the replacement that the city OR the CORPs initially called a ‘rehabilitation’ of the low head dam (it is NOT a rehab, it is a total replacement). Also notice the drawing of the dam is a straight line (this will come up later in the post).
Below is the IMPACT MAP which shows wetlands on the East Side. Before the CORPs signs off on the completion of the replacement of the dam, the city will have to create a new wetland area on the east side as requested by the CORPs.
Scope of work performed at or around Falls Park in coordination with the CORPs
As you can see from the diagram below, after the old dam was removed they made the replacement damn LOWER then the original;
As you can see below the State Historical Society (a state agency) had concerns about the adverse impacts of the dam replacement AGREEING with the CORPs, then offering to work on a solution (NOT sure what was resolved or how this recommendation got reversed) THIS IS the full SDSHS review;
Somehow the 6th Street bridge environmental review was also done before construction could be done on the bridge, and look at this wonderful soil sample they found below. As I have said in the past, almost all of the dirt and quartzite in this area of Falls Park is severely contaminated from years of chemical waste and river runoff only a few feet under the surface. It still amazes me that we continue to ‘pave over’ our beautiful Greenway instead of highlighting it’s natural beauty. I have suggested instead of all these super condos along the greenway we should put down a wide pea rock path that winds thru natural prairie flower gardens and other natural amenities, and the best part it only needs rain and sunshine to be maintained. With all the contamination under the ground in this area of DTSF you would think permanent structures would NOT be allowed by any government agency, state, local or Federal. This is why the Levitt shell is where it is, because of the massive contamination of that site, they can’t build a permanent structure on the grounds. Don’t think we have ground water issues in this area? Then why are they always tearing up the sprinkler system at the Levitt every year since it has been opened? It seems about once a month in the summer, they have some pipe torn up at the Levitt and the culprit is usually a leaky sprinkler system pipe;
Where we start running into issues is the original design of the replacement has been drastically changed. This is the original plan submitted to the CORPs;
As you can see, the replacement dam is supposed to run in a straight line from the banks of the Steel District to the old Queen Bee Mill structure, those plans have changed. Also notice the carve out around the pier below is about a foot higher then the rest of the dam on the North and South sides. I find it troubling that this was the solution concocted by the railroad, the city and the CORPs. If we get a major flood, like we do almost every Spring due to snow melt and rain, this pocket behind the pier will just fill with debris and tree trunks and I would assume rise up to cause issues with the bridge itself. Still scratching my head why the plans changed so drastically? Was this pier determined historical (built around 1900) and maybe the compromise the historical peeps were looking for? Which is also strange since other original piers were encased with concrete. Once the CORPs approves this I will be curious to see how this came about.
As you can see from the above picture they made a turn around the one pier (not sure why they didn’t just encase the Pier and put the dam up against it instead) they did encase two other piers to the east of this one;
Look at the almost ONE MILLION just to encase some Piers. While we have been ‘told’ that the Jacobsen Plaza project was $16 Million there was significant cost overruns with this dam replacement and we may never know how much it was. Apparently $16 Million wasn’t enough to install a water fountain that is level (I call it the Leaning Water Fountain of Jacobsen). The irony is if you go around to other parks in Sioux Falls that have had upgraded equipment over the past few years, much of the equipment is broken now. The electronics on the machines at Rotary Park haven’t worked for over 2 years (this park is only 3 years old). It makes you wonder if the entire parks budget was thrown at this entertainment superplex while cutting back on repairs and maintenance in other parks;
They also intend to build another observation deck over the flood gates next to the Queen Bill Mill;
The good news is it appears that the Feds only do a pre-approval so work can be done, but don’t sign off final approval until final inspection which I don’t think will be until the end of 2026 with all the extra dirt work they have to do;
I have been mystified by this project since it’s beginning and the lack of information I have gotten from the city. I have many more questions;
• Why was this called a ‘rehab’ by the city when it is a total replacement?
• Why did plans change to go around the pier instead of up against it?
• Why was only half the dam poured then an expensive coffer damn put in to complete the project (there seemed to be a long delay between the pouring of the first leg of the dam and putting in a coffer dam to complete the project)?
• What was the compromise between historical advisors and the changed plans?
• Where is the money coming from to replace this? The Railroad? The City? The Developer? The Feds?
• How are environmental concerns being mediated?
I will be curious if and when the CORPs signs off on this project. Because right now, it looks like a gigantic mess. I used to work construction, and it is common to change architectural and engineering renderings in the field so they will work with the project, but it seems this project didn’t have a clear objective from the beginning and they are making changes on the fly and this is why it is starting to look like a cobbled mess. I also found emails between private contractors, city employees and the Feds interesting. The Feds are always detailed and professional in their emails and only are interested in brass tacks, can’t say the same about the others involved with the project. I guess we will have to wait until the project is finished before we see positive results, but bringing the public along would help a lot.
In my humble opinion, I would not have handled it this way. No doubt the old dam needed to be fixed or replaced, but wouldn’t you have all the plans ready to go before putting shovels in the ground? I wonder how much all these delays are costing us? Hopefully this post will encourage the council to request a long informational on what is going on with the project, but that would require transparency 🙁
UPDATE: In a weird meeting where one of the Park’s managers apparently felt they needed to apologize to a board member for using the word BIKE instead of PEDESTRIAN we got to the bottom of what happened, this same manager confessed in a sheepish voice that ‘consultants’ came up with the detours. Well, that says it all. And why does the city use so many consultants when we have so much mid-management? Either have them do their job or get rid of them and stop depending on consultants and 6-figure managers who are glorified proofreaders. Speaking of bicycle and pedestrian safety in Sioux Falls, look at all the issues that have to be fixed, it’s like we have just ignored our pedestrian walkways for 20 years!
Typical of the city, talk about an issue after the fact. During the Active Transportation meeting scheduled for Wednesday at 8:30 AM at City Hall they will be discussing ‘Parks Trail Detour’. I hope commuters that were put off by the badly planned detours show up and express their displeasure on how this was handled. So you are going to discuss it after you failed? How about an apology so we can all move on.
SIOUX FALLS CITY COUNCIL CHAIR MERKOURIS LOVES TIFS!
During the budget hearing today Merkouris decided to put in his plug for TIFs and encouraging the state legislature to make the rules more lax to implement them. Here’s an idea Rich, how about throwing $50K at a public university so their economic department can study the ROI of TIFs in Sioux Falls. I have argued for years they would never do the study because it would reveal their ruse. Here’s your chance to prove me wrong 🙂
COUNCIL CHAIR STILL DOESN’T UNDERSTAND 1ST AMENDMENT
As the mayor stepped out early tonight for his annual jumping jack instructor dinner and charity auction, council chair Merkouris stepped in and struggled with his 1st Amendment knowledge. He cut off an inputer who dared to speak on a separate item already discussed. I’ll say it for the 1000th time; The chair of the meeting cannot cut you off for mere speech and the rules of the chamber only apply to those on the dais. The next time they try to cut you off, just ignore and keep talking. The entire council and mayor really need to take a course on the 1st Amendment, because they are clueless of the laws they swore to protect.
BIG HANDOUTS AGAIN TO DEVELOPERS
The city council agreed to lease parking for $1 a year to a stinky rich developer who didn’t plan for parking. That’s his problem and he can either pay a fair market value or forget about it. Jeffry Scherschligt the developer of Cherapa one and two decided he needed the parking because he is putting in a 20,000 square foot grocer. Kind of sounds like a for-profit business. So why would we give them a non-profit rate? Also, he claims he will do upgrades to the lot in exchange for the $1 a year. Better yet, give us receipts and we will reimburse you for the work thru deferred lease payments. Why on earth would we be giving it to them for nothing? Last I checked Jeff did this to make some money, so why aren’t we charging a going rate? Or better yet, he can buy the parcel and develop however he wants to. I have a feeling Jeff is doing this so he can secure the land once he has the money (I heard he is pretty stretched thin). Kind of hard to boot off a person who already did the improvements to the property, isn’t it? I wouldn’t even be surprised if he is angling to get the property for FREE in a few years. We have given this developer millions in tax payer upgrades to the river greenway, and here he is again at the trough, and we know why . . . he has no shame and the council rewards the welfare queens.
COUNCIL REZONES PROPERTY TO LIARS
So while the city won’t tear down the remaining properties on the MX Liquor lot, for gawd knows what reason, they have no problem spending $500K to demolish property for a religious non-profit who lied thru their teeth to get the demo money, and they reward the liars more by helping to cover up the lie by approving the rezone. They looked like a bunch of fools tonight, but that seems to be the typical theatre these days.
l3wis 
