UPDATE: Sioux Falls City Council Operations Committee recommends changes without a public meeting
l3wis UPDATE: Item #14, I guess we figured out why the city hasn’t continued demolishing the MX Liquor property, looks like he owes some money;
This is silly, put a lien on the property if he doesn’t pay for demolition and when the property sells the city will get it’s money. That property is in an Opportunity ZONE and they could easily get over $1 million for it. It is prime property for apartments and with it being a OZ a developer could get gobs of Federal Tax breaks for building it. I would encourage the current owner to look for a buyer or find a developer and lease the property. The city can still demo the remaining properties even if he won’t pay right away, we will get the money on the back end, and they know it. Ironically, they gave $500K to demolish a couple of blocks for a religious non-profit that lied thru their teeth to get it done. I would suggest going after that money before we worry about a slumlord who simply refuses to pay (he has the money).
Item #23, While the Operations Committee meets on occasion (they meet tomorrow to talk about a separate issue) they are making changes to the operations manual without addressing it in a public meeting. One of the many changes is letting the Mayor appoint certain board members and employees without the consent of the council. Not sure why they are ceding more power to the mayor’s office, but it explains why they didn’t announce it to the public in a meeting before the council meeting.
Item #10, They are moving forward with 2nd reading of the ball field in Harrisburg sponsorship without a dollar amount attached to the sponsorship. I have asked several councilors and other involved ‘How much is the sponsorship?’ No answer. While I get that they may not have all the bids in to determine how much the upgrades will be, they CAN put a cap or a minimum on the sponsorship without having the actual costs. This is NOT being done. This is the first time I have seen a park sponsorship with NO DOLLAR amount of that sponsorship included. Tells me the sponsor is only paying for a sign and that’s about it, if NOT, prove me wrong, and give us a dollar amount at the 2nd reading. Not sure why this is so top secret?
Item #11, The city council is moving forward with the campground ordinance, not sure if it will pass, but I am sure they have at least 4 votes and the mayor’s tie to pass this. Once again the council is giving in to the SFPD instead of creating ordinances that require them to do their job. Just because someone is the Police Chief, appointed by the mayor, doesn’t mean they have all the solutions in solving homelessness and the council should take lightly any advice he may give in solving this problem. The council needs to implement policy (their only job) that forces the SFPD to fix this issue. If they don’t want to follow the new ordinances, show them the door.
Item #12, Oh, the irony of this funding;
This ordinance is to supplement for $8 million to procure motor graders (currently leasing) and $1.8 million in network technology equipment to build out the data center to ensure a reliable and redundant network.
So in order to save a couple million on snow removal we have to spend almost $10 million to take over the service. I sometimes wonder if the peeps making these decisions are mentally challenged. You will see snow removal becoming less effective and a lot slower, if at all. In order for drivers that work for the city’s public works department to plow streets they will have to work a lot of double shifts and overtime, and if we get a big storm, it will be virtually impossible for them to keep up or complete the job in a timely manner. It’s going to be a bad winter for snow removal because of this change, but not sure how it could get worse. Remember the current snow plow chief had over a 100 car accidents in one day because he had his de-icing crew on pothole duty while it was raining ice. Should have been fired due to the millions in insurance claims and damage that was incurred on this day last winter.
MX Liquor Property; This isn’t on the agenda because the city is being very secretive about it. I have asked people in public works, the city attorney’s office and the entire city council, ‘When will the remainder be demolished?’ The deadlines have passed and the properties look even worse then when this process started. So did the city drop the ball on this? Why are the properties still standing? When the next mayor is installed, and if those houses are still standing, I will approach them on day two of their job and get them to finish the job. I can’t believe it took 20 years and 3 different mayor’s to get this done, and the mayor doesn’t want to lay off any city employees because they are so valuable. LMFAO!
