Dean Karsky

The Pros & Cons of a Building Permit for roofing

l3wis October 2, 2014 12Comments

I can see both sides of this argument;

Believe it or not, June’s hailstorm is to blame. It has created a back log of paperwork and home inspections for city employees in the building services department.
Since June, over 6,000 re-shingling permits have been issued in Sioux Falls. The influx of permits has one city council member asking, do we really need permits to re-shingle a house?

Since golf ball sized hail hit portions of Sioux Falls, life at the office has been pretty hectic for Chief Building Official Ron Bell.

“Last year we had a record number of building permits that we’ve ever had issued. I believe that number was just under 8,000,” said Bell.

More than 11,000 building permits have already been issued for this year. Over the last eight weeks, Bell said contractors have been coming in with 80 re-shingling permits at a time.

Bell said at this time last year they had only issued 1,500 re-shingling permits. This year, they are at 6,700.

It’s taking its toll.

“The thing is, is that by the amount of permits that are happening at the counter, the staff doesn’t have the time to devout to large commercial projects,” Bell said.

“We are delaying large construction projects because we are processing re-shingling permits for homes,” City Council Chair Dean Karsky said. “It makes no sense.”

Karsky said that’s why he wants to pull the city’s requirements for re-shingling permits.

“Building permits should be unnecessary for simple maintenance and most communities regard it as maintenance and not as construction,” Karsky said.

Contrary to Bell’s belief that the re-shingling permit gives homeowners a ‘safety net,’ Karsky said not so much.

“Contractors have to be licensed within the city of Sioux Falls, and with their license, they have to post a $10,000 bond,” Karsky said.

Karsky said that process won’t change permit, or no permit.

Believe it or not, I do agree with the city, to a degree, it is kind of a safety net if a city building inspector approves something, and that work is bad. A friend recently had to have some roofing work redone, thankfully she used a contractor for the work and was inspected by the city.

But I also see councilor Karsky’s point of view. Seems silly to get a permit to re-roof a home, say for instance you want to do it yourself over a period of time in different sections. Should you be required to get a permit to work on your OWN home.

IMO, a solution would be to get a permit if you use a contractor, and not require a permit (unless you want to) if you are doing the work yourself. For example, the city requires you to get a permit to build a deck on your home (don’t know a lot of people that build their own decks that get one.) Had a friend go through a nightmarish ordeal with a city building inspector when he decided to get a permit to build his own deck. Let’s just say, he got to build the deck twice.

There seems to be this attitude in the city building department that people can’t do their own remodel/building projects and should always hire a contractor. That is silly, and probably one of the main reasons the city code enforcement department harassed Danielson for 20 years, because he wouldn’t hire a contractor.

City Council plans to rearrange meeting schedule so Karsky can have a conflict of interest

l3wis September 8, 2014 3Comments

I want my goat and I want to eat it to.

I guess councilor Dean Karsky still doesn’t see a conflict of interest with serving on the Chamber of Commerce Board and the City Council at the same time. He is going as far as to get the city council to change the meeting schedule in October so he can attend the Chamber’s annual meeting (Item #12).

So let’s rearrange seven of the councilor’s normal schedules so ONE city councilor can attend a meeting that presents a clear conflict of interest. Why not ask the Chamber of Commerce to change their schedule?

The Ethics Commission (Kangaroo Kourt) contends there is NO conflict because Karsky will excuse himself from voting on anything doing with the Chamber. So I guess when any business that is a Chamber Member comes fourth Karsky will be excusing himself, yeah right. What is even more troubling is will Karsky excuse himself from non-chamber members asking for a license or permit that are in direct competition with a chamber member? If Karsky truly keeps his word on excusing himself, he won’t be voting very often, might as well just sit in the front room of Carnegie and watch the council meeting on TV, or better yet, just resign from the Council, the Chamber can have you.

I am wondering when Dean is going to pull some ethics out of his butt and realize this is a very bad idea to be serving on both boards. Of course, he has probably been mentoring Mr. Ethical himself, Mayor Mike.

So which is it Karsky, City Council or Chamber Board?

l3wis August 18, 2014 4Comments

Karsky is about to be elected to the SF Chamber Board (DOC: CHAMBER ) He says he will recuse himself from voting on anything involving the Chamber while on the City Council. That will be nearly impossible. Chamber members come before the city council weekly asking for various licenses and permits and rezoning.

So Dean, which is it? The City Council or the Chamber Board? You are going to have to make a decision. Because I can guarantee you that if you serve on the Chamber Board and the Council at the same time and you vote to approve something for a Chamber member, you will have an ethics complaint filed against you for every time you don’t recuse yourself, and NOT by me. Many business people in town are very concerned about the relationship.

Seems someone wants their cake and wants to eat it too. Just building that resume for your 2018 mayoral run, aren’t you Dean? How would you like to add ‘unethical’ to the list?

SF City Councilor Dean Karsky kicks the TIF political football out of bounds

l3wis March 12, 2014 0Comments

Oh the games our council plays (Item #11), and how easily they manipulate some of the players like Karsky;

The council voted 5-3 last week to postpone the decision until the April 1 meeting. But Councilor Dean Karsky wanted to push it back even further, giving the council time to have a less formal discussion about TIF rules before making a decision. A workshop is planned for April 10 — two days after the election, but Karsky said that was not a factor in scheduling it then.

“It’s not a political advantage or disadvantage to either (candidate),” he said.

While I agree there should be solid discussion on the topic and something ‘doable’ be put on the council agenda, Karsky couldn’t have it more wrong when he talks about political advantages. Huether and Erpenbach very much wanted this topic to go quietly in the night and die, or at least get shelved until after the election. I’m not sure what kind of carrots or candy was offered to Karsky by those two, but it must have been pretty good.