Development

Will the developers ever be putting forth their fair share for arterial roads?

As you can see from this graphic, developers haven’t even come close to chipping in 50% for arterial road development as they promised (several posts about the tax increase and lies from the developers) They would when we increased the second penny .02%. They have been good at blaming everything from the economy to the way the wind blows. Ironically any platting fees that they ultimately chip in for arterial roads probably is a wash because of all the TIF’s they are receiving lately.

Sioux Falls is slowly becoming a corporate welfare city, and this graphic is further proof of it. Whatever happened to the business model of ‘sink or swim’? Now it seems anytime a developer can’t afford something they just go running to the city for a lifesaver, and the planning commission, city council and Community Development office concedes. It’s time for the city council to put their foot down and say “Developers haven’t held up their end of the deal – so you are not getting this arterial street money.” Of course when you have several councilors and the mayor* investing in development in Sioux Falls, what else would you expect out of their self servitude. My suggestion would be to transfer that .02% into road maintenance and upgrades, and once the developers show us 50% we will put in our 50%.

*The mayor granted a TIF in the Whittier neighborhood for an apartment building his wife is investing in and councilor Jamison’s company did the facade remodel on Sid’s Liquor which received a facade easement grant from the city.

Another handout to private developers from taxpayers

Not only are taxpayers subsidizing the landscaping and spray park along the river for a privately developed hotel the developers got a TIF to boot. And who approved this project before it went on to the city council? The parks board of course in which the wife and co-owner of the development company building the hotel belongs as a board member.

But hey, there is no conflicts of interest here, move along, nothing to see.

Besides TIF’s is the city considering ‘cash incentives’ to developers?

Need Cash from the city? If you are developer in SF, you may be able to get drive up service at city hall.

A South DaCola foot soldier attended the city council working session yesterday, and was surprised to hear the city was considering ‘cash incentives’ besides TIF’s to developers. What a slippery slope! They told me this about the meeting;

The room was packed with developers (invited by Darrin Smith).  I sat next to a developer and a prominent city director. The developer kept making the remark ad naseum that he came to the meeting because he heard that they were handing out free money! He was giddy!  After he had said the same thing over and over, the city director that was sitting next to him said,

“Yeah, maybe we should just have a drive-up?”

I already think it is a farce we give TIF’s to developers to re-develop older neighborhoods when we don’t give it to residents who buy older homes and fix them up (though community development does a nice job with low-interest equity loans and grants). But I draw the line at cash incentives. How does a tax payer benefit from giving a direct payment to a private business without receiving a service? We don’t.

And secondly, how dare a city director joke about it.

You mean developers are not running City Hall? You had me fooled.

The Gargoyle Leader’s editorial board never ceases to astonish me. Today they wrote an editorial reminding citizens who should set policy in Sioux Falls;

More importantly, though, city leaders – not local developers – need to be driving policy decisions on whether to adjust the hookup fees.

No shit sherlock. This editorial should have been written seven years ago. Citizens elect the council and mayor to vote for their best interests, but it seems this current council and mayor do the bidding of the big developers, time and time again.

Is this even legal?

This sign has been sitting along Phillips to the Falls for quite awhile. While advertising property for lease is perfectly legal I question whether these developers and realtors can advertise property THEY DO NOT OWN. I’m sure they worked out some deal with the city (The city owns the property), but I still think it is bologna that they can advertise land THAT WE AS TAXPAYERS OWN. Wanna lease the property? Then buy it already and put it on the taxrolls. It would be like me running a classified in the paper for a car I have for sale, but I don’t own it. Then once I find a buyer, I go buy the car and resell it. Since when are taxpayer’s a bank? It seems in this town that’s how it works.

0725091158