South DaCola

Editorial Cartoonist from South Dakota

Downtown Sioux Falls

Downtown Sioux Falls Riverline District Sioux Falls

Riverline Committee finally has public meeting today

l3wis 5Comments

Not sure what happened, because it wasn’t recorded, but here was the agenda;

• Purchase agreement, timeline to public vote, and consulting timeline.

I encourage peeps in the real estate industry to read the purchase AGREEMENT and see if something sticks out. They also have a PREVIEW of the document with questions.

I have heard plenty of rumors that there is a gigantic conflict of interest with who is brokering this deal and a city official, so keep your eyes peeled. My assumption all along is that they had the first two meetings as executive sessions because they were trying to find a way to hide names of people who will be benefitting financially from this deal in the form of commissions. They are also trying to concoct this ILLEGAL advisory vote which has about as much weight as legal advice from your barber.

Like I said, I did not attend the meeting today at the admin building in the middle of the afternoon, but I am guessing they are still sticking with the advisory vote which is ILLEGAL and I have been connecting with folks behind the scenes to find a way to stop this ILLEGAL election. More on that soon.

A foot soldier came to me lately with an interesting theory on the Riverline (from this article);

“The actual project currently is scheduled in two phases, beginning with 10th Street in 2032 and followed by 11th Street in 2036.”

Just a hunch – the City will buy Lloyd’s property currently leased by the State of South Dakota as office space (as well as other parcels in the neighborhood); hold it 7-10 years, through the greater portion of the viaduct construction projects.  

The City will build a Convention Center on a portion and as the viaduct construction projects are able to forecast a discrete completion date, the City will sell a portion back to Lloyd (and similar to the land deal involved in Phillips to the Falls, the price will be very favorable to Lloyd [original cost?]).

I have felt this was part of the plan for a long time. As you can see from the maps, a two-way traffic viaduct makes more sense, but it also frees up a ton of real estate.

While I support having only ONE viaduct (or better yet kick the f’ing trains out of town then we don’t have to fart around with this) it isn’t about making the lives of the residents better, it’s always about lining someone’s pockets.

If this goes to an advisory vote and the citizens pass this it will be one of the largest tax increases on citizens in the history of our city, it will also pay NO DIVIDENDS! In other words this tax increase will not make your life more fiscally secure and virtually have NO EFFECT on your life. The Convention Center business should be private, in fact it is, hundreds of for profit businesses throughout Sioux Falls do this, we don’t need another giant building that sits empty 90% of the year. Want to spend $400 million in Sioux Falls and make a REAL economic impact? Clean up the core neighborhoods with grants and community development loans. Trim all the city owned trees! Fix all the city owned sidewalks! I can tell you spending money on these things will go a lot farther in making this community a better place then some profit making scheme by bankers, developers, contractors and all the other ilk that comes to the feeding trough.

I can’t wait to see the committee’s recommendations. This is going to be very funny.

Downtown Sioux Falls Mayor TenHaken Phillips to the Falls Sioux Falls Sioux Falls Parks and Rec

UPDATE: Falls Park or The Falls? What’s the difference?

l3wis 4Comments

UPDATE: Still gathering the tea leaves on this one but what I have heard so far is that the design was done internally (even though the city usually hires that sorta thing out to you know, Poops’ former ad agency). I’m still trying to figure out which one of Poops’ marketing goons in city hall proposed this. I still think they should have named it ‘STAY OUT OF THE FOAM PARK’.

So a few weeks ago I was riding thru Falls Park (I usually do a couple rides a day thru DTSF just to see what projects are going) and I noticed the new sign at Falls Park; this ugly navy blue and orange sign that said ‘The Falls’. Didn’t think much of it because it looked like a temp sign for the Winter Wonderland. I thought one of the local liquor distributors printed it, LOL.

First off, it is called Falls Park, because the Falls are there and it is a park. This is ‘naming’ 101. So I am confused why we wanted to shorten the name, not by much, and create some kind of branding for the park.

I have worked in printing and marketing since 1993 and the best rule of thumb if something isn’t broken don’t fix it. Not sure why we need to rebrand Falls Park? It has been there thousands of years and it’s natural beauty is what makes it.

Now there are upgrades on the horizon, but instead of RE-BRANDING maybe we just need to promote the PARK!

It often cracks me up with Mayor Poops renaming things, but NOT explaining why, because he knows it is just a whim.

I have some feelers out there and hope to have the REAL reason this park was renamed.

As a former city official said to me today; ‘Where were the public meetings to let the public in on renaming the park?’ And this person makes a great point. Let the public in on changing the identity of the park, you might just find some great results. But Authoritarians know everything, just ask them.

When you run a MILITANT ANTI-OPEN GOVERNMENT REGIME, opinions are like diapers.

If I was in charge of re-branding Falls Park I would rip every single piece of concrete out of the park, I would tear down the gift shop and observatory tower and would transform the park into a naturalist site with native flowers, grasses, etc. It would truly be beautiful, and ironically if you used native flowers and grasses, the maintenance would be minimal.

Poops vision is turning the place into Disneyland. How I hate Disneyland.

Curt Soehl Downtown Sioux Falls SF City Council Sioux Falls Uncategorized

Did Sioux Falls City Councilor Curt Soehl forget what he used to do?

l3wis 1Comments

Curtist the Blurtist was blurting and curting last night at the city council meeting about the proposed GIGANTIC TRUCK ordinance. Kermit Soehl was the only councilor to vote against it, mainly because Curt owns one of these aircraft carriers on wheels. The big argument of the night was public safety and it is pretty straight forward, but Curt wasn’t having it saying that it would cause an economic downturn in DTSF, as if only big truck drivers are the only ones who spend money downtown. It was quite possibly the dumbest thing I have ever heard a councilor say, oh wait, forgot about Countcilor Jensen. But the shocking part about Curt’s vote is he was a former firefighter and president of the firefighters union. I would think he understands ‘Public Safety’ but I guess once you become a insurance peddler those things don’t matter anymore. I hope Curt runs for mayor, he will end up DEAD LAST!

INFORMATIONAL MEETING

At the informational several folks with Sioux Falls Sustainability(?) made comments about the building codes and how they need to focus on energy efficiency. I have heard several stories about newer apartment buildings in town with little to no insulation. One friend told me his mom was paying $150 a month in heat in a 800 square foot apartment. If that apartment was properly insulated and in the center of the building there should be little heating costs.

Denny Sanford Premier Center Downtown Sioux Falls Elections SF City Council Sioux Falls

What is the difference between an Advisory Election and a Bond Election?

l3wis 2Comments

First the definitions;

An advisory question is a type of ballot measure that is non-binding, meaning the outcome of the ballot measure has no legal effect on a state’s laws. This type of ballot measure is also known as an advisory referendum, advisory vote, or non-binding ballot measure.

A Bond Election is a type of ballot measure in which voters decide whether to authorize a local government to issue bonds to pay for specific projects or services. It is typically used to fund public works projects such as roads, bridges, and other infrastructure. The money raised by the bond issue is usually repaid by raising taxes or other revenue sources. Bond elections are often held in conjunction with other elections, such as municipal or county elections.

We had an advisory election with the Events Center. After citizens voted 54% in favor of building the Denty the city council had to take LEGAL action to take out the bonds, in which they did.

If the election was an actual ‘bond election’ it would have taken a 60% passage to pull the bonds, and since this is a LEGAL election, there would be very little action from the city council to initiate those bonds because the citizens LEGALLY approved the bonds in a LEGAL election.

I am often saying that an advisory vote is actually ILLEGAL because NO LEGAL action is being taken by the public in an election. I have encouraged councilors to have a LEGAL bond election with the Rec bonds and CC bonds. First it makes their job that much easier and secondly you are giving citizens the ability to tax themselves if they choose to (we will need an extra penny sales tax in order for the bonds on the CC to work).

If the city pulls an advisory election on the CC, I encourage any local attorney to sue the city for their ILLEGAL election.

« Previous Page — Next Page »

You Missed

1st Amendment Elections SF City Council Sioux Falls Trump

UPDATE: Let Sioux Falls Vote! Sign Data Center petition!

1st Amendment Elections Marty Jackley Mike Huether Rich Merkouris SF City Council Sioux Falls Uncategorized

Trust

1st Amendment Open Government Open Meetings SF City Council Sioux Falls

I have been telling council this stuff for over a decade

1st Amendment Music

First Ave Doc, many memories