Downtown Sioux Falls

One 2 . . . Three and Four and the disappearing TIF act

Photo; Sioux Falls Business Journal

Last night during the discussion on selling the parking lot downtown, something interesting came up. Councilors were concerned that someone wanted to buy the parking lot just to convert into a private parking lot and wanted to make sure there was enough parking if housing was built there and compared it to the One 2 building next to Ace Hardware downtown (the city sold the lot for a song). In the discussion it was revealed that instead of retail on the main floor of the building it is actually now 2 levels of parking (basement, 1st floor) and in making this decision they decided to add 2 floors of apartments to the building. Now, no big deal, development plans change, but it never got re-approved by the council. Which tells me an un-elected city employee made the decision and was likely backed up by the mayor’s office.

TIFs MAY BE A THING OF THE PAST IF THE SD STATE LEGISLATURE HAS THEIR WAY

During the working session yesterday the council discussed the legislative proposals for the 2026 session and their desire to change TIF applications;

• 50% of property needs to be blighted

• TIF must also get County approval (I would also suggest school board approval since they are the most impacted – remember COSTCO refused a TIF because of school funding)

• No grants can be approved with TIF

• Any TIF over $10 million must be approved by voters in a special election

I think these are all a good start, but I would suggest one quick fix; eliminate all TIFs except for community infrastructure like water and sewer services or fire stations.

TIFs have almost NO ROI unless used to fix a community problem like blight and infrastructure needs.

At the end of the discussion Rich Merkouris asked the city attorney ‘How many TIFs in Sioux Falls were granted for just blighted areas?’ Of course, Fiddle gave his normal answer, ‘I will get back to you.’ I might dig around on it this week and see for myself. If I had to guess we have probably only put out 20% of TIFs for blighted areas.

Mayor’s ‘staff’ gets busted last night

Besides all the lying going on about the Sioux Falls Parks Master Plan, to which councilor Sigette said that the administration was NOT being transparent, there was another item that stirred the pot. Item #34 was a resolution to surplus the city parking lot at 13th and 1st. At first glance, this seems like a good idea, since that space could accommodate a whole host of things. If I had a couple million to blow I would do a 4-story structure with a partial courtyard, retail on 1st floor and 3 stories of studio apartments. I would even encourage it to be ‘carfree housing‘ so you wouldn’t need to have parking. Most of these developments have a couple of grocery runner e-cars they can use for errands as rentals;

But I knew when this popped up on the agenda, the jig was up. It was pretty obvious to me and many constituents who showed up to testify that the city already had a buyer (it was confusing as to who this developer may be, but it has some involvement with the Shriners next door). It really doesn’t matter who is buying the lot, as Sigette said, the administration is NOT being transparent, not just about the parks but parking downtown.

Normally how these supposed hearings go is the city staff put it on the agenda under the radar, they bully the council into voting for it and keeping their mouths shut and the public is the only one that appears at the meetings knowing this is wrong and basically corrupt. Not so fast. The council reamed the parking and planning staff about this, to which the planning director had to admit there is an interested party and why they are doing it.

SO WHY DON’T YOU JUST SAY THAT!? WHAT THE F’CK IS SOOOOO TOP SECRET ABOUT SELLING A PARKING LOT?!

Because, corruption can’t help itself. The mayor’s ‘staff’ has been getting away with these insider deals so long ($100 million in no-bid contracts for example) that it is just second nature for them. They were caught red handed last night, and it was fun to watch the constituents and the council double team the ‘staff’ over this corruption and lies. It was about time, and I hope ALL council meetings moving forward are like this, calling out the obvious corruption and lies of the staff.

And while the discussion last night was contentious, I think the council was extremely professional on how they approached it (they looked like an entirely different council last night) this is how government is supposed to work. Staff is supposed to give the council and the public ALL pertinent information, if they do not, it must be demanded of them before any votes take place, this finally happened last night. Erica’s ‘staff’ uh, I mean, Paul’s ‘staff’ is officially on notice and I’m lovin’ it!

I think with the government shutdown, this is prime time to evaluate ALL public employees and not only their job performance but their integrity and ethics. I can handle a little laziness, what I can’t tolerate is lies.

We lack TRANSPARENCY in local government

I agree with Joe that there is a lack of leadership, experience, accountability, common sense and diligence;

That kind of leadership requires listening, relationship-building, and the willingness to work together. It means re-establishing trust among institutions that have drifted apart and reminding everyone that Sioux Falls’ success has always come from collaboration, not isolation.

Many of these leadership issues can be solved with one word; TRANSPARENCY. When you have a government that is open to the public’s ideas by bringing them along with the process you get more involvement and when the public is more involved you have a better planned community. The problem with local government on all levels isn’t a lack of leadership or even laziness it’s a lack of openness and accountability. You could have 9 monkeys sitting on the dais and the city would still run incredibly well because of transparency. I am of the position that it doesn’t matter who is on that dais, as another realtor announces a run for council today, if we have folks that are willing to open the books and bring the public along that is ALL the leadership you need. Because real leaders are honest, open and accountable.

THE SOLUTION TO THE TRANSIENT PROBLEM IS RIGHT IN FRONT OF YOUR EYES

After reading this article last night about transients at the downtown library I sent this email to Jodi;

I am putting an invitation to you and a companion to ride on the back of my pedi-cab on a weeknight DTSF after dark, I will take you to all the places transients congregate and you can see just how serious it is.

But what I found fascinating about the article is Police Chief Thum offering a solution to the problem without realizing it;

My point is not to lack compassion for those who probably could benefit from a quiet, safe place to spend their day. Ideally, we’d find something more productive for people to do in such a place — maybe we offer classes or even the chance to create art — but if safe shelter with a way to charge a phone is really all people are looking for, maybe we need to create that somewhere other than the library.

We need the library to function as it was intended to promote literacy and access to information and related resources, not as a social services agency. 

At the top of the post I talked about common sense in government. Are you listening to what you are saying? Maybe we need a temporary shelter? It is pretty obvious to me that we need a temporary shelter this winter for these folks where they can stay 24/7 if they wish. Will it cost money? Sure, but the alternative is paying for ER visits when we are scraping them from the cold concrete in a parking ramp which costs way more then just funding a facility for the winter months. I would also hand every single one of them a bus ticket when they arrive at the shelter if they desire to go home.

This is what I mean when it comes to leadership. You obviously see the issue, you also obviously see the solution, so why not fix it?

Bunker Ramp Bum who bilked taxpayers wants a building permit

If this city council approves this project by this developer, they have lost their frickin’ minds;

The 10-story property at 141 N. Main Ave. was purchased by an investment group this summer and will be redeveloped by Lamont Cos. Inc., an Aberdeen-based developer with more than 50 franchised hotels nationwide.

I think the project idea and remodel is a good one, that building has immense potential. My aunt actually worked on one of the top floors of the building in the 80’s and the views when I visited were amazing. If this was ANY other investor group I would be all for it. But permits can be denied based on the (business and ethical) character of a developer or contractor. I think sticking the SF taxpayers with a $26 million dollar empty concrete block then getting a check to boot from us for your ‘troubles’ would mean your character ranks right up there with Homer Simpson. It will be fun to watch how the Planning Commission and Council handles this. Let the Weaseling begin!!!!

RIVERLINE DISTRICT GETS PAUSED

No surprise since they have identified ZERO funding sources;

But now things are coming to a pause. The committee said three of its objectives: creating a timeline, designing and pricing a new convention center, and timing out a public vote, are yet to be done. But they voted Monday evening to pause their work, claiming that no more progress can be made on those objectives as things stand right now.

I said from the beginning the only way to move forward on this is selling the public on a funding source instead of playing reindeer games with the legislature and trying to ‘trick’ us into a new tax. Complete stupidity. You need to show 2 things; 75-90% private investment and an ROI for taxpayers (not just the city coffers and private hospitality industry). Instead they showed us the shiny ball first and nobody cared.

As all of this discussion takes place, the clock is ticking on something to be built on the 7.2 acres on the east bank of the Big Sioux River. As a part of the City’s purchase agreement, State Partners, LLC has the option to repurchase the land if no construction starts in five years. Almost 11 months have passed since the City Council adopted that agreement.

This was also dumber then a mud fence. They thot they could sucker us into the new building since we already owned the land. You don’t buy a lot to build a new house without having the finances in order to pay for the construction of the house.

Do we need a new Convention Center? Sure. But I look at this two ways; 1) We can expand at current location by making the Arena a multi-level complex (the main reason we built the Denty at that location was so we could use it for convention center space). OR 2) Have a private hotel and convention center move into the Riverline space. We would lease the land for FREE for 99 years and we would give all BID tax revenue to only be exclusively spent on marketing.

We can make this happen, but not by increasing sales taxes or having expensive bonds that take 30 years to pay off. I look at the convention center business as a private one, and I think SF should make the bold move of letting this being taken over by private industry. You could actually model it after the Pavilion, which probably would be fine now without public money.

But the Banksters and Bondsters in town need a constant loan on the books to justify their bond commissions each year, and this was just another one of their ‘commission’ projects.

WHAT EVER HAPPENED TO THE APARTMENT COMPLEX TO BE BUILT AT 8th and RAILROAD?

While the bunker ramp bum is trying to get a permit, the Riverline committee Petered out, Tre Ministries has been less then transparent and we have no idea why the Dusty Monkeys were shipped out of town and we still have no idea what is happening with a project that got millions in a TIF. Obviously if this project ever comes to fruition (I think it is dead) they will have to reapply for the TIF due to time commitments. Why did this fail?

Ironically another well know developer* in town with close ties to the city and state government put forth a plan that was rejected. It was almost entirely affordable/workforce apartments and almost 100% local investors. I asked some people why they think his idea was rejected over the Iowa development? They laughed and said, “Politics.” The irony is this project would be already done if they would have picked this developer, but hurt feelings over local politics killed it. This is what happens when you bring politics into a simple planning and zoning matter, we all lose.

* This is NOT Billion. Billion attempted to make the first go at the project but concerns with underground parking and investors had them pull out, which created a new RFP.

The ‘Mysterious’ Tre Ministries Project

Ephesians 4:25

Therefore, having put away falsehood, let each one of you speak the truth with his neighbor, for we are members one of another.

I guess this is what JC said about transparency, and it’s good. JC really was the Dale Carnegie of 2,000 years ago!

This brings us to the former historic gas station and pot shop corporate headquarters on 18th and Minnesota, you know, the location of really expensive groceries and a employee discriminatory sandwich shop and who can forget the vape shop turned Noem campaign headquarters or the low class windshield shop where workers yell at me like cavemen when I ride my bike thru the parking lot.

Tre has changed plans many times with historic designations, running out of investors and now with a street closure and redevelopment plan that includes an office building on a residential street. Huh?

Originally we were told the city was giving them an interest free deferred loan (doesn’t have to be paid back), which would be awful. I believe the Planning Commission did approve it but I get lost with the council, which I think approved it also. But then it was revealed that Tre paid for it themselves (FF: 1:41:00). So was the council aware of this? If so, when were they going to tell the public? How does an approval process happen then behind the scenes another arrangement is made? If a demo contract needs to be canceled, the council MUST approve that cancellation in a public meeting. There are many shady levels to this project including a city councilor intimately involved with the project (maybe financially) not recusing themself from the discussion, which is an ethics violation even if HE is NOT involved in the final vote.

This administration is playing fast and loose with the law, but hey, look at the leader of the party, 50 shades of orange.