Ethics

Is the Sioux Falls Department of Parks & Recreation a monstrosity?

I compared apples to apples and all I can say is, damn right it is!

I first want to say that Sioux Falls has an amazing park system. But is it all useful? We continue to build new parks when we are not using the current parks we have to capacity. Take Yankton Trail for instance. Rumor has it the city only allows the park for competition, not to be used as a practice facility. Why is that? I have even heard stories of police intimidation if you are using certain parks just for recreation instead of competition. What Up?!

This summer I rode my bike to work almost every day on the bike trail. I found the trail to be well maintained and frequently used, I also found our parks are over manicured, watered, mowed, and maintained (what’s the point of mowing ½” of grass!?).

Why does the parks department and budget continue to grow at such a rapid rate, and what is the solution to slow it down a bit to an acceptable inflationary level? I suggest we stop building new parks for at least two years and do an extensive study on how much our parks are used by monitoring their usages throughout the week and seasons. If certain parks have little usage – we sell off the land. I also suggest we build smaller parks that are easier and less expensive to maintain. I also think we should reduce the size of some of our larger parks. One thing I observed this summer is that smaller parks are more populated. Not sure why? Maybe people feel safer?

I decided to look at another city similar to ours in climate, size and growth. Billings, Montana is two-thirds the size in population to Sioux Falls.

Billings spends $5,714 a year per developed acre of parkland.

Sioux Falls spends $11,546 a year per developed acre of parkland.

Can you imagine if it cost you that much to maintain your lawn every year! Even if you feritlized, watered and paid a lawn service for an acre of land you are still looking at about $2,200

You must also remember, the $33 Million is the 2009 operating budget ONLY! This does not include building and developing new park land, that is in a separate budget called the CIP.

Sioux Falls maintains 4.8 times more parkland than Billings and even if you adjust for the population difference Sioux Falls still maintains 3.22 times more parkland than Billings. Sioux Falls budget is 9.78 times larger than Billings and 6.52 times larger when you adjust for population – Holy Crap! This is pretty amazing considering the similarities between Sioux Falls and Billings. If you go to Billings Parks and Recreation page you will see that they also offer as many activities as Sioux Falls. In Sioux Falls defense we charge visitors a tax to buy stuff here to help fund our parks. In Billings they are not so lucky, they only have a state income tax to work with. Not only does Billings maintain developed acres on such a small budget they also maintain over 2,000 acres of undeveloped parks but they also irrigate their parks like we do, from the river. When I spoke to one of the park’s directors about his operating budget, he said they were underfunded (well duh) but when I told him our budget, he was dumbfounded, as was I when I heard his budget.

What is the problem? My guess is Sioux Falls is paying too much for outside services and over-maintaining. It’s not like Billings is a couple bucks short of us on funding, they are millions and millions of dollars shorter than us. It tells me that Sioux Falls Parks and Recreation is in a constant state of overspending. We can have all the same things we have now, we just need to start shopping at the dollar store.

How has the Parks budget grown to such a massive level without some oversight? That’s just it, there is no oversight or accountability. The Parks board meetings are not televised or broadcast on the city website. The other problem is that the Parks board is all volunteer. I think they need to be elected officials. With a $33 million dollar operating budget a year, they operate almost as a separate entity from the city. In fact, up until a few years ago, the Parks and Rec department made their own decisions on public art, not consulting the Mayor, Council or Visual Arts Commission before placing public art. Kinda takes the word ‘Public’ out of ‘Public Art’.

Once we ask for accountability from our Parks and Rec department not only will you see incredible savings to taxpayers, you will see more CITIZEN friendly parks.

It’s not ‘Criminal’ it’s ‘Unethical’

 

ethâ‹…ics

–plural noun

1.

(used with a singular or plural verb ) a system of moral principles: the ethics of a culture.

 

2.

the rules of conduct recognized in respect to a particular class of human actions or a particular group, culture, etc.: medical ethics; Christian ethics.

 

3.

moral principles, as of an individual: His ethics forbade betrayal of a confidence.

 

 

Did the Rounds administration do anything illegal in reference to the pay-to-play no-bid contract controversy? I don’t see that, and neither did anyone in the RCJ columns. But just because something is legal doesn’t make it ethical.

Do some of us do unethical things, whether it’s in our personal or professional lives? Sure we do. But I also think there are different levels of it.

Besides government other organizations provide a code ethics. Though subject to interpretation (as I found out when I asked for an ethics opinion about a couple Sioux Falls city councilors) for the most part they keep members on the up and up.

Last year the Washington Pavilion of Arts and Sciences (finally) changed their code of ethics barring board members from participating in exhibits or providing professional services to the Pavilion for payment. This didn’t happen overnight. It was a long drawn out process after years of complaints about a certain board member by not just me but several other artists and advocates in our community. In my opinion it took to damn long and I think the only reason it happened was this board member no longer serves (but I could be mistaken).

The irony of all this was that this person was one of the founders of the ad agency that got the lucrative no-bid tourism contracts from the state. Coincidence? I don’t think so.

In one attack on me in a letter to the editor he vehemently opposed openness at taxpayer funded institutions like the Pavilion. No surprise looking back now, huh?

Bill Clinton cheated on his wife in the White House. Over $40 million was spent trying to impeach him for lying about it. It was unethical (the cheating part) and probably cost Al Gore a lot of votes (even though he still won).

Last year we had to endure the Sutton hearings because the legislature thought it was unethical for an adult male to climb into bed with another adult male. Maybe it was, even though the DCI could not find proof a crime was committed. Sutton was censured.

Mike Rounds gives not just a handful of no-bid contracts to campaign contributors, but hundreds and hundreds of them and there isn’t an ethics investigation?

There should be.

Maybe Rounds will be cleared of any unethical practices, maybe an investigation will find something illegal was done. Who knows, but it’s worth the effort.

No one should defend cronyism, whether you are a Rep, Dem or Indy, even if it is being practiced legally.

Even if you don’t have a problem with the ethics of what Mike did, I would think fiscal conservatives would take issue with the irresponsibility of no-bid contracts. And if the State Legislature is truly made up of mostly conservatives the law would have been changed years ago.

I don’t think it is. We have become a Big Government state, and that is why most politicians just turn away from this issue.

So is Rounds a criminal? No way. Is he a sneak? I think so, but an ethics investigation would be the only true measure.

I hope some legislators have the guts to pursue one. It’s way past due.

Tax Happy!

What a perfect time to raise taxes, while the economy is in the toilet. That’s our city government, always thinking (about their campaign contributors that is).

KELO-TV does a story;

Eight South Dakota communities will implement new municipal taxes or increase taxes on January 1.

And Sioux Falls is increasing its current 1.92 percent local sales tax to 2 percent.

I would like to thank anyone who signed the petition to lower the sales tax in 2010 to 1.90 this past weekend.

Alaska’s Biggest Newspaper Wonders Which Palin Will Return Home

It’s obvious which Sarah Palin Alaskans need to see in the next two years. Alaskans elected her to be governor, not to give her a platform to run for president in 2012. Alaskans chose her because she promised a different way of doing business, not more of the same mindless partisan warfare.

Centrist Sarah Palin or the highly partisan social conservative Sarah Palin?