Event Center

Get your butt to the SF city council meeting tonight! Speak your mind about opposition to the Event Center funding resolution.

Reminder: City Council votes on event center recommendations tonight.
7pm • 10th & Dakota Ave. (not City Hall at 9th & Dakota)

Their resolution says they are accepting all the recommendations of the task force. That means they are asking for new sales tax to pay for it.
It also says the city must have “an accessible, user-friendly program to refund a temporary one cent sales tax to income qualified residents”. (nothing about effectiveness in reaching those who need it)

All this in today’s Argus Leader

The 657 rebate number refers to 5 months, not 3. I am trying to get the latest 3-month figure from the state. The July-Aug-Sept number is 630 households statewide. That’s all! for the whole state! (At the time of the census SD had 94,000 low-income households.) Note that the subtitle “People on food stamps must apply” is wrong. Anyone with food stamps is not eligible.

Here is a great letter to the editor about the issue.
2. a poll question on this
http://www.argusleader.com/apps/pbcs.dll/frontpage

I have to work tonight, but am going to try to get off early enough to speak. I’m guessing the only dissenting voice will be Staggers.

Sioux Falls city council to vote on the stupidest funding source for an entertainment facility evah!

But according Quen Be De Knudson, the voters will decide, right after the rubberstamp council and rubberstamp legislature decides;

A RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE 2008–2009 EVENTS CENTER TASK FORCE.

WHEREAS, a task force of citizen volunteers has studied the facility needs of Sioux Falls and arrived at a plan to build a new events center and expand the existing Convention Center;

WHEREAS, funding such a project will require state legislative authorization and will be put to a public vote; and

WHEREAS, the events center project will not be put to a vote unless it includes an accessible, user-friendly program to refund a temporary one cent sales tax to income-qualified residents;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY OF SIOUX FALLS, SD:

That the Mayor and City Council adopt the recommendations of the 2008–2009 Events Center Task Force.

Funny, no mention of the ONE CENT INCREASE on everything. Nice misleading. Losers. I expect only Staggers to vote against it.


The Gargoyle Leader’s Publisher seems to be either confused or sending misinformation to the voters of Sioux Falls

beck

Grumpy-Grumps is back on the beat, oh joy. I guess he stopped crying over Janklow beating him up.

Okay, I don’t expect the average Joe on the street to understand the Event Center circus, but I do expect the publisher of Sioux Falls’ only daily paper to understand it, especially since he is promising he will write his column again;

So beginning this month, I’ll be returning to a regular column rotation, at least monthly.

While I welcome Beck’s column, because #1, I think he is a fantastic writer and I also think he is really funny, sometimes biting, sometimes tragically, but what I do not approve of is spreading bologna about the EC funding;

Public momentum, for example, seems to be solidly behind building an events center in a way that belies the city’s fractured political leadership. As long as we can figure out how to keep Howard Wood Field out of the final solution, locate a donor to provide some seed money and convince Pierre to give us (and other cities) the power to control our own destiny through the BBB tax, we’ll be on our way to making a major investment in the quality of life in Sioux Falls.

First off, let’s clarify something, I do think a large MINORITY supports a new EC, but only if we fund it without taxing the poor and working class more, and secondly, I am not sure who’s ass you pulled the BBB tax funding idea from, but you and I both know that, that is not the proposal.

I will hold back any criticism and give you the opportunity to print a correction, soon, like, tomorrow.

Once again our local newspaper proves how out-of-touch they are with the rest of the community

Screen shot 2009-11-18 at 7.46.39 AM

Event Center Task Force Chair, Terry Baloun lays it on thick

We all knew this was coming like a freight train, the Gargoyle Leader endorses the Event Center Task Force’s flawed plan;

The plan, in its broad strokes, deserves the council’s support, subsidy and all.

They conveniently leave their endorsement as the last sentence, so let’s backtrack a bit.

First, what kind of city would Sioux Falls be without government subsidies of certain amenities?

The answer is startling.

We’d have fewer pools and no parks, for one. The Great Plains Zoo and Delbridge Museum probably would be gone. And the bike path? Forget about it. There’d be public safety, roads and sidewalks in Sioux Falls. And that’s about it.

First off, comparing an events center to the bike trail is like comparing apples to oranges. I don’t get charged an admission fee to use the bike trail and the parks. When we pay taxes we expect a service in return, we get that with the bike trail and our parks, we get that with roads, etc. Making the community as a whole pay for a facility that a majority of them will never use is unfair, and my guess will be very unpopular. That is why a BB & B tax combined with an advertising tax is the best way to pay for this facility. It is common sense really; MAKE THE PEOPLE WHO WILL BE USING THE FACILITY – PAY FOR THE FACILITY. Not sure how much simpler the concept could be?

A study estimates that an events center and expanded convention center would bring $52 million into Sioux Falls annually. That’s $52 million that might find its way to another city if Sioux Falls flinches at subsidizing an events center. In that light, an estimated annual subsidy of $400,000 shouldn’t be dismissed automatically.

While I can’t deny or prove the $52 million impact, I ask this question, “Who is receiving a majority of this revenue? The common Joe?” Think about it. The Washington Pavilion estimates it generates a $13 million dollar impact every year on Sioux Falls . . . ahem. Let’s ‘pretend’ for just a moment that is true. Has your personal finances and personal wealth grown since the Pavilion and new Convention Center has been built? Probably not. Has a majority of this community grown culturally since the Pavilion been built? I know I have personally benefitted culturally from the Pavilion, but I know I am a very small minority. I don’t think subsidizing these facilities is a bad thing, I just think we need to collect that subsidy fairly – that is what the ED Board leaves out.

The City Council is expected to vote next month on a resolution supporting the events center plan and a temporary 1-cent sales tax to pay for its construction.

Something that will probably get all of the council’s rubber stamp (including maybe even Staggers). But don’t think there won’t be a lot of shit flying before this vote. It already started Monday night. During public input of the city council meeting, only two hours after the task force presented their flawed plan, a citizen urged the council not to approve the funding source for the new events center. The citizen actually sounded like he was in support of the new EC, just not the funding source. But it did not stop Quen Be De Knudson from twisting the responsibility back on the voters. She said, (paraphrasing) “This is really in the hands of the voters to approve this funding source.” Fortunately the citizen wasn’t that stupid to believe De’s bullcrap. He reminded her that the city council is the one that will initiate that process by recommending the flawed funding source to the legislature, to which she didn’t have much of an answer. Also remember, De has ranted and raved every chance she could get at council info meetings about how “she can’t wait to increase retail taxes by 1 cent so this city can build ‘all kinds of wonderful things.'” Make no mistake, this isn’t about letting the voters decide.

Is the SF Event Center Task Force trying to sell us another White Elephant?

While I support a new EC, one of the main reasons why I think we should use a permanent BB & B Tax, is because not only would the tax make payments on the bond, it could help subsidize the EC and Convention Center;

But consulting firm Conventions, Sports and Leisure also said the city could expect to increase its arena and convention subsidy by about $400,000 annually.

I believe this number is low, especially in the first 5-10 years the place is open. Why pull more money out of an already tightening city budget to subsidize conventions, and an events center? Since we are $137 million dollars backlogged on road repair, I think the current city budget should be spent on infrastructure and essential services, not more subsidies. The current CC and Pavilion are still subsidized by the city, 10 years after they have opened. We need to learn some lessons from the past.

Teri Ellis Schmidt, executive director of the Convention and Visitors Bureau, said there is “quite a long list” of organizations that would use an expanded convention center.

Talk, Talk, Talk. Until you can back that up with names of ACTUAL clients you sound exactly like you did 10 years ago. What did you do with that list? Shred it?