The Glory House rehabilitation apartments are one step closer to opening with the tearing down of the old ice rec center.
BLACK IRON PUTS RAILROAD REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT ON HOLD
I kind of saw this coming;
The couple deferred the final vote to review costs.
Power’s say the Billion’s are revising their plan and changes will be made.
As I understand it, it was going to be very costly to provide underground parking due to quartzite issues, so I’m sure they are trying to revise the parking situation to include it above ground in the planned structure. But I’m not sure. I do know that the city requested the building be a certain amount of stories (6?) due to density and there may me a disagreement on just how that may be done with including above ground parking. I never understand why developers want to get involved with private/public partnerships with the city.
SHOULD THE SIOUX STEEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT GET A TIF?
There has been rumor floating around from city hall that a TIF may be applied to this project. Now while you may argue that the land Sioux Steel currently sits on is probably contaminated due to decades of manufacturing and this would be classified as ‘blight’ do you think it is fair to give a tax rebate to developers who contributed to that blight to begin with? Kind of a philosophical/ethical question. While we know clean up will have to occur before redeveloping the site I suggest applying for EPA grants and NOT taking away money from public education in the form of TIFs.
PLANNING DIRECTOR MIKE COOPER PLANS PRESENTATION ON JOINT JURISDICTION
Mike is going to address the Sioux Falls City Council about the purpose of joint jurisdiction after the recent fluff up over the wedding barn. The city must be getting nervous that the Minnehaha County Commission may be planning to withdraw from the ‘Polite’ agreement.
AFTER YEARS OF STRUGGLING WITH SIRE TO WORK PROPERLY, CITY DECIDES TO RENEW CONTRACT WITH THE CRAPPY SERVICE
Not sure why the City Clerk decided to renew this contract with all the problems with the service?
PARKS DEPARTMENT MOVES AHEAD WITH $200K CONTROVERSIAL CONSULTING CONTRACT AFTER ALL
Even after the city council told them to explore other options the Parks Department (director) convinced the TenHaken administration they still needed the studies done. So much for the legislative body’s input on this one. I also find it ironic we are seeking a parks accreditation but don’t seek the similar credentials for our police department. Because you know, green grass is far more important than public safety . . .
GENERAL PUBLIC INPUT RETURNS TO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETINGS AFTER CHIDING FROM DETROIT LEWIS
I posed this question to Head City Attorney Stacy Kooistra this week in an email;
Stacy,
I noticed after state law changed concerning public input that the planning commission started having public ‘general’ input at the end of the meeting. They did it for a couple of meetings than in last week’s meeting they did not do it (only on agenda items).
While I understand that maybe NO ONE came and spoke that doesn’t mean it can be eliminated. In fact in my 12 years or more of attending city council meetings there were several meetings in which people did not speak, but it still is offered.
I am wondering why they ended offering this at the planning meetings?
Stacy responded to me that he would meet with planning staff to discuss. I got this response today from Jason Bieber, Urban Planner in the Planning department;
Scott,
Thank you for the email regarding the agenda item for Public Input at the monthly Planning Commission meeting.   As indicated in SDCL 1-25-1, “The Chair of the body shall reserve at every official meeting by the public body a period for public comment, limited at the chair’s discretion, but not so limited as to provide for no public comment.â€Â Therefore, our Planning Commission Chairman made the decision to remove the agenda item for Public Input on non-agenda items at our monthly Planning Commission meeting for the simple fact that it had not been utilized by citizens so far. He also felt that we allow public input at our 12:00pm Planning Commission Briefing the day (Tuesday) before the Planning Commission meeting and that may be a better opportunity for Citizens to provide public input. In doing public input this way we do comply with SDCL 1-25-1.
This meeting of course, while open to the public, is at city hall with limited parking in the middle of the day on a Tuesday. The meeting is also NOT recorded or live streamed.
After receiving your comments as well as those from Councilmember Stehly, Planning Staff and the Planning Commission Chair have decided to add the Public Input Agenda item back on the Planning Commission Meeting agenda. Our intent was not to limit Citizen Involvement at our Planning Commission Meetings, but to provide the best avenue for Public Input.
As I mentioned in my original email, doesn’t matter whether anybody shows up or not, as long as an opportunity is provided. The irony is even if NO ONE speaks it only takes a matter of seconds to ask if anyone is present to speak and is little inconvenience to the Planning Commission or their chair.
Thank you for bringing your concern to our attention and we look forward to Citizen Public Input at the November 7th Planning Commission Meeting.
That kind of sounds like an invitation to me. I’ll keep my calendar open that night. I always have plenty to say about planning in this community.
*I would also like to thank Councilor Stehly for looking into this for me initially. We kind of tag teamed this effort.
While the Glory House and the Board of Directors may be happy with the deal the city cut with them, I for one am not. It’s another example of the mayor’s bullying, not only with the Glory House but the council to get his way;
“A great team of leaders from the administration worked hard to meet the needs Glory House has for expansion but also find some common ground, which will end up as a big win for the taxpayers, too,†said Heather Hitterdal, communication specialist at City Hall.
Under the deal, Glory House will pay $50,000 and in return receive about half of the land the city owns there now. The rest will be sold at auction.
How much that will rake in for the city won’t be known until it’s sold, but market value puts it in the neighborhood about $300,000 or more.
The public ALREADY WON before the deal was struck. I would even argue that the deal is worse for taxpayers because it doesn’t leave room for expansion of the GH. It costs taxpayers $54 a day to incarcerate someone in state prison, about $20K a year. If you keep just 3 people out of prison for one year, you already made your money back, and heck, if you keep those same 3 people out of prison for 5 years, you have paid for the entire plot of land.
How many people has the tennis center kept out of prison? Or better yet, what VALUE has the tennis center gave us? Will we ever recoup the $500K we dumped into this facility? A facility I hear can barely keep it’s doors open especially after the dust up with Cindy Huether and the SFTA.
See unlike the Tennis Center that uses the funny math of ‘quality of life’ the Glory House can actually show REAL numbers of what keeping ex-cons out of prison saves taxpayers. The $50K price-tag was an amount to soothe the Mayor’s MONSTER ego more then anything.
“I think it’s a win-win-win all around. It’s a way in which we can help the Glory House and do the right thing but we can also protect the taxpayer dollar and get some revenue out of a piece of the land,†he said. “I applaud the administration for coming around in the spirit of compromise and coming up with something that everybody can live with.â€
And once again, the mayor can’t keep his nose out of where it doesn’t belong, the council’s business. This ‘deal’ was initiated by the council, and should have been finished by them.
Not only does the city make sure they pay ‘something’ for the land, they only let them have half of what was requested;
Under the deal, the city would raze the existing building and divide the property it owns there into three pieces. A 9,000-square-foot parcel would be sold to the Glory House for $50,000, while another 43,000-square-feet would be gifted.
Mayor Mike Huether and his administrators have resisted the move, saying it’s not in taxpayers’ interest to give away city assets, even if it’s an empty building used for miscellaneous storage. Last month, City Planning Director Mike Cooper and Public Works Director Mark Cotter were in front of the City Council when they shared a recent appraisal that valued the park land at $675,000.
It’s funny how the mayor just couldn’t stand to give this land away and cut a back door deal with the Glory House to side step the council. Yet $500k for a tennis center bearing the mayor’s name is no problem at all for the good taxpayers of Sioux Falls.
Come and listen to a story about a man named Robert as told by his family. Dr. Robert Giebink was a successful doctor in Sioux Falls for many years. As a responsible and interested civic minded person, he lent his time and skills to many organizations.
Back in the 1070’s Robert was asked to help a nonprofit organization called the Minnehaha Ice and Rec Center with land. He gave the land to help the community. In the 1990’s the land was given to the city for the legal $1 with promises.
Dr. Robert’s family showed up and filled in many holes in Mayor Mike’s MIRC / Glory House story. The city never paid $100,000 for the property, they paid a single dollar. A dollar. We also hear from the donor’s family, it was a gift to help people, not make money. To those who knew Dr. Giebink, even a little, would recognize the selfless gift this property was. The family wants their father and grandfather’s gift to help those in need with the gift of a chance to succeed.