Transparency would solve many problems for Sioux Falls City Hall

by

Recently the administration said they want to increase water rates again;

While the last round of rate increases adopted in 2018 ran through 2023 and ranged from 3 to 6 percent, it’s unclear what the new rate increases will look like.

That’s because the city is still calculating what level of rate hikes are necessary to keep up with anticipated population growth, operational needs and anticipated revenues, according to the Public Works Department that oversees municipal utility services.

“We are in the process of developing the operational and capital budgets which will inform the utility rate models,” Public Works Director Mark Cotter told The Dakota Scout when asked about the hikes, how far into the future they will be scheduled and why they’re necessary. “I expect to finalize this process in the coming weeks.”

One thing that happened during the Munson administration was an effort from city hall to encourage water conservation. Heck, the city was even giving away toilet rebates! If I recall the public works director, Mark Cotter, who is still the director, said the conservation efforts were making progress and people were consuming less water. Tack this onto growth and more users and you should be able to keep above water, no pun intended, without raising rates too much.

The problem is the water and sewer department depend on user fees to fund their operations, this is called enterprise funds. You pay your bill and that money goes directly to the maintenance and operation of the facilities. While enterprise funds are a good idea, they don’t always work well when you have major expansions because we also use the funds to pay down bonds for the facility upgrades. I have argued for awhile that major infrastructure projects should come out of the 2nd penny capital budget, like new water reclamation plants and bunker ramps (the Parking division which is ran on enterprise funds is also running lean probably due to paying bonds on a parking ramp that is not completed).

Some would argue that the enterprise funds should also pay down bonds, but I ask this question; “Do the wages for people who work in water reclamation come from the 2nd penny operations fund, like all other city salaries, or do they come from the enterprise fund?” I don’t know the answer to that question, but whether it is an enterprise fund OR sales taxes it is still coming from the same pot. With $80+ million in reserves we can easily takeover the bond payments for the water rec out of the 2nd penny and avoid any rate increases.

TRANSPARENCY WOULD SOLVE THIS PROBLEM

We could come to a compromise by sitting down with the public in public forums to discuss different options when it comes to increasing rates;

• More robust conservation efforts

• Using the 2nd penny or even reserves to pay down bonds

• Even higher rates for excessive users

We don’t need to raise rates, there are other solutions but we need to discuss them in a public forum and our city council NEEDS to demand it.

While I support the efforts of the sustainability folks to call out the administrations lack of transparency I asked someone yesterday, “Where were these folks 6 years ago when this guy rolled into office?” and this person replied, “Where were they in the last election?” Basically saying we let Paul and his endorsed candidates roll over the competition without a fight.

Transparency effects more then just climate change. It also has to do with utility rates, art censorship, insider bridge deals, free facade money to political donors, purchase agreements for welfare developer queens, banning drop boxes from public libraries, demolition orders from VIP neighbors and the list goes on.

We have a bigger fight then just sustainability when it comes to city hall, we have an communication problem. Once we shine light into city hall, most of these difficulties would be less difficult. The mayor says he wants a ONE Sioux Falls (still not sure what that even means) but he seems to be the only ONE not understanding that the ONE doesn’t stand for his bureaucrats but it stands for US, your constituents.

It’s where the dominoes start

by

There has been quite a bit of turnover in Sioux Falls city government over the past year when it comes to department leadership. But instead of just reacting after the dominoes fall, maybe we should look where the tumble started.

Here is the timeline;

• March 2023, Tom Greco, City Clerk, leaves the city for a job with Minnehaha County. While Tom’s job change DOES come with a raise, it also comes with a lot more responsibility. I also find it interesting that the MCC would hire a Lincoln county resident to run their commission. Tom may have moved to Minnehaha County since, but in 2017 when his wife ran for the Harrisburg School Board they lived in Lincoln County. I’m not sure why Tom left, but it was on his own accord, the council didn’t reprimand or terminate him. I do find the way MCC secretly hired and interviewed him to be highly suspicious though.

• February 2023, Stacy Kooistra, Lead City Attorney, leaves for a research facility that is receiving millions from city taxpayers for landscaping and ‘other stuff’. I could probably write an entire blog post about this departure but I know about as much as you.

• December 2022, Shawn Pritchett, Finance Director takes over as the director of IT and Technology as well as the finance department. I found this move significant. While in the past the city has moved directors around under the current charter, they have never taken a director of one department and made them also the director of another department simultaneously, especially two departments that may work closely together BUT have different functions.

• September 2022, Shana Nelson, Audit Manager, leaves the city council and begins to work for the administration in housing compliance. Rumors had been swirling since July that she was making this move but until councilor Starr brought it up in a public meeting the public was unaware. Granted, she worked for the council and made a lateral move back to the city and is still on the taxpayers dime but I think her move plays into this.

• July 2022; Mike Grisby, IT Director for the city, left the city. The city has not said what the details of his departure were but if you go to Mike’s Linkedin page you will see he is back in Kansas City where he came from and has NO mention of his city employment. Interestingly enough, Grisby did this interview in March of 2022 just a few months before leaving where he talks about the integration of different departments into IT. It’s not a bad concept (considering the administration did just that after he left).

I mention this timeline because in less then a year, since the departure of Grisby there has been major shakeups in leadership.

Grisby is one of the few directors that came to Sioux Falls with little attachment and it is NO surprise he is back in Kansas City. In other words, he had no dog in the fight and nothing grounding him here. I think his sudden departure from the city with NO explanation is where the dominoes started to fall, and I don’t think the last one has dropped yet.

Of course I am speculating, but it is pretty obvious to those looking from the outside that the administration has been circling the wagons over the past year but WHY?

UPDATE II: Comments on the Riverline District are ‘Hot & Cold’

by

This was the analogy Mayor TenHaken gave at the State of the City address when a public event was suddenly hi-jacked by people who want to make a lot of cashola on the Riverline District.

To Poops credit he did make some admissions such as the difficulty of building housing in the area (he said people were not suggesting housing, even though I read most of the comments when the survey was live and there were many housing suggestions). He also brought up the natural springs in the area (without mentioning that building on top of them with permanent structures would be difficult). But where I had to giggle a bit was when Paul suggested that the comments about building a baseball stadium in the area were ‘Hot & Cold’.

Before we get to his lipstick job he applied to this very ugly pig, what made it even more amusing is Paul’s seemingly lack of gravitas when trying to sell the public on this. I read most of the comments, to say they were hot or cold isn’t untrue, but about 90% or more were pretty damn cold on the stadium idea.

UPDATE: I find the actual survey results in major conflict with the comments I read.

Over a year ago a citizen involved with community and neighborhood planning told me about a closed survey they sent out to a specific group. The link provided accidentally got shared with others and someone who wanted to see different results decided to have a little fun. The survey was filled out by the same IP address over 100 times. My point is, surveys can be fudged and are NOT scientific. I have yet to run into one single person who wants to see a new stadium built downtown.

There will be a privately funded economic impact study done soon and hopefully have results in July. Unfortunately this $200K private study will be funded by 20 private banking firms in South Dakota. What’s that saying about thumbs and scales?

Personally I think this would be a fantastic spot for a multi-story convention center with a green space attached that could be used for conventions. The obvious problem with this scenario is we already have a convention center and this would probably be a $100 million dollar project (funded by taxpayers). We could repurpose the current convention center as a rec center, but once again, where will the money come from?

I am all for the Riverline District, but I think the private investors and banksters can manage this all by their lonesome and if the city needs to put in a yield sign or a swing set, we can assist.

Poops says he doesn’t like the term legacy but pretty much wanted to make the Riverline Project his legacy. He may get it, and he may not like the results (think buckled siding, failed HVACs and Bunker Ramps).

I can almost guarantee if there is a proposal passed by the city council to bond for a multi-million dollar rec center or stadium, the signatures WILL be collected and it WILL go to a public vote which will need a 60% threshold to pass muster.

I guess the proposed pool bonds are rumored to be at or above $70 million.

SHOUT OUT!

Towards the end of the address, Poops recognizes Dawn Marie Johnson who is running for School Board with an election less then a month away. While I didn’t hear him mention she was running for school board, it certainly was dubious timing to recognize her accomplishments (during a public meeting funded by taxpayers). There are campaign rules about using public funds or venues to promote a candidacy. Just last year David Z was cut off at public input for violating those rules. Granted, I am unaware if Dawn knew he was going to do that, (and an attendee told me that he didn’t even see her there) and in no way is it a reflection on her or her campaign, but Paul seems to think he is some kind of king maker after the last city election. If I were Dawn, I would politely ask Mayor TenHaken to keep his endorsements to himself, she will do just fine on her own.

UPDATE II: Johnson was in attendance and took a photo with the mayor at the event that she posted to her social media page.

FACEBOOK AND RESERVATIONS

At the beginning of the SOC, Poops asked for people to eat up. Kind of confused that there would be any leftovers with all the reservations.

Public meetings are just that PUBLIC. Not only should there have been no muffins and coffee (unless paid for by a private donor) there certainly should NOT have been reservations. I was informed it was light grab and go pastries and the city did pay for them.

This also should have streamed in SIRE (city website meeting page), siouxfalls.org/live, CityLink, YouTube and Facebook. The media department has the technology to do this if they so choose. Heck, Dakotanewsnow even figured out how to stream it.

Also, public meetings (unless part of a pre-arranged presentation to the council or public input) are not a place for private investors to try to sell us on something we have no interest in buying. The SOC is a time for the mayor to share with the public the past and present accomplishments of city government and what the future holds, which PTH did do in between the school board endorsements, pie in the sky baseball stadium proposals, telling Jensen to stand up, looking for Tom Greco and trying to determine if a map is orange.

I will defend PTH on trying to utilize technology to reach out to the public, but shouldn’t this utilization come with more openness and transparency? Who am I kidding.

Is Mayor TenHaken a small thinker or a visionary? Only time will tell.  

by

“TEACHER! TEACHER! CAN I ANSWER THE QUESTION?!”

I wish I would have written that post title, but I didn’t.

It seems others in our fine community have discovered the squarespace crusader has no backbone. What took so long?

There has been oodles of backlash towards PTH and council over the roasted pumpkin seed version of the sustainability report, some critiques have been legit, others petty but this guest column editorial really nails it;

So, back to the city council: The council is elected to serve the people of Sioux Falls, not to submit to the will of a seemingly short-sighted mayor. Given that our council members’ salaries are paid by city taxpayers, yes, we do expect more. We expect the city council to carefully study and consider all the proposals in the December 2022 updated Sustainability Plan. We expect them to make Sioux Falls a leader in addressing factors that impact climate change, and to create a city of excellence in policies and practices that contribute to a livable planet for us and future generations. 

We expect the mayor to work toward measurable progress to help save the planet, and therefore help save us and future generations. A grant application for Climate Pollution Reduction funds would demonstrate good faith action in this regard.

Is Mayor TenHaken a small thinker or a visionary? Only time will tell.

As I understand the situation Poops was open minded about the initial recommendations but got push back from the council, or so they say.

Trust me, I read about government all over this country daily, as I have told my readers before, it’s my hobby, and it entertains me. But what has astonished me especially over the past 5 years is this seemingly black hole of leadership with our Sioux Falls city council and mayor. I mean, it is one thing to just make bad OR good decisions it’s a whole other level to make no decisions, with no explanation.

Tomorrow when the savior pops out of his cave he needs to make a quick trip to city hall to remind the mayor about redemption and the power of evil forces, then he needs to pull up his sandals and trot on over to Carnegie town hall to talk to the city disciples (councilors) about the consequences of bad decisions. There are a couple of things watered down wine and unleavened bread cannot fix.

TenHaken’s Pumpkin Policy Advisor doesn’t believe in mandates

by

In this interview with the administration’s newest advisor, she revealed something I have known about PTH for awhile;

“Our goal is to put something together that is realistic and achievable and well accepted by a diverse group of stakeholders and the public,” Harris said. “Sustainability should be a choice, and our job in government is to provide an education so people can make those choices. We aren’t doing mandates or forcing it on people because that isn’t how we want to govern. That isn’t how the mayor sees his role. He wants to be a uniting mayor.”

I would agree that a mandate doesn’t always solve an issue, in fact it can make it a lot worse, but when it comes to climate change we have exhausted most options. Letting industry decide if or how they are going to tackle climate change in their respective private industries means they will just choose to NOT do what government suggests. They already are on record for that. Sustainability isn’t a question of giving options you have to give and mandate direction, you also need followup and enforcement.

Just look at the over 4,000 property owners over the past 2 years that were MANDATED to repair city owned sidewalks because of the multiple ADA lawsuits filed against the city. So when the city is under fire from the FEDs to get their poop in a group they turnaround and mandate taxpayers fix the very sidewalks they are being sued over. City ordinance is pretty clear, the city has the authority to MANDATE just like they would when it comes to sustainability. I would even argue that global warming is a much bigger threat then cracks in a sidewalk.

If this mayor wants to UNITE the community, why not UNITE them around cleaner air and water? Recently the Argus Leader touched on that very problem;

Everything in the EPA’s dataset looks squeaky-clean for South Dakota, except for one category: water releases in Sioux Falls. In 2021, Sioux Falls disposed more than 5 million pounds of toxic waste into the Big Sioux River, about 2.5% of the nation’s overall generated water waste.

Nearly all TRI-registered water releases in the city involve one source: Smithfield Foods’ Sioux Falls facility, formerly known as the John Morrell Co. meatpacking plant.

In many ways, the Sioux Falls meatpacker is one of the worst water polluters in the U.S,

So while the mayor and his policy advisor want UNIFICATION I think mandating a communist Chinese owned packing plant would be a better approach since ‘suggestions’ are NOT clearly working. Now let’s all join hands and sing Kum by yah while the earth is burning.