The commission finally has the real Census numbers to work with. I’m with Hurlbert that the main focus should be Central District and everything else will fall into place. I think it should be expanded and should always have the highest numbers due to density. No doubt it is the most diverse economically, but districting committees are NOT allowed to form districts around economic status or race.
I’m really not going to take sides, (FF 42:00) but some of the members of the board brought up some good points about expanding the Central District. Jeff Schmidt, who basically has been drawing these maps for years and getting the rubberstamps from the commission really did quite the Mexican Hat Dance. I do think though the Commission is going to push on this once the actual census numbers come out (late August) and I agree that Central District should encompass most of the Central part of Sioux Falls. In the 29 years I have lived in Sioux Falls I have only lived out of the Central District a few times and it truly is the best part of our city, once we can get rid of the trains.
Speaking of the trains, City Hall moles have been telling me there is a push by the administration and downtown developers to move the trains out of Downtown! Bravo! While I totally support this you have to keep some things in mind;
• You should really involve the public so they help put the pressure on the Railroads and Feds. Trying to secretly negotiate with the RR’s will get the same result as the RR Redevelopment project . . .
• This should have been negotiated to begin with when the last mayor gave $26 million to the RR for $2 million in dirty land that the Federal Taxpayers probably owned anyway, but he failed, one of the biggest failures in negotiating in the history of the city, but what do expect from a low life credit card peddler?
• Which brings us to the most important part, this is Federal Easement land which means Thune, Rounds and Dusty will have to get involved, as well as the transportation secretary Pete and possibly even Congress itself, or even a signature from Sleepy Joe. Moving RR tracks is kind of like pulling King Arthur’s sword from the stone. I wish them luck, but I have a feeling I will be sleeping in my basement for years to come.
UPDATE: The Ethics board threw out a complaint against councilor Neitzert today based on a technicality. The person who filed the complaint had the wrong chapter number listed for what he was accused of violating. He listed the employee chapter instead of the councilor chapter. Basically Neitzert was accused of taking money from an organization to go speak at a conference in Texas with mayor Paul. He admitted to doing it already to the council. The Ethics Board could have fixed the error in a motion and then proceeded with the hearing, but of course they didn’t. More to come.
Funny how Neitzert claims there was nothing wrong with what he did, blames the messenger, yet chose to keep the complaint ‘confidential’ until after the hearing. That’s because he was hoping for an April election, and the hearing would not have happened until after that. So who is playing politics?
Not sure what this is about because it is confidential, but you can guarantee it is about someone who collects a paycheck from the city and has obvious close ties to the city attorney (in other words not someone who puts out fires or mows the parks). The recusal of the city attorney by one of the leading attorneys at Lynn, Jackson, Shultz & Lebrun to replace him tells me that it is someone city attorney Kooistra advises directly. (You can figure out the handful of people who fit that criteria – I will give you a hint, it is less than 12 and more than 1).
While the person(s) being indicted have chosen to keep this confidential, that doesn’t mean after the decision is granted it remains confidential, it is free game for media consumption.
I also find calling this an ‘executive session’ interesting. Is that even legal? While I understand the meeting being closed to the public and media, wouldn’t the person filing the complaint be included to present evidence? I don’t know, this is all really suspicious.
But I can say something for certain, and I don’t even need a magic 8-Ball, whoever it is, they will magically (no pun intended) be found innocent. I also will guarantee you that that decision has already been pre-determined. But don’t take my word on it, just look at the record of this board going all the way back to Mayor Munson . . . patsies.
Man, can you say ‘Overkill’. You would think they were building a multi-million dollar Bunker Ramp to support a mega-story hotel.
LINK TO FULL REPORT AND PHOTOS.
The Sioux Falls Districting Commission is seeking public comment on the recommended plan to adjust City Council districts. The plan consists of a map that depicts recommended changes to district boundaries pursuant to the districting criteria found in Section 6.02 of the City Charter.
The plan is currently available to the public for inspection and comment at the Office of the City Clerk, Carnegie Town Hall, 235 West Tenth Street. It can also be found online atwww.siouxfalls.org/districting-commission.
The comment period ends June 20, 2017, at 5 p.m. For additional information, please contact the City Clerk at 367-8080. People wishing to comment on the plan must do so in writing to the City Clerk, 235 West Tenth Street, P.O. Box 7402, Sioux Falls, SD 57117-7402, or via email toclerks@siouxfalls.org. Comments must include the name and address of the person submitting the comment.
The Districting Commission will also hold public hearings on Thursday, June 15, 2017, at 5:30 p.m. and on Saturday, June 17, 2017, at 10 a.m., both in Carnegie Town Hall, 235 West Tenth Street. Any interested person may appear and be heard. The first 30 minutes of each meeting will consist of an “open house,†which will be immediately followed by a staff presentation and opportunity for public comment. If an ADA accommodation is needed, please contact the Human Relations Office at 605-367-8745 or humanrelations@siouxfalls.org at least 72 hours before the event.
l3wis