Imagine my surprise tonight while out for a bike ride. The city took my advice and put up sign(s) about proper decorum on the bike trail, even though I’m not sure what a ‘courteous speed’ is. There was another sign further down the trail that said ‘DON’T FEED THE GEESE. GIVE TO CHARITY’ 🙂
Not sure. While rumors are going around that a decision to split was made very recently, nobody has said a word publicly, but the Sioux Falls City Council got an update about the possible decision at the 4 PM informational today in which a presentation involving the Falls Park Visitor Center Management Agreement was discussed and these changes;
9 month Term: January 1, 2022 – September 30, 2022 • Discussions are on-going between the Chamber and Experience Sioux Falls regarding potential separate legal status for Experience Sioux Falls. • 9/30/21 coincides with the end of the Chambers fiscal year. • 60 day termination clause exercisable by City, which allows for transition of agreement once an effective date of separate legal status is determined.
This was first presented at the Parks Board Meeting on November 17, but it was also very sketchy as to what was going on. They called it ‘legal status’ changes between the Chamber and CVB and are having ongoing discussions. Terri Schmidt, head of ESF (CVB) did say;
“ESF becoming independent from the Chamber, that process is really moving along now, and tomorrow there is a major meeting where we are expecting to probably either seal the deal, or being really close to sealing the deal. I don’t know if anyone on the outside will really know the difference, it will be more of back house of becoming independent.”
While NOTHING was said by the presenter at the informational about why this is occurring, the council, who must certainly know, has also chosen to keep this quiet or at least not filling in the blanks. Council Chair Curt Soehl even bragged about keeping it quiet and secretive by saying this at the end of the meeting;
“Thank all those involved for keeping their eye on the ball and realizing there is a lot of external noise going on at this time, for all of this, and to protect the city from everything they do.”
I find it interesting that the council is being publicly noticed about contract changes but during the presentation the public cannot be filled in on the details of a possible split. The hatred towards transparency in this city is even more troubling especially when the chair of the council brags about the secrecy. WOW! Surprised he didn’t just take a potty break during the presentation 🙁
It seems the head of ESF is the only one to at least give an inkling this was going to happen. So was a deal struck last Thursday? We may never know because of all the ‘External Noise.’
I also have a feeling if this was a simple matter of ‘back house’ deals and ‘legal status’ it wouldn’t be that controversial to release that information to the public, especially since it involves our tax dollars. I have a feeling this was a lot messier than they are putting on and they are hiding the sausage making from the citizens.
“The whole idea is to find donors that might have an interest in supporting the parks system with projects we’ve identified as priorities,†said Don Kearney, the city’s parks and recreation director.
Like an ice ribbon? Notice how that rolled out, once a donor said they wanted to give, their name was put on it and the tax payers had to pony up (while still having to pay an admission). While I am all for private donations to our parks, that donation should never be dictated to what it should be used for since taxpayers will likely have to maintain the project after it is built and likely contribute a matching donation to build it.
This is also why I take issue with it being a ‘private’ foundation where decisions about our parks will be made in private by a bunch of rich people who want to plaster their names all over our parks with their pet projects. I have always been a big believer of giving anonymously, modestly and having that gift go to an organization as a whole. It almost seems some of the elites in town are upset they are NOT getting the projects they want to see, so they will circumvent the legislative process.
The irony of this is that we could fund all of these projects through tax dollars (and charge no admission) if we stopped spending CIP money on play palaces we don’t need. I think we have an amazing parks system and for the most part it is FREE and almost 100% funded through tax dollars. I mean how many more Sanford parks do we need?!
And BTW, what happened to all the Sioux Falls logos matching???? I’m going to have to turn you into the Graphic Design Police.
CONFIDENTIAL REQUEST FOR ADVISORY OPINION 21-1 RECEIVED 10-14-2021 (EXECUTIVE SESSION TO DISCUSS PERSONNEL MATTERS PURSUANT TO SDCL 1-25-2(1) AND CONSULTING WITH LEGAL COUNSEL PURSUANT TO SDCL 1-25-2(3))
This could be anyone with the city, employee or elected official. Since it is confidential we will never know. I think even if these meetings are in private, they should at least release the question and the decision without exposing who is asking. How do we know if the Ethics Commission made the right decision if we cannot watch the proceedings?
Will the Washington Pavilion be hired to run the Ice Ribbon?
With the new ice ribbon set to be built soon down by Falls Park, some are wondering if the Parks Department has what it takes to run the paid admission facility. Since they will have to have a ticketing booth and some kind of staff to assist people, they will likely have to hire a contractor to do it. While I am sure the Pavilion could handle it, what I don’t understand is why can’t the Parks Department? Oh that’s right, besides the department being ran by a two-faced liar, they can’t even hire part-time lifeguards, now try to find part-time ice guards. Maybe we should just let the Pavilion run our entire parks department, they are already draining our entertainment tax fund every year, might as well put them to work.
Available Liquor Licenses in Sioux Falls
After the 2020 Census, Sioux Falls has become eligible for more ON and OFF-SALE liquor licenses, I am awaiting the official numbers from the city but what I have heard unofficially is there is 27 additional Package (off-sale) licenses and 19 Retail (on-sale) licenses available. Not sure how many are already spoken for. Once I get more information I will let you know.
The Curbside Garbage ordinance is already on next week’s docket
The Sioux Falls City Council will likely consider an amendment to the city’s garbage ordinances that could allow garbage haulers to require curbside placement of garbage cans for pickup or charge extra to continue valet service.
It should be up to the consumer if they want to do it and there should be NO extra charge for the service. But it sounds like the hauler wants the city to force the consumer to do it, and if they don’t want to, they will be charged extra.
Whether the city council will support the move is another issue. In his Facebook post, Neitzert said he was “torn on this issue,” and asked for feedback from residents, and Councilor Rick Kiley said earlier this year he’d be against any such change if haulers weren’t planning on lowering rates for reduced service.
Councilor Janet Brekke has also regularly expressed her support for the current ordinance and how it keeps trash cans away from the street, improving the city’s aesthetics.
You never know, it might come to a tie vote with Poops siding with the haulers, we will see. You know my feelings on it, I think the city should contract with 4 major PRIVATE haulers and divide the city into 4 sections and pay our garbage bill with our water and sewer. We already own the landfill, why would we charge tipping fees? Yesterday while driving to work thru Cathedral neighborhood I saw two trucks parked next to each other from different haulers collecting cans at the same time on the same street. Dumb.
Oh, and let’s hear about 3 city councilors who profess about apartment dwellers being great for a neighborhood, but don’t live next to them. I do, and I love apartments, but I love my house more.