Sioux Falls

More propaganda and secrets from the fine city of Sux Falls

l3wis June 16, 2009 2Comments

First with the propaganda;

“We conclude the financial strength of Sioux Falls is excellent,” said Rich Oksol, the city’s lead internal auditor.

Sure. What Mr. Oksol doesn’t tell you is the audit only includes HALF of the city budget, the operational budget. The audit doesn’t include the Capital Improvement Budget;

Rocky Balboa psp But Councilor Kermit Staggers said the audit didn’t include a review of spending in the city’s capital budget, which is a separate budget from the general fund, which pays for operating expenses.

“It’s not indicating to the public the true cost that’s taking place each year,” he said.

 

Oksol responded that capital budgets are harder to analyze because they can have big swings.

The EXACT reason why it needs to be audited. More half-truths, and half-reports from the city.

I also got a chuckle out of Vernon BrownKnows comment about putting the audit on the city website;

Councilor Vernon Brown suggested the audit be put in a prominent place on the city’s Web site so that more people can see the results.

Hey, Mr. Wants to be mayor, it is on the website, how do you think I got the information for my blog yesterday? You would think someone in the telecommunications business would know how to navigate the city website?

More worthless legal advice from the city attorney

First Transit of Cincinnati is expected to emerge with a five-year contract to manage the multimillion-dollar bus system. The company runs the system now and will receive a management fee of $147,851 this year. But some city councilors say they are concerned that they haven’t had any oversight of the process and might never be asked to approve a new contract.

And of course Judge Grumpy Butt put his stamp of approval on the negoiations;

City Attorney Robert Amundson said he believes state law allows the city to keep the proposals confidential until after contract negotiations are finished.

“They’re confidential because you don’t want to disrupt getting to a contract,” he said. “Once you get to the finality of a contract, it can be released.”

 

It’s unclear whether the council will approve the contract. Amundson said he thinks the city charter allows the mayor to sign the contract without council oversight.

“I suppose there could be a disagreement on that,” Amundson said.

 

“If someone had a dispute, and they wanted a review, I would have to look at it,” he added.

So what you are saying is, you don’t know and don’t want to do your job and look into it? Kinda of sounds like another issue you refuse to address when it comes to petitions . . .

Then Kenny points out the obvious;

“There were issues last year that cost the city a lot of money,” Anderson said. “We represent the citizens of this city, and I think we should have been more involved.”

Obviously Kenny hasn’t been let in on the big secret, the councilors are powerless due to the unconstitutional Home Rule charter.

Citizen Debt Burden in Sioux Falls and poverty levels

l3wis June 15, 2009 13Comments

I found this figure in the city audit that will be presented in the info meeting this morning, very interesting. Notice the massive climb in debt in just one year. 

Figure 10

Long-term Debt to Population (Debt per Capita)

 

 

Standard & Poor Debt per Capita averages

Low: <$1,000

Moderate: $1,000 – $2,500

High: >$2,500

 

Conclusion: Long-term debt for the City of Sioux Falls increased dramatically in 2007 and 2008 primarily due to bonding for the Lewis and Clark water system project and other infrastructure projects.[1]  However, the City of Sioux Falls is still in the moderate category for debt per capita according to credit industry analyst Standard & Poor.  Sioux Falls is considerably below the average debt per capita of the ten comparison cities.

 

I also found this section interesting, especially the 11% poverty rating. Which I think is probably a lot higher consdering the census numbers probably didn’t include this year. Also considering that almost half of the kids in our school district receive FREE or reduced meals.

 

Characteristics of the ten communities used for comparison

We reviewed data from the United States Census Bureau American Community Survey for 2005-2007 to identify ten Midwestern communities with similarities to Sioux Falls.[1]  The comparison cities (urbanized areas) were:

1. Cedar Rapids, Iowa
2. Duluth, Minnesota
3. Eau Claire, Wisconsin
4. Fargo, North Dakota-Minnesota
5. Green Bay, Wisconsin
6. La Crosse, Wisconsin-Minnesota
7. Racine, Wisconsin
8. Saint Cloud, Minnesota
9. Sioux City, Iowa-Nebraska-South Dakota
10. Topeka, Kansas

 

The eight measures we used to identify these comparison cities were:

• Population of the urban area.
• Median age of population.
• Median household income.
• Median value of owner-occupied housing.
• Poverty level: percent of population living at or below federal poverty income level.
• Geographic mobility: percent of population (at least one year old) living in the same residence as a year earlier.
• Education: percent of population (25 years and older) who had at least a high school degree.
• Housing: percent of housing built after 1990.

 

Measure

 

Although every city is unique, we believe that the ten comparison communities, when looked at as a composite, are very similar to many characteristics of Sioux Falls.  In addition, the local governments are “full-service” governments, like the City of Sioux Falls.  They offer a wide variety of government services including public safety, utilities, street maintenance, parks & recreation, et cetera.

 

And speaking of the poverty level, the YWCA will also give a report on their summer meal program during the same meeting. Notice the 16% increase from last year.

 

Gregg &#039;FREE MONEY&#039; Jamison has another brilliant idea. More handouts to special interests.

l3wis June 13, 2009 5Comments

We already know that special interests run city hall in Sioux Falls, and they have a few (most) councilor’s balls in a vice, but when I heard this idea at the economic forum, cheerled by councilor and developer Gregg Jamison, I thought it would go nowhere. Well guess again;

The idea – still in its infancy – would enact a broad, temporary tax abatement program in the city. In essence, the program would give builders an incentive to start projects now on the promise of lower property tax bills once they’re completed.

Here’s the deal. DEMAND drives commercial development. If businesses need more office space, contractors will figure it out and build more office space. What a concept? Huh?

The details of abatement programs vary, but they generally work something like this: Without an abatement, a developer who builds an office or apartment building would begin paying the full tax bill on the property once it’s completed. The property taxes on the same building built under an abatement program would be phased in.

So I am guessing this is similiar to the program I got when I bought my first home? Wait. That program does not exist you say? Well why not? Because the little man gets his taxes increased on bread and milk so the big man can have FREE MONEY from the city coffers.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4-Ve19tbxlQ[/youtube]

And of course, Gregg, SPECIAL INTERESTS, CITY LEAKING MONEY, AC/DC SHIRT WEARING, REAL PEOPLE DIE IN FLOODS, HANDOUTS NOT HAND UPS, WASHER AND DRYER IN EVERY ROOM, LISTENING TO DADDY’S TALKING POINTS, Jamison thinks it is a swell idea;

Vamp full

The idea originated in a community forum of local business leaders who were exploring options to help the economy and community. The forum was the idea of City Councilor Greg Jamison.

“I think any idea to help stimulate the economy is worth looking at,” Jamison said.

Wanna stimulate the economy? Bring high paying manufacturing and technical jobs to Sioux Falls. Have tax incentives for people buying homes in older neighborhoods that are willing to fix them up. Invest in the citizenry first, build the city from the bottom up, not the top down.

We know how Reagan’s ‘trickle down economics’ worked, we are climbing out of that hole right now. Sorry, Gregg, there is no such thing as FREE MONEY unless you are a dirt poor rancher in Winner, SD.

The city owns the sidewalks, so they should pay to build them and fix them. It&amp;#039;s time to change the ordinance.

l3wis June 9, 2009 11Comments

Don’t believe me? You should watch the public testimony last night where existing property owners testified that they are being forced to build sidewalks at their expense. All of them testified that when they built their homes they were told that no future sidewalks would be need to be put in on the backsides of their properties. So they planted trees, landscaped, put in sprinkler systems, etc. So not only is the city making them pay for city owned property, they have to pay to have other stuff removed too. And as far as I am concerned, if the city lied to these people, they shouldn’t have to follow the ordinance.

The second person to testify gets pretty irrate with the mayor, and says something to the affect that the little guy gets forced to pay for this stuff and all that it benefits is the big developers. Munson got a little irrate back at him and says he will not tolerate him making fun of city officials and ‘Fat Cats’.

The circus starts at 1:00 Hour into the video.

Further proof that special interests run Sioux Falls

l3wis June 7, 2009 2Comments

Looks like Sioux Falls’ biggest developer is pulling the strings at City Hall again;

When the Sioux Falls City Council approved the sale of land on the north edge of downtown two years ago, it was meant to jump-start the transformation of a key part of the city’s core.

But two years later, the city still holds the title to the land on North Phillips Avenue, records show. And the ambitious development plan councilors envisioned is stalled, a result of the economic downturn and a soil contamination problem that could significantly raise the price on the project.

Both the city and the developer – Uptown at Falls Park – say they remain committed to developing the area. But Sioux Falls city councilors say they haven’t been updated on the development since approving it. And despite a development agreement that called for the city to sell the land, unexpected complications have prevented the sale.

This shouldn’t surprise those of us who have been following Mr. Lloyd’s chokehold on city hall. First he orchestrated getting our retail taxes raised so the taxpayers would have to build roads for developments on the edge of TEA, SD (still trying to figure out how this benefits SF residents.) But what is disheartening is that the council approved the downtown development two years ago and hasn’t received one penny yet. Why?

Craig Lloyd, a partner in the Uptown group, complimented city officials for trying to work through the problems.

What? You agreed to buy the land, why are we using taxpayer money to ‘work through the problems’? I’m sure you are very happy with the help. We are footing the bill for all the ‘tests’ and you haven’t given us one single penny.

I have always felt that Phillips to the Falls was a stupid idea. I said from the beginning, if developers want the land, let them develop it, build the road, etc, etc. Then there is the mayor breaking city ordinance to approve a 100% spending increase on the project ($1.5 million) without council approval. He claimed he needed to approve the increase ASAP so he did not have time to contact the council. Bullshit. We are almost five years later and not one shovel has been stuck in the ground yet. I am still frustrated that Munson wasn’t  charged with breaking city charter and thrown out of office. Phillips to the Falls is quickly turning into another Lloyd / Munson boondoggle on taxpayers. Staggers says it best;

“I thought we made a good-faith contract to get the money and we don’t have it yet,” Councilor Kermit Staggers said. “It’s a surprise, but not a surprise.”

We shouldn’t let private business or even our mayor take advantage of us. It is inexcusable. Someone on the council needs to step up and hold Munson accountable, in a big way. Enough is enough.