Sioux Falls

Two different realities; the SF Mayor race heats up

l3wis October 12, 2009 2Comments

“I’m Mister Positive, please vote for me, and BTW, fill out your city survey”

Councilor Costello rebutted councilor Staggers column today in the Gargoyle Leader. While both councilors gave facts about what is going on in the city, I feel councilor Costello fails to see the bigger picture;

Councilor Kermit Staggers thinks the rest of the Sioux Falls City Council and the administration are living in an “artificial” world. Most councilors are acutely aware of the concerns of the majority of the citizens in Sioux Falls, and it is only Staggers who is living in an artificial world of pessimism and negativity.

Really, Pat?! Then why does the mayor and a majority of the council consistently vote against citizen rights and raising taxes and fees? As for your second statement, I would prefer my elected officials be a little cynical, it keeps them vigilant. Misleading the public and wasting their taxdollars is hardly positive. So who is really being negative?

While we often disagree on quality-of-life issues such as parks and recreation, the events center,

Whoa, whoa, whoa. Staggers is not against an Events Center, in fact, he has said publicly in council and informational meetings he is not, he just feels it should not be funded by taxing the poor on food.

My disappointment with Staggers is that his column is grossly misleading and incomplete. I find it ironic that a man who repeatedly has attacked the administration for not providing all the facts to the City Council would himself do the same to the citizens of Sioux Falls.

Start listing them Pat. Seriously;

Staggers implies that the 3 percent increase in the city’s portion of property taxes for 2010 will go to build a clubhouse at Prairie Green Golf Course and pond rehabilitation. In fact, money for this project will come out of the capital improvement program budget, better known as the second-penny sales tax. Furthermore, the reason Staggers’ amendment to delete funding did not receive a second is that this project is not scheduled for construction until 2012.

Pat, it doesn’t matter what freaking kitty the money comes from, it still comes out of taxpayer’s pockets, you are the one misleading. A first penny, a second penny and a penny paid towards my property taxes adds up the same, you would think an accountant, like yourself would understand that concept. And why not delete funding now instead of later? What’s wrong with that. You are the one all high on the hog about balancing the budget, go for it big guy.

By the way, the 3 percent increase in the city’s portion of property taxes is only $9 on a $100,000 home. Staggers’ assertion that an elderly widow and a single mother would lose their homes is inflammatory and simply not truthful.

And it was $8 last year, then $10 next year, then $10 the next year. I think Kermit voted against the tax to stop the trend for once. While you look at this as a ‘one time deal’ those one time deals add up over 5-10 years. It is kinda like the .08% tax increase last year to build arterial streets (that you opposed, thankfully). While taxpayers have put almost $2 million in the fund, developers have put in 17x less. I don’t think Kermit is against taxes, he just wants them to be fair and balanced.

Obviously, we have short-term economic challenges,

Let’s hope so, but if not, I would prefer a cynic in power to face those challenges.

And then there was 6

l3wis October 11, 2009 2Comments

As the city elections get closer, I love the more prepared quotes candidates give to the media. Here is a few from yesterday’s Gargoyle and my analysis;

“On a short-term basis, I think we’re going to see some real financial challenges as we continue to work our way through the economic troubles our country has had,” Peterson said. In the long-term, he said, the city’s next mayor will have to find ways of providing opportunities for current and future residents. Jobs, quality of life, and keeping the city safe and clean are among the significant issues facing the city, he said.

Hey, Bill, aren’t those the issues EVERY SINGLE AMERICAN CITY face? How about some new ideas and vision?

“The top three issues for me are jobs, jobs, jobs,” Brown said.

I agree, Vernon, jobs are important. But what kind of jobs? More of the same $10 an hour call centers or high-paying technical and green manufacturing? That is the million dollar question. We are gonna need specifics Vernon.

“Clearly, the economy in Sioux Falls has slowed down, so we’ve got some short-term fiscal issues we need to address – that we’re going to be forced to address,” Costello said. Long-term, the city’s elected officials need to institute policies that make Sioux Falls a good place for business investment and job creation, he said. Those policies include investments in the city’s quality-of-life projects.

Slowed down?! Pat, it has come to a screeching halt, wakeup. You said yourself in the informational meeting, our unemployment is through the roof and we are buying levy bonds based on the precedent that our city is in ‘General Distress’. Building a couple new parks and an events center by raising taxes on food and utilities won’t bring ‘jobs’ to Sioux Falls. I agree that the city as a whole needs to invest in quality of life, BUT, I think those investments should be paid for by the very people benefitting from them, CORPORATIONS. Having happy employees helps their bottom lines. It’s time to institute a corporate entertainment and quality of life tax and stop making the people least likely to use these facilities pay for them. Pat, you may act like you will be different then Munson, but so far, all I am seeing is a carbon copy.

“The most pressing issue certainly is ensuring that Sioux Falls stays vibrant in one of the most challenging economic times we’ve faced as a city, state and country,” Huether said. “Also, I think one of the greatest opportunities is to make city government even more productive in terms of utilizing our city tax dollars.“

Well, Mike, I think our ‘vibrancy’ has dulled a bit over the past year, and I think it will take a few years to recover that vibrancy. I couldn’t agree more about being more prudent about how we spend taxdollars. I have often told people Sioux Falls can still have great parks and quality life projects but spend less. It’s about priorities and money management. I’m just not sure that a guy who worked for a FEE HARVESTING company is someone I want managing our city budget.

Staggers said a key issue facing the city is trying to control spending and taxation.

Taxation is a sticky subject, BUT controlling spending should be the number one priority of the next mayor, it is clearly out of control.

If I had to pick the two leading candidates at this point, it would be Huether and Staggers.