I have been watching the planning department over the past couple of years and all of their missteps. Besides being sued, which seems like a lot lately, they are doing secretive deals and no-bid contracts. I think it is sooo bad at the department, I am not sure just changing the director would fix the rot. Obviously the planning director takes orders from the mayor then directs his staff to move forward. But there seems to be a disconnect between the mayor and the director and the rest of the management staff. I guess it seems they acted alone,
If I were the next mayor, I would not only replace the director I would likely replace every manager and engineer right below him. Just putting a new director in place won’t solve the problem, there needs to be a whole reorganization of the department and there goals. I don’t like seeing professionals with the city losing their jobs, but I also look at city employees as an investment and if that investment is costing us instead of providing essential services, it’s time to show them the door. It’s also damaging to the reputation of that department.
I am NOT naive, I know this has been going on for a long time, but with all the lawsuits lately the problem has seemed to rear it’s head.
Depending on who the next mayor will be, it will be interesting to watch how they handle the situation.
UPDATE: Speaking of the homeless, last night a DTSF business owner who has been frustrated with the city’s response to homelessness spoke at the council meeting (FF: 34:10). She explained to the council she did a FOIA request with the city and her findings were astonishing. Basically the city has spent millions over the past few years putting transients in this cycle of citations without providing assistance. If we simply housed these folks with housing first initiatives we could actually save taxpayers money while addressing the issue and providing housing.
Her biggest suggestion? Have a coalition of services, in other words TALK TO EACH OTHER and coordinate those services thru different non-profits, the city administration and the Police Department. I have often said managing this issue isn’t rocket science, it just takes a conversation, transparency and the will to spend the money (or should I say ‘re-direct’ the money). I have even suggested such housing programs could be sponsored by local business donations. As far as I am concerned, it has gotten so bad, anything at this point is improvement.
Screenshot of some of the ‘citations’ our SFPD is wasting our time with;
Screenshot
A few weeks back the homeless coordinator for the city was at a public meeting. She was asked how the new ordinance is working out. After a brief pause she admitted that they haven’t implemented it yet because they are working out logistics. But you could tell from her nervousness she was probably making up an excuse.
What I found baffling about her answer is that when they pressured the city councilors to pass this there was a sense of ‘urgency’. So did that urgency go away? Not at all. I rode to all 4 corners of the city on Sunday, and while there is more transients in the downtown area, I saw groups of them (6 or more) wandering the sidewalks, bike trail, etc. all over town. I counted at least 10 different groups and many individuals.
If the city has realized this wasn’t the best solution, then why not rescind the ordinance?
So today, Jordan Deffenbaugh was on a city government rant, and there was a sentence in his rant that caught my attention;
Repeal the encampment ordinance – a failed policy making vulnerable residents surveillance targets.
Jordan was talking about the Feds accessing out extensive camera system in Sioux Falls to catch homeless immigrants and his concern.
Was this ordinance sponsored by the Police Department and the Mayor’s office just a pass thru with pressure from the Governor, AG and Feds?
It just seems odd to me this ordinance was needed just around the time of Prairie Thunder then never implemented after ICE was finished harassing us. So now we have the White House influencing our local laws and policies. Nice 🙁
I have not learned much from Shawn ‘Fireball’ Pritchett’s finance reports over the years, and yesterday’s wasn’t much different. Before he started his presentation he said he was presenting them finance numbers from September instead of October because the state hasn’t released the October numbers yet because of the government shutdown. Not sure why our state revenue department would have trouble creating financial reports about state collected taxes during a Federal shutdown? It would be like our state DMV shutting down due to the government shutdown, which didn’t happen because it is a state agency. Either way, they did release the October numbers, yesterday.
A local economist, Mark Weber, comes to the finance report meetings every couple of months and gives the council his version of the financial report he puts together by using the state data. He included the October numbers in his report (FF: 57:45). The council was so intrigued by his report they let him go almost a minute over his time (tsk, tsk – don’t let Poops catch you giving away free seconds).
While there was a lot of bad news in both Fireball’s report and Weber’s report, the part that shocked me was when Weber said that retail sales tax growth has been flat for the last 7 months and some sectors are negative in Sioux Falls. So where does the 2% growth come from? Internet sales. If it were not for them we would have negative sales tax growth right now. You almost have to thank god we have a diversification of services in Sioux Falls to prop up our sales tax collection. I have often thought sales taxes and tariffs are regressive and we should tax income only because of the volatility of the tax and no guarantees or expectations. Or better yet, start taxing advertising.
Weber said he hasn’t seen this kind of negative sales tax growth for this long in Sioux Falls.
As I have said in the past, I don’t post about 70% of what is fed to me because I can either NOT get another source or it is so personal, I just avoid it. But sometimes I get a rumor sent to me, and this person was just as inquisitive as I was, so he asked me to do some digging. I couldn’t find anything from internet searches, which doesn’t surprise me, because this would be a ‘word of mouth’ kind of personal security firm. Supposedly there is a NEW private security firm specializing in protecting high-end residents and businesses in downtown, so anonymity would not surprise me to protect their clients. I am not sure if any SFPOs are moonlighting with this business or even investing in it, which I think would present HUGE union conflicts. But let’s just pretend for a moment that indeed this was cooked up by either current or retired officers, it makes you wonder if the transient problem DTSF is being ignored on purpose? It’s good bizzo for private security.
I knew it was only a matter of time, and wouldn’t be surprised something like this is already in operation or in the works. Minneapolis has had similar firms in their downtown and there main objective is knocking transient heads together, and they seem to do it with impunity. I have seen them in action. Let’s just say that I saw several transients quickly walk the other direction when they saw them.
What a sad state of affairs. This is what happens when a problem is ignored. The minions suffer while the wealthy buy their way out of it.
l3wis 
