snow removal

Let’s cut citizen services so we can blow another million on another Events Center plan

While I’m all for saving the city money with snow removal, I think by not plowing secondary routes, it will end up biting the city and it’s citizens in the ass;

The city of Sioux Falls has quit pre-treating streets with chemicals before winter weather hits, and will clear secondary streets only when warranted as part of an effort to save money.

I noticed driving home from work last night that it seemed there was more snow on the roads then usual (for only having a couple of inches on the ground). While driving conditions were ‘OK’ they should have been much better considering how little snow we did get.

Two SD cities get it, provide citizens with services they pay for with tax dollars

First Spearfish;

SPEARFISH — Tuesday’s general election in Spearfish settled a debate over snow-removal practices, but city officials said Wednesday that residents had better prepare for changes to when the streets get plowed.

The new ordinance prohibits city plowing crews from pushing snow into private driveways while cleaning streets after a snowfall. Currently, plows can push snow from the street, which can block driveways along the route. Residents frequently become frustrated when they shovel a path from the garage to the street, only to find the city has plowed it shut later during the day.

Maybe we should put it on the ballot in Sioux Falls – then we can stop hearing excuses from the Public Works department. Put up or shut up.

And in Brandon;

The Brandon City Council has decided that the city will take care of trimming trees that are in the boulevard; that is, between the sidewalk and the street. The council is so committed to this that they are reimbursing everyone for the last two years who paid for this service themselves, whether the city did the work and billed the resident, or whether the resident hired a private company to do the work.

The council reasons that the boulevard is city property; therefore, the trees are city responsibility.

That last line is important, it has been my reasoning all along. Don’t trim the boulevard trees and don’t pay the fine, the city has no constitutional right to charge you to take care of their property.

City employee deletes his Facebook comments about snowgates

KELO-TV screenshot

I had a heated discussion last night about snowgates with a plow operator with the city, he was under the impression, as his boss, Galynn Huber is, that they don’t work. Even though not one single flake of snow has fallen yet and they have not been used yet. It is pretty obvious that after having this discussion (you can at least see my comments) that someone in the street department is already brainwashing operators so that they will sabotage the gates. Silliness.

Is Milquetoast Mark the unlikely defender of snow gates?

Trust me, I was the most surprised to see SF Public Works director Mark Cotter defend snowgates, but it probably has more to do with job security then anything;

Also, Cotter received information last fall that snow gates could save time cleaning up intersections.

Typically, a sanding truck has to follow motor-graders to clean up the ridge of snow they leave behind in the intersections. The action includes a lot of backing up, which snow gates might eliminate, Cotter said.

But Mark is right. If you are concerned about saving money on fuel, it would seem this would be the place to start. But this quote from Street Manager Galynn Huber about snowgates really got my goat;

but he said it comes down to whether taxpayers are willing to pay extra.

Well, are taxpayers willing to pay extra for monkey crappers, flamingo sheds, Rhino barns, golf course clubhouses, wood and rock thingies, football fields, tennis court lockerooms, snow making machines . . . I could go on and on. I am amazed that public works is concerned about taxpayer money when cleaning snow from our streets and improving public safety but don’t think twice about installing a monkey toilet or buying Galynn a brand new super duty big ass gigantic truck that he doesn’t need.

The other thing that is blatant bullshit? Snowgates work if you use the right ones. All over Canada and the Northwest they can use them in up to 4 feet of snow. Google snowgates. There is tons of demonstration videos. Maybe the city council and Galynn Huber need to do a little Google research themselves. Of course, I wouldn’t want them to waste 30 minutes of their time.

Galynn Huber basically said he will purposely sabotage the snowgate experiment

I was shocked and appalled when I watched this testimony during the informational meeting of Galynn Huber (Street Utility manager for the City of Sioux Falls) talking about using snowgates, you can tell he will do everything in his power to make sure they don’t work.

Don’t be a Negative Nancy.

They do work, if you purchase the right ones. In Canada and Idaho, they have used them up to 48″ of snow. The nice part about them is they help homeowners that live on emergency snow routes and corner lot owners. But Galynn seems hellbent on making sure they don’t work. The irony of his testimony is that he doesn’t mention that most of snow removal is done by private contractors. All you simply have to do is write an ordinance that requires them to use them, in other words, THEY HAVE TO PURCHASE THEM OR THEY ARE NOT ALLOWED TO REMOVE SNOW FOR THE CITY.

I won’t go into detail about all the BS he spews, just watch him talk about how ‘useless’ they are. It is so fanatical you would think he started his own tea-bagger, anti-snowgate group.

It kind of sounds like he is scared of more responsibility. Boo-Hoo.