Taxes

1st Amendment Downtown Sioux Falls Mayor TenHaken Property Taxes Riverline District Sioux Falls South Dakotans State Funding State Legislature Taxes

What’s next for the Riverline District?

l3wis February 6, 2025 6Comments

I can’t imagine the meetings at City Hall today after the SD Legislative Taxation Committee killed the 3rd penny tax in a squeaker, 7-6. It is no secret their ignorant plan was to convince some rubes from rural districts to support this so they can build a street. But most people knew the jig was up. This was about building a Convention Center that nobody wants or cares about. The Ice Ribbon is a great example of a project NO ONE, ABSOLUTELY NO ONE asked for. But now $16 million later here we are.

So some are asking, without this special 3rd penny tax authority can we move forward with the Riverline District? Yes and NO.

While I think the mayor is about as bright as a bar of soap in a truck stop restroom, I think he knew this may not pass, so they may have a backup plan.

I hate to break it to you Poops, but the legislature is dug in on this one, it ain’t going anywhere. Even if passed out of committee it would have been DEAD in the full legislature.

So how can they still salvage the Convention Center deal? It will be financial gymnastics, but they can still do it within their means, but on a smaller scale. My guess is they will push all bond expectations toward the project and see how much they can borrow. They have also been banking reserve funds which I think they want to use for a down payment (It is between $70-80 million) Why does the city have a savings account from our taxes that is 3x what ordinance asks for? With this surplus and borrowing authority the city could build this without a special tax, but the private donations would have to be significant.

My suggestion all along is to implement an INCOME tax on corporations in SF that have more then 500 employees, Hotels and Hospitality to pay for this. They are the benefactors of conventions, visitors and tourism, the average citizen buying a Twin Bing at the GC won’t benefit BUT these industries would. MAKE THEM PAY FOR IT!

To tell you the truth, the more I think about it, I am not opposed to the city buying the land, it has potential, but with this crappy tax revenue source killed, the city will have to get creative. My suggestion? Demo and plant grass, form a committee that will tell us the best use for the land for the least expensive capital improvement. One idea I had years ago is turning Fawick park into a sculpture garden and put all the SculptureWalk sculptures in the park as a destination, essentially an outdoor museum. We could do this here for minimal costs.

It is no secret that Poops would benefit financially thru this deal (still digging on this one, and will crack that case).

Make no mistake, TenHaken’s lack of leadership, transparency and vision put the last nail in this coffin, and I got to admit after I watched the vote live, I howled in enthusiasm. I think I even did a jig. I am a good jigger.

But don’t get lazy, they will try to cut a deal and we must ride their asses until they are dragging on a gravel road. This ain’t over.

The irony of all this is Poop’s record on getting things done. It is awful. And if I was him I would be embarrassed and resign. Bunker Ramp, 6th street bridge, Delbridge dead monkeys, and the constant lying and belittling of public inputers. YOU ARE NOT A LEADER. YOU ARE NOT A VISIONARY.

1st Amendment Citizens for Reponsible Sales Tax food tax Gas Tax Media Property Taxes SF City Council Sioux Falls South Dakotans State Legislature Taxes

The 1st Amendment and the Sioux Falls City Council

l3wis February 6, 2025 1Comments

It seems I am spending a lot of time these days talking about the role of the council and the 1st Amendment. The thing that always puzzles me is that the 1st Amendment is NOT complicated, but folks struggle with it.

So today HB Bill 1050 got killed, by a ONE VOTE in taxation committee. Several folks were instrumental in killing this bill. It would have pretty much put a $450M tax debt on the citizens of Sioux Falls if passed. I posted Greg Neitzert’s written testimony after the hearing. I truly believe that testimony changed minds, and Cathy B’s telephone testimony cinched the deal. I also emailed the committee suggesting amendments and solutions (I think it would be good for small towns, but NOT SF.)

After this I assumed city hall was reeling, trying to figure out their next steps (I will post later about the future of the Riverline District).

But things got really interesting.

I’m going to leave the constituent’s name out of this for privacy reasons, and the city councilor, because I think it applies to the ENTIRE council.

Their is a constituent that emails the mayor and the council quite a bit, he is very involved in local politics, and I don’t always agree, but he always CC’s me in the emails so I am a media witness (I think I told him to do this). I have several concerned citizens that CC me when sending emails to the city council and I encourage you to CC me, witnesses are important.

fb.art@sio.midco.net

I sometimes do a reply all to their emails if I feel something needs to be clarified or piled onto.

After I posted Former Sioux Falls City Councilor Greg Neitzert’s* submitted written testimony to the taxation committee on the blog this constituent emailed the council with Greg’s testimony and a brief statement about his work. This person called the council ‘CORRUPT’ three times, but in fair context and NOT harassment. Then he said that Greg has ‘LARGE BALLS’. Trust me, I spit out my coffee when I read that, but it’s NOT a threat or harassment. In fact, Neitzert saw the email and thot it was funny. So a newly elected city councilor wasn’t having it and reported the email to Human Resources as harassment. HOGWASH! Not only is this constituent completely harmless they wouldn’t hurt a soul, but that doesn’t matter. This NEW councilor seems to think that he is a city employee and has the same protections, he does not, YOU ARE ELECTED and must follow the constraints of the 1st Amendment and the US Constitution. Now if such an email was sent to an unelected city employee, that would be an issue. So the city’s HR department warned this constituent if they send anymore ‘Harassing Emails’ they will be blocked. First off, they don’t have that authority because this person is NOT a city employee, secondly, sending an email about concerns is NOT threatening. It often puzzles me that they put their hand on a bible and swear an oath to the Constitution but have no idea what is in the document. If you can’t handle the heat in the Carnegie Kitchen may I suggest resignation. Nobody will miss yah. The irony of all this is this councilor was in a similar situation at a former employer. Kettle meet Black.

*Full disclosure, I worked on Greg’s first term campaign coordinating his messaging, graphic design, marketing and direct mail, it was one of the most successful campaigns I was involved with, we kicked ass and took names!

Sioux Falls South Dakotans State Legislature Taxes

UPDATE II: SD House Bill 1055 needs to be killed

l3wis February 5, 2025 4Comments

UPDATE II: I emailed the committee members and told them this was a bad idea. The sponsor was the only one to respond after I told them I think this bill was written for Sioux Falls;

Not written for Sioux Falls.

So I asked WHO it was written for;

Written for all cities.

Well, Mike, that means it was written for Sioux Falls. I find it ironic that city hall recruited a legislator from Ft. Pierre who has a close relationship with our city attorney. I am just speculating here but it just seems odd that they purposely recruited a small town legislator to pass this instead getting some Sioux Falls legislator sponsoring this, it would have had a bad look. And here’s a kicker, two Democratic legislators from SF also say they support this. Baffling that our legislature wants to have a $400 million dollar tax increase on the residents of Sioux Falls. Each penny in Sioux Falls nets $91.5M a year (end 2023 is their latest for this data). So it appears SF really could build it in 5 years if the tax was implemented which would net $457M which is very close to the estimated costs to build a CC. And this bill wasn’t written for SF. They are full of it.

————————–

Or amended to only include smaller towns who may need to build a fire station;

authorize municipalities to impose a new tax to fund capital improvement projects.

This is a 3rd penny tax move so we can borrow $400 Million for a Convention Center. The committee hearing is Thursday morning, I encourage anyone who may be there to speak against this bill, it could cost taxpayers in Sioux Falls $400M.

Advocates,

Please help oppose HB1050. It would allow cities an extra whole percent sales tax for special projects.

The problem: It takes food off tables. That should be enough said.

• Food insecurity is on the rise in South Dakota. It is already a herculean effort for non-profits to meet the need. Feeding SD saw increases last year in families coming for food, student backpacks with weekend food, school pantries, and senior boxes.

• Sales tax is harder on lower-income households than on those with upper-incomes. South Dakota has the 6th most regressive tax structure in the nation.

• Sales tax is very regressive, especially where it’s on groceries. Lower-income households pay a bigger portion of income on food. We have the nation’s 4th highest grocery tax.

• Already, the total(state+city) food tax you pay over a year could buy all your food for over 3 weeks.

• This one percent would be a 50% increase in city sales tax.

• South Dakota is a low-tax state, but not for the lowest-income group. [https://itep.org/whopays-7th-edition/ ]

Other background info:

Legislators console themselves by noting that the bill requires a public vote, has a 5-year limit on the special tax, and a 2-year gap before the next one. But is a short-term hunger increase ok?

Cities are already allowed 2% sales tax. Cities are not allowed to have a different rate on food. States may, but not cities. So there’s no use suggesting that amendment. [Streamline sales tax rules]

No matter how much we might appreciate the legislators who are on this bill, HB1050 is one of this year’s bills toughest on our low-income neighbors. A legislator’s name on a bill doesn’t mean he/she will continue to support it. Feel free to ask them to vote No on it.

What I don’t know is whether this would be useful for small towns. But for sure, Sioux Falls city leaders always have expensive projects they would love to fund, even projects that aren’t necessarily accessible to low-income residents.

Thank you for speaking up. Low-income people don’t have lobbyists.

Cathy Brechtelsbauer for the Advocacy Project

“No other tax so directly takes food off tables.”

On sales tax by long-time director of Feeding South Dakota, Matt Gassen

religion SF City Council Sioux Falls Taxes

Why are the taxpayers of Sioux Falls giving money to a Religious Organization?

l3wis January 25, 2025 12Comments

Not sure how long the city has been doing this, but if you look at the December expense report apparently we need to fund religious orgs in town now;

YMCA (YOUNG MENS CHRISTIAN ASSN OF SF): $16,416.63, Operating Support

Besides being kind of an odd amount and giving money to a religious organization without the consent of the public or even the city council is NOT a good look. Also, if you check their tax filing from 2020 they are part of a National organization that pulls in millions from donors and grants;

This organization is an independent organization and not affiliated with a larger national or regional group of organizations. Young Mens Christian Association is a 501(c)(3) and as such, is described as a “Charitable or Religous organization or a private foundation” by the IRS.

They even describe themselves as a religious organization. It would be like the taxpayers giving money to the Catholic Diocese. I know we have been giving to them for awhile on different programming but after they f’d up the deal with Sanford on the west side rec center, essentially forcing us to purchase the place because Sanford was loosing money on the facility, they shouldn’t get another penny from us!

The entire expense report is fascinating to read because it provides little detail for massive handouts, like this;

LLOYD COMPANIES: $992,331.40, Various Projects

Closed government at it’s best!

Speaking of that, the salaries finally posted Friday afternoon, AFTER, they were printed in the Dakota Scout and distributed. I have not done a deep dive yet, but if you compare to last year, some folks got some massive raises!

2024 DOC • 2025 DOC

food tax Property Taxes South Dakotans State Funding State Legislature Taxes

Legislative Update by Cathy

l3wis January 24, 2025 0Comments

Bills are still coming. You’ll see here a number are concerning already. Let’s be speaking up.

A. Sales tax.

Please. Let’s have no sales tax rate changes until we see what happens with the cost of living under the upcoming tariffs, like in all these bills:

HB1050, to allow cities to add another whole % tax for special projects. This raises the cost of living (food and other basics), makes SD taxes more regressive (harder on lower-income folks), benefits bigger towns more than smaller ones.

HB1019, to increase the state’s sales tax from 4.2% to 5.0% (besides city 2%), and use funds to reduce property tax. Several unfairnesses: Most of the benefit goes to high-end homes, where “relief” may not be needed. Higher sales tax disproportionately requires more from lower-income households. Worst, it’s highly reliant on renters (31% of SD households), who would get NO benefit. And, replacing property taxes(school tax) is not a proper use of sales tax. HB1019 moves school tax around with no benefit to the schools. Property tax is a concern, but relief needs a different funding source and some focus on need.

__Expect a bill to make the .3% sales tax cut permanent. Remember that the revenue the state is foregoing for this cut would have been enough to take the state food tax to 0%. So first, let’s see what tariffs do to the cost of living.

B. Property tax.

As listed above, HB1019, to cut prop.taxes using higher sales tax. Property tax payers have real concerns about recent increases. (In Minnehaha Co. statements went out this week. To me the increases seem to have stopped skyrockting. What do others think?) See notes above about this bill’s wrong revenue source.

SB44, to renew the Sales or Property Tax Refund for Senior Citizens and People with Disabilities and make cost-of-living adjustments. This program helps but needs to reach more people. A higher income cut-off would really help, like at least the same cut off as for SNAP(food stamps).

C. School vouchers

HB1009(educational empowerment accounts) and HB1020(education savings accounts). Both are first decided by House Education committee. They started on 1009 but did not finish. Of course, new programs should not be started when the state is short of funds. The cost to schools is not only the diversion of these millions from public education, but also schools lose the usual state aid for each student. Object to these Rep’s in House Education: Amber.Arlint@sdlegislature.gov, Heather.Baxter@sdlegislature.gov, Roger.DeGroot@sdlegislature.gov, Josephine.Garcia@sdlegislature.gov, Lana.Greenfield@sdlegislature.gov, Jim.Halverson@sdlegislature.gov, Mellissa.Heermann@sdlegislature.gov, Travis.Ismay@sdlegislature.gov, Phil.Jensen@sdlegislature.gov, Dylan.Jordan@sdlegislature.gov, Logan.Manhart@sdlegislature.gov, Kathy.Rice@sdlegislature.gov, Tesa.Schwans@sdlegislature.gov, Mike.Stevens@sdlegislature.gov, Nicole.Uhre-Balk@sdlegislature.gov,

D. Medicaid

HJR 5001 to make voters re-vote again on our ballot decision to finally have Medicaid expansion. Legislators want us to let the state drop it, if federal funds for it change. Legislators are messing with our vote again, even before federal fund changes.

E. Citizen rights

All these are attacks on our citizen rights to amend our State Constitution.

HJR 5003 to require 60% to pass. It passed the house and goes to Senators.

HJR 5004 and SJR 504 to make it harder to get the needed signatures.

What’s next for the Riverline District?

The 1st Amendment and the Sioux Falls City Council

UPDATE II: SD House Bill 1055 needs to be killed

Why are the taxpayers of Sioux Falls giving money to a Religious Organization?

Legislative Update by Cathy

You Missed

Where we stand on the city election

UPDATE IV: A Generational Change? LOL!

Noemzi has a small problem

What is the City of Sioux Falls doing with our Data?