Is the Sioux Falls City Council having policy discussions in Executive Session?

I would really like to know.

Why is this important? City Councilors have executive sessions with legal counsel almost weekly, by state law only certain legal matters are discussed, like pending litigation, current litigation or personnel issues (like potentially demolishing an immigrant’s unfinished mansion or disciplinary action towards a council employee).

Things they cannot discuss is potential policy changes (like creating new ordinances, advocating for consulting or outside assistance, or giving employees bonuses). Basically anything that is an ‘idea’ cannot be discussed because of the quorum.

Now councilors can have offline conversations with each other, and that is perfectly legit, but NOT as a group, those meetings and conversations must be public.

So why am I suspicious this is going on?

A few years back when that rascal Tex Golfing (Rex Rolfing) was on the council (you know the guy that beats the gavel puck like a rented mule) he was having policy discussions about having a car rental fee go towards some capital improvements. When opposition to his idea became aware of his backdoor policy discussions his plan crumbled.

This is an example of why you need to have public policy discussions, while his idea was horrible, what was even worse was he was trying to do it under the guise of pending litigation discussions.

Last week the council had a scheduled executive session, before the session they have to vote in public to go into that session. Forum News Reporter Patrick Lalley witnessed a councilor walk out before the session started telling Lalley that they left because they were not following procedure and they had no idea what the session was about.

But way before this incident several past and current councilors have told me about different policy discussions they have been having or had and I have been puzzled by how I have not heard of any of these proposals in a committee meeting or informational meeting (this is where policy is supposed to be discussed). I just assumed councilors were having offline convos with individuals but it seemed odd to me that after hearing about the proposals first hand all of a sudden they are on the agenda. These kind of discussions about in depth ordinances HAVE to be done with a quorum to be successful, playing phone tag won’t cut it, so obviously they are having these discussions somewhere, just not in the public eye.

Like I said, I would really like to know if the council is having policy discussions in executive session, because if they are, that’s a BIG NO NO and at least four of them should know better and the other four should have the common sense to distinguish between actual litigation and policy discussion.

The next time an executive session is called and policy is brought up I encourage the entire council to adjourn and walk out.

“Keep your fears to yourself, but share your courage with others.” Robert Louis Stevenson

City of Sioux Falls promotes property tax increases

The city’s finance director is pushing for a property tax increase again this year. I found this proposal interesting considering the mayor is increasing the budget next year for pools. The city can only use the money for OPERATING expenses. So while they CANNOT spend the money on capital improvements they can use the money to fix potholes and pay lifeguards.

2022 Property Tax $84.9 M – 37%

2022 Assessed Value, 80% Residential, 37% Commercial

ASSESSED VALUE OF SINGLE-UNIT RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES, $200K – $317.7K, 34%

As you can see, residential property taxes are the biggest chunk of property taxes paid. In other words we are OVERTAXING residential property owners to subsidize things like $25 million dollar parking ramps for condo dwellers.

When people talk about TIFs or rebates for large developers they claim there is this mysterious ROI, even though NO independent study has been done to show us what that ROI is. I would argue that a residential property owner actually has a higher ROI, besides the taxes they pay to help with street and curb and gutter improvements, they may hire a lawn care company or hire a contractor to do work to their property, creating actual jobs.

I have argued for a long time we have NO reason to increase property taxes each year because of natural growth. If we also started taxing commercial properties at their actual legal assessment (and not a reduced TIF assessment) we would also haul in millions in property tax revenue.

Once again, the city is sticking it to the little guy so the big guy has a small tax bill.

The Sioux Falls Rec Trail is ‘Shared Use’

Dakotanewsnow did a story about park master plans, and I took a screenshot of this sticky note from a constituent.

Dogs have multiple parks in Sioux Falls, they also have sidewalks, any greenspace, your house, backyard and even at a bar or restaurant. As a bicyclist I only have a few options, but if you have to ‘find’ places where your dog can be walked in Sioux Falls, you really have deeper issues, like how to smell ‘fer’.

Shape Places rears it’s head

Recently a prisoner transitional housing proposal came in front of the city council (Item #38). While the council moved it to 2nd reading, they seem to be opposed to approving the rezone to institutional from multi-family residential.

The problems are evident, changing from a regular apartment to a recovery home, buying the property BEFORE properly zoning it (the client in this case has pulled this song and dance before with other properties, so they KNEW exactly what they were doing, asking for forgiveness later, the oldest trick in the book).

While many have mentioned the sex offenders living at the facility, this is actually NOT a bad thing because 1) they would be supervised and 2) several unsupervised sex offenders already live in the neighborhood.

So what’s the problem? Shape Places, passed by the city council, and after opponents had a successful petition drive to repeal it, the voters also approved it. I helped a smidgen on the petition drive, and the ONLY real substantive change they wanted was to KEEP conditional uses in zoning (this gives the planning commission and city council the ability to put conditions on the rezone). Shape Places was stripped of this, so the Planning Commission and City Council really only have one option, approve the rezone and all the headaches that go with it, or DENY it which will likely leave this property as is, which is a dump.

If the council had the authority (before Shape Places) to put conditions on the rezone they could have worked with the property owner to at least make this a transitional, unsupervised housing (and that may be their plan moving forward).

As I tell people, the developers in town wanted this to ‘speed up the process’ or more like put things under the radar, the council passed it, and the voters passed it, it is what we have now.

The council CAN revisit Shape Places whenever they want to, and they have the power to modify it to re-allow conditional uses. I believe BOTH Minnehaha and Lincoln County Planning Commissions allow for conditional uses.

This probably happens more then we think, someone buys a property only to find out they are stuck with stringent zoning.

I support deregulation when it makes sense, but not giving our elected officials the ability to modify zoning on a case by case basis has really tied their hands.

Mayor TenHaken still pushing for full-time arts coordinator

You already know my position on the matter, I don’t think we need one and instead could rely on a stakeholder board and a part-time consultant. But for the sake of the argument let’s say I agree with the Mayor that we need this position (I agree we need SOMETHING better than what we currently have). Don’t you think it is a little odd that we have finance running the health department and the IT department, we have decided to ‘job out’ out internal audit, and the police force has had major turnover since Thum has taken over (this is a good thing, because I think he is cleaning some of the cobwebs out). You also have to remember his Cultural Officer that he needed, she was never replaced after leaving. I think the council’s position of wait and see is a good one, and once we get the SFPD fully staffed with competent officers and directors in key departments then we can talk about finger painting.

THE CITY NEEDS A FULL-TIME OPEN MEETINGS COMPLIANCE OFFICER

So it happened again this week, their was a meeting that posted the incorrect agenda so an item got pushed to next month’s meeting (this happened at the Active Transportation Board meeting). Councilor Neitzert informed the board he wanted to be on the agenda to talk about E2’s but they didn’t bother reposting the agenda within the 24 hour window. While they did the right thing by postponing the item, they did the wrong thing by not posting it when they were told about it.

It is time the city had a full-time open meetings compliance officer that makes sure all agendas are posted on time and correctly. If we are depending on department heads to do this right, it is obviously not working.