June 2012

UPDATED: Why wasn’t the SF city council privy to the Mayor’s capital plan before today?

UPDATED: In the past the CIP was used as a way to implement the long-term vision and planning efforts produced through good city government work. There were people internally at City Hall that invested a great deal of time into putting that document together, again, based on a vision of sustainable and planned growth.

Where is that committee now?

The city’s priorities within the CIP are identified by the Finance Department and Mayor.  I think the Mayor now meets individually with all departments to discuss their individual department projects in the CIP instead of meeting as a large group to discuss how each of the department’s priorities need to work together cohesively to implement our short and long term vision for Sioux Falls. And I know for a fact that the council has no part of these discussions.

The CIP has always been a tool used by staff to help in ensuring that long-term vision doesn’t disappear with the comings and goings of elected officials. Unfortunately that is no longer the case.

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

I was told this morning that the city council was not given a copy of the plan before today (capital2013). While I may understand why (well I don’t) the public hasn’t seen it yet, why wasn’t council given a sneak peak of the plan?

He will lay out the plan today at 4 PM, which includes millions in special interests projects for private club sports.

UPDATED: Hey, we don’t need no stinkin’ audit committee

I find it interesting that the mayor was quick to assemble a puppet theatre with his charter revision commission, but the council has drug their feet about the audit committee;

I recently applied for a citizen volunteer vacancy that exists on the City Council Audit Committee. I received a response from the chairman that the committee had issues with allowing me to serve, as I may be personally impacted if the Downtown Switching Yard project moves forward. I can speculate that given the public objections and incremental funding required, city administration is working on an exit strategy to abandon this project. This then leads me to believe there must be other reasons for being rejected for the position.

Exit strategy? This ship (or should we say train) has already sailed. Choo-Choo!

I’ve been critical of the pace of the project and had filed a Freedom of Information Act request relating to this project which the city stonewalled for six months before being forced to comply with the law. My credentials and background to serve on this committee are not an issue, as I have worked in corporate finance for more than 20 years, in addition to teaching auditing at the college level for more than five years. I teach my students that a good auditor is independent and possesses a measure of professional skepticism. Apparently, the City Council would prefer that citizen members of this committee not have the independence required to review the city’s business.

A free society demands open and honest government, as well as citizen involvement. I’ve asked that I be removed from consideration, even though no one else has expressed an interest in serving. My hope is that someone will apply and the City Council will allow the independence required for the position.

As you can see by Randy’s job title at Citi, he is well qualified for the VOLUNTEER position. Makes you wonder if this is a matter of personal objections by the committee itself, the city council or the mayor, or just a resistance to making the committee complete.

As you may remember, a little over a year ago we had this audit committee debacle;

Did SDN contact the city and let them know they were investigating him? Or that he resigned? He resigned last year but still sat on the committee until May of this year? This is all suspect. What did Brad tell the city in regards to the resignation? It’s not like the city doesn’t have a direct contact with SDN. Councilor Vernon Brown is marketing manager of SDN. He certainly had to know about the investigation or AT LEAST the resignation. Didn’t he think it would be wise to alert the Audit Committee?

I still have never gotten a straight forward answer as to why councilor Brown kept quiet about this? I totally understand not interfering with a Federal investigation, but he could have quietly alerted the city attorney to keep an eye on Brad, or at least put pressure on him to resign.

SF Arts Council, big on administration, small on action

Only 7 days after a new director was announced for the SF Arts council, a glimmering report about the economic impact of the arts appears in the media.

If you read the 2011 Financial report, you will find some interesting data about ‘economic’ impact to our city;

Only 10% of their total budget was spent on actual services and programs. Maybe this is why they moved out of the Pavilion and into a new location?

The Sioux Falls Arts Council is located in the Crane Centre at 8th & RR, 326 E. 8th Street, Suite 106B.

So they had to move out of the Horse Barn due to expenses, or whatever, but now they move to another location and spend 90% of their budget on operations and administration? I don’t know about you, but spending $1 a year rent for the Horse Barn sounded like a pretty sweet ass deal.

So what are their goals for 2012?

I am not the only one that finds it a bit odd that they move out of the Pavilion, name a new director and release an economic impact report in such a short period of time. Maybe this is a good thing? I can only speculate. But I do suggest that the money they take in should ACTUALLY be spent on arts programming, maybe that should be the first bullet point on this ‘action plan’.

Why isn’t the Event Center contractor RFP’s public information?

Bob, the anonymous builder

Today at the press conference to announce more contractors for building the EC, someone asked (paraphrasing),

“Will the public get to see who the other contractors were that submitted RFP’s but were not awarded work?”

As of right now, the public does not know who else submitted RFP’s.

I guess, as part of the agreement with Mortensen, they would not have to give that information to the public.

Seriously?!

This is our money they are spending, we have a right to now.

I know of at least one councilor that is checking to see if this is true.