I am posting these items out of curiosity mostly. I just find it a bit ‘ODD’ only a couple of weeks before the municipal election that the consent agenda is chucked full of of almost $2 million in expenditures. Not special interests in particular, but very curious vendors.
To tell you the truth, that is why I am posting them. I think all of these items should be pulled and discussed by the council in an open forum, not to debate whether or not they are fair expenditures of the city, but just exactly ‘What they are’ and why we are paying these fees and at this price. Okay, yeah, yeah, yeah, a debate.
Calling Dr. Staggers.
1) Not sure why the city would be paying the school district for counseling services? Does the school district pay the city for protection and resource officers? Not sure?
2) If we have our own medical clinic, why are we paying a half-million a year for other services? Don’t get me wrong, we probably need their assistance, but shouldn’t these services be covered by insurance, Medicare and Medicade and not the taxpayers of Sioux Falls?
3) I am all for extended training of city employees, but this amount seems a little high to be training employees a software upgrade who already know AutoCad? In the graphic design field, on the job training, especially on software upgrades is common practice, but if you are experienced in the current form of the software, it is customary to take it upon yourself to train on the job, on your own.
4) We’ve talked about the cobblestone alley in the past. I would love to hear an explanation from city directors about this project.
5) Okay, I am NOT in the business of appraising old RR land, but $200K for an appraisal? C’mon?! I would like to see a detailed report of their findings, and line items of these charges. BTW, I think it is a gigantic waste of tax dollars to buy this land. I am all for the city, the state and feds helping out with the moving of these rail yards and some cleanup. But I think a sale of the land should be between the RR and a private developer. There is NO reason why taxpayers need to be a broker in this deal.