The ‘much awaited’ Detroit Lewis SF Municipal Election endorsements

I decided that this year I will only do endorsements and not predictions. Many of the races and ballot issues are neck and neck and heated, and I have NO clue how this election will end up (well maybe, just a little).

SCHOOL BOARD

Roger Russell. As Roger says himself;

Challenger Roger Russell, a Sioux Falls realtor, says board members should be responsive to parent’s concerns.  As a realtor Russell says he understands the importance of keeping property taxes low.

His competitor has been nothing but a suck-up for the Homan administration, and only after threatening phone calls did he and his fellow board members decide to change their vote on the pledge. So much for listening to the parents and constituents. It is the job of the school board to keep Homan in check, be a watch dog of property taxes, and an advocate for parents. Morrison has failed this on many levels. He told one substitute teacher on the phone that he could only correspond with her through the district attorney and hung up her. We have enough elitists in local government. Time to give Morrison his walking papers.

MAYOR

Greg Jamison. I know I have been accused of being an endorser of Jamison and his campaign, so I will clear that up right now. I am not.

I just really don’t care much for his opponent.

There are things that trouble me about Jamison, you probably feel the same, and this is my word of advice, you don’t have to vote for him. If you are disenfranchised by both candidates, leave it blank. But please, don’t vote for Mike.

AT-LARGE ‘A’

Emmett Reistroffer. I have known Emmett and his extended family for a long time. I first met him when he volunteered to help Stehly and I with our tax petition drive.

He is smart, full of energy and well versed on the issues and has compassion for people. A rarity in politicians.

He would bring a breath of fresh air and youthfulness to a sometimes stodgy council.

As for his opponents, while I will give Steele credit for knowing his issues, and being a fiscal conservative, his social views make me cringe. As for Tex Golfing, not only does he still not know what the heck is doing after four years, his intent for reelection is worrisome. It is no secret that Rex is retired and owns a retirement home, far, far away, it seems the only reason he is running is to block Emmett or Manny. If Rolfing is reelected he could easily resign in a year – by law, for NO reason. He has denied to many that he will do that, but as I have told people in the past, ‘Never trust an insurance salesman’.

AT-LARGE ‘B’

We all will come out a winner on this seat. I am impressed with both candidates on some issues, and not on others.

I believe they both possess the qualities to make decent councilors (Erickson/Pierson).

I will personally be voting for Pierson, but like I said, no losers here.

CENTRAL DISTRICT

Rebecca Dunn is the obvious choice and not just because Erpenbach needs to go. Michelle has proven to be a lap dog for special interests and developers, just look at her campaign donor list. She has consistently bullied other councilors, help spear head the termination of former city clerk Debra Owen and has repeatedly stepped on the toes of other councilors to get agenda items on the council agenda without the consensus of her peers. She is also pro-censorship, something I DO NOT tolerate in elected officials.

But besides Michelle’s flaws, she would be replaced by a person who has legislative & leadership skills (it is Dunn’s line of work, and she served 8 years in the SD Legislature).

She has proven time and time again that she is very involved in this community, state and nation.

She lives in the Cathedral district home she grew up in and has fought to keep the established neighborhoods in this community viable.

S.E. DISTRICT

Bonita Schwan is wonderful 🙂 While I can’t say a lot of negative things about Mr. Kiley (I have fielded many calls and emails that he is a standup guy) I was disappointed that in the last candidate forum he didn’t take a stand on any issue, and didn’t seem to be to versed on the issues (maybe that is why he did not take a stand). He seems to be a Johnny come lately recruit.

Quite the opposite with Schwan. Besides being involved with the Save Our Neighborhood group, Bonita is a single mother of four who has dedicated much of her time to local charities. She is a former Peace Corp volunteer and has years of experience in state government working for Governor Brandstad of Iowa.

She is also an expert on municipal bonding.

I would also like to say that Bonita has a heart of gold, and if you would want anyone on the council in your corner as a constituent, it would be Bonita.

CHARTER AMENDMENTS

I would vote YES on all the amendments. A & B are basic housekeeping due to the change of council meetings on Tuesday now instead of Monday nights. They are changing the charter to stating a specific week (the 3rd) instead of a day in reference to the swearing in of the new council and mayoral candidates. Nothing life-changing here. As for amendment C, this gives the council the power to help appoint or terminate the city attorney. While I would prefer the constituents vote for the city attorney, this is at least a step forward for checks and balances.

I believe our current city attorney and the past two were only lap dogs for the mayor (because they were appointed by them).

This would clarify just who the city attorney works for; our mayor, our council and ultimately us.

INITIATED MEASURE 1

Vote YES for Snowgates. They have been proven throughout the country to be effective and some communities have been using them for almost 40 years. This is NOT a new public service, it is simply an extension of one we are already receive (except this winter) – plowing our streets properly.

The city has an obligation to plow the streets correctly, and this is one way to oblige their obligation.

We already pay for the service so why not make it better? This is also something that not only helps homeowners, it helps  business owners, pedestrians and many others throughout the community.

INITIATED MEASURE 2

Vote YES for an outdoor pool at Spellerberg. Where to begin?

1) If the outdoor pool is approved, it does not mean we have to build another aquatic park like at Drake Springs. There are many options. We could build a traditional lap pool, we could also build a natural filtration pool like they are in Minneapolis, with a beach and NO admission charges. The options are endless.

2) If the measure fails, there is NO guarantee they would build an indoor pool at the location. They could just fill the old pool in and leave it as green space. The NEW council will have to approve funding/bonds for a new indoor pool at the location.

3) It affects the parking at the VA if an indoor pool is built.

4) There is a ‘quit claim’ deed on the property from the Feds, they could refuse to give approval of an indoor facility.

5) It is the wrong location for a gigantic indoor facility, with no room for expansion.

6) There needs to be a private/public partnership for an indoor facility due to how much it will cost to operate each year (around $1 million).

REFERRED LAW 3

Vote NO. While Shape Places is a great document, it needs some tweaks. These tweaks will NOT take place if it is passed ‘AS IS’. The city directors and council will simply accept the ordinance for what it is.

If you vote against it, it will force the council and city directors to tweak the ordinance before the council votes it into law.

The ‘tweak’ that needs to take place is putting CUP (the conditional use permit) back into the ordinance, which allows citizens and neighborhoods to have input on zoning changes. This is why SON referred the measure. It is essential that this is put back into the ordinance before it passes, and why revoking it would force the council and city to do so. This isn’t just about Walmart and other big developments and retailers, this is about your neighborhood.

REFERRED LAW 4

Vote No. Before I get into a rant about Walmart, this is really about zoning, and how much input ‘established’ neighborhoods have in zoning. The SON neighborhood consists of homes that were mostly built before 2009 when the city changed the zoning designation of the proposed Walmart. These people did their research, and built their homes, now the city wants to pull the rug out from underneath them. I encourage anyone to drive through this area, these are beautiful homes and clearly not a place where you would want ANY big box retailer.

It would be the equivalent of dropping a Walmart on top of McKennan Park. Wonder how that would go over? Like a freaking lead balloon.

This issue should concern all homeowners in this city, not just those on the edge. It is about having tenure in your neck of the woods.

I would also like to say, that SON is not opposed to retail at the 85th and Minnesota location, in fact they invite it. Walmarts have a tendency (especially super stores) to bring an element of high density traffic and host of other problems.

Walmart’s argument of more tax collection and job creation is a weak one. Even if Walmart is denied this location, they could build across Highway 100 and create the same tax benefits and job creation. Walmart also has a reputation of cannibalizing other businesses and not really creating any NEW tax revenue.

It is a disgrace to our community that our local Chamber would encourage a YES vote on this project, knowing damn well the damage Walmarts do to local business, their very members.

Walmart also has a reputation of being a horrible employer that encourages it’s employees to suck off of Federal programs like Medicade and SNAP. A recent study showed that on an average, each Walmart costs Federal taxpayers about $1.7 million PER STORE, PER YEAR to subsidize their employees, and that’s just Federal money. Locally and on a state level, taxpayers will have to subsidize the traffic and other infrastructure costs associated with the construction.

SON will say this is ONLY about zoning, but I personally think this is about Walmart, the biggest welfare queen of them all.

IN CLOSING

Of course, you don’t have to take my advice. But I do advise everyone to research all the candidates and measures on their own and make an informed decision.

The best place to vote is at the County Administration building at 6th and Minnesota.

Absentee voting begins this Monday, March 24th. If you wait until April 8th, remember you can vote at ANY of these Vote Centers;

1. First Lutheran Church, 327 South Dakota Avenue

2. Memorial Middle School, 1401 South Sertoma Avenue

3. Maricar Community Center, 400 North Valley View Road

4. Oyate Community Center, 2421 West 15th Street

5. Wesley United Methodist Church, 1700 East Sixth Street

6. Sioux Falls Arena, 1201 North West Avenue

7. Peace Lutheran Church, 5509 West 41st Street

8. Kenny Anderson Community Center, 3701 East Third Street

9. Morningside Community Center, 2400 South Bahnson Avenue

10. Gloria Dei Lutheran Church, 5500 East 57th Street

11. Faith Baptist Fellowship Hall, 601 West 57th Street

12. Asbury United Methodist Church, 2425 South Western Avenue

13. Instructional Planning Center, 201 East 38th Street