May 2016

The biggest discrimination issue in the Sioux Falls workforce; Wage Discrimination

l3wis May 26, 2016 8Comments

Sometimes I just shake my head when government, whether that is National, State or Local, fiddle around with emotional topics that have nothing to do with what is on hand.

Our Mayor and City council have barked about workforce development for years now, so what major steps have they made? We got a fancy website and some billboards of our mayor in Minneapolis, oh, and we are considering an ordinance to not to discriminate against transgender peeps.

Hey, as short, fat German, I can tell you all about discrimination. It happens. I will also say I voted for and support city policy when it comes to public employees not being discriminated against when it comes to sex identification. When dealing with public employees and tax money, it can be a very sticky situation. The voters, city attorney’s office and the charter revision commission made the right decision.

As for the part that was withdrawn thisÂ week, not sure we need to step off that ledge (forcing the policy onto private employers and landlords). First off, we are a right to work state, I see some interference with those laws. I also see issues with housing*.

Whatever happened to not hiring someone because they aren’t qualified? Is that discrimination? I just see a huge can of worms we are opening by adding another layer of EOC regs with private employers. The worst part is that it may not hold up in court since this is just simply a city ordinance and not state law or federal law. And at the end of the day, are we really making employment better in Sioux Falls?

No matter how you feel aboutÂ the debate, I ponder the bigger question? What are our local leaders doing to actually get good employment for our residents no matter their race, gender or sexual orientation? I could care less about religious freedom, bathroom freedom and sexual freedom.

This is a job or career, not a reality TV show.

What are our city leadersÂ doing about female pay lagging male pay? Or management promotions? How about the minimum wage? Want to present real change through city charter and ordinance? Make employers pay a $10 minimum wage within the city limit. Require all new businesses that come to Sioux Falls to sign a promise that they will pay a living wage of at least $16 an hour for full-time work. Require employers to have a portion of their staff to be full time.

I could care less where you pee, who you sleep with, or what you choose to wear for clothing. Free country, free expression. We can have the church/bathroom/transgender debate discussion all we want, but let’s face it Sioux Falls, the real discrimination in our town is WAGE discrimination.

I ask our city council and mayor, what do you plan to do about it?

*The rumor going around is that the city was promised more HUD/Federal monies if they implemented a city ordinance to not to discriminate against LGBT peeps/transgender.

Darrin Smith Downtown Sioux Falls Sioux Falls

Darrin Smith uses common sense for once

l3wis May 26, 2016 3Comments

In one of his last decisions as community development director, he chose to use common sense;

May 26, 2016: Smith, in what’s likely to be his last press conference as Community Development director, says city will not build a standalone ramp and instead will look for new partners to move forward with mixed-use parking facility.

Not only was it obvious to NOT build a standalone structure, I don’t think the administration had the votes on the council to get a standalone passed and built, especially with the current discussion about the new administration building.

At least Smith goes out on a good note.

Denny Sanford Premier Center Event Center Sioux Falls

Will we ever see the Events Center settlement

l3wis May 26, 2016 9Comments

I hate to say it, but even with appeals, we probably don’t have a very good chance of seeing the settlement;

Argus LeaderÂ Media president Bill Albrecht wouldn’t rule out an appeal of Pekas’ decision, which he called disappointing while remaining steadfast that open record laws were violated when the city denied Argus Leader Media’sÂ record request.

â€œWe believe the public has the right to know what caused this million dollar transaction.Â It is a million dollars. Regardless if it is money spent by the city government, or money received by the city government, it is the public’s money and public needs – and has the right to know – the details,â€ Albrecht said.Â â€œThe confidentially agreement was made outside of a lawsuit which does not garner it protection based on our interpretation of the statute.”

South Dakota Newspaper Association president Jeremy Waltner said regardless of the ruling, the city’s insistence that settlement details remain seals only keeps the door open to perceptions of impropriety among those involved in the event center construction, including the city government. Furthermore, Pekas ruling essentially says any government entity can contract through secrecy, he said.

“Whether it’s legal or not legal â€¦ all of that legal speak aside, the city should release the information.Â They should not hide behind this becauseÂ all it’s doing is raising more questions,” Waltner said.

I think even if the Supreme Court were to rule in favor of the Argus, we could see a long challenge from the city. Not only that, there could be a significant white washing before the documents are handed over. Also, key players like city attorney Fiddle Faddle and Mayor Huether will be long gone.

I really think the Argus and the rest of the media in Sioux Falls missed the boat a long time ago when this was first brought to light (the siding issue) and when the consultant’s report hit the shredder. I think that report NOT being released was really the most damaging part of this whole deal. I think it was the key piece of evidence that the siding job was a pure sh*t show from the beginning.

Here is what we have speculated through this process from talking to contractors and engineers close to the project;

The original design was not used. If you look at early architectural drawings (above image), there were supposed to be large flat rectangular panels applied (about 8 x 16 Foot) giving the building an almost hexagonal look, and avoiding any unneeded bending of metal. It was dumped to save money. Several numbers have been thrown out there, anywhere from $1.5-3 million was saved. But saved for what? The rumor is to repair â€˜other’ constingency problems in the building.

A couple of contractors who worked on the EC but did NOT apply the siding were pulled into the lawsuit. This is a real mystery to everyone, even the contractors. While there may have been some issues with the work they were doing in other parts of the building, they had nothing to do with the siding. Some may say it was punishment for agreeing to NOT do the work.

This isn’t cosmetic, something I think they are also covering up. It doesn’t take an engineer to tell you something has major holes in it. Just walk up to the building and see for yourself.

We think the consultant’s report was FULL of recommendations on how to fix the siding, but we also think once a price tag was put on the fix, they bailed.

The one million dollar settlement WAS NOT cash or transferred monies, it was a discount from Mortenson on the building. It would be like purchasing a $25 steak that was cooked wrong and the restaurant giving you a $26 coupon.

The irony is, even if all the speculation is correct, if the city was just honest from the beginning, I think most people would have forgiven and forgotten about the siding. But you know what they say about how many lies it takes to cover one lie.

South DaCola Fest