September 2016

The City of Sioux Falls response to ADA complaints? Lawyer up and stall

I have been complaining about the horrible shape of the sidewalks and curbs on our city’s main retail corridor for a long time, and I am an able bodied pedestrian, imagine riding a scooter down this bombed up war path;

“I was expecting that the study would have been done, or it would have been enough to say that this fiscal year we will be doing this, this and this,” Santee said.

Crews from the federal agency cited 26 pages worth of ADA violations in Sioux Falls.
The city has four areas to work on.
The FHWA is asking Sioux Falls to enforce ordinances for private property owners, maintain sidewalks, correct public right-of-ways that are currently not compliant, and take immediate action to correct about 11 miles of sidewalks and curb ramps that were not built to code during overlay and reconstruction projects from 2009 to 2013.
The city’s response outlines studies and evaluations for each of these areas asking for up to nine months to lay out a plan.
This worries Santee.

“Will we live long enough to see anything happen,” he asked.

The city did cite a project in the design phase that would bring curb ramps into compliance on Minnesota Avenue from 18th to 33rd Street.

“I was hoping something might get done in the interim period between when it was filed and the Letter of Finding finally came out, that the city would start doing some stuff,” Santee said.

The irony of all this is that if the city just handed out code violations to the adjacent business owners, they would have to pay for the upgrades, not the taxpayers. Not only that, you would think that if you had a business on the busiest retail corridor in the city, you would want your curb appeal to look good and be safe? There is also the hypocrisy of the city going after (private) citizens for 8.5″ grass and an inch of snow on their sidewalk, but not bothering to hand out violations to businesses for crap sidewalks. Talk about bad neighbors.

City of Sioux Falls Finance Director seems a bit confused

Tracy announced this yesterday after the petition hearing;

Unless the courts advise us that we cannot legally proceed, the intention is to sell bonds in October. No official date for selling the bonds has yet been set.

Funny, because according to Moody’s the sale will take place on Tuesday;

Rating Action: Moody’s Assigns Aa2 to Sioux Falls, SD’s Sales Tax Rev. Bonds, Ser. 2016A

Global Credit Research – 27 Sep 2016

New York, September 27, 2016 — Issue: Sales Tax Revenue Bonds, Series 2016A; Rating: Aa2; Rating Type: Underlying LT; Sale Amount: $19,970,000; Expected Sale Date: 10/04/2016; Rating Description: Special Tax: Sales

So which is it Tracy? More games from city hall.

Taxpayers duped once again by the pie in the sky dreams of developers and big business

I was very reluctant to post about this story, simply because it was no shock to me that this happened. I was waiting for the day to come when we would read this;

The company that would have been the first to build in the new Foundation Park development park has decided to look at other locations.

Stuless Whunder makes a great point;

Others question the role of taxpayer-supported public entities in the area of private development, especially if urgency to find companies to fill parcels at Foundation Park drives down the market.

In that same vein, I question why taxpayers (State and Local) are putting up over $20 million in infrastructure for a project that didn’t even bother to secure a solid purchase agreement? We should have never authorized the expenditures unless we had a ‘real’ promise from a prospect, we went ahead with the possibly of spending $20 million of tax dollars based on a ‘letter’.

Wow!

Another reason we can’t run government like a business. Unlike private enterprise, government shouldn’t be in the business of taking risks and land speculation.

As for saying I wasn’t shocked that this happen, it is because we have had precedent. For one, just peruse available industrial park land the development foundation and other realtors have available already. It’s like deciding to build a 3 car garage for your Fiat 300 and bag of golf clubs. There isn’t a need for more land, it’s a classic case of urban sprawl. Remember Phillips to the Falls? How did that work out for taxpayers? We spent millions so we can have a new location for German Fest. Also don’t forget the fiasco called EB-5. There is also the employment factor (I’m guessing that is why Logistics Buddy backed out). Capital One is leaving solely based on the fact we don’t have enough workers. There is also the promise of living wage jobs that has never been hammered out before we moved ahead with this project. But hey the city is throwing thousands of dollars at businesses for the “Welfare for Want Ads” project.

I know I often sound negative and am really a cynic at heart, but it pains me to be right about something so wrong. I hope things will work out in the end. But hey folks, it’s Meth Week in Sioux Falls, so don’t worry about failed developments and petition drives. We gotta nip this dang problem in the butt. You go Tiger Mike!

I applaud the generosity of the private donors towards the Arc of Dreams, kind of.

image001

If you squint your eyes a little bit, it kind of looks like a Trojan Horse

I will admit, I was skeptical when the organizers of this project said they would raise all the money privately (I still am a little).

The project is being funded by private donors, with a goal of $1.25 Million. Schiller says they are at $1.17 Million right now.

It’s not that I don’t think the money is here in our community, it’s just that taxpayers have been down this road before. I have pressured Sculpture Walk organizers over the years to become more independent, they have been listening. There is also the logistics of the project. Talking to engineers and others in the art world who have been around large sculpture projects before I have a couple of concerns.

1. Since the large structure does not connect in the middle, there could be issues with it’s weight when it comes to high winds and counter balance.

2. The quartzite that has to be drilled through in order to create that counter balance could become very costly.

I have put city officials on notice that if any trouble arises and we the taxpayers have to chip in, that they proceed with caution. Think Trojan horse. While this is a great gift to the city, remember since it is sitting on city property, we have a great responsibility to maintain it. Where will that money come from? The sky? It would be like your dying uncle giving you his classic Ferrari.

We took a gift from Mr. Fawick back in the early 70’s and the city has been reluctant many times to keep him around, even throwing David in a storage lot for several years because they didn’t have the money to put him back up. I would be curious what the city is budgeting each year for maintenance of such a large piece of public art?

I also take issue with this statement;

Supporters have high hopes this new, massive piece of artwork will bring more than just tourists to the downtown area.

“The new awareness will truly advance economic development, workforce development in so many ways for so many years,” said Schiller.

Um . . . how will it do that? Sure it will promote more tourism to downtown, but we already have a great tourist attraction downtown, and it’s not Minerva’s or the Statue of David (Though he is my favorite DT).

When I watch press conferences like this, I often shake my head when our city leaders make ridiculous statements like this.

But at the end of day, I do Thank You . . . kind of.

Judge Salter will rule on the validity of the petitions by tomorrow

image001

According to the AL’s Joey Snevaboloney’s live tweets, the hearing finished. There were two things that stood out from the Judge. He asked the city clerk, Tom Greco, if there was a difference in voter registration between the state and the city. (of course there isn’t, and Salter probably knew the answer, but wanted Greco on the record, he answered ‘No’).

The judge also admitted towards the end of the hearing that he will be ruling on the validity of the signers. This is important, and our argument all along.