South DaCola

Editorial Cartoonist from South Dakota

April 2017

Mary Jane South Dakotans

Would recreational Marijuana raise significant taxes for SD?

l3wis 12Comments

Damn right it would! And I suspect most of that tax revenue would come from out of state. Think about it. If South Dakota legalizes Recreational, we would be surrounded by 6 states that do not have it legalized. I actually think the state could easily raise $30-40 million in tax revenue in the first year. Of course our closed minded legislators (mostly Republican) don’t have a clue, just read this ridiculous quote from our Speaker of the House;

“Never. Absolutely not,” said South Dakota House Speaker Mark Mickelson, R-Sioux Falls. “Tax yourself for something you need, don’t tax someone else for their path to destruction.”

So I’m guessing next year Mr. Mickelson will be proposing removing taxes from alcohol, or even better yet making us a dry state to end it’s ‘destruction’ of our state. Hey, go a step further and get rid of video lottery also. Only Republicans think that it is okay to tax food, clothes and energy costs instead of a cash cow like REC marijuana. I think if this makes the ballot, it will pass by 56%. As a person who follows politics, I will say that REC marijuana is used by all stripes, Dems, Indies and Republicans. I also think that it HAS to pass by a good margin, otherwise our legislature will be making moves to overturn it. Just look at IM22. It’s time South Dakota moves into the 21st century and approves this important measure, that would improve education and save tax payers millions in legal costs.

SF City Council Sioux Falls

2017 National City Survey results released today after a week of silence

l3wis 1Comments

UPDATED: At the Sioux Falls City Council informational meeting, the results will be released to the public. (They are now available on SIRE)* While this survey is paid for by tax payers and filled out by tax payers, the administration gets to pick through the results for over a week before we get to see it. Even more ironically, even though this comes out of the city council budget, the mayor still picks through the results days ahead of the council.

We often hear the same tired old argument from the administration, trust us, we are not doing anything wrong or controversial, but we still can’t share. The results of this survey being a secret for well over a week or more just proves why transparency is so important. On top of that, if the mayor was manipulating the results before sharing with the council or public, what is stopping him? Nothing. Because it is a secret. I wouldn’t hold the results of this survey with a grain of salt.

*Update: Just looking at them quickly, two things stick out; About 75% of approval ratings are down over the past two years. People are getting more and more frustrated about our roads.

The below comment is from the random comments section under ‘OTHER’. It wasn’t the only one in reference to our mayor AND council. But what I found ironic about this is that our mayor consistently complains about anon comments on social media and blogs, but it seems people are making those comments on an official city survey also.

Employment Franken Healthcare Sioux Falls

2017 City Salaries; Health Department Dentists & Other officials

l3wis 3Comments

Today we will look at the Health Department.

Did you know that some of the highest paid city employees are dentists?

The city health department employees 4 dentists with combined salaries of $620K. Seems odd, doesn’t it? When we think of snow plow operators or police officers, we think of direct service to the public, or at least most of it? But you wouldn’t likely use a city employed dentist unless you had to go to community health because financial restraints. In defense though, as I understand it, the community health department does try to receive some kind of payment. Sometimes through Medicare or Medicade. I would be curious how many patients are served by our city dentists each year?

It also seems the Health Department has many high paying jobs in the department besides dentists.

The Director receives $157K and the Chief Medical Officer about $205K a year. Oddly, even with these positions, the Director has 2 managers that receive the same wage of $88K a year. There are also 13 other mid-management that receives approximately between $80-$100K a year. The clinic even has its OWN finance director (even though the city has a well staffed finance division already) that makes $97K a year.

What is odd about these wages, that are probably not out of line of with a community our size is that many of the minions don’t even receive a living wage. Approximately 15 workers receive under $17 per hour (defined by Thrive as a living wage in Sioux Falls). With the remaining staff making a decent middle income of about $47K. The Sioux Health department has some of the highest wages (in management) of any department in the city) yet Sioux Falls continues to rank average or below average on National health rankings, especially when it comes to obesity and lack of exercise.

Here is the full doc: 2017-Wages

Employment Sioux Falls

Should city employees be required to live within jurisdiction it works for?

l3wis 2Comments

I’m finding some interesting arguments on the topic. This one from Washington State that says chartered cities like Sioux Falls could implement the rule, especially for APPOINTED positions (Like City Attorney, Finance director, etc);

Most cities probably do not have residency requirements for their employees, even if they can. Is it a good idea to require residency? Residency helps build a bond between employees and the community they serve. The public may expect city employees face the same restrictions, taxes, policies that they do, and that’s only possible if employees live within the same community where they work. On the other hand, requiring residency limits the size of the pool from which good employees come – probably the strongest argument against requiring residency. The smaller the city, of course, the more that becomes an issue. Ultimately, it is a policy decision, one that needs to be carefully considered.

Finally, note that, if the affected employees of a proposed residency or response time requirement are members of a union, this would be a matter that would need to be bargained.

I also find this argument from Minnesota about elected officials being required to live within the jurisdiction, then why not the employees?

Elected officials must maintain a city residency. Under the Minnesota Constitution, a candidate must live in the city for at least 30 days before a city election in order to serve as a mayor or councilmember. If a mayor or councilmember fails to maintain a city residency, state statute provides that a vacancy in office is created.

There are a ton of reasons for and against, I guess my argument would be ‘customer service’. Wouldn’t a city employee who lives in that community have more pride in the job they do? This would be an interesting debate to take up with the Charter Revision Commission and a possible ordinance change.

« Previous Page — Next Page »

You Missed

Downtown Sioux Falls Sioux Falls Washington Pavilion

The Pavilion roof may be in trouble?

1st Amendment Curt Soehl Downtown Sioux Falls Open Government Open Meetings SF City Council Sioux Falls

Sioux Falls City Council Chair doesn’t like being yelled at

Uncategorized

Antiques Roadshow

Curt Soehl Elections Mayor TenHaken Paul Ten Haken Sioux Falls

It’s going to get a lot more expensive to run for local office