August 2018

LifeScape Parking lot expansion further proof the indoor pool was built in the wrong place

I think the debate is over, we wanted an indoor pool and we got one. But a major issue at the time was the location of the pool. While I wouldn’t be opposed to a public indoor pool built at a city park, Spellerberg Park was problematic from the get go.

Besides the fact that there is no room for expansion, one of the major issues was parking expansion of the VA. We knew the VA was going to expand, we knew they would need more parking and we knew they held the quit claim deed to Spellerberg. If the pool wasn’t built there they could have easily expanded parking into the park. NOW, we have LifeScape tearing up affordable housing in the center of our city for parking because they NO longer have space at the VA.

I still believe a public/private partnership with Sanford at the Sports complex for an indoor pool would have made more sense, and really there is nothing stopping them from doing their own pool in the future.

While the negotiations behind the RR redevelopment was one of the worst in the past administration, building the indoor pool at Spellerberg is proving also to be another poor decision from a RAM-ROD mentality of the previous administration.

UPDATE: Without a Narcissistic, Sadistic, Egomaniac Bully as Mayor, the council is free to get things done

The City Council did their due diligence last night and saved a historic neighborhood from another commercial development that are eating up our core.

A developer thought they were going to play the game of buying crappy houses, let them go to sh*t and than have an excuse to tear them down. The council said, ‘Not so Fast.’

Watch George Hamilton school the council on what exactly the developer was up to.

UPDATE: So in this KDLT story, the developer states the obvious;

Developer Sam Assam will need to get a cost-estimate for repairing the homes and see if that outweighs the cost of demolishing them, then bring his case before the Board of Preservation again.

Well DUH it is cheaper to bulldoze a house. I think we have established that McFly. But what I can GUARANTEE and Hamilton is right, it way more cheaper to refab these houses if their structures and foundations are solid than it would be to tear them down completely and build a whole new structure. At the informational meeting on Tuesday, the Affordable Housing manager said a starter home costs about $220 now in Sioux Falls.

But the bigger question is not whether they can be demolished or not. Why are we allowing commercial development to creep into a neighborhood. I don’t even care if it is a Historic neighborhood. We should keep our affordable housing neighborhoods.

Sioux Falls School Bond issue incredible waste of education tax dollars

I’m not naïve, I can see the writing on the wall. This special election with a small number of precincts will probably only get supporters out to support the bond issue. In other words my opinion is starting to change, they may just have a good chance of getting this bond passed by the 60% + 1 threshold.

But let’s face reality here.

One argument I hear a lot from my friends who support these bonds is that we need to spend MORE on public education. I couldn’t agree more. But where we fail on this bond issue is the incredible waste involved. Basically for every $3 of tax dollars expended, only $2 of it goes towards education. We are borrowing $190 million with $110 million in interest. The $110 doesn’t get spent on education, it goes straight from our wallets in the form of property taxes to bond investors. Not one single penny of it will be spent on education. What makes it even worse is that the bond investors live all over the country and possibly world, so that money won’t even get recirculated in our economy.

So you ask what the solution is? Well, I think we should take out smaller bonds that can be paid off faster using the capital outlay. While our taxes most likely will go up (there is No escaping that fact), this allows MORE money to go towards the actual projects instead of bond interest. It also stretches out the debt and tax increases. This is something Public Works Director Mark Cotter suggested during the task force meetings and was told they couldn’t trust Pierre. A horrible excuse to blow $110 million of tax dollars on bond investors instead of education.

The other sad reality is that this $190 million is only being spent on brick and mortar. There is no long term plan to staff the schools and where that money will come from.

I hope people wake up before September 18 and come out in droves to vote down this incredibly dubious bond proposal that only lines the pockets of banksters and does very little in helping education in our community.