Now we can see why the city is trying to throw out the case, it seems, this detective’s deposition could be damaging to their case.
I want to applaud the detective for being honest and transparent in his interview, not that we shouldn’t expect that from any Sioux Falls police officer, but it was refreshing to see. They could have easily been vague.
I kind of figured the yearly permit records had to end pretty soon, but I never figured we would be down this much;
Building permits in the city of Sioux Falls are almost $100 million less in valuation than they were through the first three quarters of 2018.
Maybe it has to do with NO major public projects, something I have felt for a long time should be separated from the commercial and housing permit valuations.
IS THE CITY USING FIRST PREMIER TO COLLECT PARKING TICKET FEES?
Not sure, the information is a little hazy from the city;
Parking citation payment options are as follows:
• At any Sioux Falls First PREMIER Bank location
There are other options included, but one wonders what the bank is charging to provide this service? Yes, we will be saving money (mostly because NO one is using the boxes) but should we be allowing a portion of the parking fees to go to a third party? I doubt FP is collecting the fees out of the goodness of their hearts. That extra money would sure come in handy to buy school supplies, or something of that nature 🙂
IS FIRST PREMIER ‘SOFTLY’ CAMPAIGNING FOR JENSEN?
This is an interesting online ad;Â
SMG MERGES WITH ANOTHER COMPANY
Maybe this is the reason they had to force the last Denty manager out before the merger;
SMG, the company that manages the Denny Sanford PREMIER Center, has announced it’s merging with Anschutz Entertainment Group, Inc. (AEG) to form a new standalone management company.
It will be interesting to see how SMG explains to the city the merger and the change of contract. You wonder how long the city knew? You also have to wonder if this qualifies as a legal ‘breech’ of contract? Should the city look for a new management company, maybe one that actually books shows and brings some revenue in for taxpayers so we don’t have to pay a majority of the bond/mortgage out of 2nd Penny CIP road & infrastructure funds.
MAYOR PAUL SAYS NEW CITY ‘BRAND’ WILL ASSIST HIM IN HOW HE DRESSES FOR THE DAY
Tenhaken’s interview with BARFrage yesterday had it’s moments, but when Paul said that the new universal city brand will make it easier for him to select what pin to wear to what event, I had to laugh. I wonder if it will also help him to decide what trucker hat to wear depending on the natural disaster that has occurred?
CITY ASKS NOT TO BE SUED OVER RECENT DEATH OF TODDLER AT FALLS PARK
So the city is citing state law for why they shouldn’t be sued;
In its motion to dismiss, the attorneys representing the city argued that officials responsible for park safety did not breach their duty to the public, noting that municipalities must be proven to have acted in willful or wanton misconduct to be held liable for injuries sustained on public recreational land, according to South Dakota law.
I would agree that people need to take personal responsibility for their own safety and the safety of their children when at Falls Park or any park, but also agree with this point;
According to depositions of city officials reviewed by the Argus Leader, the city took additional safety measures following two other drownings in 2013 in the same area where Zaiger drowned.
The city added warning signs and anchors in rock walls to assist with rescue efforts after the 2013 drownings, but did not view foam buildup as a safety hazard to the public at the time. Since Zaiger’s death, foam buildup has been established as a public safety issue by the city, according to court records.
So on one hand the city is citing state law to slip under the radar, but implemented safety measures in the area where the toddler perished. So which is it? Are people responsible for their own safety? Or is the city?
I don’t think this will be dismissed and I have a feeling the parent’s will get a settlement when the dust clears.
For some odd ball reason the contract was NEVER closed with the admin building, it’s been 18 MONTHS! So now we want to AMEND the contract so the same contractor who hasn’t reimbursed us for the failed geo thermal system can expand the building for the new IT space without putting it out to bid.
Councilor Starr brought up some good points, shouldn’t this be put out for bid and close the first contract? He never said he was against the Triage Center, in fact he supports it. That didn’t stop Kiley and Erickson from trying to twist that Pat was against the Triage Center. That IS NOT what he said, he just wanted the old contract closed (with a contractor who may or may not owe us money – that is still in litigation) and an RFP put out for the expansion.
Nice performance though.
Kiley even went as far to say that another contractor could NOT do the job because they wouldn’t have the building plans from the original contractor. I know Mr. Rick ‘Know it All’ Kiley has probably built a couple of houses for himself, guess what, the entity paying for the construction OWNS THE PLANS! In other words, if another contractor came in to work on the expansion, the city simply has to hand over to them the plans, because it is the property of the taxpayers, BUT, they have to close the original contract first.
UPDATE: I heard after the meeting that the architect copyrighted the plans, so the city has to ask for permission to use them. But, there would be no reason to use plans for a building that is already built. A NEW contractor would draw up NEW plans, because it is a NEW expansion.
Neitzert basically said that we got the building because the other side lost and we need to stop being sore losers. Hey Greg, this isn’t about losing, we can tell the building is already there, that’s obvious McFly, we are asking to FOLLOW the proper procedures, like clearing litigation and putting out an RFP.
City Attorney Bengford came up and basically said they are taking the easy road instead of the right road. At least he was being honest.
Erickson went on to talk about funding (even though that is NOT what the discussion is about) Neither Stehly, Starr or Brekke asked about HOW it is being funded, and NONE of them said they were opposed to it, it is about the litigation.
Kiley said that it would just delay the process six months and it will only cost us more money. Hey Rickey Lee, HOW DO WE KNOW THAT when we never put this out for bid? I fondly remembered the new window replacement on the Pavilion that had to be put out for re-bid, and another contractor came in about $300K less.
Funny how those things work.
Of course it passes 6-2 with Starr and Stehly opposed*. And once again the majority of the council is fine with not following proper procedures. Shocker!
*Brekke voted for it because she got to see the contract in advance and said it was legal. But Janet, was it proper or ethical?
Cameraman Bruce asked tonight at public input at the Sioux Falls City Council meeting why the catalytic converters* were missing on the surplus cop cars and sheriff cars at the auction a few weeks ago. He wondered how they got ‘stolen’ in a secure public works lot. And why it wasn’t reported to the SFPD and investigated?
Hmmm.
I guess the driveshafts were also missing on the old para-transit buses also and the flooded out lawn mowers from this Spring were on the auction to.
Once again, Hmmm.
*I guess these parts contain valuable platinum that can be sold as scrap
Maybe it was a ‘Human Error’ like the tornado sirens?
The mayor’s office confirmed Monday that a cap on a water line for a water cooler in the second floor of the 18-month-old city administration building failed, causing between 750 and 1,000 gallons of water to flood the southeast corner of the building’s second floor before it was noticed.
So now we have the HVAC system litigation in limbo with the CMAR (Construction Manager at Risk) who may be responsible for installing a geo thermal system that didn’t work. Now we have a major water leak, with no viable detection system.
So why on earth would we want to hire the same CMAR to expand the IT department in the building?!
It would be like hiring the same plumber to install a bathtub after he installed a leaky toilet. NO private homeowner would do such a thing, so why would the city?
l3wis