Do the math, Sanford is dumping the property onto the taxpayers of Sioux Falls because they are losing money on the facility. We subsidize the Midco to the tune of $1.2 million a year. If we cut the rates at the new (used) facility beyond what Sanford was charging we are looking at a $2-3 million subsidy every year just to keep the doors open.
But no one on the council or at the administration is talking about the subsidy.
I am of the opposite opinion, if the citizens really want this (they don’t since this was cooked up behind closed doors with NO public input, just like the rates) we should charge enough that the place floats itself, so if that means rates HIGHER than what is charged now, oh well.
Taxpayers should NOT be funding recreation at these levels. I think providing FREE recreation is great, but if the citizens want this kind of service, we can provide it, but it is going to cost you.
And what was the public input on rates? Obviously there wasn’t one. They hold a presser to announce the rates then drive down the street to have the Parks Board approve the rates in the same day without any public comment period.
And what will happen to current Sanford members at that location? Will Sanford try to KEEP them in the fitness family by requesting they move their memberships to one of their other facilities? You guarantee they will!
We are solving NO problems with this purchase, but we are sure creating gobs of debt and operational debt for the next 40-50 years. Utter stupidity.
THE RIVERLINE DISTRICT IS JUST A GIGANTIC SCAM
Speaking of half-cocked ideas from the administration, let’s move down the street to another proposal by Poops that is turning into a real POS. They are going to use the entertainment tax, a tax normally used to subsidize maintenance on our entertainment facilities, to purchase the property, which I even question the legality of, but what makes this even more suspicious is this talk about putting this white elephant to a vote.
First, the obvious, this facility would have zero economic impact on the regular Joe in Sioux Falls except our taxes would be subsidizing this place to the tune of $20 million a year (bond payments, operational, etc.). Secondly, when they talk about bringing a ‘vote’ they are referring to an advisory election like they did with the Events Center. This was NOT a legal bond election and the EC would have failed if it were. Bond elections NEED a 60% threshold to pass. If the city tries to pull an advisory vote again, I encourage engaged citizens to do a petition drive to make this an actual LEGAL BOND election and not some dog and pony show.