I am posting these items out of curiosity mostly. I just find it a bit ‘ODD’ only a couple of weeks before the municipal election that the consent agenda is chucked full of of almost $2 million in expenditures. Not special interests in particular, but very curious vendors.
To tell you the truth, that is why I am posting them. I think all of these items should be pulled and discussed by the council in an open forum, not to debate whether or not they are fair expenditures of the city, but just exactly ‘What they are’ and why we are paying these fees and at this price. Okay, yeah, yeah, yeah, a debate.
Calling Dr. Staggers.
1) Not sure why the city would be paying the school district for counseling services? Does the school district pay the city for protection and resource officers? Not sure?
2) If we have our own medical clinic, why are we paying a half-million a year for other services? Don’t get me wrong, we probably need their assistance, but shouldn’t these services be covered by insurance, Medicare and Medicade and not the taxpayers of Sioux Falls?
3) I am all for extended training of city employees, but this amount seems a little high to be training employees a software upgrade who already know AutoCad? In the graphic design field, on the job training, especially on software upgrades is common practice, but if you are experienced in the current form of the software, it is customary to take it upon yourself to train on the job, on your own.
4) We’ve talked about the cobblestone alley in the past. I would love to hear an explanation from city directors about this project.
5) Okay, I am NOT in the business of appraising old RR land, but $200K for an appraisal? C’mon?! I would like to see a detailed report of their findings, and line items of these charges. BTW, I think it is a gigantic waste of tax dollars to buy this land. I am all for the city, the state and feds helping out with the moving of these rail yards and some cleanup. But I think a sale of the land should be between the RR and a private developer. There is NO reason why taxpayers need to be a broker in this deal.
I cannot wait to hear the Council debate the merits of spending $840,000 to restore some cobblestones IN AN ALLEY!!!
Another interesting item on the agenda is the homeless shelter on Indiana.
When the Catholic Diocese went before the Planning Commission they basically had NO plan other than they wanted to buy this property.
REALLY, you’re proposing to close the Salvation Army shelter and move that population with all of its issues south to the Indiana property.
Matt Althoff, Chancellor for the Catholic Diocese, told Rick Knobe on KSOO the reason they are pushing to get this done is because they need to sign the purchasing agreement by March 18th.
When in fact, the real reason is they want this signed off by the City Council before the April 8th election. If Shape Places passes, they would be required to have the Indiana property rezoned to institutional with a conditional use. Much more difficult to accomplish.
I hope the business owners and residents of Whittier show up in force on Tuesday. They were not very effective the last time they appeared before the Council. As I watched, I was surprised that Gigi Reider had nothing to say publicly. Several years ago, she was anointed by the City as the patron saint of the Whittier neighborhood. I guess she only speaks out in good times, not when her neighborhood is facing a major crisis.
Also, the City is possibly on the verge of accepting 35 million federal earmark dollars to remove 3 out of the 5 railroad tracks through this area. So, the City will have all of these social service agencies concentrated just to the east of this potential new development.
That makes a lot of sense, right…….
correction to my previous post:
I hope the business owners and residents of Whittier show up in force on Tuesday. They were not very effective the last time they appeared before the Council.
That should have read…..
They were not very effective when they appeared before the Planning Commission Their first appearance before the Council will be tomorrow night.
Also, if they believe this issue has not been thoroughly vetted, they as citizens have the right to ask the Council to consider a deferral.
This isn’t just an appraisal of the land involved in the railroad relocation project.
It’s an appraisal of an appraisal.
As Jonathan Ellis said in his Sunday column:
We know that an appraisal of the land was finished, and that in January a second appraisal team was being brought in to evaluate the first appraisal. That was being done last month.
An appraisal of an appraisal costing taxpayers $200,000. The Council needs to ask Cotter lots of questions about this.
Then again, that probably will not happen, this whole project has lacked TRANSPARENCY.
Same kind of issue before the Lincoln County Planning Commission last night, re: a rezone of some AG land to rural residential. ALL of the neighbors of the property owner, half the city council of the adjoining city, and a representative with petitions from 5% of the registered voters of that city were heard -and decided against.
These boards and commissions are first and foremost concerned with the proper application of the law, not the neighbors’ opinions. Just as they should be. Believe me – you don’t want this world being governed strictly by your neighbors’ opinions- NOR by government officials who DON’T follow the law.