“There are numerous citizen reports of unconstitutional city administrative hearings. Once a declaratory judgement is imposed, there will be a class action relative to cases post January 2008 when city codes were changed denying appeals and due process. It would ask for fine refunds and stop action for all cases (not just code citations).”
Dan Daily
The hearing that city attorney Shawn Tornow has been obstructing for years finally started yesterday;
Sioux Falls resident Dan Daily brought the case. He argues the city’s administrative hearings violate basic due process rights of residents and businesspeople who appeal citations or disputes with the city. Daily has been battling the city over a $200 driveway extension since 2006.
Â
The city hires private lawyers to hear appeals and render decisions when a resident disputes a citation. But Daily argues those lawyers are not sufficiently independent from the city, and residents aren’t afforded basic rights that are the foundation of the state’s judicial system.
If the city is paying them – how is that independent?
The process doesn’t guarantee residents the ability to subpoena witnesses, request depositions or force the city to produce documents. But former City Attorney Gary Colwill testified that the city’s intent was to create a “citizen-friendly process.”
You are kidding, right? When you say ‘citizen-friendly’ are you talking about project TRIM’s vague blanket code enforement? Or are you talking about how you can destroy someone’s credit rating through small claims court? Or are you referring to the flow-chart that looks more like a ‘Where’s Waldo’ poster then an official process? Just what part are you referring to Gary? Either you were flat out f’ing lying on the stand or you are completely delusional.
Maybe Plaintiff will give us an update in the comments section . . . .
Have a tree trimming party and invite these guys
The longer I follow Sioux Falls city politics and government, the more I am convinced this city is run by ideologues. I got further proof of this last night when I attended an informational and Q & A meeting with the Sioux Falls Parks and Recreation forestry manager (Duane) about project TRIM.
City department heads have their own ideas on the city’s appearance and growth, and most citizens have different ideas, and they are not sitting at the table and ironing out those differences. That was quite apparent last night during the meeting.
The SF Parks and Rec wants us to trim our trees to their standards. I’ll give them credit, they do make some good arguments. They have some liability issues with delivery vehicles, fire and rescue and snowplows getting damaged by low hanging branches. They also have stated cases of people getting knocked in the head by a low hanging branch while walking at night (I could go into a tirade about that, but I will keep it to myself). Yes, these things should concern us, but that is what the city has insurance for.
I also agree that trees need to be trimmed and maintained on a regular basis. I trim my boulevard tree all summer long, because water sprouts grow out of it like a weed. But after receiving the project TRIM letter from the city, I will be forced to cut off two gigantic branches from the tree. Fine, Â I’m okay with that. But I disagree with how the city is going about project TRIM. I believe there should be a concerted effort between the city and the property owners to get the trees trimmed. But the city sees it differently. Here’s some highlights from last night’s meeting which was attended by about 10-12 citizens, including a very animated school teacher (funny stuff).
Â
–Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Project TRIM was initiated by the forestry manager on his own, Duane. He admitted to it last night. Duane said there was no formal vote by the council to approve the project because the ordinance already existed, which troubles me. I’m certain when the original council approved the ordinance they felt it would be enforced on a complaint basis only. Duane claims that a complaint basis wasn’t working because people felt like they were being picked on. So the solution is to pick on the entire district instead? This should have been thought out better and approved by the council and mayor by an ordinance vote so the citizens could have had some input. Letting one sole individual in a city department who isn’t even elected make this decision is bad public policy but normal operating procedure for Parks and Rec. Remember, their board members are volunteer political appointments by the mayor and not elected, they also have no accountability to the public.
–         If the city charges you to trim your trees, it will cost $150 an hour. They justify this cost because you are paying for the P & R person to drive to your house and get his equipment ready. This ignited the school teacher. He basically said that he doesn’t get paid for ‘preparing lessons’ and ‘driving to school’ he gets paid to teach. He makes a good point. We already pay P & R wages, they should be charging us for the trimming only. They (The P & R director, Don, was there to) admitted they charge that much because they don’t want to be forced to do it, and they hope it will persuade people to do it themselves and comply. Makes sense, but it is still highway robbery just the same.
–         One citizen complained that the code enforcement/project TRIM letter that is sent out is threatening. P & R admits this was done purposely to intimidate property owners into complying, or as they said “getting to the point.†Many complained this was poor customer service, to say the least. I complained that I don’t approve of ‘blanket code enforcement’ since they cannot be specific about what tree(s) need to be trimmed. In fact that was the biggest complaint from most everyone there. Citizens don’t have a way of measuring and understanding the compliance. I also felt this was forcing some citizens into hiring private contractors to do the work, and I think the city should not be in the business of promoting private contractors with my tax dollars.
–         Unlike project NICE they will not come by and pickup your branches after you trim them. I said I don’t have a problem with trimming the branches myself but thought it would be a nice gesture (since I am a taxpayer) to have the city come by and pickup the branches like they do with project NICE. The response was “That’s a different project†Well duh! But why not do the same thing. The reply? “We tried it and it doesn’t work.†So I guess we just give up? I think it didn’t work because it was not done in connection with the letter. I think if they send out the letter with specifics on what tree(s) to trim and give a date they will be in your neighborhood to pick up the branches it would work. I also think they could ‘assist’ with any branches you had trouble trimming on your own. This would also give them an opportunity to inspect. Lots of birds killed with one stone (I know, tough to swallow because beaucracies do not work that way).
–         Some asked why the city can’t just trim the trees while they are out inspecting. There excuse was there is not enough ‘Manpower’. I pointed out that they had plenty of ‘Manpower’ to inspect the neighborhoods, write down the addresses, get out and measure, compile the letters and money to mail them out, but not enough to actually trim the trees? No response. I failed to mention they also have the manpower and funds to cut down all the nice birches in Yankton trail park and replant and water all summer, but no time or money for the citizens.
–Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Some solutions that were offered was reorganizing P & R budget money to project TRIM and trying to get prison trustees to help out the fixed income and elderly. P & R’s solution? We’ll give you an extention. Â Woo Hoo! It’s like the IRS giving an extention, at the end of the day, you still have to pay your taxes.
–Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â One guy showed up defending the project. No surprise, I won’t mention his name, but he works for a certain downtown non-profit and often shows up to defend the city at various meetings. He suggested a neighborhood tree trimming party. Yeah, because nothing goes together like BBQ, beer and chainsaws. Hey, you go for it, don’t forget to wear your Jackyl t-shirt. Nobody responded to his idea, and he walked out. That’s usually the reaction when this guy opens his mouth at municipal meetings. He probably had to rush off and make it to another brown nosing session somewhere else.
Towards the end of the meeting though it seemed that the Don and Duane were willing to help out a little and agree to come out and mark trees that needed it if we call, so I haven’t lost hope yet.
What do you think? Should the city work together with the citizens on project TRIM since they are the ones complaining about liability? I think so. Pretty soon they will have us maintaining our own road in front of our house if this keeps up.
As you may or may not know, South DaCola helped break this story. A regular commenter on this site ‘Plaintiff’ had a story about his lawsuit in the Argus Leader today. It’s an amazing story about property rights and the US Constitution. Though I think it will go over most people’s heads, I do think it is worth reading. I also think that it gives the regular Joe the excuse to read and learn more about the freedoms our country provides in that very document (Constitution). We have freedom in this country not only because of our brave men and women who put their lives on the line everyday across the globe, but we have these freedoms because of people like Mr. Daily (who ironically not only fought for those freedoms in a courtroom but also on a battlefield). America’s freedoms are not in a piece of cloth, but they are embedded in us and that is what makes America the greatest country in the world.
I commend Dan for fighting for those freedoms and I also want to extend a big thank you to Mr. Ellis for doing the story – a great journalist that will go far. The AL should consider themselves very F’ing lucky to have him.
I’ll let the article speak for itself, but I did enjoy this comment;
Linde said he thinks the city’s administrative process is “ripe for ad-hoc decision making.”
“I don’t think it’s as fair as a magistrate or circuit court in the state of South Dakota,” he said. “I don’t think you have as much protection. I also think that some people acting as the prosecutors are the ones making up the rules.”
l3wis