Corona Virus

Is the City of Sioux Falls blowing Covid stimulus money on unrelated things?

l3wis March 21, 2021 9Comments

Hard for me to answer that question since this item on the Sioux Falls city council informational meeting has no attached documents;

• Sioux Falls for all initiative

Doesn’t that sound lovely?

If you do a little digging and talk to a few moles and rats at city hall you get another picture (these items are of course speculation from said rats and moles);

• The city has already spent some of the money on paying off debt, which seems odd since most of these bonds have a 2% interest rate. While I am strongly against cities borrowing money anyway, I think the wise move would have been spending that money on helping people impacted by the pandemic instead of bond investors.

• There is supposedly around $22 million that still needs to be spent

Here are the items that they ‘might’ spend it on;

• $4 million on a decorative roof for the Pavilion

• Ice rink at Falls Park

• Hayward Park improvements

• 2nd Police Precinct

• Other projects in the mayor’s wish list.

Honestly, I think it would be difficult determining on how we should spend the money, and I think a large chunk of covid stimulus money is a complete waste, but one city official said it best, ‘Maybe we should put it away for a rainy day?’

Sure.

And does the city council even have a say in the matter? Well according to city charter, funding is their duty, not the mayor so why is this coming from his office?

There is also the little secret that while the Triage Center building fund is okay, there is no real plan for funding the operating costs. Maybe this would be a good place to spend it?

I fully understand it is hard to know what to do with Federal funding, but if I was a thinking man, I wouldn’t spend pandemic money on roofs and ice. Just saying.

UPDATE: An exercise in futility

l3wis March 11, 2021 20Comments

Update: It only took 2 days, but the city reporter at the paper that barely exists decided to wake up and do a story about Tuesday’s meeting. Maybe he was tired of judging burritos or something? I will make this brief;

There’s no one single thing that led to the decision, he said, although “some of it was the fact that there were only two proponents in that entire room last night, and they were from our healthcare systems. And I think that’s very telling.”

Yes Paul, it is very telling, listen to the doctors not the quacks. A couple of dozen people showed up to spew about I’m not sure what, and if you looked at viewership on YouTube that night, there was 140 active viewers. We are not Milbank, we are a town of almost 200K that should tell you something, don’t listen to the fringe.

And it wasn’t just in-person, he said, estimating that 90% of the correspondence he’d gotten over the last few weeks had the same message: “It’s time for this to end.”

This is interesting coming from the guy who hates transparency. I would love to know who this 90% are? When in doubt Paul always pulls from his behind.

“We could be adding as little as a week on to this ordinance,” TenHaken said, referencing that the failed ordinance would have ended the mandate when the South Dakota Department of Health began vaccinating subgroup 1E. 

“And so my thought is,” TenHaken said, “what is that week worth?”

My opinion on this is simple, until most if not all are vaccinated and cases are practically at zero, that is when we let up. Do you think a drag racer lets his foot off the gas before he reaches the finish line?

While masks have been a heated topic, TenHaken said it’s not what’s really dividing people. “It’s public dialogue, it’s politics, it’s social justice issues, it’s the stress of the pandemic, it’s unemployment, lost jobs.”

I agree with Paul partially on this, we have had divisive politics over the past 4 years, this doesn’t come from people who wear masks, this comes from people in his party representation who only want to conquer and destroy. This is a guy who wants to put a death nail in affordable housing, a guy who wants to help his bankster and developer friends by increasing taxes on us, a guy who hates open government, a guy who has done little to nothing to insure a livable wage, and a person who refuses to accept sexual preference diversity. We have this hysteria because as the leader of this city you refuse to lead on the very topics you talk about. Division occurs because you allow it, and sometimes encourage it.

Still, TenHaken said he would have preferred not having to vote at all, adding that a tiebreaking vote gives a perception that the mayor is “either the savior or the villain for the item.”

“People need to remember, it’s not my item, I just get kind of put in the spot where the council couldn’t figure out how to get to yes or no on it,” TenHaken said.

This statement wreaks of hypocrisy. He is right, it wasn’t his item, because it should never be his item. By charter it is the city council that sets policy, he runs the city. But this mayor, the last one, and two before that decided they should introduce policy items, and proudly prance like a peacock that they are part of the policy making body. So Paul, either you are part of the crew or you are not. Seems he wants his cake.

But Tuesday night was a little different. The original vote was 5-3 against the mandate, until Councilor Pat Starr changed his vote to yes, making a 4-4 tie.

“When Councilor Starr changed his mind, you know, I don’t think you have to be a political pundit to recognize it was really just to put, you know, me on the hot seat for that item,” TenHaken said.

It was a genius move by Starr, because like I said above, you are either part of the body or you are not and since you chose to introduce policy like moving public input to the back of the meeting you have put yourself in the arena. If you don’t want to be there, great, follow charter and stop introducing policy.

And while TenHaken chose a side on Tuesday, he said he doesn’t want people looking at it as a win or a loss for their position.

“There’s no winners in this,” he said. “We’re dealing with a pandemic, and hundreds and hundreds of our neighbors in the state have lost their lives. So turning this into this game where ‘I won the mask mandate discussion or lost,’ it really kind of bums me out.”

Oh, the ‘bummer’ excuse. I am bummed to, because you want to play in the sandbox but when it your turn to build the castle you piss in the moat.

ORIGINAL POST BELOW

The only real thing that was accomplished last night at the Sioux Falls city council meeting was allowing citizens to practice their 1st Amendment rights, even though Stormland TV questioned some of the bull being thrown.

Ironically, even if it would have passed, it would have only been in effect for about a month because of this clause;

III Effective
Unless extended, amended, or earlier terminated by ordinance, this ordinance shall automatically terminate upon declaration of the South Dakota Department of Health that vaccinations are available to members of Phase 1 Group E.

The group is scheduled for April 15th (or sooner) to receive vaccinations.

Either way, I have often said since the mandate had no teeth anyway, there was nothing stopping people from NOT wearing masks in public spaces. And even if Covid didn’t exist, any private retail business or private hospital can require you to wear a mask or leave. There are numerous constitutional amendments and laws backing that up.

But what really reared its head last night was Mayor TenHaken’s tantrum when he didn’t understand his own rules when it comes to running a meeting. Besides Starr, three other councilors called him out on it while our City Clerk sat there silent until one of the councilors chided Greco into doing his job. Hey Tom, you work for the city council and the citizens, not Mayor Stoneless. I know it may be your wet dream to be a total suck-up like the city attorney, but you really need to do your overpaid job.

It was a piss poor way to run a meeting, and enough with the huffing and puffing Paul.

Also, while I am not a fan of Councilor Kiley, he really must have been sore when not only the mayor took back his word on the way he was going to vote, but I guess councilor Jensen did also. Like Rick or not, I felt bad that his colleagues took a big dump on him, especially the mayor. That’s not leadership, that’s cowardice.

But the thing that has been baffling me over the past 24 hours is how so many passionate people will show up to complain about a rule that has no teeth and really did no enforcement (I feel businesses have done that on there own) but don’t say a peep when the city tries to stifle them at public input, raises taxes and fees, hides stuff, is full of corruption and unethical behavior. I guess all of that is complicated and hunky-dory, but masks? The shame!

I give up.