We need to give credit where credit is due
l3wis 
Over $20 million spent, and they can’t even keep a fence from collapsing.
Development
Seney Island, Sioux Steel Development Controversy
Guest Post Bruce Danielson
The recent story (Land ownership question hovers over $185 million Sioux Falls redevelopment plan) of Seney Island tripped a few issues long ago buried in the back of my mind. I have no dog in the show being presented in the Sioux Steel – Seney Island project, but I feel the history of the project needs to include a proper land title search being performed and then presented.
Also, the interesting bit of data in the article claims 160 acres being granted but the original 1859 clearly shows the town lot company survey had the planned layout and 1865 – 1869 maps show the Fort Sod fortification lines of the new settlement. From my research of many years ago, there would not have been a granting of homestead rights in the 1860’s to land already committed to being a townsite.
The enclosed image of the original survey 1859 map of Sioux Falls, shows Seney Island and the village platting. These discrepancies have bugged me to the point where I matched the 1859 images over a current Google Earth image of Sioux Falls. Though not perfect, it does show the relationship of the Island and most of the Sioux Steel property being on Seney Island.
The 1881 drawing shows the relationship of Seney Island to the coffer dam rerouting the water for the mill.
For over 40 years I have heard from old-timers and read stories of how the west channel or oxbow of the Sioux River was used as the original community landfill until it closed it to navigation. The main channel of the Sioux had to be changed to allow for the dam to produce enough water for the mill and power plant.
The 1900 photo of the west channel shown in your story, was the result efforts to fill in the river channel. The old-timers I knew, used to tell stories of the smells coming from the rotting debris leeching to the surface until it was finally covered over. As the property is now being readied for a new purpose, opening up the land could bring back the environmental issues long ago covered up.
Not so TIFilicious?
Imagine my surprise when I read this article;
Questions about the ownership of a strip of land within the Sioux Steel Co. site in downtown Sioux Falls has created a new, unexpected hurdle for the proposed $185 million redevelopment of the property.
The land in question was once a channel of the Big Sioux River and has ownership origins that stretch back beyond South Dakota statehood all the way to the presidency of Abraham Lincoln.
Archived press clippings appear to indicate that the channel that separated Seney Island from the western bank of the Big Sioux River was filled in and, along with the former island, was turned into usable land in the early 1900s. Sioux Steel Co. has owned and operated on the site since 1918.
Officials in the state School and Public Lands and Attorney General’s offices are reviewing maps, historic documents and other information to determine whether the state may have a claim of ownership to the strip of land.
I’m not naive, I’m sure the State will probably come back and say they don’t have rights to it, or if they do, sell it for very little coin. I know how palms are greased in Pierre.
But what makes this story frustrating is with all of the people from the Sioux Steel Company, Lloyd Company and the city’s planning office, NO one came across this possible conflict? It took a hobbyist in history to find it?
Not to mention that around $3.5 million has already been spent on planning this project and NONE of these questions were asked before passing a $20 million dollar TIF.
Sometimes I think developers in this town just fly by the seat of their pants, cross their fingers and hope things turn out.
There is nothing ‘Gutzy’ about approving TIFs
Similar to Donny T’s touchdown victory dance this past week, the receivers of an unneeded TIF downtown for the Sioux Steel Development couldn’t resist their own little victory lap, via the paid media (I’m not sure if this piece is paid for or not, because it looks like Jodi’s weekly column);
It takes guts to decide to forego certain property tax revenue for 20 years. And to approve the largest incentive of its kind in the city’s history. And to tackle another parking ramp project – even though it’s significantly different – while many are probably still stinging from the last one.
Sorry folks, it takes zero courage to approve a 20 year tax rebate. ZERO. I have seen this travesty across the nation, developer welfare run amuck. Courage would have either been denying this all together, or as I have suggested, at least amending it so we gift them the greenway and limit the TIF to $10 million.
Leadership is Courageous, going along to get along is NOT leadership, it’s a mamby pamby pitty party at most.
“The City Council took it very seriously to sit down with us and talk through it,†said Jake Quasney, executive vice president for project development at Lloyd Cos.
Of course they did, everytime this company has asked for a TIF, the city council has rolled over like old dogs and gave it. Heck, the city even held onto to property for over a decade, tax free for the last Lloyd project and gave a TIF to boot. When this company asks, they receive, 100% of the time.
But these two votes really mattered, and it was reassuring to see the fairness and logic that all council members used in approaching them.
Let’s not kid ourselves, there was ZERO fairness and logic going on. 1.) Everytime this developer asks for a TIF they get it 2) There has been no hard evidence that ANY of the TIFs given to them have had significant economic impact, and no studies to this day to prove it. Sorry, but ‘logic’ is based on ‘Facts’ and ‘Fairness’ is based on making decisions based on those ‘Facts’. The only FACT here is that this developer has a perfect batting average when it comes to TIFs.
It’s another to stand up, vote on what could be a politically sensitive issue and thank the business for investing in the community.
There was NOTHING politically sensitive about this issue, this was just another walk in the park for the city council. They always approve this stuff, the public knows or cares little about it, the ink dries on the rubberstamps, and the developers smile all the way to the bank.
There are other developers and other businesses looking at investing in Sioux Falls.
Investing or bilking? Isn’t that the question here? When I think of the FREE enterprise system and investment, that investment is coming from them privately, and they get to reap and keep the rewards. In the TIF system we have set up, we require the taxpayers to pay more to invest in these schemes and get nothing back but higher taxes and mediocre jobs. If you make a great investment, and you do it all by your lonesome, you deserve the booty. If the taxpayers have to supplement you, and you make money, you should share. And that is the tragedy of a TIF, they never do.
They say all politics is local. In this case, some higher-ups could take a cue from Carnegie Town Hall last week.
I think I’m going to be ill.
Sioux Steel TIF passes
It passed 7-0 (Stehly absent). There of course were pie in the sky statements made, like how we are going to get huge property tax revenue from it – 20 YEARS FROM NOW! They also talked about how they could have asked for $50 million, but they didn’t – how nice of them.
They also falsely stated their is NO cost to the city. Uh, yes there is. We are missing out on millions of tax revenue over the next 20 years, we are going to spend $10 million on the river greenway that fronts this development, which is beneficial to them. They also did not mention that it competes with our taxpayer funded convention center. But lastly, when big private developments get tax rebates like this, the rest of us have to supplement them. So YES their is a taxpayer expense here. You also have to remember here, in a world that constantly talks about ‘Socialism’ this is exactly what this is. A $21 million dollar tax rebate to a private business is ‘Socialism’ and developer welfare.
I still believe the Bunker Ramp was stopped from moving forward because of this TIF and development. I haven’t been able to connect the dots yet, but it is highly suspicious that we stop the construction of a DT hotel then turn around and give this development a TIF. Things that make you go hmmmmm.
So now we have two parking ramps we don’t need that were directly and indirectly funded by taxpayers. I knew the council would support this, and it proves what I have known for a very long time, there isn’t one iota of fiscal responsibility when it comes to our city’s elected official’s decisions, it’s just more of sticking it to the little guy. Thanks for nothing!