Development

Guest Post; Seney Island & the Sioux Steel TIF proposal

As we embark on this massive re-development of the Sioux Steel Property, let me take you back in time to when this chunk of property was like no other in this city.

Prior to 1930 – this land area was once a proud picnic area situated on the west bank of the Big Sioux River. Once known as “Seney Island” or Brookings Island prior, people used to walk along 4th Avenue, cross a little foot bridge, thuis crossing the West Channel that helped form the boundaries of the island. This was once a wooded area, with a two smaller islands off the northeastern side, a swimming beach on the southeastern side, while children once ran thru and played in the massive wooded area of Pine Trees, Elm’s, and Cottonwoods, Evergreens, and Oak Trees.

During the 1930’s, Sioux Steel, the St Paul and Omaha Railroad Companies purchased the land closing off the “West Channel” while turning the land into a massive Railroad Yard, Dumping Grounds, Steel & Lumber Yard, while on the northern portion of the property along Phillips you had Pitt’s Steel a steel recycling center.

There is really no evidence let of the West Channel unless you know where to look and find the markers, all you need to do is find the boulders on the north end of the property, follow the water pipeline around the fence line, while 4th Street marks the apex of the West Side of the Island. This island was a “D Shaped” island.

This current development project may not be the greatest, it may not always be supported by those of us whom adore nature, but lets be honest here shall we, this is the perfect compliment to returning a piece of property back to the people. Gone is the West Channel, the Sand Beach, the Forest of Trees. That part of our history is lost in time, it exists only in our memories today. But – any project that attempts to the return the once proud property back to its glorious past, is a win in my park. Gone may be the beautiful island park, but in its place today we will have a wonderful Hotel, Retail, and Convention Complex, along with a beautiful river walk along the river. As I ponder this new found development, I wish to share a few pictures from our past, below – I provide you a few pictures that include a zoning map of the area, and an old news article of the island. In it – the dream by many was to establish a wonderful and beautiful City Park. Who knew, that nearly a century later, that dream would actually happen, just not in the way it was intended all those years ago. Instead of a nature resort as the article stated; we have a commercialized form of a resort. I present to you – Seney Island.

Sincerely, Mike Zitterich
(Sioux Falls)
Link to TIF presentation

Several Reasons why the Sioux Steel TIF should be voted down

Last night at the Sioux Falls City Council meeting it was the first reading of the Sioux Steel TIF proposal (2nd reading is on  February 3rd). I spoke for my whopping 3 minutes about why it is a bad idea, I was able to run thru these points (FF video to 1:30)

• Planning Staff (Public employees) SHOULD not be recommending tax cuts or rebates to publicly elected officials (city councilors). While it is their job to lay out the pros and cons and basic criteria, employee salaries funded by our tax dollars should not be cheerleaders for private business. It goes against our free enterprise system and frankly is unethical.

• The property does not provide affordable housing OR clean up blight (The blight that does exist on the property is from the current property owner who is going to redevelop the property). We have known about environmental issues with this kind of manufacturing since the 1960’s. We were not born yesterday, you blighted this land, it is your responsibility to clean it up.

• Very little new economic growth will be produced, it will only be diverting development from other parts of the city, as well as diverting lodging from other parts of downtown. We know that over the past 5-6 years the city has seen a decrease in lodging taxes and stays do to a popularity in Air BNB, and the fact that people are not spending the night in Sioux Falls. The Events Center is a great example of how NEW economic growth and taxes will not come rolling in due to this project. In fact it competes with our current taxpayer subsidized convention center. Since the EC has been in existence, sales tax revenue has been at it’s normal snail pace until last year.

• We really don’t need more parking ramps downtown. We already have one waiting for a hotel to be built on top of it. Why are we not focusing on fixing that fiasco?

• The 20 year TIF will only produce $1.1 million in property taxes. If we forgo the tax and the project is scaled back, we would bring in around $10 million in the same time period. And if we also forgo the river greenway improvements of $10 million and just gift the development the property, it would be a $20 million dollar windfall for taxpayers instead of $1.1 million. I actually believe the development is bluffing about scaling it back, they would find the financing elsewhere, and even if they canceled the whole project (which I think they won’t) it wouldn’t harm us one bit.

• Most of the jobs created by the project will be hospitality, most of which are part-time and with few benefits.

• THERE HAS NEVER BEEN AN ACTUAL TIF ECONOMIC IMPACT STUDY IN SIOUX FALLS. This is one of the main reasons why this should be voted down. A comprehensive study would show us that there has been very little economic impact to citizens, in fact, it has probably forced individual property owners to pay higher taxes.

TIFs that don’t address real blight and affordable housing are really only a handout. It is unfortunate that the public is very ignorant about TIFs and the effect it has on their personal taxes while providing very little benefits. I can’t blame the developers for asking for this. What if your banker said to you one day, “There is this tax incentive program that will refund your property taxes for 20 years so you can improve your personal property.” Wouldn’t you jump at it? I would. Damn right I would. This is why I have argued to any city official that would listen for well over a decade that TIFs should be used to cleanup personal properties in low income working class neighborhoods instead, this would be real economic impact to the residents of Sioux Falls. But, hey, shiny things are fun to look at when the business elite are laughing all the way to the bank.

We would accrue more property taxes if Sioux Steel project doesn’t receive TIF

We have heard the argument already, if we give the $21.5 million dollar TIF the property will have a tax worth of $1.6 million a year. But folks those tax payments don’t occur until 20 years from now as Joe Sneve’s story pointed out.

So if we give them the TIF, for the next 20 years they will be paying $56K a year. So in 20 years they will be paying a total of $1.12 million in taxes for a $185 million dollar facility. Hardly anything.

BUT, if we don’t give them the TIF, the value of the project would be approximately $163.5 million (flat parking lot) with an annual tax bill that they must pay on day one of about $1.4 million a year with no rebate, a value of $28 million in collected taxes in 20 years.

Common sense would tell us that getting $28 million over the next 20 years in property taxes as opposed to $1.12 is a better deal for city coffers.

Also look at the economic impact argument. They said they would have to forgo the parking ramp if they don’t get the TIF. How many jobs does a parking ramp provide? ZERO. Whether they build flat parking or a ramp, there really isn’t a economic impact either way.

Not only could this project still be successful without the TIF, the property tax revenue is over 20X more if we forgo the TIF. On top of that, the owner and developer of this project could sell at the end of TIF and get all the benefits of the tax rebate without ever paying a 100% of the tax bill. It is a windfall for them, and little else.

Not sure who is doing the math at the Planning Department, but this TIF is anything but an economic impact. They will be voting on the first hurdle tonight at the 6 PM Planning meeting.

UPDATE: Just How does the Sioux Falls Development Foundation use our money?

Just for clarification on the video below, it may have been Rick Kiley who actually said ‘More Fabrication’ and NOT Neitzert, but we are uncertain.

UPDATE: Stehly questioned the head of the Development Foundation today at the informational meeting about this. It was a good discussion. I think Brekke and Danielson explained the reason why this isn’t protected speech;

Councilor Janet Brekke as well as civic watchdog Bruce Danielson countered, though, saying because the Sioux Falls Development Foundation receives public funds, it is held to a higher standard when it comes to political speech.

State Law on this is also very clear;

Universal Citation: SD Codified L § 12-27-20

12-27-20. Expenditure of public funds to influence election outcome prohibited. The state, an agency of the state, and the governing body of a county, municipality, or other political subdivision of the state may not expend or permit the expenditure of public funds for the purpose of influencing the nomination or election of any candidate, or for the petitioning of a ballot question on the ballot or the adoption or defeat of any ballot question. This section may not be construed to limit the freedom of speech of any officer or employee of the state or such political subdivisions in his or her personal capacity. This section does not prohibit the state, its agencies, or the governing body of any political subdivision of the state from presenting factual information solely for the purpose of educating the voters on a ballot question.

Source: SL 2007, ch 80, § 20.

I was happy to hear the head of the Development Foundation say that the board will look into this.

The taxpayers of Sioux Falls have donated millions of tax dollars to the SFDF for supposed workforce development. So how do they spend their money? They buy an article on Siouxfalls.business about the treasurer of Alex Jensen’s council campaign, Matt Paulson. Can you say possible conflict of interest?

This paid piece is sponsored by the Sioux Falls Development Foundation.

While I don’t take issue with them paying for an article about Paulson, he has many achievements, I take issue with an organization who receives tax dollars from us (even if it is coming out of a different ‘pool’) on a person who is currently engaged with at least one city council race (maybe two).

The SFDF should have steered clear of this possible conflict. I do think they are a decent organization that does some good in our community, but when you are receiving tax dollars and other special incentives from the city and citizens, this just looks bad.

It is extremely unethical for public employees to recommend approval of a TIF

As I have complained about in the past, it rubs me the wrong way that the Sioux Falls Planning staff recommends approval or denial of items on their agenda. It is the job of the Planning Commission to study the merits of a proposal from the information staff provides, it is NOT the job of public employees to recommend approval. Layout the plan, show the compatibility than let the Planning Commission decide based on the information.

While zoning and development in general is one thing, a massive 20 year, multi-million dollar tax rebate is totally different.

The Planning Commission can deny this proposal simply based on the fact that we don’t really know if the TIF will be beneficial or not. Denying the TIF would simply mean the PRIVATE developer would have to go back to the drawing board, the citizen taxpayers would not be harmed one iota if this was denied. In fact I would go step further and say that approving this TIF would be harmful to the 100% property tax paying citizen of our city because we would have to pay more in taxes to prop up this private venture.

I still think the city council needs to pass an ordinance forbidding planning staff or any public employee (that is hired, not elected) from recommending approval of endeavors that benefit private business. It’s unethical, if not highly suspect.