The task force created to establish criteria to use with any future City-initiated annexation in Sioux Falls has set its meeting schedule.

The task force includes three City Council members as well as four members of the community who are potentially impacted by proposed annexations. City employees from Planning, Project Management, Engineering, the City Attorney’s Office, and Finance will provide information and be resources for the task force members. The task force will convene for five sessions with a goal of developing recommendations that will provide a consistent way forward for future annexations. The public is welcome to attend.

The meetings will take place from 2 to 3:30 p.m. in Meeting Room B of the Downtown Library, 200 North Dakota Avenue, on the following dates:
• Tuesday, April 11, 2017
• Tuesday, April 25, 2017
• Tuesday, May 9, 2017
• Tuesday, May 23, 2017
• A final meeting date that will be determined by the task force

“Since Sioux Falls was founded more than 130 years ago, all growth has occurred through the process of annexation. It is a rather simple process when a property owner has an interest in being annexed but can quickly turn complex when the city grows into areas where the property owner is not interested in annexation. Additional challenges occur when the city boundary begins to surround a large, rural subdivision. In a growing city like ours, we need a consistent process to move forward with needed annexations,” says Mike Cooper, Director of Planning and Building Services.

The task force will be given information on the many state laws regarding annexations, some historical information to illustrate how annexations have occurred in the past, an update on the current Engineering Design Standards, and discuss the financial impact of an annexation on both the property owner and the City, along with other topics. The group will then make recommendations regarding how to move forward with annexations in the future.

As updates and more information become available, it will be posted at www.siouxfalls.org/annexation.

The City of Sioux Falls Planning Office has formed a Task Force to address various issues surrounding annexation. When the city’s boundaries begin to engulf a property that is not annexed, and does not plan to annex, there are challenges that result from that.

The goal of the Annexation Task Force is to make recommendations regarding the following questions.

  • Under what circumstances should the City move forward with a city-initiated annexation?
  • What criteria will be used to prioritize the annexation of those properties deemed to be annexed under the city-initiated process?
  • Will the City move forward with a petitioned annexation request if the annexation requested creates a pocket of unannexed land within the city limits?
  • What infrastructure design standards will be required as annexation occurs?
  • What financial contribution will the city make towards any required infrastructure improvements due to a city-initiated annexation?

ANNEXATION TASK FORCE MEMBERS

Councilor Rick Kiley
Councilor Marshall Selberg
Councilor Greg Neitzert
Matt Metzger – Citizen of Lincoln County
Tena Haraldson – Citizen of Sioux Falls
Greg Starnes – Citizen of Sioux Falls
Jeff Davis – Citizen of Minnehaha County
Support/Resource members:
Mike Cooper, Director of Planning and Building Services
Albert Schmidt, Urban Planner
Debra Gaikowski, Project Manager
Chad Huwe, City Engineer
Tracy Turbak, Director of Finance
Danny Brown, City Attorney

ANNEXATION TASK FORCE MEETING TOPICS

Topic #1 – Annexation law and the requirements and limitations imposed by those laws.
Topic #2 – The history of city-initiated annexations including the design standards the property owners were held to.
Topic #3 – A review of all unannexed property within the city that is currently completely surround by annexed land and the amount of development that exists on the surrounding land.
Topic #4 – A review of all recently completed CIP projects or CIP projects programmed in the near future that are adjacent to unannexed property or directly impact unannexed property.
Topic #5 – Assessment law, the rights of the city, and the rights of the property owners.
Topic #6 – The financial impact of annexation on a property owner including property tax changes, financial benefits, and the cost of infrastructure improvements.
Topic #7 – The impact on the property owners and the community if Engineering Design Standards are lowered in order in an effort to get unannexed property annexed. Review current ADA requirements.
Topic #8 – The impact on development if limitations are imposed on property owners wanting to annex land but a pocket of unannexed property is created by that annexation. Examples to be provided.
Topic #9 – How often should the established annexation criteria be reevaluated and by whom?
Topic #10 – Notification and Communication Process

Our Romantix Annex Office building is never without a story. The latest one we have is how the foundation may have erupted the budget. We’re sure the town’s chief marketing officer will find a way to dispute this but our construction sources are reporting the quartzite blasting has left the building already over budget – but the public will never know, because the CMAR process keeps that all secret-secret.

The need for heated underground parking garage for special cars to be parked is putting the building behind before it is finished. What do you suppose they are going to say was unimportant so the building can com in “under” budget?

I finally finished reading the 227 page Report (DOC: Affordable_Housing_Needs_Assessment_2016). I encourage others to do the same.

I will be breaking down some of the more interesting STATS I pulled from the report.

My initial analysis is that Sioux Falls is going down a GRIM path when it comes to Affordable Housing, unless we take action NOW. This is what the report is encouraging.

The Report Points out;

Poor or No coordination and inefficiency between affordable housing organizations

Household incomes at or below $25K are increasing at a drastic rate and the divide between rich and poor is growing while middle income stays stagnant.

Extreme population growth has contributed to problem.

The task force recommends starting with the most vunerable, children living in poverty.

This table shows the gap between rich and poor and really how the poor are getting poorer and the rich increasing at a faster pace.

This table shows the projected enormous growth in the Healthcare industry in SF.

This shows the poverty that exists within our school system.

37% of SF workers make under $25K

This table shows the exploding home values.

This breaks down rental property in zip codes.

This breaks down rental rates in SF.

This breaks down income and home ownership.

This shows the percentages of school kids living in poverty.

These are some comments from people looking for affordable housing.

These comments prove that affordable housing needs to be built in our core and not out by $300K homes.

These comments are about all the ‘HYPE’ in national rating firms and magazines.