Is Sioux Falls Community Development and Fire Department hiding something from the development community?

by

Many in the development community may already know what that secret is, but, it seems, some do not;

But that’s not sitting well with JDI, Inc.’s CEO Robin Miller, who’s company wanted to build a 12-story condominium, including underground parking and a rooftop garden.

Miller said unlike the two other proposals, which would have maintained the parcel’s green space by turning it into a park, JDI’s plan would have generated $35 million or more worth of construction, brought high-quality architecture to downtown and bolstered downtown’s parking capacity.

If that plan wasn’t good enough for the city, Miller’s not sure what would be.

“When we first went to the city they said ‘We want to see quality construction that’s uniquely special to that site, and we agreed.” Miller said. “When they don’t proceed with what you think is a good proposal … what’s my incentive to make a proposal on something else.”

What many people may not know is that the city may be holding back on projects like this because of the height of the building. Remember the $1 Million dollar fire truck the city had to provide to make sure they could reach the top of the Events Center? Rumor is the planning office won’t allow NEW buildings over four-six stories. It has a lot to do with the airport and National guard base’s proximity to downtown, but it also comes to the fire department not having the equipment to put out fires over 4-6 stories high. The other bank buildings downtown that are over four stories were built before these regulations were put into place.

Let’s face it, we could develop 12-story condos downtown, but if the fire department can’t reach the top in an emergency, we would be screwed.

I wonder if anyone in Community Development or the Fire Department will ever share this little tid-bit with the good tax payers of Sioux Falls? Oh, that of course requires transparency. LOL.

 

Cory does a better job than I in explaining Salter’s ruling on the petitions

by

I would like to thank Cory for weighing in on the topic;

The petitioners argued that they “substantially complied” with the law in seeking signatures from Sioux Falls voters. Indeed, no one has demonstrated that Team Danielson sought to pad its signature count by seeking signatures from non-Sioux Falls voters. Clerk Greco’s own review of the petition found sufficient local signatures to validate the petition if the oath hadn’t fouled things up.

But Judge Salter doesn’t ask whether the petitioners substantially complied with the signature requirements. He asks whether the petitioners substantially complied with the requirement to swear the municipal initiative petition oath by swearing the statewide initiative petition oath. Judge Salter says that swearing the latter does not substantially comply with swearing the former.

Bruce also weighs in on Cory’s post;

Cory, the courtroom experience was interesting and Judge Salter was very engaged in the questioning. I was impressed in his involvement.

There is a misconception needing to be cleared up. The statement from the ruling “Danielson knew he had obtained the Statewide Form and not the correct Municipal Form when he began his petition effort in late July” was never addressed in the courtroom.

I did not learn of the oath error until a week AFTER the petitions were submitted for validation. Had the city website been functional or the Clerk been willing to assist in construction of the petition, I would not have used the wrong oath.

This narrative is what happens when anyone makes decisions on what you think happened without knowing all the facts. I could have been asked the question when I was on the stand. Now it is part of the permanent record without being part of the evidence.

I have argued that if Judge Salter would have ruled in favor of Danielson, he could have possibly set himself up with an even bigger decision, whether or not to rule an injunction against the bond sale. By ruling against Bruce, based solely on the oath and not signatures Salter freed himself from having to make a very ‘political’ decision. Judges try to stay out of politics, and who can blame them? I’m not saying that was Salter’s angle, I’m just saying by not ruling in favor of the petitions he saved himself a lot of headache.

Taxpayers duped once again by the pie in the sky dreams of developers and big business

by

I was very reluctant to post about this story, simply because it was no shock to me that this happened. I was waiting for the day to come when we would read this;

The company that would have been the first to build in the new Foundation Park development park has decided to look at other locations.

Stuless Whunder makes a great point;

Others question the role of taxpayer-supported public entities in the area of private development, especially if urgency to find companies to fill parcels at Foundation Park drives down the market.

In that same vein, I question why taxpayers (State and Local) are putting up over $20 million in infrastructure for a project that didn’t even bother to secure a solid purchase agreement? We should have never authorized the expenditures unless we had a ‘real’ promise from a prospect, we went ahead with the possibly of spending $20 million of tax dollars based on a ‘letter’.

Wow!

Another reason we can’t run government like a business. Unlike private enterprise, government shouldn’t be in the business of taking risks and land speculation.

As for saying I wasn’t shocked that this happen, it is because we have had precedent. For one, just peruse available industrial park land the development foundation and other realtors have available already. It’s like deciding to build a 3 car garage for your Fiat 300 and bag of golf clubs. There isn’t a need for more land, it’s a classic case of urban sprawl. Remember Phillips to the Falls? How did that work out for taxpayers? We spent millions so we can have a new location for German Fest. Also don’t forget the fiasco called EB-5. There is also the employment factor (I’m guessing that is why Logistics Buddy backed out). Capital One is leaving solely based on the fact we don’t have enough workers. There is also the promise of living wage jobs that has never been hammered out before we moved ahead with this project. But hey the city is throwing thousands of dollars at businesses for the “Welfare for Want Ads” project.

I know I often sound negative and am really a cynic at heart, but it pains me to be right about something so wrong. I hope things will work out in the end. But hey folks, it’s Meth Week in Sioux Falls, so don’t worry about failed developments and petition drives. We gotta nip this dang problem in the butt. You go Tiger Mike!