Property Taxes

Bunker Ramp Bum who bilked taxpayers wants a building permit

If this city council approves this project by this developer, they have lost their frickin’ minds;

The 10-story property at 141 N. Main Ave. was purchased by an investment group this summer and will be redeveloped by Lamont Cos. Inc., an Aberdeen-based developer with more than 50 franchised hotels nationwide.

I think the project idea and remodel is a good one, that building has immense potential. My aunt actually worked on one of the top floors of the building in the 80’s and the views when I visited were amazing. If this was ANY other investor group I would be all for it. But permits can be denied based on the (business and ethical) character of a developer or contractor. I think sticking the SF taxpayers with a $26 million dollar empty concrete block then getting a check to boot from us for your ‘troubles’ would mean your character ranks right up there with Homer Simpson. It will be fun to watch how the Planning Commission and Council handles this. Let the Weaseling begin!!!!

RIVERLINE DISTRICT GETS PAUSED

No surprise since they have identified ZERO funding sources;

But now things are coming to a pause. The committee said three of its objectives: creating a timeline, designing and pricing a new convention center, and timing out a public vote, are yet to be done. But they voted Monday evening to pause their work, claiming that no more progress can be made on those objectives as things stand right now.

I said from the beginning the only way to move forward on this is selling the public on a funding source instead of playing reindeer games with the legislature and trying to ‘trick’ us into a new tax. Complete stupidity. You need to show 2 things; 75-90% private investment and an ROI for taxpayers (not just the city coffers and private hospitality industry). Instead they showed us the shiny ball first and nobody cared.

As all of this discussion takes place, the clock is ticking on something to be built on the 7.2 acres on the east bank of the Big Sioux River. As a part of the City’s purchase agreement, State Partners, LLC has the option to repurchase the land if no construction starts in five years. Almost 11 months have passed since the City Council adopted that agreement.

This was also dumber then a mud fence. They thot they could sucker us into the new building since we already owned the land. You don’t buy a lot to build a new house without having the finances in order to pay for the construction of the house.

Do we need a new Convention Center? Sure. But I look at this two ways; 1) We can expand at current location by making the Arena a multi-level complex (the main reason we built the Denty at that location was so we could use it for convention center space). OR 2) Have a private hotel and convention center move into the Riverline space. We would lease the land for FREE for 99 years and we would give all BID tax revenue to only be exclusively spent on marketing.

We can make this happen, but not by increasing sales taxes or having expensive bonds that take 30 years to pay off. I look at the convention center business as a private one, and I think SF should make the bold move of letting this being taken over by private industry. You could actually model it after the Pavilion, which probably would be fine now without public money.

But the Banksters and Bondsters in town need a constant loan on the books to justify their bond commissions each year, and this was just another one of their ‘commission’ projects.

WHAT EVER HAPPENED TO THE APARTMENT COMPLEX TO BE BUILT AT 8th and RAILROAD?

While the bunker ramp bum is trying to get a permit, the Riverline committee Petered out, Tre Ministries has been less then transparent and we have no idea why the Dusty Monkeys were shipped out of town and we still have no idea what is happening with a project that got millions in a TIF. Obviously if this project ever comes to fruition (I think it is dead) they will have to reapply for the TIF due to time commitments. Why did this fail?

Ironically another well know developer* in town with close ties to the city and state government put forth a plan that was rejected. It was almost entirely affordable/workforce apartments and almost 100% local investors. I asked some people why they think his idea was rejected over the Iowa development? They laughed and said, “Politics.” The irony is this project would be already done if they would have picked this developer, but hurt feelings over local politics killed it. This is what happens when you bring politics into a simple planning and zoning matter, we all lose.

* This is NOT Billion. Billion attempted to make the first go at the project but concerns with underground parking and investors had them pull out, which created a new RFP.

Finally, someone in the local media is digging around on TIFs

It took the property tax discussion to get this out in the open, TIFS ARE NOT GOOD, ESPECIALLY IF USED ONLY FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT;

“That told me they were not providing the oversight on these TIFs, that they were just rubber stamping them,” Sibson said.

Well, Sibby, that is what communities across the state do. They are sold a shiny ball and they approve it.

“If they’re not done correctly, they end up being simply subsidies for certain private entities. That’s my overall concern,” Sibson said.

And that is ALL they are these days. Developer Welfare. Parking ramps and condos? How does this benefit the general public? I think if reverted back to Industrial and Affordable Housing which combined only make up 8% of TIFs across the country, you would see more value in them. I think that is what the State Legislature plans to do, or at least make an attempt at changing the law. Good Luck! Sioux Falls and Rapid City and all other larger communities in SD will fight you tooth and nail on this one.

The City of Sioux Falls Finance Director is a real FIREBALL

After the Finance Director, Shawn ‘Fireball’ Pritchett put on his best performance to date to the city council Tuesday night supporting a property tax increase, some councilors were not buying it.

Why?

Well, because it’s strange that Fireball budgeted in the tax increase for 2026 before the council even approved it. I have no doubt the city council will pass this, either with 5-6 votes or a 4/4 tie with the mayor approving it. But what if the council votes this tax increase down? Then what? Well, the finance director would have to adjust the budget.

It is the council’s job to control the budget, and by charter they really are the ones supposed to be compiling it. So how does Fireball get away with budgeting for an assumed tax increase BEFORE the council approves that increase? Cart before horse. Reminds me of the Riverline promotion without a revenue source to pay for it. I guess I would have found the revenue first before pushing this forward. I would vote against this increase so Fireball has to do his job and actually put a budget together that focuses on fiscal restraint and not ‘assumed’ increases. I can’t believe we have 10 more months of this crap.

CITY NEEDS TO LIVESTREAM ALL PUBLIC MEETINGS ON YOUTUBE

The city’s agenda page is STILL broken after almost 16 years, just last night while watching the planning meeting it was screwing up. I sent this email to the entire city council, we will see what they do. I have been requesting this for several years with NO results;

Hello,

Trust me, with conversations with councilors current and past, I get your frustration with the video system on the city website, it started failing as Munson was leaving office and has never really been fixed since, and it appears it is getting worse. Several meetings over the past month have had video glitches. There is something you can do for a temporary/permanent fix. I would suggest keeping the current system so people can follow along the agenda, but for those who are only listening or watching the meetings they can also stream in YouTube. The benefit of the stream is it is FREE, in fact if you would put ALL of our public meetings on YouTube you would probably generate ad revenue from it. Also, almost every single local government in South Dakota uses YT to stream meetings, including the 2 local commissions and school board. The benefit is you can rewind the meeting at any time if you missed a speaker and the meeting is available for review IMMEDIATELY after the meeting ends. This is way past due. Now, I would assume that since the media department reports to the Mayor it is in his wheelhouse to get this fixed, but council meetings are under your review. My suggestion would be to pass an ordinance that requires the media department to live stream ALL public meetings. I would also give them 60 days to implement the YT stream in case they have to upgrade equipment or do some training (I learned how to make a YT video in 20 minutes). I also stress this needs to be in CHARTER, no handshake deals that get forgotten about in the next administration, I would even go a step farther and see if a council staffer can manage this and not even involve the media department.

As I said, way past due, and you can force the hand of the administration to comply by passing an ordinance. See, government can be easy sometimes, it only took 16 years.

Scott

Will the Sioux Falls City Council raise property taxes today?

(Item #53 – 1st Reading)

The city council is set to increase property taxes tonight by 2.9% which is allowable by state law, but look how the city is ‘twisting’ this ‘option’;

This ordinance shows the 2026 budget for the Governmental (tax supported) Funds for calendar year of 2026, and the required revenues and sources to support the expenses.

In other words they created the 2026 budget assuming the city council will pass the property tax increase. So what if they don’t? That means the finance department would have to adjust the budget, which is what GOOD GOVERNMENTS do. The city council doesn’t have to pass this tonight and have NO requirements by city or state law to pass a property tax increase. ZILCH. Not to mention with the way the economy is going right now it would be one of the WORST times to increase property taxes.

How the city council votes on this will show the true colors of the individual councilors. While 99% of the community is hollering to lower our property taxes it will be interesting to see which councilors are ignorant enough to support this increase. I have no doubt it will pass, it always does with usually 2 dissenters but I have a feeling the vote is going to go a little different this time, but if 4/4 occurs Mayor Lame Poop will break the tie to increase taxes. He has never cared about the little man and he ain’t going to start now. I hope it goes to a tie vote so he owns this tax increase.

I will also be curious to see if these folks who show up to every county commission meeting to bitch about property taxes will come to the council meeting for a good reaming. This is 1st reading, so I don’t expect to many comments, but hopefully at least 5 councilors will look in the mirror before entering the dais and shoot this down tonight so it never makes a 2nd reading.

Sales taxes are regressive, and any effort to raise them will be met with massive opposition

I see Jodi is now becoming the Mayor’s cheerleader in trying to raise our sales taxes;

At the same time, before offering any incentive like that, we need to consider raising sales tax across the board if we’re going to continue to emphasize reducing property tax.

In the city of Sioux Falls alone, one penny of sales tax can generate almost $100 million each year. An option to capture that revenue, while at the same time pairing a sales tax holiday to provide relief during the year, seems worth exploring.

Our average of 6.11 percent, coming in at No. 36, is quite low, especially when you consider there’s no personal or corporate income tax to help fund government services.

She thinly veiled her support for a sales tax increase with a story about sales tax holidays. How about we put South Dakotans on a permanent sales tax holiday and implement an income tax. I did the math, and if you set it with certain income levels, 60% or more of South Dakotans wouldn’t pay a penny in income taxes. I have argued if we implemented a income tax on households and private business who make over $100K a year (with exemptions for children) and increased the assessments on commercial and ag properties for property taxes, we would have oodles of money for programs while eliminating the sales tax almost entirely. I would keep sales taxes on luxury items and items over a certain dollar value. Sales taxes on anything we need like medical, energy, food, clothing, etc., would be eliminated. Making poor people pay more in taxes so property owners can get a tax cut makes no sense and is defeating the purpose. I support a property tax cut, but other changes have to be implemented for it to work, and we don’t need to increase taxes on things we need, the government needs to budget differently and we need to go after the tax dollars where they are; RICH PEOPLE. But since they control this town and legislature it will never happen.