Railroads

Why does the city have to be the middleman on a land deal?

“I’m not going to be negative like that.” (actual quote at the press conference). Who wouldn’t be positive when you are spending other people’s money and hanging out with babes. (Image: KELO-TV screenshot)

Now that BNSF is NOT asking the Feds and SF to build it a switchyard, just to purchase the property – why should we get involved at all?

Seriously. If they want this land for development, then let developers purchase the land for development. Why is my money being used to clean up this property so developers can profit from it? Screw that, didn’t we learn anything from Munson’s mess called Phillips to the Falls? (which we still own because of the contamination).

Nearby, though, the city dealt with high levels of contamination to build Phillips to the Falls, and the city is paying almost $20,000 for a study of Falls Park West to figure out how to go about building there because of previous contamination from when it was used as a landfill.

If BNSF wants to sell the railyard for private development – fantastic! Sell it to private developers and keep my tax dollars out of it.

 

UPDATE: More transparency from city hall on the RR relocation project

Here we go again;

A reporter for the Argus Leader tried to attend a meeting Tuesday. BNSF representatives did not object, but Mark Cotter, the city’s public works director, asked the reporter to leave.

Yup, one of the most transparent city halls in history, but hey, when you compare yourself to the previous administration, it may be true.

Ellis did a fine (Part II) story about this today. I await Part II next Sunday(?) which hopefully talks about our current mayor’s role in this matter.

I also see the city council is moving forward with the texting ban. Unfortunate. It amazes me how little our city legislators know about the law.

What’s in a Legacy?: Guest Post, Andy Traub

The longer our Mayor is in office the more confused I am about his legacy. You can have a legacy of what you leave behind and a legacy of what you stole from the future. If I spend my kid’s college savings account then my legacy is what I took away from their future. Many observers thought that Huether’s legacy was going to be the events center but the longer he’s in office the more I think his legacy will be what he took from our future versus what he left behind.

The only pain that is real is the pain you feel. By paying for the events center with current taxes it appeared to many that Huether minimized the pain our city will feel in the future. He didn’t add a financial burden, but what did he take away? Here’s another way of looking at the Events Center. What could our city do with $115,000,000 over the next 20 years? What won’t we get because we have that debt to pay? We’ll never know.
We’re well on our way to losing $40,000,000 in federal money to move a switching yard. We’re losing money in two areas by not using this money. A new switching yard would draw businesses that want better access to trains as a way to move their product. Businesses would build near the new location and that economic impact would be even greater than the opening up of real estate downtown. By focusing his energy on growing our debt (the events center) he also missed the opportunity and the income from moving the switchyards. It’s a double-whammy.

So what will his legacy be? No one knows but when you focus on one thing instead of the whole, other parts suffer. I hope I’m wrong. I hope the events center isn’t a flop and I hope we don’t lose $40,000,000 in federal money. As it stands it looks like both of those things are going to happen. He’s fond of saying, “Make it a great day Sioux Falls.” Maybe he should focus less on making it a great day and more on making a great future. That’s what I’m worried about. Quite a legacy.

This Choo-Choo train ain’t going anywhere

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=syxPU7CmCW4[/youtube]

If only we had Thomas to help us out!

A big part of the downtown Sioux Falls rail yard relocation project has been derailed. City officials say the railroad company has killed plans that would have routed trains on a Y-Bridge over the Big Sioux River to a proposed new yard northeast of Sioux Falls.

“They are just willing to accept the fact that things are hunky-dory the way they are,” said city councilor Jim Entenman. “And they can stay the way they are and they don’t have to participate.”

You mean you just figured that out today? Wow! Where have you been the last couple of years? On a beach in Mexico? Oh, yeah, nevermind. The Railroads have been happy with the way things are for over 100 years in Sioux Falls, why change now?