I had heard a couple of months ago a ‘young attorney’ was running for Ricky Lee’s open seat;
David Barranco is getting ready to move forward with his candidacy and this past Friday announced to friends privately that he’s running, and is noting his interest,
In 2022, when Councilman Kiley’s term ends, his seat will be open. I am excited to run for that position. My hope is to serve working families, keeping a pragmatic, problem-solving focus. I’m dedicated to building a bright future for Sioux Falls, with a strong economy and reliable infrastructure.
I’m passionate about expanding the local workforce and creating more affordable housing. As a husband, father, and FCA coach, I’m dedicated to keeping kids safe by supporting law enforcement and defending public health. I’ll endeavor to grow pet-friendly spaces, reduce automobile traffic, and plant thousands of trees. Most importantly, I’ll strive to be a cooperative consensus builder — one who embraces good policy but eschews divisive rhetoric.
Of course it should not surprise anyone that David has close ties to the SD GOP. His wife Catherine is involved with the National Federation of Republican Women (I think she serves on the board) and used to work for the SD GOP as staff in communications and is still a region director.
It will be interesting to see what kind of support Dave gets from SD GOP . . .
UPDATE: This is NOT a fee increase, just an annual notice that the fee exists and renewed, it has since 1992.
City Council Members and Council Staff,
Good afternoon. A resolution (per City Ordinance 96.033) will be presented at Tuesday’s City Council Meeting to levy an annual front foot assessment fee for street maintenance and repair. The special assessment funds are used to partially fund the highways and streets operational budget for the repairs and maintenance of our city streets to include pothole patching, asphalt surface maintenance, and street sweeping.The front foot assessment fee has been in place since 1992. The front foot assessment fee will be $1.00 per foot for 2022 and has not changed since 2009. Attached is the resolution and on the back is the amount that has been collected for each respective year since 1992. Thank you, Mark Cotter
Looks to be a new tax being created assessed on the residents of Sioux Falls, is this true? $1.00 Per foot per property along our ‘streets’. If we have a total # of 900 centerline street miles in this city (1,800 if you include both sides of the street), and each mile is roughly 5,280 feet, this tax generates $9,504,000.00 for the city to be used to maintain and resurface highways, streets, and roads in the city. With a $654,000,000 million revenue stream, is a new tax really necessary?
Once again Paul is showing us his lack of transparency and his dark hatred towards open government. Most government’s would have put this thru a vetting process with it’s public works department, the city council and the citizens. Not to mention in the same night there will be a property tax increase (item 15). You also have to remember we spent most of the $50 million in Covid money on play things and gave away $144 million in tax rebates this year. It looks like we will be heading into the dark abyss for another 4 years unless Paul gets one heck of a challenger.
Presentations on the City Council and Mayor’s 2022 Budget and Covid (what is surprising in the City Council Budget is the expenditure of over $200K for the City Election. I have NEVER seen it that high. I would be curious about the explanation on that one.)
Item #6, Approval of Contracts, Sub Item #20. It’s a mysterious what this is, but it seems like some partnership for transit. Be nice to have a presentation and explanation instead of burying it in the consent agenda.
Item #15, 2nd Reading, Property Tax Increase. Of course the Rubber Stamp Council who gave away $144 million in TIF tax rebates this year has NO problem with raising our taxes by millions in a Covid economic recovery.
Item #17, Resolution, Moving the Sculpture Sea Dream from the DT Dog park location to Prairie Green Golf Course. I wonder if the artist was ever consulted about this? I know once when I talked to him about the sculpture at an Augustana art reception (he used to be a teacher) he was irritated that people would call it ‘the golf ball’.
Item #21, Resolution, Levy Front Assessment of $1.00 per foot. Maybe I am missing something here, but shouldn’t this be 1) a 1st and 2nd Reading and 2) an explanation as to why we need this in conjunction with a property tax increases?
#22, Resolution, One Sioux Falls. So this is a perfect example of something that belongs in the resolutions category on agenda, meaningless word games from the mayor’s office.
After watching the city council meeting tonight and addressing them on open and transparent government I have to admit I have almost given up on educating them about open government. They don’t have a clue.
While discussing the Med MJ ordinance Councilor Selberg admitted that the councilors formed the ordinance privately talking to each other on the phone. Well at least Selberg told the truth even if he is ethically challenged.
Councilor Kiley blew off the supporters of Med MJ at the meeting speaking out as special interests and brought the mysterious folks he got emails from, yet never read a single email or told us who these people are.
I guess in Kiley’s eyes the 75% of Sioux Falls voters that supported Med MJ are special interests and not worth listening to. What arrogance.
If open government was a foot long blunt lit with a blowtorch and smoked by the councilors, they still wouldn’t understand. Baffling.
A. 2022 Experience Sioux Falls (Convention and Visitor Bureau for Sioux Falls) BID Tax Budget by Teri Schmidt, Executive Director (if you look at the PP presentation you will find it is interesting how since the Events Center has arrived that city’s tourism revenue really hasn’t gone up that much. My suspicions are because the Denty has been only a money vacuum sending most of its profits out of town and not recirculating entertainment dollars in our community. Just another money pit.)
B. Vast Broadband – Communication & Design Update by Mike Harry, Chief Business Development Officer; Jeff Seidenfaden, Chief Commercial Officer; and, Cash Hagen, Chief Operating Officer (I think this will be an interesting presentation. I’m curious who inspired VAST to have a change of heart? I’m even more curious how the city allowed the goofy green towers to be installed to begin with?)
Item #7, Change Orders, Sub Item #5, $39K more for the chairlift replacement at Great Bear.
Item #33, Special One-Day Malt Beverage and Special One-Day Wine Licenses for Community Indoor Tennis Center Inc., 4210 North Bobhalla Drive, for a fundraiser on November 5, 2021. (I find it curious that they don’t call the facility by it’s name, Huether Family Match Pointe. Kind of wondering how that place is doing. Would be nice to get a presentation on how they spent our $500K yet have given the public virtually nothing in return for that handout.)
Items #41-42, 2nd Reading, Med MJ. I would expect a lot of amendments. I do know that around 4-5 councilors have amendments. One of them would be lowering the license fee to $25K. These two items alone will make for a very long night.
Item #44, 1st Reading, Property Tax Increase. Once again the Rubber Stamp Council will increase our taxes even though they have NO real reason to do so. Just because. Ironically in the same year they gave away around $144 Million in TIFs. (I have said $200 million in the past, and I am correcting that statement. It was $94 to the Development Foundation and $25 to Sioux Steel and $25 to Cherapa II)
Item #50, 1st Reading, Chief Matt Burns (Firing) Range Naming. As if the night couldn’t get more ridiculous the Mayor has asked the Naming Commission and the City Council to approve this naming at the new public safety facility. Am I the only one that finds it a bit ironic that a ‘firing’ range is being named after him? Maybe Mayor Poops is sending some kind of subtle message about why Burns left the city? We may never know.
Item #53, Resolution, Main Street BID Tax. For several years many downtown business owners have asked what they get for this special tax roll. DTSF does use the money and staff to promote Downtown (if you pay membership dues) and do have a cleaning crew (which I think the city’s Parks and Rec department should be doing). But does this BID help provide healthcare insurance options for small business owner’s employees? Business insurance? Short term business loans or grants? Nope. Nadda. Zilch. It seems all the BID tax really does is pay salaries of those who work for DTSF. I would love it if they would do a presentation on what they are doing to actually help DT businesses thrive economically. Because watering plants and marketing a Burger Battle isn’t cutting it.
The CRC will begin taking recommendations from the public. I will present my 3 ideas during public input since the city wants regular citizens jumping through hoops to bring them in advance and get on the agenda. Here is my exchange with the city’s paralegal in emails;
To:Â Greco, Tom Cc:Â Hanzel, Cari Subject:Â Re[2]: Charter Revision Commission
Tom, thanks for the assistance.
Cari, so as I understand Tom, I can just present my ideas during public input for consideration? Correct? and give the CRC members a copy of my proposals at that time?
Thanks
Her response;
Hello Mr. Ehrisman:
The Charter Revision Commission’s preferred practice is to submit your proposal, to include a copy of the Article section(s) with the proposed amendments made in underlined/strike-through format, to them at least a week ahead of the meeting you would like to attend so that it could be added to the agenda. At their initial meeting in August, the Commission set out a schedule of when they would be reviewing each Article. I believe Tom provided that schedule to you already. It would make the most sense to put your proposal on the agenda for the meeting that the Commission will address that relevant Article. All that being said, you are always welcome to address the Charter Revision Commission during public input at any meeting and submit your proposal(s) at that time. The down side to that is the time limit of 5 minutes. If presented during public input, the Commission may decide to address your proposal(s) at a later date and/or when that particular Article comes up for review in their schedule.
Do you have proposals that relate to Articles I-III? If so, and they are ready to go,  I can check into the possibility of amending the agenda to include your proposal as a formal recommendation under the appropriate Article for the meeting next week. Let me know what Article sections you are looking at and we can figure out the best way to proceed. Thank you!Â
My response back, in which I received no response, and didn’t expect one;
Cari, I have no idea where my articles would fit in, I am not a city attorney, and I don’t believe it is the duty of a citizen to try to hunt it down in the city charter, that would be the responsibility of the CRC and the City attorney’s office. My only responsibility is presenting my ideas to the commission. I know it is not in your wheelhouse to tell the CRC what to do, but this is prime example of poor customer service to citizens, which I believe is done purposely to discourage participation, there really is no other excuse. Citizens should be able to present their ideas to the CRC and the CRC can decide to craft the proper language and article in which it applies. I also believe that there should be NO time limit on presenting ideas to the CRC. I should be afforded at least 5 minutes for each item. I will present my ideas to the CRC in public input and ‘try’ to figure out the articles it applies to. Thank you for you time. Scott L. Ehrisman
As I have mentioned in the past, even if my revisions make the ballot (which I doubt they will since the CRC is only interested in killing citizen ideas) I’m not so sure they would pass. As the CRC has said in the past they are concerned about putting revisions on the ballot because they almost always pass. I think I would have to educate a lot of folks to get passage. I am still refining my revisions, but I can tell you they concern TIFs, Public Input and City Directors. You will have to tune in on Wednesday to hear them 🙂
l3wis 
