Sioux Falls Parks and Rec

Don’t think the SF Parks and Rec spends money recklessly for what we get? Think again.

l3wis May 1, 2009 10Comments

A friend of mine spoke to a 19 year veteran divisional director of the Kansas City Parks and Rec department recently and gave me some interesting figures when compared to Sioux Falls.

KS: 470,000 residents served
SF: 150,000 residents served

KS: Parks and Rec department trims the trees in the blvd.
SF: Forces residents to trim city owned trees or fines them.

In fact the director said it is illegal for residents to trim the trees and they will be fined if caught. The reason is because of liability reasons. The director ‘was amazed’ that a city attorney in Sioux Falls hasn’t squawked about it since it is the city’s liability. IMO it has to do with HOME RULE and the way our ordinances and code enforcement are written around it.

KS: Maintains 300 parks
SF: Maintains 69 parks

KS: Employees 300
SF: Employees 150

Now here’s the interesting part;

KS: 2009 Budget $35 million
SF: 2009 Budget $33 million

Not only does Kansas City serve 3 times more residents and 4 times more parks then Sioux Falls for the same money, they also trim CITY OWNED TREES with that budget. And their usage season is longer because of milder winters. So if you think we are getting a ‘bargain’ with our Parks and Rec department, you have completely lost your mind, in fact, taxpayers are getting screwed.

The ‘truth’ about SF Family Park revealed

l3wis April 13, 2009 0Comments

Some ‘details’ about the proposed Family Park are being uncovered in this Gargoyle Leader story. Stuff that we suspected all along. What is strange about the story, is how it starts, assuming the city council has already approved the gift from the Soukup family. This is not the case (even though it does have the support of at least 7 councilors);

A new park being developed in western Sioux Falls will be unique to the region by offering trout fishing, city and state officials say.

Eventually, that area could be the site of a residential development, complete with a lake and 100 to 150 houses. That’s at least five years into the future, Soukup said.

Chip Kolb of Tall Prairie Properties owns the land to the immediate east of what will be Family Park.

 

“I was thinking apartments along the lake,” Kolb said of his development, which he categorized as in its early stages.

So Sioux Falls taxpayers will have to pay for the maintenance of a park so homeowners and apartment dwellers have lakeside property? How much access will the rest of us have to the park if it is surrounded by apartments and houses? I’m not against accepting the gift, but I think the developers and the city should be in a 50/50 partnership for the maintenance of the park. Once again, this suspiciously looks like developers are getting a gigantic handout from taxpayers. Not only are they taking the massive chunk of land off the taxrolls, the developers will be building homes on prime property that will be maintained by the rest of us working stiffs instead of a housing association.

There is something very fishy smelling about this whole deal.