I was glad to see the city released this graphic . . . 3 months later. What is frustrating is that when the storm hit, the city was begging for volunteers (which I agreed with) but was not bothering to tell citizens that the city was chipping in also. As you can see from the graphic, city employees helped, quite a bit (this is also good). So why did the administration think this had to be a big secret at the time? To prove we have amazing volunteerism in this community? I think a lot of us knew that already. I really believe the city did not decide to move forward with city assistance until pressure was put on the administration by certain city councilors. While I think spreading praise to volunteers is a good, why did it take 3 months to talk about the contribution of city workers we pay for with our taxes and Federal disaster relief? When the next natural disaster occurs (which I understand could be this spring with even worse flooding) I highly suggest the city department in charge of communicating assistance (mayor’s office) to the citizens does it promptly, and doesn’t wait 3 months to put up a graphic on Facebook.
Hultgren Construction has been sentenced to one-year probation for “willful violation of the OSHA Act, causing death to an employee.†The company pleaded guilty to the federal misdemeanor in September.
They were also issued a $50 fine (which I doubt they will pay since the LLC is bankrupt).
While I could go on about worker safety laws in SD and even nationally and the lack of any local investigation of the collapse, I want to talk about something else; How easy it is to form and dissolve LLC’s in SD, something our MSM in SD needs to dig in a little;
To dissolve your Limited Liability Company in South Dakota, there is a $10 filing fee required.
I believe the charge to form an LLC with the state is around $150.
While Hultgren and others involved with this mess are paying a separate settlement, the LLC’s that were formed and dissolved throughout this have protected ‘the people’ involved.
I know I have beat this dead horse before, but our state legislature is a joke. Only in SD we would find it appropriate to charge people with a crime for ingestion, think industrial hemp is recreational pot, but if someone collapses a building do to negligence and kills a person, they walk away with NO jail and a $50 fine.
We need to start lawfully connecting LLC’s to ‘PEOPLE’. You know, the people who own them. An LLC is just a piece of paper, it can’t kill anyone on it’s own.
I would hope our legislature would revisit our LLC laws, but since a lot of the members probably own a lot of LLC’s themselves, I won’t hold my breath. Another sad, sad, sad day for justice and workers in South Dakota.
UPDATE: I’m hearing tonight that there may be a deferral on Item #31 (The rezone below). I’m not sure why. Some say it may be because of the conflicts, others have said they may be working out a deal to finish the road. I guess we will hear more Tuesday Night.
• November Financial Report. It looks like the city will probably end the year at or above a 6% increase from last year. Too bad workers and especially our police officers can’t get that kind of raise, as this letter writer points out;
Mayor TenHaken just reported a huge increase in tax revenue for Sioux Falls. His next step was to propose to raise the cost to everyone who wants an event that involves security. Perhaps he doesn’t know that we already pay the police and firemen’s salaries. We pay with our tax dollars and have no say in where they go or what they secure. If we are already paying them, why would it cost more to have them work a special event that involves the city of Sioux Falls?
• Audit report on Landfill Licensing. I hope the entire city council asks some serious questions of what is going on out there. As an enterprise fund (funds itself) it should be trying to pull in as much revenue as possible, that means regulating garbage haulers better. I still think we can fix the problem by having public garbage haulers.
• We are getting TIFilicious with the Sioux Steel development. Funny how NO presentations are linked to this agenda item. While the city is working with the developer, I think it is outrageous that the planning department can’t put the presentation online (that we know is already done). It is NOT the administration or planning department’s decision, it is the decision of our citizen representatives, the city council, to pass this TIF. Give us the damn information before Tuesday and stop playing a poker game so you can sneak this by the citizens.
Sub-item #5. A 27% increase in recycling/garbage fees for the city. I hope a councilor pulls this item. What I find ironic is while I have been talking about how the city needs to have public garbage service, the city is getting bent over the barrel on garbage service.
Sub-item #7. While the city has it’s own Public Works/Streets department, we pay a private company to clean city sidewalks.
Sub-item #32. So this is interesting. The city (that is funded mostly by sales taxes) is going to repave a parking lot for the school district (funded by mostly property taxes). Besides the price tag of $163K+ the city calls this ‘maintenance’ and part of the ‘parks and rec’ department. I am assuming this is because there may be a community center there. I’m too lazy to look it up. This is why this ‘fun’ stuff gets buried in the consent agenda so people don’t ask those questions.
Item #20, Package liquor license for Walia C-Store. Of course this has been deferred. This will be an interesting discussion. I’m not sure how the vote will go, but if I was a betting man, they will vote it down.
Item #31, Golden Gateway project, Rezone, 1st reading. (Sneveilicious does a good story about it in the AL). As we all know, this is contentious. I expect this item to take up a lot of the council’s time on Tuesday night. I also expect it to pass the 1st reading (even if some are opposed). While the fireworks will probably be long on the 1st reading, the 2nd reading will be fiery. After watching the Planning Commission meeting on this item, it is clear that the neighbors are PISSED. Would YOU? If I was sitting in a half-million dollar house, probably, but as we have found out in this town, the developer rules. As I said to a city councilor the other night, “Why does the Planning Department ‘Recommend Approval’ to the Planning Commission?” Shouldn’t they just lay out the facts of the development plan on the table, listen to testimony and make a decision from there? I compared it to the Licensing Department. What if Jamie Palmer (the agent of the department) told councilors to ‘recommend approval’ of a license? She has never done this. She is there to give the facts and information. It is up to the council to determine if a license is worthy of approval. The Planning Department needs to end this practice. I actually encourage the council to write an ordinance that forbids the Planning Department from recommending approval. It is egregious and borders a little on corruption and unethical.
Item #36, (I assume) councilors Brekke and Stehly are bringing back the texting ban ordinance to a 1st reading. They want to add this clause;
(f) City council members’ use of electronic communication devices during official meetings shall be limited to researching and/or accessing support materials for purposes of official business or public policy of the city. This section shall not apply to a city council member who engages in personal and non-city business activities outside the meeting room. Public input and city council discussion is not permitted through electronic communication devices during an official meeting. For purposes of this section, “Electronic Communication†shall mean any text, audio, static images, or video to be exchanged between two or more city council members or a city council member(s) and member(s) of the public in real time or near real time. Examples of electronic communication include, but are not limited to, electronic mail also known as email, instant messaging, chat rooms, text messaging, social media, and blogs.
While some on the council oppose this measure, the public has told councilor Stehly they want this. This will also be a fiery discussion. I think certain councilors will try to kill this at 1st reading. But even if it is killed, it will be a wakeup call. When councilor Stehly told me she was bringing this back, I asked her if she first wanted to get the council on board. She told me it was time, and they have been warned it was coming. GOOD. The discussion needs to take place. While Stehly can be controversial, and may not get ordinances passed, she does ultimately get action. Even if this fails, I guarantee the texting will be cut back. I can already hear the arguments against it ‘We can police ourselves.’ Uh, clearly you cannot. I expect an amendment allowing FREE soap and hand sanitizer be given to councilors when they arrive to Carnegie for a meeting.
Item #37, Appointment of Citizen Board Members. I find it interesting there is NO attached documents that give BIOS of the appointees. This is the first time I have seen this. Hmmm?
Item #38, City Council Legislative Priorities. This will also be a good discussion because there seems to be some disagreements of what they will be asking the State Legislature to do for them, uh, I mean us. This is an exercise in stupidity. Why we waste tax dollars on a legislative lobbyist is beyond me. The council knows our legislative representatives, in fact they are probably friends with them. Why not call them up and have a friendly phone convo, email, or better yet invite them over for coffee cake and tea, or a fizzy American beer? Do we really need to pay someone to tell the legislature what we want. I can sum it up in one sentence; Stop being stupid.
Item #40, Transfer of Appropriations. So the city gets a little coin in the the coffers from the Railyard Redevelopment sale and they are already transferring funds from that sale into projects. By statute they have to, which is a good thing, but they surely didn’t waste any time. Who says government can’t get things done – and fast.
As I predicted a month ago, the National media is finally realizing the connection between Bloomberg’s presidential run and his city initiative that our city participated in;
Michael Bloomberg is relying on powerful city leaders as allies in his presidential campaign. Several have received grants, training and support packages totaling millions from his foundation.
Fortunately, Sioux Falls is NOT mentioned in the article. But don’t hold your breath.
As Mr. Bloomberg traverses the country as a presidential candidate, he is drawing on a vast network of city leaders whom he has funded as a philanthropist or advised as an elder statesman of municipal politics. Bloomberg Philanthropies, which has assets totaling $9 billion, has supported 196 different cities with grants, technical assistance and education programs worth a combined $350 million. Now, leaders in some of those cities are forming the spine of Mr. Bloomberg’s campaign: He has been endorsed so far by eight mayors — from larger cities like San Jose, Calif., and Louisville, Ky., and smaller ones like Gary, Ind., representing a total of more than 2.6 million Americans.
For all of those endorsers, Mr. Bloomberg has been an important benefactor. All have attended his prestigious boot camp at Harvard that gives the mayors access to ongoing strategic advice from Bloomberg-funded experts.
Now, some of the same people who aided these mayors from Mr. Bloomberg’s foundation are the ones asking for their political support. Mr. Anderson, who several mayors described as the most vital point of contact at Bloomberg Philanthropies, is now directing the campaign’s “Mayors for Mike†coalition.
And then there is this distinct thing going on, that I also warned about, using the same people who built the foundation to work on the campaign;
But Mr. Reich, the Stanford expert, was skeptical about the effect of logistical steps like separating email addresses. “It’s a detail that seems to miss the point of the exercise, which is to erect a wall between the activities of a philanthropist and the political interests of the donor,†he said.
So far, only a few of the mayors linked to Mr. Bloomberg’s foundation have actually endorsed his campaign.
I knew it would only be a matter of time before the ‘network’ that was formed through the foundation would be used in his campaign. How long before TenHaken becomes a ‘Mayor for Mike’? No worries, he will probably vote for Trump anyway.
I want to remind people that Mr. Huether is NOW a private citizen, so please refrain from making comments about his presentation in a political nature. If you want to comment on his past political service, have at it, that is free game.
l3wis 
