Sioux Falls

Sioux Falls City Council Agenda, May 4-5, 2022

The meetings are on Wednesday and Thursday this week because today was supposed to be the runoff election.

EVENTS CALENDAR LINK

Informational Meeting • 4 PM • Wednesday May 4

Presentation on 2022-23 Sculpture Walk Review by Brandon Hanson, Director of Museums, WPAS & Sculpture Walk

Regular Meeting • 6 PM • Wednesday May 4

Item #6, Approval of Contracts, Sub Item #4, Leadership Training. The pricing is attached to the agenda item. As I have discussed before, I do support ongoing training of city employees, but what I find astounding is training people who should already be able to fill the rolls. It is also very expensive.

Item #60, 2nd Reading, Sidewalk ordnance changes. As I have said previously, I find it strange we would be making significant changes in the middle of 2,600 violations handed out in the core neighborhoods. What I find ironic is if you look at sidewalks on city property (adjacent to city buildings) the sidewalks are in dire shape. But instead of focusing on that they go after private homeowners to deflect.

Item #61, giving more money out for the ice ribbon. Shocker.

Planning Meeting • 6 PM • Thursday May 5

Item #2B, Wants to change from regular suburban residential to historic preservation. I just think this one is interesting because it is on the 21st St Blvd in McKennan Park and if you drive past the home you can see a lot of work done. But why switch it? Well, if you can get your home designated as historic preservation you can get tax incentives and even grants. I would be curious if they are requesting this change because of the love of historic preservation or for the tax incentives? Probably both.

Item #2N, Changes to Annexation ordinances. I find it interesting that these changes are pushed into the consent agenda without discussion, and this part was added;

§ 153.004 ANNEXATION AGREEMENT.
Upon receipt of a request from property owner(s) to annex property into city limits, the petitioner, the public works department, and city attorney’s office have the authority through SDCL 9-4-1.1 to enter into an agreement specifying the conditions under which the landowner’s property may be annexed into the municipal boundaries.

Not sure what that means, but anytime you add an entire section, it probably doesn’t mean the government is giving you more rights, probably the contrary.

Item #5A, Ordinance changes to Concept Plans.

Item #5B, Ordinance changes to Shared Paths.

Item #5C, Amending 2040 Comprehensive Plan.

City of Sioux Falls Website got a little bit more transparent

Imagine my surprise today when I went to the meeting agenda page and in the bottom left hand corner when I clicked on the calendar instead of a PDF coming up, an actual interactive calendar appears with links to events.

I have known about this link for awhile but it was never linked to this page. I am not sure if it was ever linked to the website before. It was previously sent to me by a city employee.

Not sure who in the IT department or clerk’s office crawled out of the darkness and made this nice little change, but you deserve a coin, a children’s book or at the very least an atta-boy.

City of Sioux Falls files Water Reclamation Lawsuit, but who knew?

Last night the Argus Leader put up a story about the lawsuit and how the city is suing for ‘millions of dollars’ in damages and loses. Basically the city contracted with a company to install a system that would suck nasty gas particles from reclamation to power a generator to save electrical costs at the plant.

Sounds like a great idea. But it didn’t work.

Where the story gets bizarre is the timeline.

The whole process started in 2015 and was installed by 2017. The city realized right away that it wasn’t working and since the company has not resolved the issue, they are suing.

Makes sense.

But even if you give the company a year to resolve the problems (2018) why has it taken 4 years to decide to sue? (we still don’t know the outcome of the failed geo-thermal HVAC system at the administration building – probably safe to assume the taxpayers ate that $300K F’up)

I asked a city mole why we are hearing this from the Argus and not the city? Wouldn’t the city at least want to put a press release out about the pending litigation before a surprise story appears in the paper?

This person said they were unsure if many people in leadership even knew about it.

HUH?

I’m still digging around on that statement because if it is true how does the city file a lawsuit seeking millions in damages without knowing they filed it? Did the mayor know? Did the lead city attorney know? Did the council know? Did the public works director know? Did the guy who cleans the mayor’s toilet know? Bueller? Bueller?

Maybe they did and just didn’t bother telling us. Maybe they wanted the Argus to crack this nut?

But this isn’t like Joe Sixpack getting sued over some bushes and piles of shingles in his backyard. This is a long strung out process with millions in taxpayer money wasted. Oh, that’s right, the city is good at those sort of things, at the end of the day we will probably end up paying them a settlement 🙂

But you have to wonder, did a subordinate file the suit (or hire outside counsel to do so) without anyone in leadership knowing? Well folks, that is how cruise control government works, let the minions worry about the lawsuits so it frees up more time to write children’s books.

Sioux Falls City Council SHOULD do a roll call at the Informational

Well you do learn something new everyday. During public input today at the informational I asked why a roll was not called before the meeting started. The reason I asked is because only 4 councilors decided to show up in person so I had NO idea who was on the phone. It was later revealed that 2 councilors (Jensen and Selberg) were on the phone and 2 were absent (short timers Kiley and Erickson which I don’t expect to see much of moving forward). While Curt corrected councilor Starr at the end of the meeting that they do not do roll at the informational (I checked previous meetings and it is true) the real reason I asked was because there was no acknowledgement of the councilors on the phone at the beginning of the meeting, roll call or not.

During public input I said that I think this phone it in practice (that really started because of Covid) needs to end, and then I got interrupted by the chair, Soehl that I was off topic. I was going to finish by saying that if the public has to show up in person, the council should too. It will be interesting to watch the new councilors phone it in practices (BTW, none of the newly elected councilors were at the meeting either, to at least watch and learn).

Most of my input was about how the city pretty much did their yearly financial report ass backwards by handing out millions in subsidies without having an audit or final report in their hands right before an election.

I asked, “How can you hand out millions when you don’t have a yearly financial report or audit, with no working sessions or public comment and input?”

Deer in headlights.