State Legislature
If you are visiting a tourist site, that makes you a tourist
Sometimes I think it may be a good idea to drug test legislators, especially when they come up with stupid crap like this. You are either brain dead or on drugs killing your brain cells;
The bill would cut the state’s tourism tax rate from 1-1/2 percent to 1 percent, which wouldn’t leave enough funding for the South Dakota Arts Council.
State Rep. Tom Pischke (R-Dell Rapids) sponsored the bill because he doesn’t like the way the money is collected.
“Let’s say for example, I live in Dell Rapids and I want to take my kids to the children’s museum in Brookings. So I don’t really consider myself a tourist if I drive 30 miles up to Brookings to take the kids to the Children’s Museum. But then again, I’m getting charged a tourism tax,” says Pischke.
The definition of Tourist;
a person who is traveling or visiting a place for pleasure.
Doesn’t matter if Tom lived next door to the museum, he is still a tourist. Oh, but Tom’s argument gets even better;
Pischke says he supports the arts, but doesn’t think the tourism tax should go toward things the SculptureWalk or JazzFest, two recipients of funding from the state art council. He says the collected funds should go directly toward tourism.
Public art is tourism. Do you think people would travel to Mt. Rushmore if there wasn’t a sculpture into the side of that mountain? Where do these legislators come up with this stuff?
How many South Dakota State legislators does it take to screw in a light bulb? Zero. They would be too busy arguing over how to pay for the light bulb, in the dark.
Guest Toon: Sioux Empire Podcast
Click to Enlarge
SD State Legislature & City of Sioux Falls
Of course we can mostly thank the Anti-Citizen League for killing the bill;
Yvonne Taylor of the South Dakota Municipal League told lawmakers that there are two steps in the annexation process that already require certified letters and a public vote.
Nothing gets me hotter than my tax dollars paying this lobbying organization and it’s anti-citizen, pro-corporate welfare agenda. They consistently lobby against bills that improve transparency and help citizens navigate local government. If I was the next mayor I would fire them so fast their heads would spin. Actually, I think the city council controls that expenditure, they should cancel it. We pay an operations manager almost $100K a year to help follow legislation in Pierre, why do we need a lobbyist, especially one that lobbies against the best interests of the citizenry?
It also didn’t help that Mike Cooper and Council Chair Rick Kiley showed up to talk against it. A witness told me that Kiley claimed that only ONE person complained about the annexation process when it comes to notification. What a stretch.
Investor Notification Legislation
While I think this is a great idea, like annexation, this will probably get killed in committee;
The bill, which hasn’t been assigned a formal number by the Legislative Research Council, would require companies working with governments on public-private projects that have been in existence for five years or more to disclose the names of any investors who own 5 percent or more of its shareholders or investors.
Like I said, great idea, but there is always loopholes in any of this stuff, just ask former city attorney Fiddle-Faddle. I also think it is sad that we have to pass laws in order to get the information the public should have a right to. And if any developer had one ounce of integrity, they would give up that information on their own. Oh, nevermind, I forgot we do business with people who drag cancer causing agents through out town without a care in the world. Real pillars of our community.
HERE is an interesting story about how well private/public partnerships work. I really believe the Village project will never happen, or we will be left holding the bag.
Alcohol Distributors still crying in their beers
While the craft brewers do 99% of the work creating their delicisousness, the beer distributors still want a cut for being a taxi service;
South Dakota beer distributors said this week a proposal aimed at letting craft brewers sell their beer directly to stores and restaurants gives them unfair advantages over other players in the beer industry.
Oh, baloney. They are simply saying it is foolish to go through a distributor to sell to someone next door. They will still have to use distributors for large scale distribution.
The greed the distributors are showing is the reason why people are buying online more and more, besides the fact that sales taxes are regressive, people are tired of paying a middle man (salesperson) for essentially not doing much. It is similar to art galleries taking a 40% commission for hanging a painting on a wall.
It also doesn’t help that we have legislators who have a direct conflict of interest with the legislation. Kolbeck and Beal should excuse themselves from voting on this legislation.
Guest Toons; Sioux Empire Podcast
Click to Enlarge either image