I never believed Noem truly wanted this tax cut and was probably secretly giddy it failed. I would be shocked if ANY tax cut is approved this legislative session. Playing the Devil’s advocate, why would those who control the coffers want to eliminate a reliable revenue source?
If I were a legislator the prudent thing to do would have been a step reduction in the food tax (eliminating 1.5% this year and 1 penny the following three years and on the 5th year eliminate the municipal food tax portion).
I personally support the property tax cut. While they contend it will only save taxpayers around $300 a year it is around a $800 savings each year in Sioux Falls (that is the approximate take of the SFSD for a $100K valuation). The food tax cut would only save me about $150 a year. As for helping the poor with a food tax cut that is a false flag (an overall sales tax reduction would have a bigger impact). Since most legitimately poor in our state receive food from food banks, FREE school lunches, WIC, churches and SNAP they pay NO taxes on food so why not give them real savings by reducing the overall sales taxes on anything purchased (especially on cigs and beer their biggest staples 🙂 I also think there should have been legislation to eliminate sales taxes on gas and electricity (something renters and homeowners both pay). As I said from the beginning, I don’t think our legislature has the courage to cut taxes. As my stepdad used to say, ‘Gutless Wonders’.
Amber Hansen, Reyna Hernandez and Darcy Millette sent the statement to Sioux Falls Live in advance of a meeting of the Visual Arts Commission, which meets at 9 a.m.
“We are grateful to the Sioux Falls Arts Council, the Visual Arts Commission, and MarketBeat for their support during the city’s selection process for the 10th Street parking garage mural. As of now, we do not know the reason behind the Mayor’s decision to override the VAC’s unanimous selection of our design, ‘Buffalo Dreamer.’
“As local artists and community focused muralists, we are disappointed by the exploitation of time, energy, and resources that the city’s process demanded from those it claims to serve. Despite our disappointment in what has transpired, we are hopeful that this experience ignites a conversation surrounding issues of transparency and systemic power plays concerning who determines and shapes the arts and culture in the city of Sioux Falls and throughout the state of South Dakota.”
I was glad to see they acknowledged their disappointment in the process. What has NOT surfaced is the actual rejected image. I doubt we will ever see it.
This is why I have pushed back on the mayor having a full-time arts coordinator in his office. Decisions about public art should take a village, not a dictator.
—————————
The VAC will be meeting at 9 AM at the City Center Admin building downtown in City Center Conference Room 110. There isn’t really anything special about the agenda except for public input could get interesting.
There has been a lot of hoopla surrounding the rejected Bunker Ramp mural project. But without knowing what the rejected mural looks like (there have been several accusations that it was insensitive towards Native Americans and the LGBTQ+ community) it is hard to make a judgement call as to if this all to do about nothing.
Some have said that the image cannot be released due to artist permissions and copyright infringement, but my experience with being in a juried exhibit or competition those rights can be waived. I have not seen the image but I encourage the artists to release the image to the public so that the public can make that call.
Transparency goes a long ways, and in the case of rejected art, showing the image to the public would bring a greater understanding of what the artists intended and what the jurors and mayor perceived.
I doubt these three artists worked this hard to win the selection only to dupe the public into a secret plan to offend them with controversial art. If you think that you truly are ignorant to how the process of creating art works. It’s not like they suggested putting a statue of a naked dude in DTSF for 50 years.
I struggle with the notion that 6 members of the VAC who unanimously approved the initial concept would be so naive to move forward with a piece of art that would offend a certain group of people.
Me thinks the only people offended by the concept are not really affected by it’s message just butt hurt they were NOT honored and obeyed.
*for the record, I found out about this when a friend of mine casually said, ‘Have you heard what is going on with the parking ramp mural?’ I said no. So I decided to go read the agenda minutes from the VAC meetings and found a missing narrative in the January meeting. Not only were the minutes initially missing as to what the planning director discussed about the mural, the agenda page incorrectly listed it as a Jan 11 meeting instead of Jan 17. I contacted someone who may have been in attendance and they confirmed to me that the planning director came to the meeting and told the VAC the mayor had selected the other mural concept. This is another reason I have suggested that ALL city board/commission meetings be recorded and live streamed on YouTube.
The Mayor has the right to reject the recommendation, just like the city council has the right to reject zoning proposals from the planning commission. What he cannot do is bully all of the participants that were involved in this long and complicated process.
Resolutions and the state legislature have a long history of nothingness. But recently legislators from multiple districts have signed onto changing the correct pronunciation of two towns; Pierre and Wagner.
Unless you are a total dolt, you know the proper pronunciation of Pierre is pee-air while the proper pronunciation for Wagner is vahg-nuhr. Ironically, while there is a lot of bullcrap on the ground in Pierre I am not sure about all the pee in the air.
Pierre was founded by Pierre Chouteau Jr. a wealthy fur trader and I can almost guarantee no one called him ‘peer’. Wagner is founded by Walter Wagner who found the area so wonderful after a fishing trip he decided to create a town.
There were some opposing resolutions. One was to change the pronunciation of Sioux Falls to sigh-ox falls and another to change the name of Pierre to L.A.G (lactation, abortion and guns).
One legislator opposed to the resolution, who will remain nameless, said, “Pronouncing Pierre, pee-air just seems a little gay to me, and while we don’t accept a lot of gay in South Dakota we seem to be okay with a little gay? Seems like a slippery slope.”
We also traveled to Wagner to get some opinions from residents on the resolution. Carla Running Horse told us that at least they are not calling it Fagner. “But I guess it is far better then being called Crankton or Methchell.”
Bob Britches says, “I live in a small rural town in South Dakota, who cares how it is pronounced just as long as we don’t call it Shirley.”
Of course if these resolutions pass there is nothing legally binding to make people to pronounce the towns names correctly, and even if they do there is NO cost to taxpayers.
A resident in Pierre said this, “I’m no grammar teacher, but I am guessing whether you say peer or pee-air the spelling is the same. I think?”
*of course none of this is really happening . . . or is it?
You know the old saying, “If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, then it just may be a duck.” which should be followed by the sayings “Follow the money.” and “Pay to play.”
Sioux Falls city attorney Stacy Kooistra is becoming the new chief operating officer and general counsel for the Dakota State University-Applied Research Corporation.
Kooistra will begin his duties this spring and will be based in Sioux Falls.
Last year when the city pledged $10 million to the project for ‘landscaping and other stuff’ according to DSU’s president in a city council presentation, it seems someone is receiving the benefits of that gift.
The city certainly won’t be in dire straits if Mr. Kooistra leaves since most of the heavy lifting in that department is done by staff attorneys and outside counsel (in which the city spends millions each year by hiding legal budgets throughout multiple departments instead of having a centralized legal fund in the finance department).
Kooistra has also been rumored to take extensive leave for his military commitments (while still receiving city compensation, PTO and benefits) which is protected by Federal Law but has left the office in disarray. Just look at Stacy’s misguided opinions on the 1st Amendment and prior restraint or the multiple typos on council agenda items culminating into misleading legal statements presented to the council on the 6th Street Bunker Bridge vote.
But the timing of this promotion is what is dubious. The city announced a little less then a year ago they would be committing $10 million to the project and even after the president of DSU really didn’t know what the money would be used for the rubber stamp council approved the pledge. After TenHaken enjoyed four endorsed council victories in the city election last spring it seems he has been on a ramrodding spree to do whatever he wants including this suddenly mysterious promotion of Kooistra to the very institution that is receiving millions of dollars from Sioux Falls taxpayers and the city he currently serves (ironically to a guy who doesn’t even live in Sioux Falls city limits).
So is this a conflict of interest? Does a duck quack?
In Marc Maron’s lastest HBO special he suggests we change the name of abortion clinics to ANGEL FACTORIES to get Christians on board. After hearing the bit, I thought, ‘Don’t give the SD Legislature any more ideas!’
l3wis