If the city is swimming in money, why do we keep raising fees, rates and taxes?

by

It seems the city wants their cake and eat it too. They want large reserves, unneeded infrastructure projects, and they want to raise our taxes;

For one, the audit shows that Sioux Falls has more cash on hand and more assets than the average of 10 other cities in the region.

Then why are they constantly gunning for more increases? More, More, More, that’s why.

Plus, Sioux Falls’ long-term per capita debt is lower than those other cities’ and still below the threshold that’s considered to be high.

Nevermind it doubled between 2006-2007, I guess that isn’t important. It mostly doubled because we took out a loan for a water pipeline that we ‘might’ have by 2012. That’s right kiddies, we are paying interest on something we don’t have or know when we will get it.  It would be like taking out an equity loan to get your roof fixed and after you paid the contractor he tells you he will be back in 3 years to do the repairs.

These are all welcomed signs indicating that Sioux Falls is making good decisions about its reserve-fund levels and long-term debt.

Doubling our debt to pay for something we don’t have is hardly a ‘good decision’. I have said all along, we should of signed a contract with Lewis and Clark telling them we will pay them IN FULL when the water starts to flow. And instead of paying interest on a loan while we are waiting for the water, we could be setting money aside for the project letting it gain interest in an account. But that would make sense? Wouldn’t it?

The topics of saving and spending have been particularly heated at times in recent years as residents and city officials debated whether to fund certain projects – and if so, then when.

There has never been anything ‘heated’ about it. Citizens tell the city they are spending too much money, they ignore them and cower to the special interests.

In addition, City Councilor Kermit Staggers is correct to point out that the internal audit didn’t include a review of the city’s capital budget, which tells the rest of the story about Sioux Falls’ financial health.

Yeah, when is that audit coming out? Never?

Of course, the internal audit doesn’t mean that tough public debate ever should disappear. And it certainly isn’t a license for city officials to begin spending out of control.

Too late, they have been doing that for the past 6 years.

Posted in: Sioux Falls

What does L & C water system have to do w/Sales Tax? NOTHING!

by

Mayor Munson seems to be up in arms over the sales tax decrease initiative (Argus Leader), which is no surprise, well it kinda is. It will have NO EFFECT on his budget and will have to be dealt with by the next mayor and council. By the time this takes effect, there will be at least 3 to 5 new councilors and a new mayor. Secondly Munson seems to be spinning the story,

Munson bristled at accusations that he hasn’t overseen responsible growth during his time at the helm, pointing to major street construction projects on 57th and 26th streets as recent examples.

“We planned Lewis & Clark for growth,” he said, referring to the water project. “Maybe under their scenario we don’t need Lewis & Clark. I think that’s crazy.”

First off, this decrease won’t take ANY money away from street construction (I’ll get to that later) and secondly Lewis & Clark is being paid by a loan the city took out that is being paid off from increased water rates, not sales tax. We also may receive money from the Federal Government (don’t hold your breath though, it seems neither presidential candidate is too interested in that). Like Rudy Guilliani and 9/11 everytime someone wants to cut the budget, Dave brings up Lewis & Clark. Cut the bull Dave.

As for street construction money being taken away, this is also a myth;

Officials warn that Sioux Falls will continue to lag on new road construction if the tax doesn’t go to a full cent. That, in turn, would hurt economic growth at a time when the national economy already is in precarious shape.Officials warn that Sioux Falls will continue to lag on new road construction if the tax doesn’t go to a full cent. That, in turn, would hurt economic growth at a time when the national economy already is in precarious shape.

It is merely $5 million dollars that will have to be cut from the Capital Improvement Budget (Basically a slush fund that pays for all the goodies (wants) in our city). In fact Munson mentions a great cut in the article.

Munson pointed out that McKennan Park next year is budgeted to receive $615,800 for upgrades.

Huh?! They just received upgrades this year already. Another example of wasteful spending.

And it seems councilor Costello went over to the dark side,

“They are fully within their rights to do what they are doing,” Costello added. “I personally would not sign that petition.”

Why wouldn’t you sign it Pat? I sign petitions all the time with stuff I don’t agree with. I signed the Initiative 11 petition, I signed Nader’s and Bob Barr’s petition to be on the ballot in South Dakota. I think it’s good to let the citizens decide. This is what a democracy is about. Do we want to let citizens decide on what they want to spend $5 million dollars on, or do we want 4 councilors, developers, special interests and a mayor decide?

I think we know the answer to that question.

Posted in: Citizens for Reponsible Sales Tax, Munson, SF City Council, Sioux Falls, Taxes ⋅ Tagged: , ,

Transparency would solve many problems for Sioux Falls City Hall

by

Recently the administration said they want to increase water rates again;

While the last round of rate increases adopted in 2018 ran through 2023 and ranged from 3 to 6 percent, it’s unclear what the new rate increases will look like.

That’s because the city is still calculating what level of rate hikes are necessary to keep up with anticipated population growth, operational needs and anticipated revenues, according to the Public Works Department that oversees municipal utility services.

“We are in the process of developing the operational and capital budgets which will inform the utility rate models,” Public Works Director Mark Cotter told The Dakota Scout when asked about the hikes, how far into the future they will be scheduled and why they’re necessary. “I expect to finalize this process in the coming weeks.”

One thing that happened during the Munson administration was an effort from city hall to encourage water conservation. Heck, the city was even giving away toilet rebates! If I recall the public works director, Mark Cotter, who is still the director, said the conservation efforts were making progress and people were consuming less water. Tack this onto growth and more users and you should be able to keep above water, no pun intended, without raising rates too much.

The problem is the water and sewer department depend on user fees to fund their operations, this is called enterprise funds. You pay your bill and that money goes directly to the maintenance and operation of the facilities. While enterprise funds are a good idea, they don’t always work well when you have major expansions because we also use the funds to pay down bonds for the facility upgrades. I have argued for awhile that major infrastructure projects should come out of the 2nd penny capital budget, like new water reclamation plants and bunker ramps (the Parking division which is ran on enterprise funds is also running lean probably due to paying bonds on a parking ramp that is not completed).

Some would argue that the enterprise funds should also pay down bonds, but I ask this question; “Do the wages for people who work in water reclamation come from the 2nd penny operations fund, like all other city salaries, or do they come from the enterprise fund?” I don’t know the answer to that question, but whether it is an enterprise fund OR sales taxes it is still coming from the same pot. With $80+ million in reserves we can easily takeover the bond payments for the water rec out of the 2nd penny and avoid any rate increases.

TRANSPARENCY WOULD SOLVE THIS PROBLEM

We could come to a compromise by sitting down with the public in public forums to discuss different options when it comes to increasing rates;

• More robust conservation efforts

• Using the 2nd penny or even reserves to pay down bonds

• Even higher rates for excessive users

We don’t need to raise rates, there are other solutions but we need to discuss them in a public forum and our city council NEEDS to demand it.

While I support the efforts of the sustainability folks to call out the administrations lack of transparency I asked someone yesterday, “Where were these folks 6 years ago when this guy rolled into office?” and this person replied, “Where were they in the last election?” Basically saying we let Paul and his endorsed candidates roll over the competition without a fight.

Transparency effects more then just climate change. It also has to do with utility rates, art censorship, insider bridge deals, free facade money to political donors, purchase agreements for welfare developer queens, banning drop boxes from public libraries, demolition orders from VIP neighbors and the list goes on.

We have a bigger fight then just sustainability when it comes to city hall, we have an communication problem. Once we shine light into city hall, most of these difficulties would be less difficult. The mayor says he wants a ONE Sioux Falls (still not sure what that even means) but he seems to be the only ONE not understanding that the ONE doesn’t stand for his bureaucrats but it stands for US, your constituents.

Posted in: Downtown Sioux Falls, Global Warming, Mayor TenHaken, Public Utilities, Public Works, Sioux Falls

Sioux Falls City Council Agenda, March 3, 2020

by

Council Operations Meeting • 2:30 (3/3/2020)

• Review of Draft Edits to the Policies and Procedures Manual (mostly to do with public input).

• Committees

• Use of Electronic Devices

Council Informational • 4 PM (3/3/2020)

Presentations on,

Neighborhood Connect. It appears the Planning Department is rolling out some new software to do the following;

• Transparency
• Extend business hours
• Alerts
• Reduce inquiries
• Easy user interface
It integrates with the City of Sioux Falls Land Management software

While on it’s face, I think it is a good idea, over the last couple of months the city hasn’t had a very good track record with their online presence. Their videos have been crashing, the CityLink live stream has been taken down, the search engines are complicated and a mess and the pilot program for on-demand transit may not get off the ground. I guess if the city wants to be innovative, maybe that innovation should work.

Also presentations on the upcoming election and 2021 Budget Prioritization.

Regular Meeting • 7 PM (3/3/2020)

Item #45 & #60, 2nd Reading, Supplemental Appropriations. Not sure how this vote will go, or if it will be amended, but I have a feeling it will get at least 4 votes to pass (Mayor tie-breaker). They really should censure him for violating the charter and proposing budget changes.

Item #54, 1st Reading, Supplemental Appropriations of $355K to Pavilion for planning the repair of the roof.

Item #55, 1st Reading: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SIOUX FALLS, SD, REPEALING SUBCHAPTER SIOUX FALLS VETERANS PARK ADVISORY BOARD OF CHAPTER 95: PARKS AND RECREATION OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF SAID CITY. (I’m not sure why this board is being repealed, hopefully there will be more details Tuesday night).

Item #56 (57-58), 1st Reading: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SIOUX FALLS, SD, AUTHORIZING INTERIM WATER RATES FOR CERTAIN CUSTOMERS OUTSIDE THE CITY OF SIOUX FALLS. (Prairie Meadow Area). This has to do with a future annexation agreement.

Item #64, A RESOLUTION ADVISING AND GIVING CONSENT TO THE APPOINTMENT OF MEMBERS TO CERTAIN CITIZEN BOARDS. (once again the biographies are missing, I have requested from some councilors to ask the administration why the BIOs are no longer listed on agenda).

Planning Commission • 6 PM • (3/4/2020)

There have been a lot of strange changes lately to the city website and agendas. The latest is in the Planning agenda, instead of numbering the items, they are now using this labeling system; Ex: REZ-011688-2020. More confusion for no reason.

Posted in: Planning Commission, SF City Council, Sioux Falls

Sioux Falls City Council acts like food fighting toddlers

by

City Council Vice-Chair and Leader of the RS5, Greg ‘Man-Child’ Neitzert basically said this during the city council open discussion at the informational meeting after Councilor Brekke offered her disappointment in NOT being allowed to make a presentation to the super secret operations committee.

First off, Brekke made the point that ANY city councilor that is fairly elected to the council should have the opportunity to make a presentation to the full council.

Janet’s presentation is about the phone texting ban (basically) during the meetings. She was simply asking for input before putting it as a 1st reading. The chair of the ops committee (that hasn’t probably met in over a year) Neitzert said he consulted the other members and decided he would refuse Janet’s request. First off, that is a flat out lie. Councilor Starr is on the committee and he said he was never asked. Secondly, I’m not even sure they can deny a fellow city councilor an opportunity to make a presentation about anything, and thirdly, I think the meetings should be in public.

That didn’t stop councilor Christine AirBNBrickson from making all kinds of excuses from scheduling conflicts, time limits (which by charter don’t exist) to whether this could be a public meeting.

And while Greg had the audacity to say the council was acting like toddlers (I think Brekke was very professional and kept her cool) HE was the one that acted like the big baby in refusing to allow Janet the opportunity to make the presentation. Kettle meet black.

FINANCIAL DIRECTOR TRIES TO SPLIT HAIRS

Also during the informational, financial director, Shawn Pritchett tells councilor Stehly that water rates are NOT going up but sewer is. I was wondering if Shawn knew that we don’t get separate water/sewer bills and that they are tied into one bill? In other words, your water & sewer is going up, no matter how he wants to spin it. He also said we already made a bond payment on the Bunker ramp. The payments will be between $1.5-1.7 Million per year for the next 15 years.

PRESIDENT OF THE TEA DEVELOPMENT FOUNDATION . . . UH . . . I MEAN, SF HOUSING DIRECTOR CHELLAC UNRUH GIVES A CONFUSING PRESENTATION

Unruh basically says we will continue to bail out the poorest of the poor making sure developers are making a buck along the way while taxpayers are definitely not maximizing their investment. Same program, different person.

While there were some differences, I didn’t see any major changes. Like stopping global warming, we are beyond a simple fix for affordable housing solutions, but I do think the city could use a 4-tier approach, or a combination of any of these things to get a handle on it. I suggest we start in four different core neighborhoods for a pilot program.

  1. You start with fixing curb and gutter, parking strips, sidewalks, streets and lighting (this would be no out of pocket costs to homeowners and apartment owners in these neighborhoods)
  2. You look for Federal Grants that can help with EPA cleanup requirements like lead paint or mold remediation.
  3. For those that qualify you use community development loans for minor repairs to windows, roofs, furnaces etc. These loans are often low interest to no interest. There are options to be on a payment program or pay off the loan when or if you sell the home in the future.
  4. Probably with a change to state law, we start applying TIF rebates to larger fixes and remodels, like adding bedrooms, fixing basements, etc. to single family homes.

I think the fixes are there, and if you break it down into different programs, the neighborhoods have options.

LEGISLATIVE PRIORITIES – DUMP OUR LOCAL PAPER

In one of the council’s priorities, they suggested alternative publishing options for public notices. During public input, I suggested putting them online (which I think they are already) and ditch the newspaper (which basically takes about $70K a year from taxpayers to print the notices in 4 PT type on a Monday or Saturday issue that no one reads). I also suggested for those who don’t have the internet, to have printed copies of the notices at all the public libraries, Carnegie and City Hall. The city has it’s own media/digital department. It would cost them very little to provide printed copies at the libraries. Of course, this will have to change in the state legislature. I think they could simplify the law by giving municipalities carte blanche on how they want handle public notices.

Posted in: SF City Council, Sioux Falls