SOUTH DAKOTA STRAIGHT TALK

A different sort of drifter came hat in hand to the Sioux Falls City Council at Monday’s “Informational”.

Monday, Minnehaha County Government came with their hand out seeking a financial partnership with the City of Sioux Falls to provide not only what they believe will help address the homeless problems in Sioux Falls but also provide permanent housing for perhaps up to thirty five homeless persons.

As reported in Monday’s “Argus Leader”, County Human Services Director, Hugh Grogan, was seeking municipal government support saying, "My perspective would be, we need to know from the city that they are committed to the idea of providing permanent housing as a possible solution to the homeless issue, and to the idea of jointly funding that solution,"

County Commissioners, Carol Twedt and Jeff Barth also spoke to the need to deal with the Homeless and more specifically a program technique referred to as “Housing First.” While the County Officials emphasized they were not locked into any specific proposal they seemed anxious to have the City pursue owning the current Army and Navy Reserve Center on Russell Avenue and using it for essentially an apartment building for the (my term) most chronically homeless. The permanent housing was described as a Hospice for the Homeless. It was suggested that such a permanent solution thus was usually a last stop for many. It was stated that have a permanent home then gave social workers an opportunity to make real progress on other problems the client had. It was noted that these chronic homeless were in generally in failing health and their life expectancy was poor.

The County Officials were adroit in using a common negotiating strategy of arguing about details while just assuming that the City would be their financial partner.

From the discussion of the six City Councilors (Beninga and Costello as well as the Mayor were not present) they all seemed open to discussion and listening to the Q and A, watching their body language, and reading today’s press report probably are divided on their feelings and support on this issue.

Homelessness is an issue in our Community and is an important issue that should be dealt with. Answers are not easy as the problem has many facets, social, economic, mental health and substance abuse among others. Without question the City Council and the Citizens of Sioux Falls and Minnehaha County want to deal with this problem.

A Few Observations

Generally the State has designated the County responsible for welfare and social services. This is not a City Government responsibility.

City Government has its own obligations and challenges that they are responsible for. What would County Government be expected to do if they were approached by the City and asked to pay for street maintenance or water and sewer?

County Government is financially challenged perhaps more so than the City because Counties have growing responsibilities with recently rapidly escalating costs (Law Enforcement, Courts and Welfare) without the smorgasbord of revenue options that City Government has (property tax, sales tax, fees, and revenue funds).

The City of Sioux Falls however has plenty of its own demands at the moment. Obviously Lewis & Clark Water System is #1, the need to fund the Levee upgrades, Street repairs and maintenance, and even the so called quality of life issues (libraries, parks, and sports fields) for a growing City, For example, making the choice of using funds for a Library for West Sioux Falls or apartments for homeless, the money spent on a library (a City responsibility) will positively effect many and by waiting even two or three years actually impacts many more people.In the case of young people not having ready access to a library can be a missed opportunity to nurture learning that is of lifetime benefit.

As I often postulate, when you subsidize something it gets bigger – in this case putting the chronic in permanent housing (that does perhaps solve the immediate problem) will in my judgment by its existence create the need for even more permanent housing.

Finally if the County or the City and County do decide to proceed with the Reserve Center or another property – they should consider partnering with non profits such as Habitat for Humanity, Salvation Army, other non profits and Churches. I would also employ Convicts to help with construction tasks as was done when our Schools were wired and the State Fairgrounds renovated.

We ask a lot from our Government, sometimes too much, but at the end of the day Citizens must insist that Government stay prioritized and on task.

If you enjoy political theatre, you do not want to miss watching last Monday’s City Council Informational when the Council discussed the recent snafu regarding the project estimates and funding of the Windows at the Washington Pavilion.

You can watch it at: http://siouxfalls.granicus.com/ViewPublisher.php?view_id=2 and then clicking on “video” to the right of Informational City Council Meetings – April 28, 2008.

There is something in this political melodrama for everyone without regard to your position of feelings about the snafu or the merits of the Windows Project. The mistake on the windows basically was an underestimate on the project’s cost of about $300,000 because the cost of the installation labor was not included in the project estimate. When the project was approved by the City Council last year it was one that received some public attention and though approved the Council was divided on.

At the Informational last Monday, All the Council members that were present spoke up and some more than once. (Vernon Brown was absent out of town on business, Gerald Beninga was absent but I do not know the reason, and Mayor Munson was not in attendance.)

Kicking off the show was Sandra Pay the Chairwoman of the Washington Pavilion Board of Trustees. Mrs. Pay stated that we are sorry to be here and sorry for the “miscalculation” on the estimate. She said it was a careless oversight and that the Pavilion’s management had taken steps to provide additional oversight of future work. Mrs. Pay further stated that they were truly sorry for this any embarrassment that it has caused. She also pointed out that the “Argus Leader” was inaccurate when they editorialized that the money for the project had been spent.

While Mrs. Pay characterized the mistake as the Pavilions, she also I thought very carefully and craftily attempted to leave the distinct impression that while it was the City’s building and ultimately their responsibility for upkeep, in no way should this “careless oversight” impact the fact that the Pavilion’s management should not be left in full control of management of the Pavilion’s operations. Further the impression was left (at least with me) that the Window’s Project should move forward this year even though it would not be entirely completed. Finally while it was unsaid, I thought it was hanging in the air that in no way should this mistake in any way cause the City to further question the Pavilion management’s ability or the Cities ongoing financial commitment to subsidize the Pavilion’s operation. The current annual subsidy amounts to over $1 million,

Mrs. Pay was followed by John Loos, Director of Operations for the Washington Pavilion. Loos accepted responsibility for the error and basically explained it away saying that it was not a big deal, was his first major mistake in 9 years on the job, that the money had not been spent, that a Representative of the City Planning Office had been present at a February meeting when the mistake was reported, and then he reiterated that he was sorry.

What followed next were questions and answers from the Council Members. The questions fell into several broad categories where Members expressed their opinion and in some cases frustration. The exchange between Kermit Staggers and Pat Costello was particularly pointed.

The outspoken supporters – These included Council Chairwoman De Knudson and Councilman Bob Litz. Litz felt that a mistake was made, the Council needed to put it behind them and move on.

The question was raised why does not the Mayor’s Administration inform the Council about significant events and problems. This gets back to control and the continuing power tension between the Council and the City Administration. The three councilmen that were generally in this Camp, included Bob Jamison, Kevin Kavanaugh, and Kermit Staggers. Jamison and Kavanaugh are both retiring in two weeks and in some ways were venting their long standing frustration of the Councils not being informed and lack of information. (In bureaucracies information is power.)

Kermit Staggers used this controversy as an opportunity to again challenge the Windows Project. Kermit also suggested that the lack of communication might have been an attempt to silence this fiscal error before the recent election. He was thus creating doubt I thought, that the Theresa Stehly - Vernon Brown election might had turned out differently had the Pavilion snafu been public. Given Brown’s popularity, the margin of Brown’s victory, and the fact that Brown had absolutely nothing to do with the mistake and the lack of communication – Stagger’s suggestion is off base.

Finally Staggers suggested that the Project should be delayed to discipline City bureaucrats and the beneficiaries of City money that mistakes have consequences (another opportunity to reverse the Window’s project.) It was at this point that Pat Costello suggested it would not be the Pavilion that would be punished but Citizens and Taxpayers.

Communications Problem, Bob Jamison specifically spoke to the breakdown in communication between the Administration and the Council. Kevin Kavanaugh seemed frustrated with not knowing about the mistake for several months and finally asked why the Council did not know and that he demanded an answer. Chair Knudson whose only remark was that she looked forward to the day that the Pavilion had its windows, said that an answer would be gotten from the Mayor. At this point the obvious unasked question was where was the Mayor?

This was fine theatre where passion, feelings and frustrations surfaced. The video is worth watching.

As a follow up on who knew what when KELO news reports that the mistake was known by the Planning Department. Mike Cooper, City Planning Director, notes that they probably should have told the Mayor but in their daily routine back and forth on so many projects did not.

Quick Straight Talk Commentary – Jamison made his point about communication without any hint of rancor and I thought with determined sincerity but Cool Hand Luke was Pat Costello who was reasoned an unemotional.

Disclosure – I previously posted on the Windows Project. This is a worthwhile project but because of recent changes in the economic landscape and other needs that have come to the forefront, the Windows should be put on hold.

Following the discussion on the Windows is an interesting report and update by the Lewis and Clark Water System on the current state of the Project. It too is worth watching but much drier stuff than the political theatre of the Windows Project. Quick synopsis – The L & C Project has been reconfigured to move forward by rearranging priorities and funding thus bridging timelines and putting the necessary federal dollars in as a last dollars received scenario. For the short term Sioux Falls will receive its short term water needs in the next 4 to 5 years.

Final Comment – There is more Theatre to come. On the May 5th City Council agenda are the first reading of ordinances to raise the City Sales Tax to a full 2% and to remove the suggest employment ratios for Police and Firefighters respectfully. I hope to post on this shortly.

The high profile Window Renovation Project at the Washington Pavilion found its way into the news again this week.

It was revealed the project’s cost was underestimated by $300,000. Apparently the flub-a-dub was done by one of the Pavilion administrators who forgot to include the cost of labor into the estimate. The Mayor correctly called on the Pavilion’s management to take responsibility for the mistake. A spokesperson for the Pavilion did so, but very meekly calling it “an oversight.”

When the Windows Project was approved, it was a close call and the Council was of differing opinion on whether to include it into the Capital Improvements Budget. I narrowly supported the project, if the funds were available. It made sense to me that a) the Pavilion is a City owned facility b) the Pavilion is one of the cultural centers for the City and the building is used by many (including many out of town guests and school children) and c. the windows would provide for some payback because the resultant energy savings were estimated to be between 5 and 6 percent.

Today I feel differently – not about whether this is a worthy project but about the timing and the added costs. Since the project was approved last year the civic and political landscape has changed. Since last August, the federal subsidy for the Lewis & Clark Water Project has been eliminated from the budget proposed by the Bush Administration, the Army Corps of Engineers has altered the City’s flood plain map, a very unusual, tough and prolonged winter has caused unexpected breakup in our streets. Since last August Citizens have been confronted with much higher energy and gasoline prices and because of their concerns about the direction of the economy they are reluctant to make discretionary expenditures perhaps thus causing the City a slowdown in sales tax revenue growth.

Two things should happen. The Mayor and the City Council should take a breather and re prioritize. Put the windows on hold.

1. Fix the streets, which in part the City Council did recently when extra money was found and they diverted money from the Mayor’s plan for land acquisition.

Sidebar – While on the issue of streets, the local developers have proposed a funding arrangement to help development of streets in new areas. After taking care of these first necessities, the Mayor and Council should find a way to implement this program.

2. The City Government should accept the responsibility to immediately begin construction on the dike / levee system that is needed to protect the City from flooding. In the event of a flood this will prevent possibly the loss of human life but also property damage to homeowners and businesses. Taking care of this problem now will save thousands if not millions of dollars in flood insurance premiums to real property owners. The City could issue general obligation bonds or some kind of hybrid bond if help is available from the State of South Dakota. The promised Federal help would be welcome, but the feds truly are broke and the City should not wait.

3. Find some way to assure that the Missouri River water gets to Sioux Falls via the Lewis & Clark Project. Sioux Falls has become the ward of an unreliable Federal (and again broke) government. We need to make sure this happens. Sioux Falls’ future depends on it.

The windows project and many others in the Capital Improvements Plan are extras – things that would be nice to have but they are not among the government’s first responsibility to help provide for the health and safety of its citizens.

Endbar – The cost estimate fiasco again raises questions about how the Pavilion is managed. The Pavilion receives in excess of $1 million annually as an operations subsidy from the City. The Pavilion has a new CEO, Gary Wood. The cost estimate fiasco gives Wood the opportunity and the public relations cover to make changes if necessary to insure that these kinds of “oversights” don’t happen. It also would provide assurance to the Council that money it entrusts to the Washington Pavilion is being properly managed.

Sioux Falls’ voters went to the polls on April 8th and reelected the two Incumbents (Litz and Brown) and two new Councilors whom are legacies to their Fathers who previously served on the Sioux Falls City Council or Commission, Greg Jamison and Kenny Anderson, Jr.

Voters sent the message they are on balance satisfied with the direction of City Government. Bob Litz was appointed to the Council to replace Darin Smith who quit after coming in fourth in the Mayor’s election two years ago. Litz received about 54% (with the runner up getting 37%) of the vote. Vernon Brown won by a large margin in the City Wide At Large seat receiving over 61%.

Post election coverage and analysis in the Argus Leader centered on (as did the public that was paying attention) the At Large election between Brown and Theresa Stehly. This is highlighted by the fact that this was the only race that all City voters participated in and thus give a sense of what the entire City is thinking. Particularly the Argus’ commenter’s believed Brown won because of his superior name identification.

Name identification is important and gives a candidate who have it an advantage, but name identification alone does not produce 22% victories.

As noted in the election recap story the At Large race was about more than the marquis election between Brown and Stehly. Stehly was widely seen as a surrogate for Councilman Kermit Staggers. Staggers and Brown have distinctly different views on government (or non-government in the case of Staggers) and their vision for Sioux Falls.

The Staggers Stehly affiliation stems from the Drake Springs pool election last year. Stehly was the lead sponsor and spokeswoman for the Outdoor option. Staggers who was the only Councilor to oppose the more expensive Indoor pool used the pool issue to highlight his beliefs. When the Outdoor Pool won, Staggers proclaimed a victory not only for the Outdoor Pool but for his view of less government.

Stehly who found the pool election empowering and encouraged no doubt by Staggers decided to make a run against Brown for a Council seat.

Staggers and Stehly believed and postulated that since the Council had supported the indoor pool and the voters wanted an outdoor pool that the Council was out of touch with Citizens. (the corollary of course is that because Staggers often is the one vote in many 7-1 Council votes – voters in the pool election thus proves Staggers is right and is the Man Of The People on all other issues as well.)

The election on April 8th proved this not to be the case. The pool vote was about the voters wanting an outdoor pool and as the April 8th election demonstrates not an approval rating of City government.

Five months ago I chimed in on this and yet again funding the Lewis & Clark Water Pipeline is in the news again.

President Bush has completely taken funding for Lewis & Clark out of his proposed 2009 Budget and out Elected Officials are howling. I like our Senators and U S Representative believe some level of funding will be restored, though it may not be until after the November election in a lame duck session or even until next year.

Reiterating a few points I keep making –

               An Abundant and Adequate Water Supply Is A Paramount Government Responsibility

              Lewis Clark Water System Is An Excellent Project

              Is This Really A Federal Project?

              While we wait the costs just escalate

In 1989 when L & C was first conceived it was about an $87 million project or there about. In July of 2005 when I first wrote about Sioux Falls #1 Problem the estimated cost was something like $432 million dollar project. Currently the cost is estimated at $650 million and going higher.

Given the Economy’s current growth rate and current lower interest rates would this not be a good time to have a revenue bond project fix the project’s cost, stimulate the economy and assure the regions future growth? The downside of course is that paying for the project without Federal help is very expensive and perhaps prohibitive.

The Mayor, City Council, Lewis & Clark Officials, and our Federal Representatives need to come to grips with the problem and get the pipeline built. Not an easy task but it is that Important. We should not be continuously be going through this funding B.S.

Endbar – L & C is going to have Federal involvement and participation (given the fact that it the cost today may be prohibitive for 100% local funding), but our government can do better. Any bets on when this $30 million will be solved or reconciled? When the next lack of Federal funding crisis will ensue and when I am writing about More Waiting?

Kermit Staggers as reported in today’s “Argus Leader” is being recruited to stand for election for his old District 13 State Senate seat.

The District 13 Senate seat currently is held by Democrat Senate leader Scott Heidepriem. Scott is often touted at the Democrat’s next Governor candidate and thus “knocking him off” is a big Republican priority. Scott surely has ambitions for statewide office, probably Governor as speculated, but I would not be surprised to see him run for U S House of Representatives should Ms. H. S. not run or even perhaps in the future a candidate for U S Senate or even Attorney General. Which office would be determined by the current political landscape. In any event Heidepriem is a formidable presence and it is in the GOP’s best interest to try and make him go away.

Kermit would be without doubt the best possible candidate the GOP could put up. He is a proven winner and is well known in central Sioux Falls. He represents approximately the same district in his City Council position. He is an indefatigable campaigner and is probably on a first name basis and acquainted with several thousand people in District 13.

Kermit is a focused candidate and no one will out work him. When I was with the South Dakota GOP, we regularly conducted campaign schools. Kermit always attended. I used to always ask him sometimes directly and sometimes rhetorically to the entire school, why are you here as an attendee? You should be teaching the course.

Kermit knows the drill. Without question with Staggers in the race Heidepriem would be tied down this summer going door to door and not out helping other Dems win election. Also consider that this would be an expensive race likely to set a spending record. Scott raised in his last election what is probably already a record of over $120,000. This may be more than even Stan Adelstein spent on his most costly election. A key difference is that Scott raised most of his dough from others.

Kermit is no slouch in raising campaign funds either. In fact he is a tiger!

Kermit Staggers as I have posted before is a charming and engaging curmudgeon whom you cannot help but to like.

Should Kermit oppose Heidepriem and make a run for the Senate again the District 13 Senate race would be a Classic. In today’s “Argus” article Staggers affirms that he is “Inclined” to serve on the City Council rather than seek the Senate seat.

Kermit, in my opinion though under what will be enormous pressure from the GOP and the anti taxers (Americans for Prosperity and the like) will decline to run. Kermit has stars in his eyes and is planning a run for Mayor in 2010. Kermit, in his 8 years in Pierre was just a cog in the wheel. He understands as Mayor he would be driving the bus. Additionally by running for the Senate he risks losing and if he were to win (a real possibility) he would give up the platform and microphone he currently enjoys on the City Council.

I disagree with Kermit Staggers on most issues. He opposes most anything that improves the quality of life. But you can count on Kermit Staggers to always be sincere. There is a value to having someone like him in public service, someone who is willing to ask the tough questions. He is consistent and represents the people who vote for him - primarily older voters who want little new from their government, people who are generally on fixed incomes and want low taxes.

Correction Jan. 25th  - I had a nice phone conversation with Kermit Staggers today. Kermit told me that the anecdote that I reported being told was not factual. Whatever you may think of Kermit’s opinion’s, he is honest and I believe him. Consequently I have removed the material that Kermit says is inaccurate. JR

The Coliseum Exploratory group stated this week that their planning is moving forward and if significant details and developments can be worked through ground could be broken for a new Sioux Falls Events Center in 2009 and construction could be completed in three years.

Sidebar – It is an uninformed observation but starting in 2009 seems very quick (considering funding, approval by the various units of government, what will obviously require voter approval, facility planning and design) and three years of construction seems too long.

Other details that were released in a report in the “Sioux Falls Business Journal” were that the 2008 Legislature would be asked for enabling legislation for the City to increase the City sales tax by 1% to fund construction of an Events Center. Any tax increase thus would have to pass the Legislature and then be passed by the City Council. Likely opponents would refer the tax increase (and of course delay the project and make it cost even more.) The plan indicates that the tax would be temporary for one year and is projected to raise about $40 million.

It can be expected that non Sioux Falls Legislators and the Governor might oppose this authorization despite the fact that it is enabling and permissive not a tax increase in and of itself. Interestingly given the State’s strong support of tourism, and that a Sioux Falls Events Center would dramatically raise Tourism numbers opposition does not seem consistent to existing State policy.

The Exploratory committee is providing strong and much needed leadership. Co Chairman, Kelby Krabbenhoft is right, when he told the Sioux Falls School Board, “ The coliseum must happen. ... Holding it back isn't going to work. Trying to stop it, it's not going to work." These are very aggressive leaders as the timeline to begin construction attests. However the greatest strength of the Exporatory Group is their ability to listen and compromise.

Several weeks ago, after the announcement of the Committee’s formation and broad outline of a plan, there was some objection from those who had attachment to Howard Wood Field. The Explorers astutely worked to overcome those objectios. They announced that the name Howard Wood Field would attach to the field in the new facility and all Howard Wood facilities would be replaced or duplicated at other venues in Sioux Falls.

In Thursday’s Sioux Falls daily another report appeared that despite the willingness and effort by the Coliseum Group to work through prior objections and make adjustments and compromise some unhappiness still exists.

When you are happy resistance to change is understandable and not everyone will be satisfied with a new Center in every respect. That is what compromise is about.

Concerning the needs of the Sioux Falls School District. The School Board is charged with operating the District in the best interests of the students (first) and the taxpayers. The School Board should not agree to cede Howard Wood Field without being made whole in terms of their programs. I do not believe that the Explorers feel any differently and reasonable people can move forward with everyone’s interest intact.

Just as a fiscal note, the School District under the existing proposal has an opportunity to save millions of dollars by not making planned renovations to Howard Wood. However, having the district building extensive fields and tracks with bleachers, press boxes, restrooms, etc. at each of the High Schools would not be a practical alternative. These additions likely would cost far more than renovations at Howard Wood Field.

One thing is certain.: Sioux Falls needs a new modern faciltiy in keeping with our Great City. The Time Is Now!

Disclaimer – I support a 21st Century Events Center and previously posted on this: A New Events Center

Sioux Falls City Councilors tomorrow will be considering the new and revised and long awaited campaign finance regulations.

The proposed new regulations are up for their Second Reading and Final Consideration. There has been a lot of time and study by the sub committee (Councilors Staggers, Costello, and Knudson) and the City Clerk, Debra Owen. There has also been some disagreement, the final recommendation was sent to the full Council on a 2-1 vote.

The new ordinance is far more detailed than the current law concerning reporting requirements, defining various types of committees and detailing gifts, loans and other possible types of political contributions.

Contribution limits will be the controversial sticking part when proposed Ordinance 0127 is considered. Proposed are limits by individual persons of $1000 annually or political committees of $1000 annually. Additionally political action committees will be prohibited from receiving more that $10,000 from any individual contributor.

Contribution Limits will be at the center of the debate. It is rumored that Bob Litz who opposed this Ordinance on its first reading will make a motion to amend the Ordinance to remove all limits. Litz also announced this past week that he will be seeking election to his first full term in next Spring’s election. Litz was appointed to fill the term of Darin Smith who quit his office after coming in 4th in last year’s Mayoral race. Smith upon losing discovered he needed more time professionally and with his family and thus resigned his Council seat.

It will be an interesting debate. Kermit Staggers, who fashions himself as the champion of the little guy also opposes limits.

What may be just as interesting, though I often disagree with Kermit, I also oppose limits. Campaign contributions are a form of free political speech. What is needed is immediate disclosure of all Campaign Receipts and Expenditures.

Whether you favor or oppose no limits some change is required. It is nonsensical to limits PACs to the same amount as individuals.

The proposed ordinance does not go near far enough in its Disclosure requirements. The proposal calls for periodic reporting (as is done now.) Immediate Internet based reporting is needed. With virtual reporting there would be complete transparency and the public would know almost instantaneously how much and from who a candidate or committee were getting their money.

Given the current state of debate on this ordinance and the feeling that even after almost five or six months of study - some compromise is required. Keeping the current $1000 individual limit is fair and placing a $5000 or $10,000 limits on Committees also seems reasonable.

As with State elections, corporate contributions to Candidate campaigns should be prohibited but permitted for ballot question committees.

In any scenario transparency and Immediate Disclosure are required and they in themselves will overcome most other ordinance defects.

Reports in today’s Argus Leader are that a new leadership group has formed to develop a business plan and promote a new Events Center in Sioux Falls.

This announcement is an extremely positive development that complements the many good things that are happening in fast growing Sioux Falls. This report has two important components – leadership and compromise.

Leadership - in addressing the City’s need for a new events center and developing a strategy and framework for moving forward.

Compromise – in coming forward with a proposed framework that overcomes many of the existing objections perceived in the current public debate over a new Center. The three primary objections are do we need a new Events Center, the cost, and the location. Through Compromise the proposed framework positively addresses those objections.

The Basics – A new Events Center would be built near the site of the current Howard Wood Field at the Sioux Falls Events Campus. The project is envisioned to be a facility similar to the Fargodome. The Center would be financed both publicly and privately. The leadership group in the next six months or so will be putting together a business plan and detailing more specifics about the facility in addition to putting together the all-important “numbers.” This is an impressive group of leaders and businesspersons. There will be a substantial and workable plan.

The news report suggests there is a mega donor ready to contribute perhaps as much, it is suggested as $50 million. Everyone can guess who that might be given the Co-Chairman of The Coliseum Exploratory Group are Kelby Krabbenhoft, president and chief executive officer of Sanford Health and Dana Dykhouse, president and CEO of First Premier Bank. However, I would not be surprised if it doesn’ turn out to be someone other than South Dakota’s Mega Philanthropist.

Sioux Falls needs a new center and this is an exciting development.

Background and Commentary – The Fargodome. (the numbers and financing facts are from memory so I will stand correctd

The Fargodome is an outstanding facilty. It is a multipurpose arena and domed stadium. It is located on the North Dakota State University campus and serves as the Bison’s football stadium and basketball arena. Configured for football the Fargodome seats over 21,000.

Sidebar – think how fantastic it would be to have a State vs U basketball games in Sioux Falls in a 20,000 plus seat Arena.

The Fargodome was a true community effort to finance. The State of North Dakota through its University system contributed to the cost. Uniquely both the cities of Fargo and sister city, Moorehead, Minnesota have a small sales tax that supports the facility. There also is a parking fee at the Fargodome that supports the facility.

I do not know the terms of the contract with Global Spectrum that manages the operation of the Fargodome (they also are the recently hired manager of the Sioux Falls Convention Center) but perhaps some of their receipts from concessions, rentals and the like also supports the facility. What is for certain, Fargo is getting events and concerts that Sioux Falls can only wish for. Interestingly - the poplulation of the Fargo Moorehead metropolitan area is approximately 174,000 while the Sioux Falls metro area is 223000.

Public discussion and debate will be interesting to watch as the plan unfolds in the coming months. It is important to understand that this facility requires public support. Support that is necessary and only right – it is a public facility. It would be fantastic if a Sioux Falls Events Center was profitable but may not be realistic. In either event such a facilty deserves public support and finance.

Sioux Falls should again advocate for State authorization for the local option to levy a third penny sales tax related to entertainment. It is suggested that Revenue Bonds might also be used to support an Events Center. Certainly Revenue Bonds are an option.

Just as a caveat, as necessary and important that an Events Center is to the City’s future, it pales in comparison to an adequate water supply. The Lewis and Clark water system must remain the City’s first priority. Until Lewis and Clark funding is resolved, pledging any significant City resources would not be prudent.

Today’s news is welcome and fantastic and I can hardly wait for a new Center, however as they say the devil is in the details. With this Leadership group and public support an exciting Events Center will be realized in the not too distant future.

The bids for the Lewis & Clark Water System Treatment Plant were opened on Monday and astonishingly they came in 33 percent over the Engineer’s estimate or about $34 million over the $108 million estimate. This is a big story as the L & C project is fundamental to the future growth of The Sioux Empire.

Sidebar – Where is the news coverage of this important story? The blown engineer’s estimate was briefly reported from an Associated Press report as a News Update teaser at Argusleader.com on Monday night. Yet despite the story’s importance there has been little coverage. There are important questions that need to be asked – Like - how the estimate was missed by such a large margin? What L & C management is going to do now? What is the reaction of government leaders at the local, state, and federal levels and what action if anything they propose to assure an increased water supply? Obviously these questions includes the how is this going to be finance and ultimately paid for? (Federal taxpayers, local taxpayers, and/or water users)

Why there has not been more extensive coverage of this important story is another question.

Straight Talk has commented extensively and repeatedly on the necessity of obtaining a long term supply of water and the cost of waiting. The current setback changes nothing, it just exacerbates it. The clock is ticking and the costs of waiting for someone else to pay continue to rise. Consider also that Federal funding priorities today have been refocused on rebuilding infrastructure, not funding new projects (although technically L & C is not a new project). The competition for Federal Bucks is ferocious.

Our prior posts are Sioux Falls #1 Problem (July 2005), Just Do It! (January 2006), and Why Wait? (February 2007), yet here I go again writing about the same thing. Our leaders need to get off the “let the federal government pay for it cost escalator”, show some leadership, build the project and secure our future.

Salient comments from the earlier posts

“Just Do It!”

It now seems waiting and waiting and waiting is not working. Of course it has not worked for a long time. Perhaps our so called leaders and politicians are slowly coming to this realization. We need the water and the time for Sioux Falls and the other communities to take matters into their own hands and act responsibility is Now! Let's Just Do It!

“Why Wait?”

This project needs to be built NOW! Our leaders should step up to the plate and find a funding solution and then do it. Some options available might be having the City of Sioux Falls bond the entire project, having the State of South Dakota issue revenue bonds or having the Federal Government instead of making diminishing grants make a loan or loan guarantee (along the lines of the DM&E loan) to construct the project.

Lewis and Clark is an Excellent Project. The bottom line is Sioux Falls needs the water and they will have to ultimately pay for it. The project will cost more going forward so quit waiting for someone else to pay and BUILD IT NOW.