“Game on” for the Sioux Falls tax decrease
A day after they were hanging their heads in defeat, the coalition to reduce sales tax in Sioux Falls consulted with their attorney, and they’re back to saying that they think they can press forward:
On Monday night, Minneapolis lawyer Betsey Aby told city councilors it would violate state law to lower the sales tax because portions of the city’s sales tax are obligated to pay its outstanding bonds.
and…
Sioux Falls lawyer Dan Brendtro disagrees with Aby’s opinion.
“I think that she is flat-out wrong,” he said after meeting with Stehly.
Brendtro said the decrease sought by Citizens for a Responsible Sales Tax would not imperil the city’s ability to pay off existing bonds. He argues that the state constitution requires local governments to collect a “sufficient” amount of money to honor debt payments.
“It doesn’t say you can’t lower your taxes,” he said.
“For the city to spend money to stop a vote makes the city look very bad,” he added.
Read it all here. A good reason why it might be good to ask for a second opinion before accepting the one from the people you’re going to take on.
Can the coalition get the job done?
If you enjoyed this post, please consider to leave a comment or subscribe to the feed and get future articles delivered to your feed reader.
Comments
We are actually in a holding pattern for a few days, we are still weighing our legal options.
Detroit, one question: Everybody in this state, and certainly you, Mr. Staggers and Ms. Stehley, knows any law can be referred for 20 days after adoption. You and your group choose not to do so last year when it was passed. You did not refer it then when the law was on your side, why try now? How can you hope to convince anyone that this is anything other than posturing for the next mayoral election?
OK, more than one question, sorry.
On re-reading the post, it comes off a bit snarky, although I’m nowhere near PP and Epp in that game.
I’m earnestly interested in the question: how do you plan to convince the voters that something has changed greatly, such that you now feel strongly about doing something you passed on earlier?
How is this posturing for the mayoral election? I have no intentions of running for office. Staggers has considered a mayor run and Theresa has considered running for Kermit’s seat but they have only ‘considered’ it. I will tell you one thing, Kermit and Theresa are two of the most humble people I have ever met, they do this out of concern for citizens and this community NOT for political gain. I know that is hard to fathom since most city politicians are constantly posturing, Vernon Brown is a prime example of this.
We are not looking for a legal fight, trust me on that, we just want a vote.
Whether or not it is or isn’t posturing is irrelevant, you know you’ll be accused of that by the opposition. Especially since the referral option was passed on.
My question remains, HOW do you plan to win ? This is a campaign blog, let’s hear your pitch to the voters. If it hasn’t gotten that far in your thought process, I’ll understand, but, that begs the question of why do it if you haven’t thought through the alternatives you plan to offer voters.
While not directly on point with my question above, let me say that I would have been greatly disappointed in Mr. Staggers if he had voted against the bonds. His district knows the ravages of a flood all too well and he led the charge for $40mm in drainage improvements in the City’s central core afterwards. He did the right thing in voting for flood protection in other areas of the City.
not sure if this info in relevant, but here it is. Maybe not since Sioux Falls is home rule ?
9-20-19. Legislative decision of governing body subject to referendum–Administrative decision not subject to referendum. Any legislative decision of a governing body is subject to the referendum process. A legislative decision is one that enacts a permanent law or lays down a rule of conduct or course of policy for the guidance of citizens or their officers. Any matter of a permanent or general character is a legislative decision.
No administrative decision of a governing body is subject to the referendum process, unless specifically authorized by this code. An administrative decision is one that merely puts into execution a plan already adopted by the governing body itself or by the Legislature. Supervision of a program is an administrative decision. Hiring, disciplining, and setting the salaries of employees are administrative decisions.
Source: SL 1986, ch 73, § 2.
that is a good question, mhs. why did you pass on the referral option? i feel bad asking, because i did nothing, either. just wondering.
Legal opinions are like rear ends. Everyone has one and the usually stink.
Sorry in advance Epp.