SOUTH DAKOTA STRAIGHT TALK

Tuesday election was a major butt kicking for the Rec Center’s proponents. How dismal they looked in Wednesday morning’s Argus Leader - chief spokesman Andy Howes, major supporter and Sioux Falls Sky Force owner, Greg Heineman, and major domo campaign manager Dan Nelson.

I too am disappointed because it was a missed opportunity for a community that has so much going for it.

What Happened? – While I do not favor using this forum for discussing campaign tactics the principal reason the campaign failed is basic – I’ll breach my maxim: The proponents failed to give any reason to vote for the project.

The campaign headed by the task force that recommended the Recreation Center Project and delegated the leadership to Dan Nelson, Public Affairs Director of the Sioux Falls Chamber of Commerce adopted what appeared to be a campaign plan of a sprint rather than a marathon. They relied on the fact that the special interest coalitions and some notion that having the better-financed campaign and the prospect of perhaps cold or inclement weather would carry the election. There were the trappings of a campaign but it was empty. The newspaper inserts did not sell the project and failed to carry any message of why the community needed the Center.

The campaign was deaf to the community at large. Almost no one I spoke with who did not have ties to swimming, soccer, hockey, or was city booster planned to vote for the Center. Opposition stemmed from many sources but could best be summed up –I won’t use it why should I pay for it? (or how will I benefit?) The campaign failed to address any of the concerns of the opposition and never told the voters why they should support the center.

There are answers for the objections, but hard numbers or answers were never provided by the campaign. Now is not the time to make them but if another project and campaign is launched the entire community must be engaged.

The conclusion by Nelson, "Obviously, we needed a better campaign or a different campaign," is a gross understatement! While Nelson may be an adequate lobbyist for the Chamber, he had a tin ear on this campaign.

I like Andy Howes; we need more young political activists like him. While I prefer the Republican variety, he brings many of the aspects to civic involvement we need (primarily young family persons that are from the business community.) In this campaign I would have like to have seen him share a little more with other members of the City Council the “selling” the positive aspects of the Rec Center.

The special interest groups who opposed the election are thrilled with the results (they should be they won). I do not agree that the proposals defeat is a validation for their positions that food should not be taxed or these kinds of facilities are only for the special interests and should be financed privately.

Voters opposed this proposal for a variety of reasons. 1) The belief that only certain sports clubs would have access to the facility and the general community would not have access without paying high fees. 2) A confluence of cost overruns at City Hall, the deficit budget spending in Washington, and the perception of the government response to the Katrina hurricane. 3) The introduction of Avera Health System into the election in an environment where the public is questioning that with unaffordable health care costs; Why are our hospitals are spending on projects not directly related to their missions? 4) The City has other priorities that need to be addressed, essentially sewer and water projects.

Sidebar - After the election a reader of SD Straight Talk, contacted me and said that I have gone liberal because I keep suggesting that varying political factions should work together to solve problems and thus showed my lack of a rigid commitment to a conservative political philosophy. He further suggests that my support of the Rec Center just makes me like the other weak Republicans who liked this project because it will be used by the wealthy while we have the government pay for it. He also felt that the Rec Center never had a chance of passing.

Support for the Rec Center – While the Center would have been available to all young and old; low income, middle, and upper economic classes, the Rec Center would benefit primarily children and provided for a super indoor playground in a climate that has four to six months of winter. There must be a lot of rich people in Sioux Falls because over the years thousands of children and adolescents have played soccer and swum.

It’s hard to disagree in retrospect with the substandard campaign,  the proposal ever  had much chance of passage.

I supported this project because it was low cost and forward-looking. It is a vision thing. Sioux Falls is growing by 4000 people a year. Let’s not stay stuck too long.

Whether the No voters rejected the proposal or were saying they don’t want any Rec Center is still an open question.