Public Comment – City Council Meeting – December 19, 2011 (transcript)
I’d like to remind you I have 5 minutes presentation for this unconstitutional illegal public assembly. Please don’t interrupt. What I have to say here is the truth and nothing but the truth.
My name is Daniel R. Daily. I’m a disabled combat veteran and a citizen of Sioux Falls.
I sued the city and won in Circuit and State Supreme Court.
Initially, the matter was a concrete pad that (per city ordinances) is legal without a permit. After 4 city hearings, I constitutionally challenged city civil procedures in court. The city process was abhorrent. I received 4 repeat citations (quadruple jeopardy). They were not presented in person (improper service). I’d not seen them when the city code enforcer bouncer knocked and blocked my front door at 8AM on a Saturday morning. There was one hearing I arrived for that was last minute city hall cancelled. I attended one hearing with 5 directors the city said never happened but I proved did. One 8 hour hearing was recorded. The city attorney stated he had no recording but was heard on the presented tape asking to change his tape for his recording. I was not allowed to present evidence and forced to testify against myself (unconstitutional). The city process violates all state civil procedures and 2 amendments to the US constitution.
There were 4 Circuit Court dates. At one, the city showed up without subpoenaed witnesses arguing they were not served at the city PO box. Prior witnesses appeared when they were served at 224 W. Ninth. The judge awarded me $1300 the city has never paid. There was no representation at one hearing because the assistant city attorney was ill. When called at his city office, he answered. The city presented a form I’d signed. However, there was a fabricated 2nd page with architectural lettering I’d not seen and didn’t sign or initial. This, the only city evidence was inadmissible. The city cited one 1800’s Minnesota case while I cited 30 South Dakota cases.
The city lost in Circuit Court and appealed to State Supreme Court. They left out the concrete question and the matter became entirely constitutional. The city cited 6 cases while I cited 70. I’d like to thank 3 law firms and the school of law for their pro bono participation. My attorney fees had reached $50K and these patriots recognized I needed help. Yes, I won in State Supreme Court. Everything the lower court ruled. Justices scolded the private attorney. City tax dollars are wasted fighting against your constitutional rights with expensive private attorneys.
There’s federal law that protects me from local government malicious litigation. The city, as defendant, has no complete record for this matter. They’ll have to use mine. Constitutional law requires they keep a thorough file. The federal case warrants a jury trial with damages (actual, punitive). The city tortured me 8 years. I lost my house and my spouse of 27 years. The Veterans Administration treats me psychologically. My issues are PTSD and Agent Orange. I’m seeking financial reimbursement and 6 figures I can devote to a mayoral candidate who will repeal home rule. If you don’t know who she is, you’ll find out. See you in court. No questions.
Funny, after this testimony, the city website is down. Gee, I wonder why?
And the video is still absent this morning . . . hmmm.
I fully support Dan being compensated for his troubles. This includes full reimbursement (with interest) for all of his costs, and an additional amount for his efforts.
That said… I’d need to know whether we are talking low six figures, or high six figures. Do I think he deserves $100k? Sure. Do I think he deserves $950k? No. Like it or not, the city is not responsible for his wife leaving him so that is sort of a moot point.
Based upon his laser like focus on this one issue and his inability to be engaging in any discussion without invoking some reference to “unconstitutional Sioux Falls” (even when the topic is far, far away from these types of issues), I can completely understand how friends and family would distance themselves from him. There is a fine line between passion and obsession. I’d say Dan crossed that line several years ago.
What he intends to do with the money is also a moot point… I could care less if he wants to fund a political candidate or if he wants to head to Scarletts and make it rain – that is his choice.
I do apprecaite Dan’s service however… in both of the wars he has fought in.
I am assuming he will donate a lion’s share to charity, it’s not really about the money. The pyschological damage done to Dan cannot be repaired with any amount of money. While he sounds a bit crazy on here sometimes, it is nothing compared to the craziness that was inflicted on him, it would make any sane man completely nuts, he has actually held up pretty good. He is lucky to have a successful business and national clients. Just think if this would have happened to someone like me or you. Would we have the resources to fight it? Nope, or the will.
“I do apprecaite Dan’s service however… in both of the wars he has fought in.”
I would agree 100%
“I’m seeking financial reimbursement and 6 figures I can devote to a mayoral candidate who will repeal home rule. If you don’t know who she is, you’ll find out.”
Dan is pushing hard for Debra Owen to run for mayor, and I would agree with Dan, she would rock the house. An attorney with extensive knowledge of city government and PRO- Transparency, she quite possibly could be one of the best mayor’s in the history of SF, and I may be wrong, but the first female to hold that office.
BTW, I think Dunsmoor at Stormland TV is going to do a story about it today, he got a copy of the transcript also.
The video is available but there’s no volume (at least not on my pc). Imagine that…
Yup, just watched it. BAM!!!!
Was Munson in on any of this, or does he claim to have no knowledge of what was going on?
Yes, Daily got the run around and was treated very poorly by the City Attorney’s office. Yes, we thank him for his service. To his credit he never gave up and proved the City wrong. I didn’t have a problem watching the video on the city’s website. But his testimony was downright weird. This guy really needs to move on. He is starting to sound like a nut case.
He didn’t say some words right, and I guess if I was telling the city I was suing them in Federal court, I would be a bit nervous.
There is one thing I will say about Dan, he is no nut case, in fact I find him very rationale, rationale in the sense of people’s rights.
We have come to a place in this country that we must obey all authority, because gosh darn it, they know the law. Trust me, they don’t. I have had 2 encounters with the law in SF and both times the coppers did not know WTF they were talking about. Once when a cop tried to question me after he read me my rights, and I told him “Unless there is a lawyer sitting next to me right now, I will answer no questions.” He paused and knew he got his ass handed to him. The second was when one of my paintings was vandalized at a public place and they wanted to negoiate a sale price instead of arresting the thug, they said, “Well then we are going to have to arrest him.” and I said, “Yup. Isn’t that your job.” Two of the biggest clems I have ever seen.
Debra Owens for Mayor!
Dan Daily and Scott Ehrisman for City Council!
Sorry, I had a long day and am very tired but goll durn it, does that sound great?! If that is the case, y’all got my votes!
LOL! Don’t give them all heart attacks at city hall!
Has the city ever come out with a number on the city resources that were wasted on this fiasco? I’m sure not. What disturbs me on this on top of the city’s thuggish and unconst. behavior, is that the city kept such a crappy record. Obviously is is used to just bulldozing people on this type of thing. Where the hell was Amundson when this thing was going down. He should have stopped it. Probably too busy thanking his old buddy Munson for the job and those city benefits. I think Daily was awarded attorney fees (appellate) by the Supreme Court, but turned them down. Also, you might think his claim of his wife leaving him is a reach, but I’m not so sure.
I’m proud to once again see the use of the word “clem”.
Clem: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6K0fFeHX474
We’re so poor we eat food one day and swallow it the next. LOL!
I thought for a moment that this was/could be a SF city counsel meeting:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MApjMm-I9_E&feature=player_embedded