Entries Tagged 'Elections' ↓
June 10th, 2015 — Developers, Development, Elections, Sioux Falls
The Argus Leader reported today that the RFP for the mixed use parking ramp downtown was awarded to a joint venture which includes Ramkota Companies and Bender Real Estate.
These companies are lead by Robert Thimjon and Michael Bender.
Both men have donated in the past to the mayor and his campaigns;
Nothing nefarious here, it is perfectly legal in South Dakota to ‘pay to play’. A certain Ad Agency in Sioux Falls has been doing it for years with the state.
So it is NO surprise who got awarded the RFP. The bigger question here is if any city officials or family members are or will be investing in the project? A good question to ask at the presser tomorrow.
April 17th, 2015 — Elections
Ann Tornberg from the SD Democratic Party did a presentation to Democratic Forum today about the history of the initiative process in SD. She ended the presentation with the above slide of possible initiatives coming up. Representative Bernie Hunhoff is working on the school funding initiative. The redistricting would be changed to having NON-elected, bi-partisan members of the committee.
April 16th, 2015 — Elections, SF School District, Sioux Falls
I was not in attendance, but one of my foot soldiers sent me this;
It was short, but quite unbelievable!
Kent Alberty momentarily FORGOT that approval of the 2015-2016 calendar was on the agenda.
Then, just two days after the public vote where voters gave her another three year term, Kate Parker wanted to change the school calendar which the infamous calendar committee had just formulated.
Fortunately, Doug Morrison injected some common sense into the discussion and ultimately, the vote was 4-1 in favor of not touching what the calendar committee had just come up with!
Like I said, I wasn’t there, and have yet to watch the video, but I am uncertain how Parker felt she could skirt state law? Oh wait, I guess it was OK for some of the teachers to skate that fine line, so why not an elected school board member?
These people! When are they going to figure out the initiative and referendum process is a check and balance?
April 13th, 2015 — 1st Amendment, Elections, SF School District
Before we get to the Whaabulance party going on in the Vote YES campaign, I want to clarify something for voters.
If you vote NO on Tuesday, that means you support school starting after Labor Day. That vote also means you will TRULY get a school start date change.
If you vote YES on Tuesday, that means you like the calendar just the way it is, and there will be NO changes made. There seems to be this myth floating around out there that if you VOTE yes there is a chance of a compromise. I can almost guarantee that will NOT happen. The school board has already said they would not look at it seriously until after the vote, and there is nothing in writing. In fact, only one school board member, Kent Alberty has said he supports a compromise, but doesn’t speak for the rest of the board. Don’t kid yourself, whoever wins on Tuesday, one of two things will be clear. The calendar will remain the same, or it will change to after Labor Day. Let’s not muddy the waters with what ifs.
As for the campaigns themselves, I have been watching both of them very closely. It seems the Vote NO campaign has raised money, they have organized, they have put up yard signs, they have done a mailer and they have done print ads. They have also participated in several forums.
The Vote YES campaign has depended on students to get out their message, have raised very little money, and have really just whined about being hamstrung by state law. This is where I will come in and say “Poppycock!”
When I addressed the school board about state law concerning campaigning and the use of public funds and property I never once said that teachers couldn’t campaign. In fact, the way I look at it, teachers have 16 hours a day Monday-Friday and 24 hours a day, Saturday and Sunday to fully practice their 1st amendment rights and campaign for the YES vote. State law hasn’t prohibited the teachers from organizing, raising money, knocking on doors, talking to friends and neighbors or even holding public informationals, that would be a direct violation of their 1st Amendment rights, and they know it, or maybe they don’t?
State law is pretty clear. You can’t do it on the taxpayer’s dime, that’s it. But I have heard a lot of whining by their side that they have been somehow hamstrung by this law. That is just a bunch of boloney. It almost seems like teachers don’t think they should have to campaign for their cause unless they are getting paid, and that is unfortunate. Or is it that NOT all teachers support the early start? I have talked to several who are looking forward to the longer summer and voting NO. So let’s be clear, nothing has prevented teachers from campaigning on their own time, and some have, and I commend them. But to claim they are being hamstrung by state law is a stretch.
At the end of the day, the choice is simple on Tuesday. If you like the way things are, VOTE Yes, if you want your kids to enjoy summer more, VOTE NO.
This isn’t rocket science folks.
April 11th, 2015 — Elections, SF School District, Sioux Falls
April 10th, 2015 — Elections, SF School District
My first reaction is to blame it on bad journalism and ineptness, let’s face it, coming from a station who has a long standing anchor resigning because she just realized she is grumpy and grouchy and another station that is more concerned about photo-ops with the mayor at their company Christmas party we shouldn’t be too surprised.
First, Sammi starts it off with her bad math skills;
The later start also means pushing the end of school back. The last day of school this year is May 14th.
With the new proposal, it would be nearly a month later on June 2nd.
Not sure what math classes Sammi took in college, but last I checked a month is between 28-31 days. The difference between 5/14 and 6/2 is 19 days, about 11 days short of a month. But nice try skewing the topic.
Let’s move on to the Grouchy Nancy station.
Contrary to popular belief, this group is completely student run, other than a mentor needed to oversee the students. Students are not given extra credit to join the group or vote in the election. These ideas and opinions are all student based and are what the students want.
Ah nice work (wink, nod, nod, SF School District Attorney Sue Simons) yeah, not one single teacher or administrator, or PR person has spent ANY time during instructional time on school property helping these students, because see that would violate state law, and let’s just take their word for it. But why would KSFGrouchy spend anytime actually investigating if what the students are saying is true? Because that would take being an actual journalist instead just a microphone stand.
April 7th, 2015 — Elections, SF School District
I know it is a shocker, but the SAME super precinct voting centers are being used for the School Election as were used in the Municipal Election. That’s right, for the first time in YEARS you will be able to vote at the same place you voted at in the last election.
I was surprised to see that Bev Chase w/the School District and Lorie Hogstad with the City Clerk’s office figured out how to communicate with each other. Not sure if they used phones or carrier pigeons.
I know, I had to double check myself.
But if you are still tired of the musical precincts games, as I am, you can absentee vote at the County Administration building up until April 13.
Sample Ballot: (SampleBallot)
Click to Enlarge
April 1st, 2015 — County Commission, Elections, Minnehaha County
March 18th, 2015 — campaign finance, Education funding, Elections, SF School District, Sioux Falls
The State Law is pretty clear;
Universal Citation: SD Codified L § 12-27-20 (through 2012)
12-27-20. Expenditure of public funds to influence election outcome prohibited. The state, an agency of the state, and the governing body of a county, municipality, or other political subdivision of the state may not expend or permit the expenditure of public funds for the purpose of influencing the nomination or election of any candidate, or for the petitioning of a ballot question on the ballot or the adoption or defeat of any ballot question. This section may not be construed to limit the freedom of speech of any officer or employee of the state or such political subdivisions in his or her personal capacity. This section does not prohibit the state, its agencies, or the governing body of any political subdivision of the state from presenting factual information solely for the purpose of educating the voters on a ballot question.
Source: SL 2007, ch 80, § 20.
You can’t use district property maintained by taxpayers to promote your cause. If your parents want to hold a party at their house after school hours, that is perfectly legal. Does Roosevelt HS have any civics teachers that have a clue, or for that matter administrators? Geezsch!
Maybe this is what they are teaching in government class at Roosevelt HS.
March 11th, 2015 — Elections, Minnehaha County