Shareholder vs. Stakeholder Government

by

While listening to Sioux Falls Central District City Council Candidate Emmett Reistroffer speak yesterday (for well over an hour) he brought up a recent candidate forum he was at with Councilor Brekke where she brought up the concept of Shareholder vs. Stakeholder government. He sang the praises of the simple concept. I found it intriguing, as she further described it today on FORUM.

I will confess I haven’t had a phone conversation or email exchange with Janet in months (she is fantastic to talk to about strategic planning and is probably one of the most intelligent city councilors we have ever had) and I had NO idea she was pitching this idea for her campaign.

It’s very simple, in local governments you have two kinds, the Stakeholder and the Shareholder. If you look up the definitions it is clear;

Shareholder; an owner of shares in a company.

Stakeholder; a person with an interest or concern in something, especially a business.

Brekke insists that our form of government in Sioux Falls has turned into a Stakeholder government where the money elite control the levers of power. She of course envisions a Shareholder government that includes all the citizens working with our elected leaders to make change and progress.

Brekke logically comes to the conclusion that open and transparent government eliminates the stakeholders and empowers the shareholders.

DUH!

I have accused the Rubber Stampers on the council and the mayor’s administration of having a war on transparency, and now it is clear what the end game is, eliminating shareholder government.

Which brings us to a candidate running for the other At-Large position, Rich Merkouris.

COUNCIL CANDIDATE RICH MERKOURIS ENVISIONS A STAKEHOLDER FORM OF GOVERNMENT

We must first define what the good pastor stands for;

Prosperity theology (sometimes referred to as the prosperity gospel, the health and wealth gospel, the gospel of success, or seed faith)[A] is a religious belief among some Protestant Christians that financial blessing and physical well-being are always the will of God for them, and that faith, positive speech, and donations to religious causes will increase one’s material wealth.

Don’t believe me? As the current pastor of his church and the president of Kingdom Capital, Rich draws salaries well over 6 figures a year. If he starts drawing a 3rd salary on city council, Rich could be pulling well over a $250K a year.

Besides the fact that I don’t think it is ethical for a pastor and a leader of a religious non-profit charity organization to run or serve in a governmental role, especially since they have controlled money from taxpayers for rental assistance it is clear who Mr. Merkouris serves and it is NOT the shareholders.

I have often loved these bible verses, and I sometimes wonder if Rich has ever read them;

Matthew 22:15-22 Then the Pharisees went and plotted how to entangle him in his words. And they sent their disciples to him, along with the Herodians, saying, “Teacher, we know that you are true and teach the way of God truthfully, and you do not care about anyone’s opinion, for you are not swayed by appearances. Tell us, then, what you think. Is it lawful to pay taxes to Caesar, or not?” But Jesus, aware of their malice, said, “Why put me to the test, you hypocrites? Show me the coin for the tax.” And they brought him a denarius. And Jesus said to them, “Whose likeness and inscription is this?” They said, “Caesar’s.” Then he said to them, “Therefore render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s.” When they heard it, they marveled. And they left him and went away.

It seems that Rich wants to entangle the wealth of God’s kingdom with the wealth of Caesar’s kingdom in his rise to power;

Matthew 19:24 And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.

I understand it when a realtor, a doctor or an insurance salesman wants to run for city council and further their financial opportunities, where I get weary is when a supposed man of God who makes 6 figures a year wants to do it.

Former City Councilor Dr. Kermit Staggers said to me once, “I am very suspicious of politicians that run for office who wear their religion on their sleeves.”

Me too.

Sioux Falls City Councilor Brekke on FORUM

by

Well at least one other city election candidate/incumbent took advantage of KELO AM’s policy of free advertising (FORUM is actually a required public affairs show that the station plays weekly);

A community issues and answering program that focuses on the city and people of the Sioux Empire.

As I mentioned last week, Mayor Poops two hour appearance didn’t violate any rules. Knowing Jon Michaels I am sure he will bring on several other council candidates to balance it out.

Janet talks about her decades of governmental and business experience in Sioux Falls. While I don’t always agree with Janet’s votes, it still baffles me that her colleagues are fighting so hard to replace her with a person that has ZERO experience in government, public service and the business world.

She also told a strange story of how the Mayor’s receptionist has a photo of herself with one of Janet’s opponents on her desk. Bizarre.

Janet finishes her interview talking about Stakeholder vs. Shareholder government. I will be posting later about a candidate who is part of the Stakeholder gang.

Sioux Falls City Councilors Starr and Brekke present ordinances for more transparency

by

There is actually some positive legislation on the city council agenda that costs citizens $0 (so I’m sure there is plenty of money left over from 2021 to fund it 🙂 Pat and Janet are sponsoring two ordinances that address more transparency when it comes to keeping ordinances simple and transparent legal advice.

Item #44 is a clean up measure from state law;

(d) For the purposes of implementing SDCL 9-19-7.1, “substantially alters” shall mean
alterations to a proposed ordinance so significant as to amount to a new proposal from that
which was noticed and heard.

Basically this calls for ordinances to be easily understandable and if they get so complicated and are multi-subject they have to be broken up into separate ordinances (this is how it was explained to me).

Item #45 is self explanatory;

(k) The mayor or any member of the city council may request an official opinion of the city
attorney or a memorandum of legal advice that is not privileged pursuant to SDCL 1-25-2.
Such opinion or memorandum of legal advice shall be open to the public for inspection and
copying. The original opinion or memorandum of legal advice shall be filed with the city
clerk. An official opinion or a memorandum of legal advice shall not be issued on any
matter described in SDCL 1-25-2. The city attorney also reserves the right to deny a request
for an official opinion or a memorandum of legal advice request. Requests for an official
opinion shall not be unreasonably denied, and all denials shall be in writing stating the legal
or policy reason(s) for the denial and shall be filed with the city clerk.

This one will likely get a majority of council support. Basically they are asking the city attorney’s office to issue opinions, due it in a timely manner and make those opinions open to the public.

I guess several councilors have been irked that City Attorney Kooistra’s attitude towards councilors inquiries have been either ignored or denied. Kooistra seems to have one master and they are fed up with it.

As lead city attorney, they must not only serve the mayor and city departments in general but the city council.

I will defend Kooistra on one aspect of his behavior; he probably has denied opinions because he doesn’t know WTF he is talking about.

There will never be ‘Regular People’ serving in Sioux Falls city government ever again

by

We saw the writing on the wall when Alex Jensen and his cabal of donors had to spend $127K to beat a self-employed piano teacher by around 90 votes. The regular guy/gal is no longer allowed to compete.

Just look at the usual donors on the financial reports (someone should tell Andera that she can’t add her smaller contributions up twice 🙂

It is the same group of rich Republican businessmen and mysterious dark PACs (so some of these rich people can hide their identities) that are once again funding the campaigns of the NON-regular people (except Islam who seems to have half the state of Michigan gunning for her and they all work at the same hospital 🙂

You have to chuckle when Clowncilor Marshall Selfish actually suggested that the reason the members needed a bigger salary is so more regular people could run. That’s rich considering he never mentioned that you actually need the money up front.

We could change this with a couple of easy steps;

• Get rid of the Home Rule Charter as it exists and give more power back to council and,

• Publicly finance the races so everyone is on the same playing field.

We of course first must throw out the current charter, and there is a stew brewing on that one along with some other goodies I will share very soon.

So it looks like we will have yet another city election where a handful of people vote for the very people who are lining their pockets with donations from the banksters, bondsters and developers that are turning our city into a corporate welfare state.

This is the current lineup for the election;

Mayoral Race; Paul TenHaken, David Zokaites, Taneeza Islam

Central District; Curt Soehl (No challengers)

Southeast District; David Barranco (No Challengers)

At Large (A); Janet Brekke, Bobbi Andera, Dr. Sarah Cole

At Large (B); Rich Merkouris, Pam Cole

Sioux Falls City Council folds like a wet paper bag

by

At the meeting tonight the council decided that after councilor Brekke shot holes in their pay raise proposal and offered an amendment to reduce the pay raise by $30K (Proposal was $195K reduced to $165K and it is currently $130K) they voted for her amendment.

They did it, because I would assume they got an earful from constituents over the past week about how ridiculous the original proposal was. Even people I talked to over the past week that have no clue about what happens at city hall scoffed at a 30% pay increase and the fact that the mayor accosted me in the lobby of Carnegie Hall about it. Someone asked me, “What’s his deal?” I responded, “You would have to ask his chiropractor, or his pastor, I think they are one in the same.”

They passed this amendment to save face in hopes that citizens will vote for the lesser increase and they might, it certainly is more palatable.

I still reject it because little to no research was done on the original proposal and the whole thing needs to be thrown out. It was pretty freaking obvious the original proposal reflected a $1 per resident, which is something a 3rd grader would have concocted, or former Councilor Rex Rolfing.*

I’m glad it was reduced, but it was only reduced so it has a better chance of passing. I have already talked to some people with a strategy on how we will inform the public to vote this down. The council needs to go back to the drawing board.

In other news I have heard a couple things through the grapevine;

• There may be a group working on initiative to throw out Home Rule Charter in Sioux Falls. I am absolutely NOT involved, but I would be willing to support them in anyway.

• There is also talk that two more mayoral candidates may emerge. I am told both are male and Republican. I may know one of them, but uncertain who the other candidate is. I know there is a lot of frustration with Paul’s cruise control government in the business sector.

*In the past during a working session in which the council was discussing swimming pool fees, Rolfing pulled a number literally from his his behind, in which Erpenbach chewed him out about how he came up with it. She basically told him the numbers have to be based on study and research not what happens between his ass cheeks (she really didn’t say that, but she was pretty PO’d).