WOW. The Rhetoric couldn’t be more ridiculous. Better put a hat on it, or take it off, or make people sit down . . . I forget.
Entries Tagged 'Rex Rolfing' ↓
In their disdain for Councilor Staggers (at one point, Rolfing told councilor Staggers to go sit down who was presenting his resolution from the podium, let’s talk about decorum Rex, that was a real classy move) in reference to Kermit’s resolution to allow councilors to be committee members in their respective parties.
Rex seemed angry when reading his statement, which he should be, but it was entirely misdirected towards Kermit’s resolution. I joked not to long ago, Erpenbach and Rolfing would vote against a promoting World Peace resolution if it was Kermit’s resolution.
Rolfing was angry about conflicts, but not once mentioned the obvious and blatant conflict Dean Karsky has with the Chamber of Commerce, which does do business with the city, unlike the party committees. He also didn’t even bring up the mayor representing Obama as a Democratic Party delegate. That apparently wasn’t on the radar. Nope, because Karsky and Huether are not Staggers, and let’s admit it, that’s all their NO votes against the resolution by Erpenbach and Rolfing were about (they were the only two to vote against it, because you know, the rest of the councilors used common sense instead of angst while voting).
To be honest with you, they looked like fools singling out Staggers and Erickson last night, when every single one of the councilors and mayor have numerous conflicts of interest that are more detrimental to governance in this city then going to a convention for your party every couple of years.
Some people on the council need to grow up, or at least grow a brain.
No big surprises. It looks like Walmart threw in only an additional $33,000 in the last week before the election. Some interesting notes to point out in the candidate races were that Kiley received only ONE individual contributions right before the election, $250 from Cindy Huether. Cindy also gave $250 to Tex Golfing & Michelle Erpenbach. How convenient that she gave this late in the game, knowing her name wouldn’t appear on a financial report until after the election. I guess she learned well from her sneaky husband.
Mayor Huether also had some interesting contributors. From PAC’s he got $1500 from two separate Unions, Citigroup gave $500, John Morrell’s (Smithfield) gave $1000, and one of the more interesting of his PAC contributors was HDR Engineering, which gave $500. HDR does a boatload of consulting for the city planning office. A very strange donation to Christine Erickson was from Kyle Schoenfish (used to be a Democrat, and is the son of Mayor Huether’s first cousin) who gave $125. Still trying to figure that one out.
Wow. Sometimes it’s the little things at the council meetings that makes you laugh, cry or just scratch your head. After listening to Rex Rolfing’s stab at last night’s invocation you would probably be left doing all three. And to think, I am afraid of some of the extreme things Manny Steele says. Rolfing’s version of a council ‘blessing';
“The US Election of 2012 brought discord and division. The results left half the nation feeling disaster that could have been avoided and the other half felt ruin was near.” Then he quotes Martin Luther, “Christians should pray for bad leaders.”
Not sure ‘WHO’ Rolfing was talking about, but I will say this, even if I am not a Christian, I will still pray for him, the mayor and the rest of the council, even if I don’t think it will do much good.
And the big winners are Erpenbach (over $9K and Huether (over $50K). Documents:
What I find even more interesting is the in common donors. And these are not just dead beat rich folk in town. Who says the mayor’s office doesn’t work with the city council. Besides Michelle & Huether double-teaming the termination of Owen, looks like they send their contribution letters to the same peeps;
Doug Hajek (handles a lot of legal work with bonds for the city, including the EC. Doug is married to state legislator, Anne Hajek.
Craig Lloyd (the owner of the largest development company in Sioux Falls and also the recipient of the most TIF’s in Sioux Falls)
Jeffrey Scherschligt (awarded a TIF and a taxpayer funded bulk head along the river greenway)
Dana Dykhouse (Head dude at First Premier Bank)
Michael Crane (developer and partner with Huether and his wife on projects)
Michael Bender (commercial realtor)
And the developers, attorneys & bankers don’t get what they want, yeah right.
I also viewed Rolfing & Aguliar’s financials, but did not post them. Neither raised any money in December. My guess that neither will seek re-election.
Councilor Staggers has recently been pulling items from the consent agenda. During yesterday’s informational, he asked to pull the minutes from the last meeting (for a correction) and the Phillips Avenue Holiday Lights expenditure. Well that did not sit well with councilor Rolfing. He went into a tirade about inconveniencing city employees who might have to come to a council meeting and answer a question.
First off, the consent agenda is at the beginning of the meeting, if a department head had to come to a meeting to answer a question, they would be there 20 minutes tops. Secondly, most department heads are at the meeting anyway for other agenda items, and lastly, THEY ARE GETTING PAID like the councilors to do the public’s work, which may include attending the council meeting. If there are certain department heads and city employees that feel like they are being inconvenienced, I haven’t heard that. In fact for the over ten years I have watched the city council meetings I have only seen one person complain about how long the meetings are, a councilor, De Knudson. Rolfing seems to be crying wolf about a problem that does not exist.
Fortunately, councilors Karsky, Anderson and even Erpenbach defended the practice of pulling items from the consent agenda and the city attorney agreed to help with a better process.
Personally, I have not been a fan of the consent agenda, I think every item should be pulled and voted on separately, but since that is not the case, as Karsky pointed out, it is well within the power of the council to pull items from the consent agenda.
Trust me, I knew how this was going to go down tonight. I knew it would probably fail.
But the process was not honored. Five councilors didn’t honor their oath to US Constitution to uphold democratic ideals, holding timely elections per request of citizen petition signers. It’s shameful, lustful, greedy, and COWARDLY. These are your five councilors that are COWARDS!
The worst part is that Council Coward Chair Erpenbach decided to implement one of her made up, pro-censorship, anti-1st amendment rules and limiting public testimony to 20 minutes (Think SF School Board meetings). That is why I was not allowed to speak, though I raised my hand.
If I would have had the opportunity (But apparently this city now is a dictatorship ran by a coward called Michelle Erpenbach) I would essentially said this;
I have been watching city government longer then any of you have even served up here. You are very predictable, but I am hoping tonight I would not have to predict the normal, self-interest, cowardly action to protect the ruling class from the working class of this city. I think it is incredibly pathetic that I even have to come here and beg my elected officials to uphold their constitutional duties they swore on in an oath. This is a slam dunk, your constituents have followed the letter of the law gathering these signatures and turning them in. Your job is easy. Vote YES to secure a timely election, any other action would be shameful, cowardly and unconstitutional.
“Showing up to meetings is all about decorum.”
I will have to give a Hat Tip to Ellis for doing the research on this (since I am too lazy);
City Councilor Rex Rolfing was on hand for Monday’s 7 p.m. council meeting for the first time since Sept. 12. Rolfing missed three of the 7 p.m. meetings. Those are the meetings where the council votes and takes official action. Typically there are three of them a month.
Rolfing missed three in a row – including one in which the council approved next year’s budget. That third absence led to a little legal research here, at City Hall, and elsewhere. The city’s charter lays out several reasons for how councilors can forfeit their offices. One states that a councilor forfeits office for missing three consecutive “regular meetings,” unless excused by the council. The council as a body had not excused Rolfing.
It appeared, on first reading, that Rolfing had missed three regular meetings. And if that were true, then he was off the council.
But upon further research, the council has an ordinance that defines a “regular meeting.” For the record, the council has one “regular meeting” a month — the first Monday. So Rolfing was in the clear.
Council Chairwoman Sue Aguilar said Rolfing informed her he would be gone. His absences were business related.
Rolfing has missed six 7 p.m. meetings so far this year. That’s the most of the eight councilors and one mayor. Jim Entenman is in second with four.
Ellis forgot to mention that Tex also showed up to the 7:30 meeting Tuesday night at the Caille Branch library that councilor Jamison was hosting.
I’m not the only one who has noticed that Mr. Rolfing has been absent from the past two city council meetings, and has seemed to miss quite a few meetings since he has become a councilor. I understand that the city councilors serve as part-time public servants and that Rolfing has to make a living and has other business to attend to privately. But one is starting to wonder if he is really into this job or not, missing some very important votes recently. I have always been under the impression that people serve as public servants because they want to SERVE the public. If Mr. Rolfing’s personal life is too hectic to serve on the council properly, maybe he should resign and have someone take his seat who wants to do the job.