Entries Tagged 'Rick Kiley' ↓

Two Sioux Falls City Councilors supporting troublesome school bond issue

Councilors Kiley and Erickson have joined the drum beat of public officials who are encouraging people to vote yes for the school bond issue. It is well within their 1st Amendment rights to voice their opinions. What is troublesome though is that we have elected officials who support not only a dubious election but a very wasteful bond loan. For every $3 we put towards this in tax dollars over $1 goes towards interest and bond investors. Over a $100 million of tax dollars that will never be spent on education.

Another city councilor has worked behind the scenes to try to get the election to use ALL of the precincts, no E-Poll books and have the vote be electronically counted by the Minnehaha County Auditor. Their request fell on deaf ears.

The E-Poll books failed in the primaries because the company that created them no longer services them (Hart Interactiv) and another company, B-Pro has stepped in to try to get them to work. If the E-Poll books don’t work properly there is no way of knowing if people voted multiple times, and if they are hand counted, there is no way of knowing if ballots have been tampered with.

While the election process and extreme waste of tax dollars is troubling in itself, it upsets me even more that we have two public officials promoting this.

Talk about a lack of fiscal responsibility and democratic principles.

Water Rates going up? That’s news to me.

Apparently Councilor Rick Kiley has a crystal ball, because he is predicting our water and sewer rates are going up;

“They foresee a possible increase of about $2 per month for a family of five,” city councilor Rick Kiley said.

Kiley says the city knew this day was coming.

“You never want to raise rates, but in a situation like this where we are at 82% capacity today, we have a community that’s growing by 5,000 people every year and we are bringing on regional customers in addition to that it’s the prudent thing to do now is to expand our existing facilities,” Kiley said.

The city council will be voting on the funding this project when it passes the city budget in October.

While I agree we need to fix up a 1980’s water treatment plant, if we didn’t switch the rates over to enterprise funds we could easily pay the bonds with 2nd penny CIP revenue without raising fees. But see, former mayor Bucktooth & Bowlcut wanted to free up the 2nd penny from paying for silly old water pipes, and use it for paying down bonds for monument building.

So now our taxes are going up for a new jail, and Minnehaha county admitted at their Tuesday meeting (Commissioner Barth) that there will likely be another opt out, put that on top of a 25 year around $300 million dollar new school bond and our already existing $300 million city debt, and things are going to get a lot more expensive in Sioux Falls, including taking a dump.

Sioux Falls City Councilor Selberg moving forward with ‘Huether/Rolfing’ memorial ordinance

That’s what I am calling the proposed ordinance Tuesday Night (Item#9 – 1st Reading) to change the order of the meeting agenda so public input is at the end of the meeting. The irony of it is that Public Input became a ruckus because of the lack of respect and decorum Huether and Rolfing showed to the commenters. Often laughing at, heckling, or making cry baby speeches at the people who would come up and speak truth to power. They were incredibly disrespectful and arrogant, than they wondered why someone would call them an SOB? Go figure.

They are trying to change the rules because of ONE person’s actions. But in reality, that is just an excuse they are using. The city has been embarrassed time and time again because of the input from citizens at the council meetings;

• Walmart on 85th

• Copper Lounge Collapse

• Oak View neighborhood

• Events Center Siding

• Administration building

• Downtown noise ordinance

• Poorly negotiated RR redevelopment deal

. . . and the list goes on.

This isn’t about one person’s potty mouth or a disenfranchised veteran, this is about stopping public commenters from pointing out important issues in our city. Some of the best solutions to problems and awareness comes from the people who come and bring public input. That is why the former mayor and certain councilors hated it so much.

I asked Councilor Neitzert in a text today how he would vote on the first reading (he seems to be the deciding vote) he gave me a line about coming up with a ‘pros and cons’ list. I told him it would be hypocritical of him to support this, especially since he used public input many times as a citizen and ran on transparency in government. Pushing citizens to the back of the line is certainly NOT a PRO to open and transparent government. I’m just hoping Greg sees the light by the time Tuesday rolls around. Besides, transparency was the #1 issue in this last election. Moving public input to the end of the meeting wreaks of closed government.

Either way, I will remind the ENTIRE council once again why this would be a very BAD idea to change.

• It has worked well for 16 years. I remember when Munson was mayor there were several nights when public input got a little heated. Dave wasn’t shy, he dropped the gavel and told you to sit down. That is what a GOOD leader/chair does, they take control of the meeting and situation. You don’t change the rules for the majority because a tiny minority has a potty mouth. TenHaken needs to be a leader and instead of supporting this (I hear he does) he needs to take control of the meetings. Maybe before Tuesday he can get some tips from Munson on that.

• The family friendly argument is a joke. I didn’t know a government meeting was like an episode of the Brady Bunch. Besides, let’s talk family friendly. Was it family friendly to approve going into partnership with a developer who’s contractor caused the death of a worker? Is that what you mean by family friendly? I am way more offended by that than if a person says SOB at a meeting.

• What the heck has Councilor Marshall Selberg done in 2 years? Besides voting on developments that benefit his employer without recusing himself (conflict of interest) he has contributed NO legislation. So his first order of business is to push through anti-dissent legislation? Wow! He really has NO CLUE about public service.

• As I mentioned above, half the problem with public input solved itself when Mike and Rex left.

• I have also argued that this will actually make the meetings longer, because people will show up for public input and start to comment on all the agenda items. If you have 4-5 people from the public speaking for 4-5 minutes on every agenda item, the meetings could get very long. And once you get to public input, they could let you have it again about the decisions that were made that night. Do you really want to end your meetings that way?

Finally I will say what I have said to the council a thousand times already – the citizens own this government, not the banksters and developers and mega-plex hospitals. The public should have the first opportunity to speak at meetings and the rest of them, who are essentially benefitting from the city either financially or otherwise can wait. Besides, like standing in a long line at the courthouse to get your license plates, waiting until the end of the meeting for public input is another form of taxation. Everyone else in the room (councilors, mayor, directors, city employees, bar owners, developers, etc) are getting paid to be there, we are not, but we are funding the operation that’s why we get to go first.

Public input is NOT broken, it just needs to be handled better by the chair, someone who is willing to gavel and put people in their place when they use potty mouth or ramble about what happened to them in 1973.

Leave it as is!

CONTACT the council and mayor’s office and tell them how you feel.

I know that Selberg, Kiley and TenHaken support this. I think that Erickson and Soehl MAY support this. Brekke, Starr and Stehly DO NOT. So far Neitzert is undecided.

Sioux Falls City Councilor Kiley on Main Street Café this Morning

KSOO Radio’s Main Street Cafe with Chad and Beth had as special guest Sioux Falls City Council Chair Rick Kiley on April 6, 2018. LISTEN HERE.

The discussion centered on Public Input during the City Council meetings without touching on why people are showing up. Instead of trying to talk about the important issues being brought up during the citizen inputs, Rick only talked about his hurt feelings.

TRANSCRIPT

McKenzie; you’ve done away with I think I agree it’s a very important part of the meeting I just think that we’ve lost all decorum it’s gotten to the point we’re expecting you guys to sit through a video of toy trains with the three stooges doing some sort of Nazi salute* at the very end of it or somebody who’s done a rap video that’s uh that’s a waste of time that’s not what public input was intended to be at least in my opinion so I agree with you I think the public input released remain but my question is does it have to be on television does it have to be carried live on Sioux Falls on your cable channel**

*This episode of the Three Stooges is one of their most famous, it was making fun of fascism and dictatorships, not promoting it.

**CityLink is on Cable. But it is also public access paid for by the very people who speak at public input.

Kiley; well you bring up very good points Chad and I would agree that the examples that you just just cited that’s not productive time that’s not using our time productively or the citizens time productively especially for individuals that are attending the meeting because they have important items that are going to appear later on the agenda.

*The people who speak at public input own the city government just as much as the people that are there to do business.

There’s been cases where we haven’t finished a few times it’s been after 10:30 close to 11 o’clock and sometimes that’s due to the length of public input sometimes that’s due to the length of input during the different items as well but and much I much of the input over the years has been very valuable

*No where in the charter is there a ‘time limit’ on meetings. If they are getting long the council can take a short recess or recess to the next day. They have that right. They also are getting paid to be there unlike the public who shows up on their own time.

but as I mentioned lately here we’ve reached new lows and unfortunately I do believe that it’s probably going to be looked at very closely with the new administration coming on and what kind of changes could potentially be implemented I’m not sure what those may be you bring up some good suggestions.

*I hope changes are made. I told Bruce recently that as soon as the new mayor is elected I am going to sit down with them and explain the importance of public input. I’m also going to tell them that it won’t be the same because the person causing the turmoil will be gone. As long as the next chair is dedicated to open and transparent government, they will have no concerns about public input.

Others have too by the way the story that you posted to the KSOO website a few days ago that’s been picked up by other blogs as well and comments have been made in and for most purposes I know the comments that I’ve seen have been favorable towards what you what you have written.

*Actually the comments have been about 50/50 with most people agreeing it is the chair that has turned this into a circus. In fact, when Kiley ran the meeting about a month ago in the absence of the mayor, public input went swimmingly.

It’s obvious something does need to change but it’s very unfortunate that there’s really just a small group and I mean three to four people that are driving this change the need for the change I would say it’s become personal it’s now to the point where for some reason it’s become a personal thing they’re out to purposely embarrass the City Council and the mayor for whatever reason and it it’s uncalled for it doesn’t need to be yes unfortunately for the mayor it’s it has to be difficult to sit in his seat night after night and take that kind of abuse and there’s been some directed toward the City Council but not nearly as much as what’s been directed towards the mayor and I would tend to agree that it is personal it’s now a clash between individuals that do not like one another and it’s just unfortunate and it’s serving absolutely no purpose it’s big it’s turned into a mockery and that’s not the way it was intended to be well we should be able to have people attend with their children we’ve had Scouts and Girl Scouts and other individuals bring their children the smoking issue brought families in and then had to have them exposed to this kind of behavior it’s not only is it embarrassing but it is just not right.

*So now government is PG rated? In a Democracy things are messy, and I think it is a great civic lesson to the young people that are attending.

Hosts; and Rick to you one of the things I’m concerned about is if a citizen would like to address during that time that they may see themselves as not wanting to be grouped in with the others that are also providing that public input and so people with a concern I don’t like about tree trimming or something are not going to go there because they don’t want to be seen as part of that group best you bring you bring up a very good point after witnessing what happened there there was another lady that I had not ever seen before at public input and I’m quite certain she did come up but I’m quite certain she was wondering what she was getting herself into at the time and we don’t want to discourage individuals from addressing their City Council we would like them to feel that they’re free to do so well Rick we appreciate you making some time for us this morning and addressing what was on our website earlier this week I hope that the new City Council and the new mayor addressed this and something can be done about it.

*Actually I think we have empowered a lot of people to come up and speak. I have been speaking for over 12 years at council meetings and I am often complimented on my testimony. The only person intimidating people from speaking is the chair who stares people down and makes smart ass remarks after they speak. He recently told an attorney that he should be ‘better prepared’. Really?

Kiley; I truly do well I hope so too and I hope that the citizens have realized this isn’t a reflection of a good work that the City Council is performing and when I say that I include the mayor there have been a lot of good things that have come out of our meetings and out of the whole process but it’s easily overshadowed by just a few minutes of very gear responsible behavior.

Hosts; Thank You councilor we appreciate it thank you okay have a good day councilor Rick Kiley chair of the Sioux Falls City Council joining us this morning here on KSOO.

Sioux Falls City Council Chair Kiley has NO CLUE what ‘confidential and Priviledged’ information is

I often shake my head when I see people in local government think they know what they are talking about.

You can watch the council tonight brow beat Stehly about her resolution for openness. She wasn’t getting the information she wanted from city hall so her and Pat Starr proposed a resolution to get the information. Well within their rights.

The discussion is intriguing and really shows the council’s true colors. Hide the secrets at ANY COST. Here is a great letter to the editor about it.

I could write a short novel about the entire discussion, but I only want to comment for now on Kiley’s assertion that certain city councilors are sending the media ‘confidential’ information to blogs and the media.

There are ONLY two forms of this information. Personnel and Litigation. I have NEVER received an email about either of these two things from councilors. They know better. It’s against the law. I have however received emails about OPINIONS from the city attorney that have to do with proposed legislation. This is public information. We pay the city attorney, we own the emails, it is public information. Any city councilor can share this info with me, the media or any citizen in this community. Kiley simply knows not what he speaks.

Why isn’t Sioux Falls City Councilor Rick Kiley participating in Forums?

No challengers. No Problem. Suck it.

Technically Rick doesn’t have to debate since he is an incumbent without a challenger.

But I had two different people tonight ask why he just doesn’t do it as a courtesy.

Good question.

I know in the past I have seen incumbents with no challengers participate in candidate forums, just to give voters a refresher of who they are and what they plan to do in the next term.

Maybe Rick doesn’t want us to know what he will be doing in the next 4 years. So much for transparency. I wonder if he knows that Huether will be gone after May 15th?

Sioux Falls City Councilors Kiley and Erickson need opponents

 

It’s time to wipe these two faces from the city website after May 2018.

After the recent votes on the golf contract and parking ramp it is becoming more and more obvious councilors Christine Erickson (at-large) and Rick Kiley (SE) need opponents.

Kiley has always been a strong supporter of the mayor and his policies of secret government. But it seems Erickson has lost her way. It all seem to have happened when her and the mayor had their ‘special’ meeting when she became elected vice-chair. Some kind of handshake deal was made because a lot of people are wondering what happened to the old Christine that supported things like FREE bus rides for kids and opposed the city administration building. That ship has apparently sailed after signing a deal with the devil, or should I say dictator.

Unfortunately NO one has stepped up to run against these two. Clara Hart has decided to stay in the already crowded at-large position that Rolfing is leaving vacant (Paulson and Brekke are also running in that race).

There has been some talk about a possible challenger to Kiley (if not two) but I am still waiting for a challenger to Erickson.

We truly need a significant change in city government coming May, and I think we not only need to replace the mayor and any candidates with his philosophies (Entenman and TenHaken) we need four new fresh faces on the city council.

I encourage people to oppose Kiley and Erickson, they are beatable, you just have to expose their voting records that support a more closed and non-transparent government. Step up, your city needs you!

Sioux Falls City Councilor Pat Starr did the right thing

Sure, we can discuss the minute details about how Pat handled this (did he walk out at the right time? Was it professional? etc., etc.) but when you look at the BIG PICTURE something I reminded the council to do when looking at the parking ramp project to begin with, I think Pat walking out was the right thing to do, especially since he had no other options. The Mayor and Kiley already said there would be no more input, could Pat really have gotten the rest of the council to overturn it? Probably not.

As Tim Stanga brought up during the meeting (and Belfrage discussed it on his show today) the council’s minds were already made up before the meeting even started.

What was disappointing the most about the input about the ramp itself was the fact that we heard NO testimony from the developers, we also had NO testimony from the city’s legal counsel about the liability of Hultgren and Drake.

It was obvious that the mayor wanted to bury the hatchet as quick as possible, it was obvious when he was acting like a restless child when Stehly brought forward amendments.

But what is more troubling is that Kiley and Huether reaction to Starr’s statement that he is the one being ‘unprofessional’. The entire council and mayor BESIDES Starr acted like complete children throughout the meeting, as I have pointed out earlier. I don’t blame Starr for not wanting to be a part of it. I also applaud him that his name will not appear on any of the documents or votes on the project (that I think will never happen due to lawsuits, lack of investors, bankruptcy OR all of the above – remember, the developers have already said they have no investors yet, or a hotel franchise).

Huether and Kiley were acting like jackasses when it comes to public input, as they normally do, and they finally got called out on it. If anyone should be embarrassed it should be them. Honestly Starr looks like a Star in this manner.

Keep selling the wage collusion in town

I will at least give Mr. Nasser props for trying to encourage professional careers but the argument is lost with Kiley and the Chamber with the constant push for affordable housing instead of higher wages.

Sioux Falls City Council Race mash-up

The city council races are starting to come together, but there are still some unknowns and variables.

Currently the Central District has three running in the race. I won’t rule out that more could get in that race, but probably unlikely.

Retired Firefighter and Insurance Salesman, Curt Soehl. I don’t know a whole lot about Curt, but what I have read on his FB page is that he was very pro-Huether and approved of his accomplishments and leadership style, which is unfortunate.

Thor Bardon. I believe Thor works in banking. Thor’s platform is workforce development and other social issues in our community.

Local art promoter and business owner, Zach DeBoer. Zach is heavily involved with the downtown culture and development.

At-Large has 3 candidates, but that could change.

John Paulson, former Sanford Executive and Planning Commission member who lost to Theresa Stehly in the last election will probably run the same ‘everything is wonderful and great in Sioux Falls’ campaign.

Janet Brekke, who is a former city attorney and currently a private attorney is challenging Paulson. I don’t know a lot about Janet, but I think we will learn more in the coming weeks since she has formerly announced.

Clara Hart has said she will run in the At-Large, but she could just as easily challenge Rick Kiley to get out of a crowded At-Large race (which may get more crowded). Clara lives in his SE district and may have a better chance in a two person race, and avoid a run-off.

As I said, Kiley has announced he will run for a 2nd term and has no challengers currently, I hope that changes.

Erickson hasn’t announced whether she is running for a 2nd term or not, she has said she will probably NOT run for mayor. But currently if Erickson did announce, she doesn’t have a challenger. I’m wondering if someone is waiting in the wings until Erickson announces. One of the bigger questions I have been asked over the past couple of weeks has been, “Will Erickson run for a 2nd term to begin with or is she busy trying to recruit someone to run for the seat?”

As you can see, we have about 5-1/2 months until the city election and the council races are still shaping up. Anything could change at this point.