Funny how the AG knows who butters his bread but our city attorney does not

I have to admit I was a little surprised when one of my long time friends called me last week and told me she was considering a petition drive of her own (nothing to do with taxes) in Sioux Falls and has been in correspondance with the city about election laws, etc. She said she saw all the troubles my petition was having and she wanted the city to clear some stuff up before she even considered the petition. I’ll be honest with you, I had no idea she was doing any of this until she shared the final information with me. I’m sure the city was suspicious she was involved with us because the city attorney gave his normal response how he doesn’t work for tax payers, etc., etc. But what is telling is the difference between the Attorney General’s response and the City attorney’s response. They are both similiar in that they do not give out opinions, but the AG didn’t seem to have a problem with attaching the laws so my friend could review them on her own or with a private attorney. Must have been too hard for the city attorney to ask his secretary to print out a couple pages of ordinances, yeah right.

Below is a copy of the correspondance and the different responses. (I cropped and transformed the images for space reasons).


She basically was trying to get the ‘6 month question’ answered. Does state law apply if the city doesn’t have an ordinance that addresses it? Admundson’s response;


Notice Robert goes on a rant about who he works for. Also notice that taxpayer’s are not included in that list. He calls the city his ‘client’ not his ’employer’. So does Robert collect a FEE for your services and pay rent on his City Hall office? Or does he collect a PAYCHECK? I think we know the answer. While I do admit, he has no obligation to submit an opinion, he does however have an obligation to show my friend all the ordinances that apply to petitions, like the AG does below.


Not only did the AG attach a copy of the laws that apply, he did it a day faster then our City Attorney. He also said he could not share his opinion.

So my question is? Why can our State AG provide us with election laws but our City Attorney cannot? I’ll have to agree with the Argus Leader Editorial Board on this one, it’s appalling.


#1 l3wis on 05.20.09 at 10:54 am

I forgot to add that the City Clerk’s office DID provide a ton of information about petitions to my friend before she sent the last letter, it just did not include any info on the ‘6 month question’ ordinance.

I still believe the City Attorney’s office is silent on the matter because they don’t have any ordinance to provide.

#2 Plaintiff Guy on 05.21.09 at 10:18 am

City ordinances are available on line from American Legal dot com. You’ll find they are very vague and can be construed several ways. Forget about challenging them in court. There is no appeal from city judicial process. State government is democratic and city government is socialistic.

#3 Plaintiff Guy on 05.21.09 at 10:22 am

If you ask for a copy of city ordinances at city hall, you’ll get ‘we think they’re available at the library’. Basically, they don’t need them because they make them up as they go along.

#4 l3wis on 05.21.09 at 11:18 am

I have called the ‘6 month filing’ ordinance, the ‘Ghost Ordinance’. Kinda hard to print out an ordinance that does not exist.

#5 Plaintiff Guy on 05.21.09 at 5:46 pm

They use our taxes against us. If challenged, they face no consequence. The best way to stop them is to get them into an ethics hearing at the state supreme court. I’m going there with mister sounds like porno.

Leave a Comment