South DaCola

Editorial Cartoonist from South Dakota

March 2013

Mayor Hubris Mayor Subprime Mike Huether Mike Huether Walfart

Update: Is Mayor Mike trying to ‘Huether’ in a couple of new Walmarts?

l3wis 35Comments

Image; courtesy of People of Walmart.

Yeah, we can read all about Mike’s latest adventure to bring in more trailer-trash retailers . . .

A major concern in the planned Walmart development, according to Ross Wright, a neighborhood resident, is the potential abrupt transition from single-family residential zoning to the most intense C-4 commercial development. Wright acknowledged city officials such as Cooper are making a good faith effort to ensure as gradual a transition as possible. But Wright referenced comments Huether made about people overcoming misgivings and allowing the administrative process to play out.

“You say people do not trust government,” Wright told the mayor. “That’s where we are now. People are shaken.”

Hey, Ross, if you trust this mayor, I have a spray park I would like to sell you on the Big Poo River, and it just happens to be in front of a Hilton Hotel!

Not sure what to think of this comment (left yesterday on my site), or whether it is true, but it kinda shows how the mayor likes to roll . . .

The Lincoln County state’s attorney attended the Mayor’s listen and learn meeting this morning and asked the Mayor why people in the area of 85th were not told of the deal for Wal-Mart to build another store in their neighborhood. The Mayor didn’t answer. The Lincoln County attorney then said he attended the Wal-Mart open house and asked the Wal-Mart representative why the 85th street location and was told that’s where the city told them to build. The Mayor got angry, used a four-letter word and said he wanted the Wal-Mart guys name. At least the Mayor is consistent. At every twist and turn.

CLARIFICATION: Ross Wright is a deputy in the Lincoln County state’s attorney office and is the person the commenter misidentified as the SA.  He is not holding himself out as a Lincoln County deputy/employee at these events.  He lives in the neighborhood and has been a vocal opponent to the proposed development. As for the 4-letter word, not sure what it was. But I know Mike like’s to say ‘Crap’ quite a bit.

I have been hammering this home before he even stepped into office. Mike will do what he wants, when he wants. And until the electorate figures this out, he will continue to make the rules, control the checkbook, and thumb his nose (and middle finger) at you, every chance he gets.

There will be a Walmart at these two locations. And you know why? Because the citizens of those neighborhoods are not strong enough to stand up to this bully. Or maybe they are?

And people are worried about my ‘cyber-bullying’. The only ‘bully’ in this town is your mayor, and his boot prints are all over your faces.

Sioux Falls Sioux Falls Parks and Rec

We don’t ‘NEED’ a public indoor pool

l3wis 69Comments

After reading Argue Endorser’s managing editor’s ‘column’ about indoor pools (or should I say, muttling thru it). I have to wonder why logic is never factored into these ‘discussions.’

Opponents of the as-yet-still-hypothetical idea of building an indoor pool at Spellerberg Park to replace the leaking 45-year-old outdoor model that currently sits there said this week they’ve gathered about 7,000 signatures to put the issue on the ballot.

Oh, goody.

Perhaps it can go on the same ballot as whether we should have snowgates.

This is hilarious, on many levels. For one, there is nothing ‘hypothetical’ about an indoor pool at Spellerberg. The city has been hammering this idea for over a year, and when they put out their aquatic study on Thursday, like a broken record, guess what? Indoor pool at Spellerberg.

The other part is Pat’s statement about snowgates. You would think the managing editor of the city’s only daily would know that snowgates are already on the 2014 ballot, which is probably where this issue will be. But maybe he can invite the mayor’s wife on his show to talk about it, or at least inform him about the latest ‘special interest club sport’ that needs money from the city.

This whole indoor pool debate is not complicated OR philosophical. It is pretty simple.

We don’t need a public indoor pool, because . . .

1) There are plenty of private facilities in SF already you can pay a ‘fee’ and swim at. We don’t need taxpayer’s to subsidize it.

2) If we really want to build one it needs to be in a location where there is available expansion (like RC did) OR in conjunction with the school district. I am not opposed to public entities, but they should get maximum usage.

3) Lastly, on a snarky point, ‘single’ issue people drive me bonkers. Whether it is pools, or dog parks, pickleball, a word of advice. Diversify your life. You can play tennis and swim in the summer. You can ski and ice fish in the winter. That is the advantage of living in our climate.

My prediction is that an indoor pool at Spellerberg will get voted down. A handful of swimming advocates are not going to tow the line for the electorate. This is a democracy folks, that is just how it works.

Next Page »

You Missed

SF City Council Sioux Falls

What was on the menu tonight at the Sioux Falls City Council meeting?

Crime Crooks Downtown Sioux Falls Mayor TenHaken Riverline District Sioux Falls

UPDATE: Mayor of Sioux Falls Paul TenHaken blows off a one year 700% increase in murders

Downtown Sioux Falls Riverline District Sioux Falls

Riverline Committee finally has public meeting today

Democratic Forum Democrats Drinking Liberally Sioux Falls

Drinking Liberally (12/6/2024)