2014

Is it time for a city ordinance to eliminate spending tax dollars on ‘educating’ the public on ballot measures?

government-waste

The following Argus Leader article from today’s paper highlights the problem all the citizen efforts will face. What’s to stop City Hall employees from discussing openly who/what the people should vote for? With our lack of ethics law, what’s to stop decisions being made affecting who can vote.

Is the city wrong in this attempt to sway a citizen effort’s defeat? What do the city ‘leaders’ have to gain? Why do the efforts of city bureaucrats mean more, than the citizen efforts? We will see the same thing happening on the other three issues.  The pool issue is but a small part of the larger picture of what is happening in Sioux Falls and South Dakota.

We will be seeing city hall led efforts to take charge of the non-ballot discussion to sway the pool vote. Our salesman mayor only knows how to sell something. The only way a salesman gets gratification by closing another sale, damn the costs that’s someone else’s job to worry about.

Maybe it is time for a city ordinance banning the use of taxdollars being spent on ‘educating’ the public on citizen initiated ballot issues.

Should elected officials be able to speak freely to the public about their opinions on certain ballot issues? Most definitely, in fact the First Amendment protects that right. But should an elected official or a city director/employee be able to use taxpayer resources to educate the public about a ballot issue they want defeated or even approved? State Law says it cannot, but the city seems to be using a ‘loophole’ claiming they are ‘educating’ the public. Baloney.

When you present the public (leak it to all the major news media) 75% more drawings of an indoor pool, then an outdoor pool, and clearly make the indoor pool look more favorable, while spending $46,000 on these drawings, you are clearly trying to sway the public to vote against an outdoor pool.

I have no issue with Walmart, SON, Community Swim, Veterans for the VA or even the snowgaters organizing and paying for an education campaign. As private enities, they have that right. But they should not be expending tax dollars to sway a vote.

Since the city seems to want to ignore state law, or use loop holes to continue to ignore it, what can we do as citizens to stop the taxpayer funded ‘education’ program?

Ironically is probably another ballot issue to close the state law loophole. Who is willing to come forward? Soon?

Who will chair the council meetings after the municipal election?

Gavel

 

There has been many discussions about who should be running the council meetings. Should it be the council chair? The mayor?

Not sure of the city ordinance or Roberts Rules on the issue, but logically the council chair should be running all council related meetings, and if the council chair cannot, the co-chair should be. For some reason, after Munson took office the mayor started running the gig. It only makes sense for the legislative body to run their own meetings. The President doesn’t preside over the Senate and the Governor doesn’t preside over the legislature.

The mayor presents an agenda to the council, and they vote on it. Obviously the mayor should be present for the meetings in case of a tie vote  he has to break or if he would like to comment on his agenda, but he should not be seated with the council, and he should certainly not be running the meeting.

Of course, this would force the mayor to have to sit with the rest of us poor schlumps and city directors without the protection of the terrier dog fence, but if he feels his safety is compromised, they can always give him a chair in the corner directly behind the city clerk.

Hopefully the new council will consider removing the mayor from running the meetings, I would suggest it to be their first action at their first meeting.

I guess everyone who lives in District 15 is a Catholic

stjoe3

VOTE FOR ME! St. Joe for State Legislature in District 15, “The voice for Catholics in Pierre!”

Been awhile since I have seen some idiotic reasoning on Dakotawarcollege, (well, not really) but today’s takes the cake;

At least if we can’t elect a Republican in that District, there will be a pair of solid pro-life candidates who don’t mock Catholics representing the Cathedral District well.

I thought legislators were supposed to represent all citizens? Which means it doesn’t matter what religion or sect they may be critical of or support? Would DWC be defending Muslims if Buhl was bashing them? Or how about Native Americans (yeah right). District 15, which I live very close to and have many friends that live in the district, is a very diverse district of young professionals and working class folks, some of which are NOT Catholic, dare I even venture to say are Atheists. I would probably even venture that a majority of the residents in that district are NOT Catholic.

It seems DWC is running out issues to bash Buhl over so they had to dig another one up. But what would you expect from a political blog more concerned about guns, religion and abortion then they are about citizen’s rights.

ALEC, guns, cold medicine and cell phones

flu

I’m not making Meth, though it would probably make me feel a lot better now.

It is no secret our State Legislature wastes a lot of time on pointless bills, and they are at it again.

They want to put you in a private database for the pharma companies to track sales of cold medicine, which in no way stops meth production (you can make meth from several substances besides cold medicine).

Secondly, they want a statewide ban on texting, which is not needed, because distracted driving laws already cover texting and driving recklessly.

This is all a distraction. Why? First of all, our state legislature doesn’t have a clue, that is why they go running to daddy (ALEC) anytime they need legislation. They even go as far as defending the very organization that is funded by big pharma (the ones that want the database) saying they ‘teach’ legislators (more like brainwash).

Why not have a bill that requires all handgun owners be registered on a public website? Wouldn’t you like to know if your neighbor had a handgun? And the numbers don’t lie, handguns in our country kill more people then any other country in the world. If we are worried about texting and meth production, shouldn’t we be worried about people who carry dangerous weapons?

Oh, I know the argument, not every one that carries a handgun is dangerous. Couldn’t agree more. Just like everyone who texts doesn’t do it while driving and everyone who buys cold medicine isn’t making meth.

Double standard if you ask me. But big Pharma could care less about gun ownership.

The legislature needs to focus on more important things that actually make our state better, like bringing in living wage jobs, ending the food tax and funding education properly.

It’s time that Pierre pulled ALEC out of their asses and did the work of the people.

 

Jamison Events

Greg Jamison to Announce Part two of his People First Initiative

Sioux Falls SD – Greg Jamison a candidate for Sioux Falls Mayor will announce part two of his People First Initiative.  Jamison’s initiative will continue to encompass many new innovative ideas that will ensure the Mayors’ focus is returned to serving the people of Sioux Falls.

The People First Initiative is Jamison’s vision for the future of Sioux Falls. Part Two of Jamison’s People First Initiative is to address a growing need in our community.  Jamison goes on to explain, “We have a serious problem in public safety and it needs to be improved. Our Police department does a great job but we need to give them a higher priority and more resources. I want to put the focus of the Mayor’s office on creating a pro-active plan for crime prevention.”

The announcement will be held inside the Police Department Lobby at 320 West Fourth Street on Tuesday January 28, at 10 am.  For more information – visit our Twitter, Facebook, or website at www.JamisonForMayor.com or call (605) 941-5444.

5 by 7 Invite