I’m going to be cautiously optimistic, but it seems the council has a desire to keep the control of public input under their power, which they should.

Watch the Info meeting HERE.

That of course wouldn’t stop the chair (Mayor TenHaken) from controlling people during public input, which he should. But the guidelines will be clearly set by the council, or at least that was their desire. State law is murky, but I would interpret it as public bodies can set guidelines as long as the chair can monitor the working meeting as they see fit within that scope.

There will be a working session next Tuesday at a time TBD at Carnegie for the public to give their input on public input. Be there or be square.

My advice; keep it simple; leave it as is.

What I find Ironic

While our local talking heads will go on and on about people who talk to long or cuss out the mayor, there seems to be NO concern about ACTUAL violence at our public meetings.

Our state legislature, in all their hillbilly wisdom, says it is just fine to bring a loaded firearm into public meetings or buildings. Did you know that? In other words, while some people may be ‘hurt’ or ‘offended’ by t-shirt images or words, no one brings up the fact that real damage could occur at these meetings NOT from words, but from bullets. And while they have tried to compare us public commentators to ‘gun nuts’ they couldn’t be further from the truth. I don’t own a gun and NEVER WILL. Most of us deplore violence. I believe in peaceful assembly. If the city council really wanted to make their mark, they would challenge state law and ban all firearms in public buildings in Sioux Falls. You can’t really support the 2nd if you don’t support the 1st.

Frank Zappa does it best, there just words.

By l3wis

6 thoughts on “Sioux Falls City council wants to set the guidelines when it comes to Public Input”
  1. “You can’t really support the 2nd if you don’t support the 1st”……

    That’s a good quote, but sadly it is probably over the heads of most pro-gunners…. (“What’s he saying?”….. “Is he trying to take away my 2nd Amendment rights with this college talk?”)

  2. I own guns as investment. I also keep a loaded firearm at home in case someone who shouldn’t have a gun breaks in. I have a concealed carry permit for when I show guns for sale. Otherwise, I’d never carry into a public or private building. I like the fact that politicians realize there could be a gun toting individual present. Considering how Strong Mayor Charter is used, I wouldn’t be surprised if one someone takes the law into their own hands.

  3. Eliminating Public Input, pro and con, is worthy of national news. Democracy has faced attack in rural republican states. The media could make this mayor a one term wonder. Then we can elect Jolene.

  4. I’m curious what you think a ban on weapons would do unless you have armed security and metal detectors/bag searches at every meeting. Is that what you’re proposing?

  5. Josh, you are missing my point. While the council, or mostly talking heads seem to be concerned about ‘words’ at our meetings they say nothing about people being able to bring guns to meetings. Words don’t hurt people, guns do.

Comments are closed.