Government Secrecy costs A LOT of money!

Well, you know the old cliché, Lawyers are professional liars. They brought those talents to Pierre to try to get an open settlements law killed in committee;

“Transparency is a good thing, but at what cost?” said Sioux Falls lawyer Steve Siegel, who represented the trial lawyers. Siegel noted that parties in lawsuits use confidential agreements to keep embarrassing information out of the public, and he noted that the South Dakota Newspaper Association was in favor of the bill.

I guess we only have a right to information if it isn’t embarrassing? Only a lawyer would come up with such a ridiculous excuse. He also apparently tried to peg the SDNA as a tabloid and gossip rag organization. Hey Steve, they represent NEWS organizations, not the National Enquirer.

They also tried to use the tired old excuse that keeping things secret saves money. LOL. How would we know if the settlements are kept secret?;

David Bordewyk, the executive director of the South Dakota Newspaper Association, pointed to the secret settlement that Sioux Falls negotiated with contractors over flawed exterior panels on the Denny Sanford Premier Center. That settlement only became public because a lawsuit had not been filed. The settlement agreement showed that Sioux Falls officials mislead the public about receiving $1 million in cash from the contractors.

That settlement, in which we got $1 million of our own money back, cost taxpayers well over $100,000 to defend it’s secrecy in court. In fact, the Federal government forbids secret settlements because government secrecy tends to cost them billions of dollars a year.

This isn’t about saving money (a lie) but it is probably about embarrassment. We had a mayor who probably signed off on bad siding, and in order to cover it up he lied about a supposed settlement. And even after the city lost the Supreme Court case, the shame and embarrassment didn’t seem to bother him at all, in fact, in true Trump style he doubled down on the lies and to this day has refused to admit if he singed off on the Shi**y siding.

Opening up these settlements will save taxpayers in South Dakota millions of dollars, and maybe the ‘public embarrassment’ will keep these settlements to a bare minimum, if they are not truly deserving. But I don’t think the recipients are the ones that will be embarrassed, it will be the corrupt politicians who got our tit in a wringer to begin with, and to that I say OPEN THE BOOKS!


#1 LJL on 01.29.19 at 6:07 pm

This is sickening. It’ only going to get worse as our 2 party systems become more fractured by the crazies within.

#2 l3wis on 01.29.19 at 7:02 pm

Are you talking about the settlement bill, the constitutional carry or both?

#3 "Very Stable Genius" on 01.29.19 at 8:06 pm

South Dakota Inc., doesn’t like this bill, do they?

#4 scott on 01.29.19 at 9:12 pm

2 party system? i’m pretty sure one part runs things in pierre.

#5 LJL on 01.29.19 at 10:13 pm

Both….Both of these items should be decided by the ballot. Both items would have the opposite decision if decided by the voters.

Both parties aren’t listening to the majority. MN is going too far left and SD is going too right. Political mansluaghter by the ruling party.

#6 LJL on 01.30.19 at 6:56 pm

Let’s be clear Scott, all politics is local.
For how man years now has the permit process been acceptable in this crazy right wing state? Why is it now the hard right decides it’s necessary to drop the permit process?

When national talk on the hard left demonizes all gun owners, the ruling party in right wing states must react. it’s political manslaughter of the other side all the time now.

Here’s the next far left curve that will be retaliated against. Abortion post birth.

Leave a Comment