January 2020

Stehly brings up costs of other ‘Quality of Life’ Projects in comparison to Project TRIM

During the Informational meeting yesterday, Stehly thanked the Parks Department for doing the Project TRIM experiment. She also brought up other things we subsidize each year. She said that the money could easily be budgeted for the city to trim their own trees in the boulevard.

There was also a discussion about the golf contract with Landscapes Unlimited and how they want to amend the contract so they can possibly provide management for Brandon’s Municipal Course (which I think is a conflict). They cleverly claim that people who will work at the Sioux Falls city courses won’t work at the Brandon course, yet what they fail to mention is that LU is a corporation with multiple management locations all over the United States. Corporate headquarters knows exactly what is going on at both locations simultaneously. They also talked about ‘opportunities’ between the two locations. I’m not sure how people paying to golf at Brandon’s course is an ‘opportunity’ for the taxpayers of Sioux Falls. I have often said we should just have a flat lease for the courses and let the contractor do as they please, and maintain them at their expense. This would be more beneficial to taxpayers, and would eliminate any contract conflicts.

There has also NOT been any determination on how the golf cart shed fire started. During the contract discussion, LU admitted they received $100K from insurance for lost carts, etc. When the Director of Parks, Ding-Dong Don was asked how much the city got from insurance for the destruction of the facility, he responded that they have received nothing yet. When asked why, he said it is because they haven’t figured out yet how they are going to replace the facility (stand alone or along with a new clubhouse). Sorry, but a damaged building value has NOTHING to do with what the new facility will cost. I find this very odd, and wonder if a determination on the cause of the fire will ever be revealed. Of course, this is coming from the same guy who lied about no-mow zones (and various other crap). Can we impeach him?

The Stehly Report

Sioux Falls city councilor Stehly’s yearly mailed newsletter hit the mailboxes today in Sioux Falls. I know that it was mailed to a ‘significant’ amount of Sioux Falls registered voters. This is NOT a campaign piece. Theresa has NOT announced if she is running for a second term and paid for the printing and postage out of her personal funds and NOT from city tax dollars or campaign donations (I don’t think she has any campaign money). It’s a fantastic read! I did NOT contribute and didn’t know about it until today when I saw it posted on Facebook on the SF Politics page (they actually deleted the post after I pointed out they were promoting it, while bitching about it). Theresa sent me the PDF version below;

READ THE CLEAR PDF VERSION HERE.

Sioux Falls City Councilor Neitzert’s desk disappears at Carnegie

A Carnegie Hall mole sent me this photo a while back. It was Neitzert’s desk in the basement of Carnegie Hall. After I brought it up and the rumor going around he may be applying to be Innovation Manager for the city the desk has now disappeared. It will also be difficult for Neitzert to take the job (if he wants it) because city ordinance would have to change. A city councilor cannot work for the city for a full year after their term is up on the council.

Antacids, breath mints, gum, aspirin, hand lotion, and sticky notes, the desk of a true leader.

Former Sioux Falls Mayor Knobe writes another FB post on money in local politics

Rick gets into the thick of it again;

A word on Sioux Falls City Election Campaign funds.

You learn a lot about a person by the way they handle other people’s money. Both tax dollars and those monies raised to run an election.

When a person runs for office obviously they need money to run a campaign so they can get their ideas out to the public.

When the campaign is over and the bills are paid, what should be done with leftover cash?

To me it’s simple.

It’s not your money.

Whether you win or lose, you don’t keep it. You don’t save it for your next election. You don’t give it to others running for office.

I agree, as I said a few days ago, the responsible thing to do to your contributors is spend every last penny up until the day of the election. Your campaign chest should really be empty or in debt on election day. That is called running a responsible and fiscally wise campaign which reflects on how you will run government when elected.

If you can figure out how to return it on a per donor or pro rata (an equal percentage goes back to each donor) that would make sense. Remember, It’s not your money. It belongs to your donors.

If that is too cumbersome, then donate it. Maybe the Community Foundation, the United Way, or the local government you love.

I think it would be difficult to give it back, but I do agree with the charitable idea.

Also I think it is dishonest to raise money to run for a city election and use the leftovers to run for another office later on. “I gave you money to run for mayor. I didn’t give you money to use it to run for Governor, Senator, Congress, or any other position.” I’m not targeting the current mayor. Just using that position as an example.

You kind of are, especially a politician who has money left over by skirting campaign finance rules and receiving donations from toddlers. Yes, toddlers.

I like level playing fields. People who have accumulated big war chests while holding office have both the name identification advantage AND the money advantage.

That makes it nearly impossible for smart motivated unknowns to make a dent.

If you run for office to be a true public servant that’s where your energy and time should go. Not to endless fund raising.

This is local government. It’s supposed to be non partisan and with few exceptions be part time.

Let’s not allow lucre (money) to interfere with good local government.

There have been several local races that have won spending a lot less than their opponents. Staggers (versus Knudson), Stehly, Brekke and Starr all spent less than their opponents and even though DeBoer lost to Soehl (by a handful of votes) he spent a lot less. It is possible to beat big money, you just have to find creative ways to get your message out there.