So will Mayor TenHaken and Councilor Erickson publicly endorse Jensen now?

(screenshot of Erickson’s FB page. Look, Alex has a name tag already!

So now that the ethics debacle has taken place, will this now give Paul and Christine the green light to publicly endorse (not just give money) Neitzert and Jensen, essentially saying that Julian and Stehly are not fit for office? And if so will Brekke and Starr follow suit and publicly endorse Stehly?

Neitzert said this on FB about the decision;

Yesterday the board of ethics ruled it was not only legal but ethical for Councilors to donate, endorse, and host fundraisers for other Council candidates. Same goes for the Mayor. And thus common sense and free speech won. And those using the board of ethics as a weapon during the campaign season to try to malign good people and attack their political opponents failed miserably.

I know, it reads like a line from a Shakespearean tragedy.

The issue with this kind of endorsement is the reason Brekke asked the question. Why? They are not really endorsing anyone, they are just saying that Theresa and Julian are not fit for office, so she needs to be replaced and Julian shouldn’t be able to serve.

It’s a different situation with Julian because he isn’t the incumbent, but with Stehly, she has a record. All we have from Jensen is a short rubberstamp legislative career chocked full of discrimination and higher tax votes. They are certainly not going to endorse Jensen based on his record, all they are saying is we need a rubber stamping seat warmer to replace Stehly.

This has been my biggest frustration with the race so far. We know Stehly and Neitzert’s record, we also know that Julian has had several public events saying what he stands for, he even helped with Jolene’s campaign. But with Jensen we have heard virtually nothing. NOTHING.

How can you say he would be better than Stehly when we don’t even know what that ‘better’ means? It is pretty clear to me that an endorsement of Jensen isn’t an endorsement at all, it’s just a dig on Stehly, and it’s extremely unethical, and any logical adult can see right thru the charade.


#1 Steve on 03.08.20 at 12:07 pm

Well written post and I’ll agree. Now Neitzert and Erickson will hide behind the decision of the ethics board while their unethical behavior continues. I do hope other voters will see their obvious and blatant dislike for Theresa is driving this support of Jensen and that she has a proven track record of progress for the citizens and is deserving of reelection.

#2 VOTER on 03.08.20 at 1:04 pm

Perception is Reality.

I would NOT vote for any of these four individuals.

#3 Fear & Loathing in Sioux Falls on 03.08.20 at 2:01 pm

That pictured reminds me of Mt. Rushmore. Except, it should be called Mt. Bunker Ramp.

#4 Mike F on 03.08.20 at 2:20 pm

Why has there not been an objection previously to elected officials endorsing? It is happening all over the country and has been all the time. What makes this different than the other elections at the various levels?

We live in a republic. It makes complete sense for elected officials to endorse and support candidates that will carry a common vision.

Jensen can run his campaign anyway he chooses. You don’t have to vote for him. It’s very common in an election to be voting against someone rather than for someone.

#5 "Woodstock" on 03.08.20 at 2:38 pm

“Say, that’s a good idea, but in a different way”…. “They should carve the likenesses of the two mayors and the council members responsible for the Bunker Ramp unto the south side of that Bunker Ramp in true Confederate Stone Mountain style”…. “Because like the Confederacy, the Bunker Ramp was ill-conceived, self-serving, and both have a (L)legacy that continues to haunt them”….

#6 l3wis on 03.08.20 at 2:56 pm

Mike, you are exactly right, and I told several councilors that the voter ultimately makes the decision if this is ethical or not. The two reasons I hear why people will continue to support Theresa is 1) she listens to the constituents and tries to help 2) too much money in local politics. I hear the 2nd reason over and over even from those who have a lot of personal wealth.

So what is the difference. When Stehly gave money to Brekke, there were no incumbents in that race, same with when Starr endorsed Jolene, no incumbents. There are incumbents now and according to council ethics cannon, fellow councilors and mayor are not supposed to publicly decry their colleagues. Now you may argue they are not saying anything bad about Theresa, but I have seen the private messages and emails. By endorsing Jensen they are essentially saying Theresa is ineffective and they don’t want her on the council anymore, that is where the ethics come in. As I have said, legally Paul and Erickson can do whatever they please, but voters are watching this, and they don’t think it looks good. If Theresa gets re-elected, it is going to be fun listening to the excuses as to why she won. I think it is pretty evident why she will most likely win and by a wide margin, because the Jensen team seems to keep burying themselves with this kind of behavior.

#7 l3wis on 03.08.20 at 3:21 pm

What I find funny about these pods is that they are not very discreet. While I believe nursing women want to have a private place to do this, I think drawing attention to what they are doing in these pods is some how counterproductive to the reason they wanted these to begin with – privacy. Reminds me of this Farside toon.

#8 Twins on 03.08.20 at 10:52 pm

Notice how Neitzert and Jensen have the nerd look down to a science?