UPDATE:Sioux Falls Ethics board to meet tomorrow, April 30, 2020

UPDATE: The Ethics board threw out a complaint against councilor Neitzert today based on a technicality. The person who filed the complaint had the wrong chapter number listed for what he was accused of violating. He listed the employee chapter instead of the councilor chapter. Basically Neitzert was accused of taking money from an organization to go speak at a conference in Texas with mayor Paul. He admitted to doing it already to the council. The Ethics Board could have fixed the error in a motion and then proceeded with the hearing, but of course they didn’t. More to come.

Funny how Neitzert claims there was nothing wrong with what he did, blames the messenger, yet chose to keep the complaint ‘confidential’ until after the hearing. That’s because he was hoping for an April election, and the hearing would not have happened until after that. So who is playing politics?

Not sure what this is about because it is confidential, but you can guarantee it is about someone who collects a paycheck from the city and has obvious close ties to the city attorney (in other words not someone who puts out fires or mows the parks). The recusal of the city attorney by one of the leading attorneys at Lynn, Jackson, Shultz & Lebrun to replace him tells me that it is someone city attorney Kooistra advises directly. (You can figure out the handful of people who fit that criteria – I will give you a hint, it is less than 12 and more than 1).

While the person(s) being indicted have chosen to keep this confidential, that doesn’t mean after the decision is granted it remains confidential, it is free game for media consumption.

I also find calling this an ‘executive session’ interesting. Is that even legal? While I understand the meeting being closed to the public and media, wouldn’t the person filing the complaint be included to present evidence? I don’t know, this is all really suspicious.

But I can say something for certain, and I don’t even need a magic 8-Ball, whoever it is, they will magically (no pun intended) be found innocent. I also will guarantee you that that decision has already been pre-determined. But don’t take my word on it, just look at the record of this board going all the way back to Mayor Munson . . . patsies.


#1 I am not a crook on 04.30.20 at 7:27 am

It reminds me of the book “The Hunt For Red November”

“I’m the damn President, Colonel. If I say it’s legal. It’s legal. And if it’s not, it damn well will be by the time you hand me the report.”

“Yes, Sir,” answered Madison, snapping to attention.

“Thank you Colonel Madison. Master Sergeant, Alvarez. Please keep me informed.”

“Yes, Sir,” responded Madison and Alvarez, while saluting.

“Good night to you both. Avery will show you out.”

“Sir. If I may be so bold,” offered Madison. ” I think it would be wise if you doubled your Secret Service team.”

#2 D@ily Spin on 04.30.20 at 9:35 am

I’ve met the city attorney and had a good impression. He’s ethical and (likely) doesn’t blend well with the crooks at city hall.

#3 Steve on 04.30.20 at 9:30 pm

Slowly and surely being groomed for a Mayoral campaign. Is getting good experience from shadowing PTH.

#4 "Very Stable Genius" on 04.30.20 at 9:59 pm

A “Red” conference for a “Red” mayor and a “Red” council member. #ALECII

( and Woodstock adds: “I heard they both attended the Flip-Flop subcommittee meeting”….)