UPDATE: Sioux Falls Ethics Board meets Friday to discuss the ethics of some mysterious Mickey Mouse city official

UPDATE: After a brief public input session the BOE met for approximately 4 hours in executive session with the accused being represented by what seemed to be two attorneys who were in the room before the session started. As I understand it the person who filed the complaint and the accused attorneys left the meeting two hours into it and they met for another two hours then recessed. In other words the BOE did not emerge for a public vote which means they are still in discussions about the validity of the complaint. It seems odd to me that 5 people can’t make a simple decision in a matter of 4 hours. Of course we still don’t know who Mr. Mouse is, and we don’t even know what the complaint is. Will we ever know? The BOE of course will have to reschedule a later time to finish deliberations. Who knows when that will be?

Another interesting tidbit is that one of the attorneys representing the accused seems to be the same person representing the Jensen camp in the re-count next week. Of course, this is not surprising since there probably isn’t a lot of attorneys out there willing to wade into the waters of election recounts and ethics complaints.

First, let’s pretend for a minute that Mickey Mouse works for the city, and let’s just say, Mr. Mouse took a trip paid for by a partisan group. Then let’s say that this same Mr. Mouse already had a violation thrown out on a technicality, which cost taxpayers in outside counsel $3,750. Then let’s say the city council met last night to approve another expenditure for Mr. Mouse from the SAME law firm that could not exceed $7,500. But for some reason none of us seem to know who Mr. Mouse is? Could we assume that the first Mr. Mouse is the same Mr. Mouse that is being looked at a 2nd time around? Or could it be his friend Donald Duck? Or maybe it is from another department? Maybe Mr. Pooh. Or Waldo? Or the Grinch? Oh, it’s probably Rat Fink!

Here is my take. If you are a city official, and an ethics complaint is filed against you, and you think your are innocent, why hide behind confidentiality? As Porky Pig would say, ‘That’s all Folks!’


#1 "Woodstock" on 06.17.20 at 9:51 pm

“What about Pig-Pen?”…. “There always was a cloud around him”….

#2 l3wis on 06.17.20 at 9:58 pm

LOL, when I was writing this post I thought of this scene, sorry Woodstock, you were not in it;


For historical reference, Peanuts is my all time favorite comic strip. As a middle-schooler I could draw Snoopy to a tee, and the life lessons from that strip I hold dear to my heart. While I would like to consider myself as a Snoopy, I also feel like a little Charlie with Lucy thrown in.

#3 "Very Stable Genius" on 06.17.20 at 10:21 pm

I still have my Peanuts lunch pail from 4th grade. Its inners still have the aroma of Sunshine barbecue potato chips, too. #TheWonderYears #SchwinnStingRays #ManOnTheMoon #NixonIsNotTheOne

( and Woodstock adds: “Yah, beginning with Reagan, I think barbecue potato chips, especially from Sunshine, were classified as a school lunchroom vegetable, if I am right”…. )

#4 "Woodstock" on 06.17.20 at 10:31 pm

“That’s okay l3wis”…. “Peppermint Patty in that clip looks like she’s attending a Sanford Hydroxychloroquine press conference”…

#5 D@ily Spin on 06.18.20 at 9:44 am

Is this because Mickey Mouse is black?

#6 anonymous on 06.18.20 at 11:41 am

Does this mean the public will never see the content of the compliant or the outcome of the hearing involving a sitting City Councilor?

I wonder what his constituents in the NW District think about this!

#7 The Guy From Guernsey on 06.19.20 at 8:24 am

I am expecting exoneration.
Chairman Marsh will step to the microphone to utter, “Wellll, there’s nothing in statute, nor city charter which says this was illegal. Nothing to see here. Move along.”
Another example of a feckless and toothless review board assembled to sanitize, whitewash and grant legitimacy to the amoral and unethical dealings of government officials and bureaucrats in this state.
We like to think of South Dakotans as good and honest people.
I submit that we are not that good, nor honest – else why would we elect and tolerate the amoral and unethical work of our elected government officials and unelected bureaucrats?
Much of the electorate doesn’t view any of this as lacking ethics. Given opportunity, any of the voting public would do likewise.

#8 Pundit on 06.21.20 at 7:50 am

GFG: Spot on. A tabulation of the outcome of all ethics complaints during Marsh’s tenure – and the entire history of the Ethics Board, for that matter – would be very telling. Has the E.B. EVER upheld or sustained an ethics complaint? I doubt it.

#9 Steve on 06.21.20 at 3:10 pm

Another item to be swept under the rug with this Board and administration. It’s funny that the rug never seems to get bumpy as often as this happens.

#10 D@ily Spin on 06.22.20 at 11:02 am

It seems the ethics board has become a method to permanently exonerate someone from past or future crooked recounting. It’s a parole board with no crime, punishment, and (therefore) no permanent record. Just wondering, can they hear for my citations and parking tickets?