Sioux Falls City Councilors Jensen, Erickson and Neitzert vote against asking a bar manager questions about police calls and license renewal

Sometimes you see some pretty bizarre things at council meetings, actually just about every one over the past 5 years, but hearing a councilor (Erickson) argue against hearing from a bar manager that has had complaints filed against them about police calls is ridiculous.

Basically, during the 2021 license renewals at tonight’s council meeting, PAVE Bar was up for renewal and councilor Starr asked for them to be pulled from the consent agenda because he had questions about their police calls but asked for it to be deferred until December 1st because he learned the applicant could not attend, and Jamie Palmer, the city’s licensing agent asked if he could come later, and he said he could, she also informed the person complaining to come at a later date.

Makes sense? Right? Wait until the applicant can attend to answer questions about police calls.

Not so fast.

Erickson wasn’t happy about it, and felt that since the applicant wasn’t there to answer questions, they shouldn’t have to answer those questions.

HUH? Where the Frick is the logic in that? That would be like telling someone who was supposed to be in court to defend themselves against a violation and the judge and jury telling them if they don’t show up for their hearing they will be presumed innocent.

WOW. Christine and her lap dogs Greg and Alex have been going off the rails for a while now, and I honestly don’t understand where it is coming from? I really don’t. I could only speculate that her and her pups are friends with the people who own PAVE. Kind of reminds you of how a $26 million dollar disaster got approved. The only explanation would be something my grandma VI used to say, “Maybe she is taking 500 mg ugly pills before the meeting?”

I have not seen the police call evidence about PAVE, and I have NO idea what it is costing taxpayers, but should we at least see the evidence and have a hearing before we renew their license? I think it is only fair. Apparently Christine, Alex and Greg don’t give a rat’s ass about any of those things.

Fortunately five of the councilors felt it was important. They left their ugly pills at home tonight.



12 comments ↓

#1 Fear & Loathing in Sioux Falls on 11.17.20 at 8:58 pm

Heels like bars. “Immediately” like service. ’57 Plymouth – with tail fins – owners go with the flow to be accepted.

#2 anominous on 11.18.20 at 1:33 am

Well Erickson totally phoned in her no to masks vote. Honest to the Lord what is she so afraid of she can’t show up in person to do the Lord’s work, antifa? You got to hand it to neitzert for showing up and voting no on masks and sitting there for hours without a mask. That’s like a good game of pinochle if ur old. I’m sure he’s gonna get covid along with that group of insane people but whatever. About PAve I can see why the council is sad about the bros fighting the police, as it is all MMA types who go to PAve. It’s weird cuz only antifa fights the police but then you got this club’s scuzz trying to, I’m sure all the MMA lovers on the council are appalled. idk, seem wrong to me.

#3 D@ily Spin on 11.18.20 at 9:40 am

Seems to me license renewals should be automatic. It’s sales tax revenue. The only real power the council has is liquor licenses. Is it not also a significant side consideration that makes councilor status profitable? There’s few developer projects at the moment so no side favors.

Get back to listening about masks so we can keep you chained til midnight. Leave our pubs alone. We need a place to drink, fight, and maybe throw an ax. It helps us accept city corruption.

#4 Getting Off the Hook By NOT Being Physically Present on 11.18.20 at 12:34 pm

All eight councilors were elected and are paid by the taxpayers to be at the Peoples’ Town Hall for Council meetings.

They need to be there IN PERSON at EVERY meeting.

It’s a BIG room folks, they can figure out how to social distance.

#5 Where Is Councilor Neitzert's Mask? on 11.18.20 at 12:50 pm

The Mayor ordered all City employees to wear masks. That happened several weeks ago.

Councilor Greg Neitzert IS a City Employee. Why is he not being required to wear a mask at City meetings in a city-owned facility (Carnegie Town Hall)?!!

#6 Fear & Loathing in Sioux Falls on 11.18.20 at 1:59 pm

Data boy doesn’t like the COVID data. I guess he knows best, huh? Which conference did he learn that at?

#7 Causemasksaredumb on 11.18.20 at 2:02 pm

Good for him, standing his ground and using common sense and science saying you have a 99.9% of not dying of COVID!

#8 "Very Stable Genius" on 11.18.20 at 6:48 pm

Except, the .1% equals 330,000 lives and it will grow with most of them being the elderly. Noem is committing geriatric genocide.

#9 Honest Pete on 11.18.20 at 7:12 pm

As an independent “insider” with no dog in this fight, could I add a few missing details from the meeting (that I attended) that maybe will help to clarify some details?

1. Deferring the license issue. The question that was trying to be addressed was how does an applicant and the complainant know “not to show up” for the issue when the council had not voted to remove it from the calendar yet? Presumably, both parties would have shown up to give their testimony only to find out that the council voted to defer it. You see, the only way that could have happened was for a city employee or dept to tell the parties to not show up as it would be deferred. However, this “City person/dept” couldn’t predict that (unless they had done their “politicking” outside the Council’s authority already). I think a certain Councilmember “fired a shot over the bow” to send a message to not do that again to the Council unless the Council authorized it first. In short, the Council could’ve voted NOT to defer it, and then neither party would have been present to answer any questions. The Council sets their own calendar agenda and not someone from the city/dept employee etc.

2.The council committed to try to “Social Distance” at all Council meetings by sitting in every other chair. This required 2 members to stay home and be present via telephone. The intent was to rotate who stayed home, but some members chose only to attend in person, so some members respected that and decided to “take one for the team” and offered to stay home more than their rotation so as to help accommodate those members that preferred to be present in person.

#10 l3wis on 11.18.20 at 8:12 pm

Pete, that would be a good question for Jamie Palmer. She has pulled this crap quite a few times. I still remember when she approved a license before council voted on it (it was for a wedding or a party or something). They chewed her out about it. And that is really what Erickson should have done, thrown Jamie to the matt about sending these folks on their way before the council deferred it. Let’s just say there is a reason why Jamie got that job . . . and it had to do with another council staffer losing their job. You can knit that one together.

As for staying home, that’s fine and dandy, but Erickson had Covid, so I am sure she is still quarantining, but why wasn’t Nutzert wearing a mask as mandated by city employees. Oh, because he is ethically challenged.

#11 anominous on 11.18.20 at 11:46 pm

could remodel carnagie and build a thing like Hollywood Squares so everyone can show up maybe get some plexiglass like a penalty box for the mask scoffers.

#12 Fear & Loathing in Sioux Falls on 11.20.20 at 5:33 pm

The local personalities are too boring to be on a Hollywood Squares, but our mayor does like to sport Paul Lynde’s plaid jackets, however. He just needs to get some turtle necks.

Leave a Comment