Does the Sioux Falls Planning Commission have too many conflicts of interest?

Imagine my astonishment tonight when at the beginning of the Planning Meeting, 3 members of the board including the chair recused themselves for several items on the consent agenda, one member said he had conflicts with 2 of the items. And in the regular items a separate board member recused themself. Can we even have a functioning commission with this many conflicts? Are they volunteering on behalf of the constituents and the city or for their own business interests? And further more, isn’t it interesting how their conflicting items got on the consent agenda. It was astounding.

The application for the casino on the loop was also withdrawn by the applicant with NO explanation. I have heard there was quite the blowback from the neighborhood and knew if it made it to the full city council it would be DOA.

Here were the recusals;

John Paulson 2I,

Kurt Johnson 2F & 2H

Erik Nyberg (Chair) DID NOT say what item only commented that it was ONE of the items

Bradyn Neises, 5B


#1 D@ily Spin on 07.07.21 at 7:11 pm

How about this? One year terms for mayor, council, and boards. Then, there’s not enough time for special considerations and monetary corruption. Then, political funding and bribes would be annual and to expensive for organized crime. We’d be voting all the time but it’d give us time to remove dishonest office holders and the honest ones could focus on what’s best for the people.

#2 "Woodstock" on 07.07.21 at 10:50 pm

“Were any of them wearing a polo shirt with a logo on it, that promoted the real estate/development company they work for?”…. “That’s always a good one, too”…. (….”Yes, I would like to hand over the remainder of my time to my esteemed colleague from the corporate state of….”)….. #AlexWithAFirstPremierPolo