2021

Sioux Falls City Councilor Kiley’s Tuesday Night Shananigans & Scammery

Besides the potential Open Meetings violations at last Tuesday night’s City Council meeting, it seems Kiley was participating in some very strange behavior.

If a City Councilor has a conflict of interest with an item, they must recuse themselves and go in the back room. They must do this AT THE ANNOUNCEMENT of the item and not return until after the final vote. They can’t sit there and listen and then leave before the vote. They must ALSO tell us why they are leaving. Kiley didn’t do that.

My assumption was it was done to save the mayor from having to have a tie vote on Neitzert’s Amendment that Kiley saw in advance*.

Watch how this plays out on Item #40, resolution on development.

(FF 21:20) Kiley doesn’t leave at the beginning, and Erickson whispers something into his ear.

(FF 1:06) Kiley is still sitting on the dais and leans into Erickson and says something as Neitzert discusses his amendment. Between 1:06 and 1:10 he leaves the dais and goes into backroom before the Amendment vote of 4-3 saving the Mayor from breaking a tie. Kiley doesn’t return until after final motion vote and the announcement of the next item.

So Ricky Lee, seems like an interesting time to take a potty break? Talk about blatant corruption and scammery.

But that wasn’t the only time Ricky was up to his little bag of tricks with the help of his magician assistant Heels. *(FF: 2:38) While Neitzert gave an advance notice (several days) of his Garbage Hauler amendment, Ricky did not. It has been ruled in the past by the city attorney that councilors should give a 24 hour advance notice, they have called councilor Starr out on it. So Pat asked Ricky Lee about it and said he could do it because Pat did it in the past to which Pat responded sarcastically, “Yeah, I’d be happy to take credit for it.”

Should the Sioux Falls School Board team up with City Council to offer FREE public transit rides for minors?

As I reported in August, Rapid City decided to extend a FREE public transit ride program to students. I think Sioux Falls should do the same, and our cost would be minimal if anything. We already do it during summer months mostly so food insecure kids can eat in the summer.

Recently Congress passed an infrastructure bill that has billions in it for public transit. Sioux Falls could take advantage of this by hiring and training more drivers and extending routes and time of service.

Now, don’t be fooled, this cannot just happen with a stroke of the pen. The devil is in the details. I encourage the school board to sit down with the city council in a public work session to discuss how to move forward. Let’s face it, there would have to be some route changes and other logistics, but it’s doable.

A candidate for mayor put it best recently in a FB post;

Regardless if it’s a “public school issue,” the shortage of bus drivers is a community problem. Many SFPS students also use public transportation, and as our city grows, the need for a robust public transportation system is a must.

A lack of planning on critical issues like this is why we end up with parents being asked to drive school buses. We can and will do better.

As they point out, different branches of local government CAN work together on this for a solution. I reached out to a school board member and a city councilor last night about the idea, hopefully talks will happen soon.

Some may not know this, but I actually consulted and encouraged a city councilor to start the FREE summer youth rides when they asked me if their idea was worth pursuing. It was then and a broader approach should be pursued now.

Open Meetings Violation Filed against the City of Sioux Falls

The below document is actually a ‘notice’ to the city that one will be filed next week with the State’s Attorney office. I believe that it refers to presentations during the consent agenda in which the Chair (Mayor TenHaken) did not ask for public input. It was also the responsibility of the City Attorney, the City Clerk and the Chair of the Council, this is why they are mentioned in the complaint.

I also want to clarify, I wasn’t the one who caught this, I missed the part in the meeting when this occurred as I was on a phone call (I watch the meetings live from home). Sierra is the one who actually caught it and took action on her own.

The irony of all this is that I just told the Charter Revision Commission last week that public input at city meetings was broken and needed to be fixed.

Stay tuned, much more to come next week.

Did the Sioux Falls City Council set themselves up for a discrimination complaint?

The city council bowed down to the garbage haulers last night essentially allowing them to charge a valet fee to pick up garbage by your house if you can’t carry it to the end of the driveway (Councilor Neitzert and Starr voted against the measure). So not only will cans be blowing all over the streets moving forward, they will probably remain there all week since the city really has no enforcement.

One company already told a person today that the valet service would be $17 extra a month even if you have a disability. Some have already been discussing if this is an ADA violation discriminating against handicapped and elderly folks. We will see the complaints coming.

Also, as Councilor Starr pointed out last night, Kiley’s Amendment didn’t get a required 24 hour notice to the council a rule that Kiley and Erickson have squawked about in the past when other councilors have not followed the rule. In fact the city attorney is the one who thinks this rule should be followed even though he remained silent about it last night.

I understand the haulers complaints about gas and labor issues, but the haulers already have the power to raise rates, they just wanted the council to validate it for them.

I have argued that common sense could easily fix many of these issues and actually lower our rates without getting rid of the private service or valet. Two things I have suggested are setting up sectors and days when garbage can be picked up during the week in a specific neighborhood and stop charging the haulers tipping fees unless they go over a certain tonnage or are dropping trash from other communities. The first idea has actually been thrown around for awhile and would save the haulers on fuel and labor. The second idea has probably not been discussed but makes sense. The taxpayers already own the landfill and pay for it’s maintenance. We also make money from the methane and other materials we sell. It doesn’t make sense for the city to charge a private hauler tipping fees then have them turn around and charge the consumer for dropping garbage off at a facility we own. It’s like putting a parking meter in your driveway.

The council should have voted for Neitzert’s original amendment to leave it alone and discussed putting together a task force to explore other options to save money. Neitzert said it best last night, what we currently have now is a ‘community standard’ we should be proud of. Once again, the rubber stampers took the easy cruise control government route that will make service more expensive and messier without solving the root causes. I’m surprised Carnegie didn’t explode last night with all the DUMB on the DIAS.


There is also a rumor circulating that an open meetings violation will be filed since public input was NOT allowed during the meeting on two items (Club David’s liquor license, and Covid study). Both were pulled from the consent agenda and the Chair of the meeting, Mayor TenHaken, did not request public input, and neither did the clerk or other councilors.