BREAKING: Emmett Reistroffer & Cody Ingle qualified for Sioux Falls City Council ballot today

Some very good news today in the city council races. Both young men are incredible progressive advocates for citizens and they are going to make this race fun to watch.

Riestroffer is running for Central District. He is a consultant for the Cannabis industry and has previously run for the City Council I think against Rex Rolfing.

Ingle is running for SE District.

About

I currently work as the IT/App Support Specialist at the Center for Family Medicine, where I help physicians and residents best utilize our Electronic Medical Record system to ensure quality patient care. I also help in daily IT issues, such as printing errors and random computer glitches (technology is great). I am passionate about healthcare and addressing the disparities seen in it. Data analysis and population health are my biggest professional joys.

I am a board member of Pathways to Inclusive and Equitable Workplaces, which strives to educate the business community in Sioux Falls on diversity, equity, and inclusion. I am the Secretary of Sioux Falls Pride, and am a strong advocate for marginalized people groups. I strive to help lift up voices of those who feel as though they have no voice, and to help bring equity to all humans.

Here is the list of candidates. While Emmett is NOT listed on the city website, he did confirm to me that the city clerk confirmed he had enough signatures. I guess Immanuel Bassey did not have enough signatures to make the ballot in the SE District.

Listing of Current Candidates
(Alphabetical Order (Last Name) by Office)
Name Office
Taneeza Islam Mayor
Paul TenHaken Mayor
David Zokaites Mayor
Bobbi Andera At-Large Council Member “A”
Janet Brekke At-Large Council Member “A”
Sarah Cole At-Large Council Member “A”
Pam Cole At-Large Council Member “B”
Rich Merkouris At-Large Council Member “B”
David Barranco Southeast District Council Member
Cody Ingle Southeast District Council Member
Jim Burzynski Central District Council Member
Emmett Reistroffer Central District Council Member
Curt Soehl Central District Council Member



27 comments ↓

#1 D@ily Spin on 02.26.22 at 10:39 am

Young on council is a start for breaking up the insider network. However, more and a new mayor could restore democracy and replace Strong Arm Charter autocracy.

#2 F*CK PUTIN! on 02.26.22 at 11:24 am

The thought of smoking pot and riding around in a yellow trike entices me. The other guy is from a interracial marriage, which is cool and we could use more of that here in River City (Are we even suppose to notice that?). While Curt needs to be deprogrammed and then returned to us as a real Democrat. But I don’t smoke, and I am a real Democrat, and although I favor Sanford, I think I am with Avera this time.

#3 Mike Lee Zitterich on 02.26.22 at 12:32 pm

For those who call us a Democracy, ask the real question:

Are we a Democracy, or are we a Republic of which utilizes a “Representative Form of Democracy”. One of which based on the fact the “People” and their “Representatives” manage the government together.

Not only do the people adopt laws by ‘consent’ meaning, while we adopt them thru direct voting, while the those people who are to be governed by such law, have the same equal right to refer that law back for 2nd Opinions – either A) by taking a 2nd Confirmed Vote of the People, or B) Lobbying the Representatives to take action on such law; of C) Challenge said law in our Public Courts in order to obtain that 2nd Opinion of its legality.

IF we were a direct democracy, which no where in the constitution, the state constitution, nor the declaration did our founders ever express, mention, or call attention to, created such a democracy. For those who opposed Democracy did so out of fear of how the people directly can be manipulated by the mob itself.

Whether you are Republican or Democrat, what is most important is to protect our defined state of our governing process, in order to protect the majority from mob rule (minority opinion), as it relates to governing that majority’s property rights, thus protecting our natural right to Life, Liberty, Prosperity, and Property.

You have the Right to do anything you so choose, believe as you wish to belief, be who you wish to be, Freely, so long as you never commit actions of Rob, Rape, Murder, let alone Interfere with the Natural Rights of another person, all of which are protected by the Constitution, of which protects the defined natural rights as prescribed by our Declaration.

“WE THE PEOPLE” are a Sovereign People of who make up “THE STATE” of which we adopt our Laws based on the Consent of the Governed, of which our first line of defense are held by those “Representatives” who the people elect as per each Small Narrow Minded Populated District whereas each District in itself is a small sample of the the Majority.

Amen.

#4 The Guy From Guernsey on 02.26.22 at 1:47 pm

Fantastic to have contested races at each level and for every elected position in City government.
Janet Brekke has earned my vote for re-election as one of a diminishing number of Councilors that the ordinary tax-paying citizen can count upon to represent their interests with integrity and transparency.
I look forward to supporting and voting for Pam Cole and Cody Ingle in their races. Each represents a flavor of political ice cream different from the one with which I might typically associate. But frankly, it is time to support significant change in our elected representives – at many levels of government in this state.

#5 F*CK PUTIN! on 02.26.22 at 1:58 pm

What about counties? I thought counties mattered? But isn’t a system where counties have an imaginary electoral college system a form of “minority opinion”?

I, too, thought I was a sovereign until yesterday, when I got my newest real estate assessment notice in the mail.

Oh, and I hate it when “Rob” commits an act (There are actually people named “Rape” and “Murder”? (Really?)).

And the only time I have ever interfered with another’s “Natural Rights” is when I once unknowingly walked into an already occupied one stall can.

#6 NTNLIQ on 02.26.22 at 2:01 pm

“Brevity is the soul of wit” – Mike Lee Zitterich

#7 l3wis on 02.26.22 at 2:10 pm

My assessment went up 19%+

#8 scott on 02.26.22 at 2:11 pm

can someone clarify? is the at large councilor b running unopposed, or do the top two vote getters win?

#9 F*UCK PUTIN! on 02.26.22 at 2:25 pm

Mine went up 28.20%. One of the issues for the city election should be what our political leaders want to do, or are willing to do, to lower our city mill levy so these new assessments don’t create unnecessary heart attacks next year.

#10 "Woodstock" on 02.26.22 at 2:27 pm

“If your house is painted taupe, I think you should have to pay a special tax assessment”… “That’s what I think”… (“Wait a minute, my nest is naturally taupe”.. 🙁 …. )

#11 "Woodstock" on 02.26.22 at 2:31 pm

“What? The anti-quotation boy is using quotations?”… #ThatsCool

#12 l3wis on 02.26.22 at 2:36 pm

Two years ago I got a 21% increase and after talking to the nice lady at equalization she knocked it down to 12% and last year I think it was minimal, but now they are back at it. I figure if they keep this up, my home will be worth 5x its sale price in a couple of years.

#13 l3wis on 02.26.22 at 2:38 pm

Scott, great question. There are TWO separate At-Large seats (as you can see above at the end of my post) and you have to file for one or the other as they are separate on the ballot. I have argued for a long time that the AT-large should just be in general and the 2 top vote getters get the two seats. But I think the Rolfing rule of having run-offs in council races screws that up. A stupid rule that needs to go bye-bye.

#14 The Guy From Guernsey on 02.26.22 at 2:52 pm

MLZ,
“… the ‘People’ and their ‘Representatives’ manage the government together.”
Cool civics lesson, bro. But extremely idealistic with respect to the passage noted above, especially at levels of municipal, county and state government in South Dakota.
I could produce a long list of examples from the City of Sioux Falls, Lincoln County or the State of South Dakota. But one needs only to follow the annual ritual of our state legislature to subvert, on a priority basis, the will and guidance of the PEOPLE. An anti-corruption measure, a minimum wage initiative, an initiative to approve recreational marijuana. In each, the PEOPLE were denied their role in managing/directing the government.

#15 The Guy From Guernsey on 02.26.22 at 2:58 pm

Hey “F P!”,
Is that you VSG?

#16 VSG on 02.26.22 at 6:13 pm

I believe the words “F*CK PUTIN!” are all of us in solidarity, are they not?

( and Woodstock adds: “‘Solidarity’ is a word first made popular by anti-communist Social Democrats in Poland about 42 years ago. And I had an uncle who was a Social Democrat and he drove a Saab to prove it”…. )

#17 Steve on 02.27.22 at 7:22 am

Since someone brought up Assessments, just curious how the city figures that my structures are worth 25.75% more but land value stayed the same. Also, so glad that I was able to see another short essay from Mike this morning. Maybe spent too much time doing that and should have been out getting signatures.

#18 The Guy From Guernsey on 02.27.22 at 8:13 am

VSG,
Ah. So “F*CK PUTIN!” is a newly crafted nom de plume allowing you a device to present an allegory about the present state of international relations with Russia, amirite?

#19 The Guy From Guernsey on 02.27.22 at 8:49 am

While in any case “F P!”
While not a Democrat, I can agree with you about the deprogramming and return of Soehl to your party.

A very noble gesture that you would accept him back after he completely abdicated representation of the interests of his constituents in the Central district (always reliable turf for the Dems) during his first term on City Council.

But we are indeed a State of Redemption, aren’t we. A former AG, who once before while in that office presided over a division which was found to harbor a hostile work environment for women, can be regarded by the Republican party as a legitimate candidate to be the chief law enforcement officer in the state again.

Noble also of the powerbrokers of the Republican party to give Marty another chance at the AG office. He only needs 4 more years to campaign for Governor.

#20 The Guy From Guernsey on 02.27.22 at 9:00 am

F P!,
About a candidate’s marriage – regardless of “notice” or not, none of that matters. At all.
As a proclaimed Democrat, why would you comment on that aspect of a candidate’s life?
I have suspicions but want to hear from you the rationale of that portion if your commentary.
I’ll hang up and listen.

#21 F*CK PUTIN! on 02.27.22 at 12:09 pm

First of all, Noem endorsing Jackley for AG must mean that #MeTwo doesn’t matter to her anymore.

Secondly, why do I “notice”? Because we need to acknowledge and promote it, that’s why. (And thanks for taking my bait on that. 😉 ) Because we live in a town where our school district created a white high school, which should have been a mixed high school. We also live in a town that warned of “three buses from Fargo”, while a truck load of asbestos through our city doesn’t matter to our political leaders.

We must embrace diversity, identify it, promote it, and not just assume that it exists and is on automatic dial. A color blind society cannot be done by fiat. It must be done by initial obvious exercise.

#22 VSG on 02.27.22 at 12:17 pm

TGFG,

“F*CK PUTIN!” is actually a bumper sticker of brevity for my old pick-up, because a sticker that I would like to have, that said “F*ck Putin, Trump, and all of the Trump supporters who now claim to be on Ukraine’s side”, would cover up to much of the proud patina that I have on my old truck.

#23 The Guy From Guernsey on 02.27.22 at 5:33 pm

VSG,
Doubtful that #MeToo ever had meaning to Noem. The endorsement by Noem of Jackley is simply the act of a politician who operates without guidance of any principles, neither ideological nor moral.
The initial act to bludgeon Jackley with the issue is just the attack instinct of a Mean Girl.

#24 The Guy From Guernsey on 02.27.22 at 5:54 pm

Bait!?!? Bait!?!? THAT is the utility to you of race and inter-racial marriage? To use as bait under the guise of promoting diversity?
Race-hustling race-baiting Democrats who continue to sow seeds of division on basis of race are like those who train fighting dogs. Keep the issue (another dog) captive only to be applied as bait.

“Guess Who’s Coming To Dinner ” was a 1967 film. Sir, it is 2022. You need to advance your politics from the days of the Johnson adminustration.

#25 VSG on 02.27.22 at 8:54 pm

By the way, we just lost Sidney Poitier and I think his work is timeless.

As far as your other contention, I don’t have a dog in that fight. And you and I have had this discussion before. Racial equality still has a lot of work ahead of it, and that’s why Biden picked a black woman for the Supreme Court, because else, it would have never happened as long as whites dominate our politics. And also, was it wrong for Reagan to want a woman on the Supreme Court and was it wrong for Biden to want a black woman on the same Court? I don’t think so, nor does even Mitch McConnell think so either.

( and Woodstock adds: “Wait a minute, are you saying that Mitch is into identity politics, too?”…. (“Is that why he’s always promoting and protecting Buba?”….)… )

#26 Mike Lee Zitterich on 02.28.22 at 1:27 am

The Guy From Guernsey,

Thank You for the respectful response – to answer your concerns related to the four laws adopted by the voters, you also have to consider the fact the LAW itself has to be written in such manner it fits within our ‘constitution’ framework, let alone that same people making up the State of South Dakota have the lawful ability to refer such law back for 2nd Opinion, which can be done directly by referring it back to a public vote; by lobbying the legislature to discuss it, assess it, make recommended changes, to repealing it; to lastly, any such law can be challenged in a court of law based on its legal standing as per the constitution itself. Laws cannot stand if a) they are not constitutional, b) violate other parts to our law, or c) no one consented to such law.

I agree, there should only be 1 At-Large Rep, and that should be the “mayor” himself.

What we have here is 1 Mayor and 3 At-Large Reps. Basically the same format as the old “commission” form of City Government, in addition of the 5 District Reps.

Originally set up as: At-Large Rep A and B were elected in the first citywide election (1994) to serve 4 years; whereas At-Large C was elected in 1994 but only served 2 years. This meant, that every two years, we would vote At-Large A and B spots, while the following city election we voted for the At-Large C spot.

The way our City Council is set up:

1st Election Held in 1994 – We elected the Mayor, At-Large A and B, NW DISTRICT, NE DISTRICT, SW DISTRICT to serve 4 Years;

While at the same time – We elected the At-Large C, Central District, SE District to serve 2 Years.

This allowed us to vote for 5 Candidates 1 year, and 3 Candidates two years later.

#27 The Guy From Guernsey on 02.28.22 at 9:21 am

MLZ,
I consider as “lobbying the legislature” the overwhelming support which voters have granted at the ballot box to some of these IMs or referenda. A pretty clear signal from the voters on a consensus of direction for policy and legislation.
Yet, rather than craft alternative legislation which align with the spirit of those iniatives as indicated by voters at the ballot box, our legislature has taken upon itself to overturn completely many of these results.
Not only that, but our legislators, apparently weary of having to acknowledge the will of their pesky voting constituents, have further responded by attempting to erect higher barriers for approval of the voice of the PEOPLE.
The legislature has been tone-deaf to hearing the voice of the PEOPLE and is dismissive and disrespectful of the “lobbying” from/by their constituents (results of IM and referenda at the ballot box).

Disclaimer:
From the standpoint that I believe that it was not sound economic policy, I did not support the minimum wage issue with my vote at the polls.
I have no great passion, one way or another, the adoption of recreational and medical marijuana, so don’t feel like I have a dog in that fight.
Nonetheless, many of my fellow constituents felt strongly about each such that they were adopted at the polls.
I respect the voice of the PEOPLE, whereas our state legislature does not respect the voice of the PEOPLE.