UPDATE II: I decided to see if the 50% rule has even been used since it was implemented in 2017. It has ONLY applied ONE time, and that was in 2024 and the runoff between Thomason and Deffenbaugh, and the runoff results were the same as the general election with Thomason the victor. There have been 4 elections since the rule was implemented and has only been triggered one time! Simply not needed. In 2018, there was a runoff between DeBoer and Soehl, but the runoff would have occurred even with the old rule of 34% in place because neither Zach or Curt got over 27% of the vote (there was 5 candidates in the initial race). It seems silly to defend a rule that has never been applied, was implemented because of political revenge, keeps grassroots candidates on the sidelines, costs us extra in elections and has NO political or constituent advantages to stand on. The councilors that VOTE against changing it back really need to get their heads examined. This is an easy one. Something wasn’t broken, change it back.
UPDATE: When this was introduced a few years ago by councilor Starr, councilor Merkouris told fellow councilors keeping the 50% rule would keep out the ‘fringe candidates’. In other words grassroots candidates with little money would’nt be able to take on the money machine. This is why Spellerberg and Sigette had no challengers. Peeps are tired of the money game. I also find this rule ironic, since if applied to the last presidential election there would have had to been a runoff between Harris and Trump (he received 49.8% of the popular vote.)
——————
I will say, I have been following council since Hansen was in office. I have seen some pretty weird meetings, but tonight, was sickening.
First, the public input. I think that most of them need a brain scan to see if they have dementia, secondly, they were saying crap that was counter culture to what really happens. Here is a fine example, so there is this guy that shows up to the council meetings that thinks he is philosopher, but he is mostly just a blabber, and he says to the ordinance about changing the plurality to council races BACK TO 35% that it seemed ‘politically motivated’. Hey, it got changed because of POLITICAL MOTIVES and that is why we need to change it back, so good catch, even if you don’t know what you are talking about. The change came in 2017 when the council was split and Mayor Huether broke the tie to pass this very idiotic change.
Let’s move onto the city council, they also took the side of ‘political motivation’ as to why not to change it back. Let me inform you. Councilor Rex Rolfing was vindictive, he was mean, and didn’t make any policy changes unless he was punishing his political enemies, and the move by him was purely political because of his disdain for councilor Stehly. The main reason why this should be eliminated was it wasn’t needed to begin with. If 7 people are running for a council seat and the leading candidate gets 35% of the vote, that’s good enough for me (the remaining 6 candidates would get an average of 11% of the vote, which is a THIRD of what the winner would receive.) It seems the council likes to enrich the pockets of local campaign electioneers, so the longer they can draw this out the better. The problem; You are so misinformed it is almost criminal.
It is shocking to me that the majority of the council has NO CLUE about good governance. Just protecting their behinds. In a democratic republic you are elected to represent us, not to preserve some rule that was concocted to punish political foes. Do your research BEFORE the second reading, and you will see that changing a rule that was in place for 20 years back to it’s an original intent is the best way to resolve this, and put the Rex Rolfing rule to rest once and for all.
First of all, did anyone wear a baseball or a trucker hat as they spoke from the dias? The reality of that could be very telling as to where we are going as a city:
https://www.southdacola.com/blog/2015/10/hat-hater-sioux-falls-city-councilor-rolfing-insults-a-veteran-at-council-meeting/
As far as 35 versus 50, well, 35 potentially empowers minority voices, while 50 most likely directs them out of the political picture.
We have had the same city council system in this town for 31 years now. In 1994, Sioux Falls had about 110,000 people living here, while today it’s closer to 216,000. Yet, the number of council members has stayed the same in the last 31 years at 8, which means that in 1994, a council member – from a given district – represented roughly 22,000 people, while today that same council member represents 43,200 people. So, if the 1994 change of government was meant to make our city more democratic (lower “d”) and representative, then the fact that the council has not be enlarged over the years in size to reflect our growing population as a city makes it even more imperative that in the short run we return to 35 as the threshold for council seat victories to potentially assure at least an influx of minority voices on the council in a town that continues to grow; but unfortunately growing away from its historic democratic tendencies or intent.
( and Woodstock adds: “I still say we should run the city council in way that is patterned after the UN Security Council, where there would be some permanent seats on the council for some special constituencies like developers, Premier, and Sanford as well as permanent seats for Sierra, Mike Z., and David Z” …… ( ….. “That would be a good time, indeed”….
))……
Many of us already knew this, but Trump truly has no class. He’s an embarrassment:
https://www.cnn.com/2025/06/17/us/video/trump-will-not-call-tim-walz-minnesota-shooting-digvid
But didn’t Trump say this about Walz in 2020?……:
https://apnews.com/article/tim-walz-trump-audio-riots-george-floyd-3b349ec2a8611f242333b76512a82d4f
Boy, some people will just say about anything, in time and place, won’t they?
the irony of the pastor wanting to keep the fringe candidates out, when the lord says all are welcome.
To Very Stable Genius,
That is the argument I have posed to the C.R.C the past two sessions (2021, 2023), that it is time to amend the charter to give the people a greater voice on the board, I have said, that with todays population, we need to maintain 1 per 30,000 people on the council, which would give us a 7 district city. In 2023, I suggested we change the charter to read “the city council shall be made up of the Mayor, at least 2 At-Large Members, and a Odd Numbered group of district representatives that maintains the rule the people get 1 voice per 29,000 people” This allows the Districting Commission to every 10 years to adjust the membership body, adding or removing districts as necessary. The way the charter is written today, they cannot add or subject districts. They can only adjust the lines to maintain a equal voice. So s the population goes up, the city remains at 5 districts.
Black bears spotted in NE South Dakota! Where’s ICE when you need them?! Or, would ICE just shoot the dog instead? #RIPCricket #CanadianBears #CanadianBacon #CanadianBeers #LaBlattScat #BozScaggs(?)
https://www.keloland.com/news/local-news/gfp-confirms-bear-sightings-in-ne-south-dakota/
Personally, I don’t want any fridge candidates, because big fat people, who are very opinionated, really bother me. #ShutUp! #GoFindASandwich!
The man who said that all of the current wars in the world are happening because he was not president the last four years, the man who warned us against another Bush becoming president and the Bush Wars, has now given us a greater continuation of the continual war. A George Orwell could not have written this plot, this strategy, any better.
President Bone Spurs has created his own Achilles’ heel. Trump 45/47 has become Bush45 and Bush47.
“Wow, two more and we’ll have a full six pack of Bush
” …..
Does the city council even matter for Strong Mayor Charter? The mayor can override a council vote. How about make all council seats undecided without 100%? What needs revision is Home Rule Charter. It’s but a lower form of autocracy and fascism as for the Executive Branch of the Federal Government. Perhaps it’s time for “No Kings” demonstrations at and outside of Carnegie Hall on council meeting nights.
There is a lot of ironies (or are they contradictions?; contradictions of character?) in the actions of Pastor Merkouris in his role as City Councilor.
Like casting a vote to erect a fence to exclude the poor and downtrodden?
How do you return to the pulpit with an (allegedly) Christian message after casting that vote?
As a parishioner, how can you sit in a pew and grant any further credibility to a message from Pastor Rich? WWJD?
Spoiler parable – WWJD?
He would turn some tables in the temple (rather than that which seems to be the Merkouris aproach – to take a seat behind some of the tables of the money changers).
Still waiting for Pastor Rich to turn some tables …
“Maybe Pastor Rich thinks that poverty is a sin”…. “You know, like how Mormons watch their weight, don’t consumer alcohol or caffeine, and are big into exercise”…. ( ….. ” …. ‘poverty is a sin’?”…. ” OMG, I think I finally figured out the GOP mindset
……. )
OH, our council is full of money changers, indeed. But on another note, what I’ve never understood about that biblical story is that isn’t the table turning itself a sin? Or, did not Jesus believe in property rights, which makes for an interesting twist on the whole thing concerning wealth and poverty, does it not?
OH, and here is another fun fact. My Mother recently turned 98 and fellow residents at her retirement center presented her with an average size birthday cake at best, but then she offered it to all in the dining hall, which then somehow fed 50 plus people…. When I heard this, I said: “Jesus!”
( and Woodstock adds: “Man, I’m fxcking mad and sad…. Fxcking Dua is engaged! (?) ;-( …… )