UPDATE:Here is the entire survey. You will see that they did not include any citizen comments on the survey, they have in the past. This tells me, there probably wasn’t too many positive comments. They also went the BIGOTRY route by filtering out Hispanics on the race question. Not sure why they did that because we have several immigrant communities in Sioux Falls. Weird.
I will do a deeper dive tonight after the presentation but there were a few stats I wanted to point out.
It seems the council is hestitant to fund childcare services or transient management but the citizens seem to be ok with it;
• 80% support funding for transient issues and housing
• 70% support funding for childcare
• 70% support funding for airport
Where the survey takes a bad turn is government services and transparency, many failing grades, but this one surprised me;
I’m sure there will be more details at the meeting today, but it will be interesting to see how the council addresses the transparency issues. I was surprised by these stats because I have been telling folks for 20 years the lack of transparency in city government and how bad it has gotten over the past 12 years but just figured no one notices because when you don’t inform people they tend to not be involved or care. If only 50% trust the government in Sioux Falls, yah got problems.
I saw this story today, then Trump signed an executive order to ban androgynous names like;
Pat(t) • Jordan • Taylor • Lauren (Loren) • Shannon • Mickey • Scottie • Carrol(l) • Kerry (Carrie, Kari) • Leslie (Leslee) • Lynn • Shawn (Sean, Sion, Shaun) and if you are a Johnny Cash fan . . . Sue.
I am kidding of course, or am I?
There is a part of me that is really bummed about a president who has lost his mind (current and previous) but you have to admit the pettiness is unrelenting and so ridiculous it is comical. Watching cabinet meetings is like watching ‘One Flew over the Cuckoo’s Nest’. The Crazy part is they would probably have better policy ideas. Heck, a pimple on a teen’s ass would have better policy ideas.
Speaking of pettiness, I think I will be hosting a SouthDacola Fest to celebrate the termination of the dumbest person on earth and current DHS director. I guess she is preparing for the termination by buying a home in Yankton (or maybe she is trying to help out her nephew who lives there that just got a DUI?) DEPORT HIM! WE DON’T WANT THAT KIND OF STUPID GARBAGE IN OUR COUNTRY!
It will be fun to watch a Fox News pundit from the basement of a Crankton Home Studio. I wouldn’t be surprised if she already signed her Fox News contract, probably did it at the Mexican Restaurant in Watertown (that kind of sounds like an oxymoron, but ironically most small cities in SD have a Mexican Restaurant ran by an immigrant family, and usually it is best restaurant in town. Yankton has one of the best in the state, this is probably why her husband chose the place, because racists really are that thick).
Sure they follow state law, a law that was hijacked. When our current open meeting laws were implemented they were originally written by a Democrat, Nancy Turbak. But instead of the SD GOP opposing her bill, Dave Knudson convinced them to work with her on the legislation, instead, Dave gutted it leaving it up to local governments to decide what is open and what is not, kind of like the fox watching the hen house. Just look at how our city attorney ‘interprets’ our open meeting laws in this presentation to council;
• If a quasi-judicial item, then the applicant is allowed a rebuttal following public input. (while I think it is fine for an applicant to have a rebuttal, that equal time should be afforded to the opposition. Not in Sux, business owner first, citizens dead last.)
• General Public input must be included on the agenda and is limited to topics which did not involve those agenda items appearing earlier. (As I have said in the past, the council can’t limit what you can say during general public input, it is a violation of your 1st Amendment rights).
• Can the public body discuss the issue(s) first raised by a General Public Input Presenter at the same meeting? No.
Then it may become an agenda item which was not properly noticed. (this excuse made me chuckle. If a constituent asked the age of a city councilor while standing at the podium and that councilor answered, that is NOT a whole new item. What a ridiculous excuse. Constituents used to be able to question council at meetings but Mike had that rule changed. This has NOTHING to do with open meeting laws. The council knows they can answer a question they are just to scared of the city attorney.)
• Are email discussions an “official meeting”? Official meetings can be conducted electronically. “A quorum of a public body who discusses official business of that body via electronic means is conducting an official meeting.” (this would explain why Fiddle says we have 500 meetings a year, he thinks sending an email to the mayor is a ‘meeting’.)
If you review our current State Open Meeting laws you will see they grant massive power to local governments to self-determine what can and cannot be transparent, in other words LEGALIZED CENSORSHIP.
Nomination for At-Large “A” City Council Member Vernon Brown 2019 S Pendar Lane Sioux Falls, SD 57105 Nomination by Council Member Miranda Basye Nomination seconded by Council Member Ryan Spellerberg
It was no secret that the council was likely going to appoint a former city councilor this next Tuesday night to take over Dr. Cole’s seat after she HAD to leave Sioux Falls for her profession.
The question was who? My short list was;
Rolfing
Starr
Kiley
Neitzert
Jensen
Stehly
Brekke
I could also see Jeff Barth or John Paulson.
Another name brought up to me last week was Erpenbach. And I thot this may be the wisest choice since she just disbanded Thrive maybe she could take the next 6 months on the council to to reorganize the homeless task force. So while I am NOT a Michelle fan, it was much better then others on that list. It’s not Michelle but it’s close, it is likely someone who works for Michelle’s husband Steve.
I figured over the weekend the true candidate would emerge, and they may have. The rumor is that Vernon Brown will be nominated on Tuesday night and there will be no other nominations. I guess things could be worse, we could nominate Matt Paulson to the city council, of course they would have to change house rules so Matt could bring his emotional support dog* to the meetings with him.
They may mix it up and nominate Michelle, Vernon and Rick just to make it look like they are doing their due diligence, but I hear they didn’t have to many takers (or at least takers that are willing to wear knee pads around 9th and Dakota).
*That was satire. I know ‘who’ his emotional support dog is, and they don’t eat Alpo.
UPDATE II: Sometimes you have to go straight to the source. I was asking a former city attorney today about the ordinance that was referenced and the intent. They first told me that their is a HUGE difference between ‘recused’ and ‘excused’. They went on to tell me they actually wrote the ordinance (30.017) and the intent since authored was for councilors and the mayor to present their financial conflict at the time of the recusal, which Mr. Spellerberg did not. So there you have it, straight from the horse’s mouth, the author of the ordinance ALWAYS intended that you disclose that conflict in public as it says SHALL DISCLOSE. Funny how our city attorney decides to interpret the law differently then how it was written, but that is what he is infamous for. I wonder if Spellerberg will come clean on this? Doubtful. They learned from Selberg you can break all kinds of ethical rules and it doesn’t matter, just look at who is running our country.
UPDATE: Remember when you were just a snot and you broke your mom’s favorite matador/bull sculpture and instead of just telling her you tried to fix it with school glue? Remember how that turned out? Apparently Mr. Spellerberg hasn’t had this experience, because of instead just admitting that he broke the matador, he tries to glue it back together;
Roll call vote to adopt. 6Yes: Thomason, Basye, Cole, Merkouris, Sigette, Soehl; 0 No: (None). Motion Passed. Spellerberg was excused from the meeting and the vote on this item pursuant to City Ordinance 30.017.
This specific ordinance reads;
City council members may not abstain from voting, but may absent themselves from the meeting by physically leaving the meeting at the time an item is called by the clerk. Members with a financial interest in a matter shall disclose that interest and shall absent themselves from the meeting by physically leaving the meeting while the matter is considered.
In other words it is something financial, but what is more interesting is he didn’t follow the ordinance quoted in the minutes by telling us what that is (ex; loan security, board membership, personal assets, etc.) This get worse by the minute(s);
Spellerberg was excused from the meeting
Notice they said ‘excused’ instead of ‘recused’ there is a legal difference;
In legal and ethical terms, recuse is to withdraw from a case due to a conflict of interest, while excuse is a broader term for releasing someone from a duty or requirement, which can be due to reasons other than a conflict of interest. To recuse is a specific type of excuse, a voluntary action taken by a judicial official like a judge or juror to remove themselves from a case to avoid bias or the appearance of bias.
So which is it Fiddle Faddle and your trusty city clerk? I await your answer, of course, after your 500 board meetings. LMFAO!
——————————-
City council members may not abstain from voting, but may absent themselves from the meeting by physically leaving the meeting at the time an item is called by the clerk. Members with a financial interest in a matter shall disclose that interest and shall absent themselves from the meeting by physically leaving the meeting while the matter is considered.
It seems the neighborhood is all for the street closure and project at the council meeting tonight, so who am I to tell them otherwise? The city council did what they are supposed to do, listen to the neighbors and proceed. I personally don’t like the project because there really isn’t anything special about it which is troublesome so close to a historic neighborhood, but if the neighbors are fine with it, I support the council in their decision, BUT, Councilor Spellerberg didn’t follow city charter when he recused himself tonight;
35.056 DISCLOSURE OF INTEREST. City council members who have a financial interest in any matter pending before the city shall disclose that interest to other members of the city council, and shall refrain from further discussion of the matter; shall not be physically present when the subject is discussed in an executive session; and shall not vote on or participate further therein in any manner.
In other words when you are telling the rest of the council, you don’t do it in an email or private phone conversation, you make the announcement at the public meeting, as he did, and you TELL the council and the public what that conflict is, which he DID not. Several current councilors have followed this rule, when recusing themselves they tell the council and the public why they are recused. For example, Councilor Thomason has recused himself several times on an issue in which he serves on a board, and he told the council and the public in a public meeting WHY he was recused. This is the proper procedure. But the misstep tonight was just a culmination of conflicts. The city council has voted on this item three times before the second reading (a first reading and two deferrals) in August, September and October, and each time, Spellerberg voted and did not recuse himself. So why now? Not sure, but my educated guess is that he works for a company that is handling the finances of the developer, but who knows?
So let’s just say for a moment that Spellerberg didn’t have Tre Ministries as a client until after the last vote in October, that just makes it even more troubling because the passage of this item effects his bottom line. It would be one thing if he voted in August then withheld the next two, but I have a feeling he knew all along what he was concocting and this is why it is a serious ethics violation, I would even suggest he should be recalled, even if he wasn’t elected 🙁
The irony of this is that it is Ethics 101. When you have a conflict, you explain that to the public, you also don’t lie about that conflict for 9 months then recuse yourself when it matters. Ethics don’t work that way, they are not like laws that can be turned on and off, they are guide on how to govern, and if you don’t follow it, you are not only cheating your reputation but the citizens who put you there. This isn’t hard. You can’t just be ethical when it is convenient, which is exactly what councilor Spellerberg did.
I’m sure they will blame the city attorney for bad advice, but everyone and their cousin knows he is a legal dolt. Just watch his stellar performance at the informational today where he did everything in his power to shut down open meetings and transparency, even claiming at one point that the city has 500 separate board meetings a year. I literally busted up laughing when he said that and went to the city calendar. The city has about 75-100 board/committee meetings a year with about a third of them being canceled. I’m not sure where the 500 number came from, but I am assuming Fiddle-Faddle thinks having a Diet Coke with the Mayor in a city hall hallway constitutes a board meeting. Or maybe he is referring to having a couple of micro-brews and Fireball shots at a downtown bar as a ‘board meeting’?
I know it is hard to see with all the political turmoil going on right now, but our city government is corrupt, and the sad part is they don’t even realize it.
l3wis 
