South DaCola – Editorial Cartoonist from South Dakota

Elections SF City Council Sioux Falls Vernon Brown

Sioux Falls City Council violated so many rules tonight it was ALMOST comical, but I am NOT laughing

l3wis December 9, 2025 1Comments

The city council appointed Vernon Brown tonight since we was the ONLY(?) nominee for Cole’s empty seat. I don’t take issue with Vernon’s appointment. While I disagreed with him on most everything on the council, he is NO dummy and he will be an asset to the council over the next 6 months. I would love to be a fly on the wall when Vernon expresses his discomfort with council leadership on how haphazardly the council and city government is being run now, and I hope Vernon acts more like a Private Investigator then a councilor over the next 6 months and reports back to the public, but I am NOT going to hold my breath. (for full disclosure I went to HS with Vernon’s wife and have known her family since I was a tike, her parents are the salt of the earth).

Nomination aside, Vernon approached this the way several other potential candidates did; professionally, so what I am going to say about council action tonight has NOTHING to do with Vernon’s character or ability to serve. He did everything right, and there are NO faults with him.

So where did the council f’ck up? Man, where to begin?

• They didn’t provide a singular contact to apply for nomination just that you had to kiss two councilor’s asses. In a functioning open government you have a direct source to apply for these nominations. This made it a CLOSED process and a 1st Amendment violation. The council didn’t even provide a direct contact to THEM! It is HYPOCRITICAL to complain about citizen participation in local government then when an opportunity presents itself you tell the public to GFThemselves. WOW!

• They only nominated ONE person. While Soehl expressed that several candidates applied (I know of at least 6 but he touched on clergy and business folks which were NOT on my radar). All the applicants should have been listed. Even Miranda ‘Lucy’ Basye thot there would be more nominees though I think her little statement was smoke and mirrors while we watch Charlie Brown lay on his back in pain.

• But where they really screwed the pooch happened several weeks ago when Council Chair Rich Merkouris said in a live presser that he wouldn’t nominate anyone who was running for office in next year’s city election. This is a CLEAR violation of charter. There are ONLY TWO requirements to be on city council; You must be 18 years of age and a resident of Sioux Falls for the past 6 months. There are NO other requirements!!!!!! He is violating charter and the 1st Amendment!

I knew this process was Sh!t from the beginning, and I feel sorry for the appointee who got appointed on a false premise. But this is how we do govmint’ in Sux.

1st Amendment abortion Larry Rhoden Marty Jackley South Dakotans

Rhoden and Jackley apparently don’t know what the 1st Amendment is

l3wis December 9, 2025 1Comments

So Larry and Marty think they are cracking down on crime;

Governor Larry Rhoden is urging Attorney General Marty Jackley to investigate a new abortion ad campaign, appearing at gas stations across the state.

The ad campaign is being broadcast by Mayday Health, advertising abortion pills at 30 gas stations in 20 South Dakota cities.

Governor Rhoden specifically cites SDCL 22-17-5.1 and SDCL 36-4-8.

“All ad campaigns, no matter what the issue, need to follow state laws and fair trade practices,” said Jackley. “We will review these ads and determine if any laws have been broken. If laws have been broken, we will take appropriate action.”

The advertisement doesn’t perform abortions or dispense abortion pills it simply advertises a website where you can get help. They have a 1st Amendment right to advertise and the laws referenced above are about performing or assisting in abortions. Last time I checked a billboard can’t perform abortions.

While I know Rhoden is this stupid, I would think Jackley would know the US Constitution and Free Speech Rights. They could ask them to cease and desist, but they don’t have to comply. If they try to indict this organization it will be laughed out of court. They will likely get a stern letter from Jackboots and pull the ads. They have already served their purpose and by announcing this potential indictment you just gave them more press then they know what to do with. Idiots.

My bigger question is if the media will do a counter story about the 1st Amendment violations? You would think a news organization would be protecting their advertisers.

1st Amendment Downtown Sioux Falls Homeless SF City Council Sioux Falls

UPDATE: Sioux Falls Citizen Survey results down in almost every category since 2021

l3wis December 9, 2025 1Comments

And some of it isn’t good, some categories dropping almost 10+ points in 2 years. They will do a presentation today at 4 PM, and here is a link to the document.

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.

1st Amendment Donita Trump Noem Humor Kristi Noem Political Satire Satire Trump

Trump to Ban Androgynous names

l3wis December 8, 2025 8Comments

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).

1st Amendment Open Government Open Meetings SF City Council Sioux Falls

The City of Sioux Falls does as little as possible when it comes to open meetings

l3wis December 8, 2025 3Comments

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.

You Missed