UPDATE II (updated): Towards the end of the CRC meeting, chair Hajek mentions they will be discussing emergency appropriations and supplemental appropriations at the next meeting(?), and I am not sure if anyone is bringing a proposal. After I rewatched the meeting it was hard to understand if someone was actually bringing a proposal to the next meeting or not but sounded like there will be a discussion. Sorry about the confusion earlier in the post, THERE IS NOTHING IN WRITING RIGHT NOW, but we will watch for the next agenda. (FF 40:00)

I had a good laugh listening to the CRC meeting today. Mike Zitterich asked a great question about the city attorney and issuing opinions. Lead attorney David P. answered first and basically said the AG has more power. Former AG, Larry Long and CRC member answered next and basically said the AG’s opinion can be thrown out or ignored by the courts.

When former city clerk Owen filed an open meetings violation against the city after she was terminated, David used the defense of an AG’s opinion and the lawyers on the open meetings commission told David then that the opinion is NOT case law and cannot be used as a defense. In fact, I was at the hearing, and they told him TWICE that his defense was flimsy, and he lost.

He learned nothing.

UPDATE: One thing that came to mind when they were having the discussion about litigation transparency, etc., it got me thinking about the Active Transportation Board and why it may have come about. If you look at how it got started there is NO mention of someone nicely asking them to form this board. I have a sneaky feeling the 4,000 ADA violations lawsuit may have something to do with it.

UPDATE III: The Parks board is meeting TWO times on September 20th with a 2 PM meeting with NO agenda or location (I’m sure it is some quasi-executive session about Lenin’s Tomb at the Zoo).

Janet Brekke set a new standard for Sioux Falls City Council thought provoking discussion on June 19, 2018. During the discussion of the fake Public Input control ordinance Brekke had to remind the proponents and everyone else what goes into proper process.

We must remember, there is nothing lost if everything is in the open following proper process. The Selberg / Kiley fake Public Input ordinance controversy never had to happen. It was a brain dead proposal to shut off voices they did not want to hear, interfering in proposals they appeared to want hidden from us, the owners and customers of our city government.

To help everyone understand, the city of Sioux Falls is technically a public corporation run through by-laws (A.K.A. Home Rule Charter). The Home Rule Charter gives the administrators certain responsibilities and are answerable to us, the stockholders. We citizens are the stockholders of the corporation, not the special interests who pay money to have more influence or pay platting fees.

The last few years we have been teaching the public how and when they should redress their issues and concerns. This fake issue was shot down by the people, those who showed up and those who couldn’t. It appeared for the time being, the elected board of directors heard the message.

UPDATE: There seems to be confusion from several people in the media about Haggar’s original letter, so another one was submitted to Sierra and the AG’s office. Basically Haggar is saying he does NOT have the authority to rule on this, BUT the Open Meetings Commission under the direction of the AG’s office does. It now will be up to the OMC to first determine if the complaint is viable to hold a hearing. This could take 6-8 weeks. If they determine that it is viable they will have a hearing on the matter. I’m not sure what certain reporters in the media are confused about? All Mr. Haggar did was review the complaint and he felt it needed to be passed on because it has merit, so that is what he did. At this point we just need to wait to hear from the OMC. That is the only story here.

Minnehaha States Attorney, Daniel Haggar has determined that it appears that city ordinance was violated when citizens were not allowed to publicly comment on two items pulled from the consent agenda (see statement below).

In Haggar’s LETTER he has chosen to send the complaint over to the Open Meetings Commission. Here is the original Complaint.

Of course they are. They don’t understand it (we will get to that in a moment) and they don’t want to ruffle feathers. It reminds of what Greg Belfrage said this morning on his show, about talking about politics at family events, he says he doesn’t. I believe him, because he doesn’t know a damn thing about politics and he is probably afraid he would embarrass himself, and he couldn’t hide from his liberal uncle by hanging up the phone on him while passing the gravy.

Many in the media have chosen to not talk about the open meetings violation because they have told the complainant that it is ‘too complicated’. A city official said that it is NOT a big deal and just an ‘ordinance violation’.

First it is NOT complicated and secondly, an open meetings violation is a big deal.

The city is required to have public input on items that are pulled from the consent agenda. Now mind you, if it is about spending $33 on a squirrel feeder at a park, probably NOT pressing, but still required, but this was about a liquor license for a bar with several questionable police calls and underage violations (the real story here), and the fact that the complainant had told many city officials she was going to speak about the item when pulled days in advance. I think the Chair of the meeting, Mayor Paul TenHaken did not call public input on purpose, because he didn’t want to hear what she had to say.

This is why this is IMPORTANT and should be shared in the media. You may not always agree with freedom of speech, but it is equal for all of us whether you want to talk about a gun stuck up your butt all day, a fertilized egg that has a heartbeat, that AR-15s are standard for EMTs, defunding the police or bars that are allowing teenagers to get pistol whipped when they illegally came into the adult establishment.

The simple, real story here is that the Mayor, Paul ‘Poops’ TenHaken violated the law by not allowing public input and a bar skirted any public rebuke because of a lazy, cowardly city staff and council and an oblivious media that doesn’t want to work to hard, if at all.

Is the infrastructure bill and January 6th investigations complicated? YES. And we have thousands of reports about them we can read every day. Is censoring public input complicated? F’CK NO! And we should have at least 2-3 local media reports about it. But we don’t.

Maybe if the meeting was held in a food truck?

You can read the full complaint HERE.

The complaint was filed at the Minnehaha County State’s Attorney office and the State AG’s office because there may be a conflict of interest. Once a report is filed it could move onto the Open Meetings Commission for consideration.

It has to do with not allowing public input on items that were pulled from the consent agenda in Tuesday night’s city council meeting that was riddled with many issues, including possible conflicts on items, a mysterious potty break and failure to notice an amendment 24 hours in advance on the garbage hauler notice.

The Chair of the Meeting, Mayor TenHaken, the City Attorney, Stacy Kooistra, City Clerk & Parlimentarian, Tom Greco and City Council Chair Curt Soehl are all mentioned in the complaint for failing to call for public input during the meeting.

As I mentioned to the Charter Revision Commission a couple of weeks ago, we have many issues with public input in this city that needs to be fixed but they accused me of ‘micro managing’ the meetings. Well it seems someone needs to manage these meetings, because our supposed leaders are not doing a very good job of it.