1st Amendment

Mayor’s Public Input Diatribe last night proves he has NO Clue what the 1st Amendment means

Shortly after the city council meeting last night I sent the city council and the mayor an email reminding them of the language of the 1st Amendment, I highlighted this part;

‘or prohibiting the petitioning for a governmental redress of grievances.’

Why did I send them this? Because after public input last night the mayor went on a diatribe about how he has been trying for six years to eliminate public input and has not succeeded (FF: 51:00). He said that it was not ‘productive’ and they shouldn’t have to listen to it.

What astonished me the most is that the mayor of South Dakota’s largest city has no regard for the US Constitution or the 1st Amendment. Pretty scary that a person who rules over a city of 178,000 people thinks freedom of speech at a public meeting should be squashed because ‘he doesn’t like it’.

Call a waaabulance! (but don’t call a regular one, it might not show up.)

In a little over 11 months this nightmare of closed government will hopefully be over for the citizens of Sioux Falls, and we can hopefully go back to ruling as a Democracy and bring a little sunshine back to city government.

Transparency Irony

Over the past couple of weeks I have been humored by the irony of our Council Vice-Chair Slick Kiley bragging about live streaming the Annexation Meetings and having them recorded to be viewed later (though they failed with the baby monitor with the 1st meeting). It also seems they think it is just AOK to record and live stream the re-districting committee meetings (just like the Charter Revision and Planning meetings). But for some reason, the very delicate and fragile elitists that serve on the Parks Board couldn’t be bothered by such transparent government, they may freeze up or have a nervous breakdown if they have to sit in front of a video camera.

Do I suspect a bit of Hypocrisy when it comes to transparency in regards to recording certain meetings? REMSA and the Parks Board can hide under a cloak of secrecy while spending millions of tax dollars or making health and safety decisions for the rest of us. But when talking curb and gutter, we need to open the floodgates of transparency.

C’mon Slick! Either all the way, or not at all.

Sioux Falls City Council contact information is ‘PUBLIC’ information

In other words it can be shared with anyone. Whether that is on a city website or a public or private flyer. NO ONE has to attain permission to share public information as long as it is accurate.

There seems to be some confusion lately with what can be shared with the public, and I can assure you, official city email and phone numbers of elected city council members can be shared. If anyone tells you otherwise, they are WRONG.

Alt Mayor driving Real Mayor Bananners!

I have been enjoying Alt Mayor’s tweets, and I think I got the person narrowed down (more on that soon).

What I have admired recently is their calling out the mayor on transparency (oh the irony) and offering to sell the account to the city.

But what is even more funny is that it is driving the mayor crazy he can’t bust this person. It seems he threatened some kind of legal action with the State’s Attorney and Twitter, but like most things 1st Amendment, the mayor is no different then Sandy Jerstad yelling at a porn shop owner, you can’t muck with the 1st Amendment when you are an elected official.

Also, ironically, the Alt Mike has been pretty kind to the real Mike, besides a little snark about pool passes and transparency, they certainly haven’t been mean.

Once again, Real Mike proves just how ‘real’ he is when it comes to modesty.

What is the cost to follow the Mayor around with a camera?

Theresa Stehly mentioned on B-N-B show this morning that she requested the amount it costs to follow the mayor around with a camera for press conferences and Listening & Learning sessions. The finance director could not give her a solid number saying they really don’t keep track (in other words buried in the CityLink/Media budget.
Huether fancies himself as a great and prudent businessman. He has a director of finance (Turbak) who pretends to know what he is doing controlling the town’s cash. This director of the cash doesn’t know the cost of videoing the mayor’s events?
An astute businessman would know how much it costs to:
  1. buy all the equipment needed
  2. send a guy out with a camera
  3. return to the office to upload
  4. store the recordings
  5. how much it costs to replace the equipment as it wears out
They both complain about the cost of recording but had no idea how much it would cost? This proves how bad the city finance system is when they do not understand the basics of cost centers. This is actually a very easy number to generate. To a real cost accountant, this could take minutes to figure out. As for a guy who has worked in the media business for over 20 years, if I had to do a quick educated guess, just to record the press conferences and L & L sessions, it would be well over $100,000 a year. This does not include the entire CityLink budget OR the independent contract hosts like Madeline and Jolene.
There is a strong belief the lack of recordings is not a cost issue or to protect the board members. This effort to stop recordings is to protect city staff from being recorded giving bad advice the board members have to follow. There is no attempt to protect the members only city employees. Our videos show this time and time again.