Charter Revision Commission

Sioux Falls Charter Revision Commission denies my proposals based on (non-legal) Opinions

As I told the Commission at the end of the meeting during general public input, I had NO doubt they would deny my proposals because the CRC kills all proposals unless it comes from the administration in the form of fixing a typo in the charter.

I have reminded the CRC in the past that it was not their job to deny proposals based on their personal opinions but based on the law and if they legally could be on the ballot.

I do believe they had a good argument against my TIF changes proposal based on inserting a whole new section in the Charter. I also think the legislature once again is going to fiddle with TIF qualifications this winter in the legislative session. No harm no foul.

But where I take issue is the comments coming from Chair Justin Smith and Commissioner Anne Hajek when reviewing the other two proposals (directors living within the city and public input) Both said that these measures are ‘micro-managing’ and that they are trying to fix something that ‘isn’t broken’. These are merely personal opinions not based on the legality of the proposals being on the ballot, and two commissioners agreed with me. Commissioner Carl Zylstra voted for both of the proposals and Commissioner Larry Long (a former Judge and AG) voted for the director residence requirement. He said if it wasn’t prohibitive of the city to help pay re-location expenses he could support it.

I offered plenty of evidence that public input at all the public board meetings is broken, but they hung on the fact that it was 5 minutes and Hajek used the tired old argument that the business people and poor school kids had to sit through public input. Once again giving no LEGAL basis why this could not be put on the ballot and be voted on.

At the end during general public input where I informed them they denied my proposals not based on legality and evidence but just personal opinions and assumptions, I also reminded them the reason why the only two people in the audience was Mike Zitterich and I was because they hold the meetings at an inconvenient time for the public. I told them that city government is turning into serving leadership and the city employees and NOT the public. They quickly adjourned.

I would like to thank the Sioux Falls Charter Revision Commission for their Professionalism . . .

. . . while hanging me. I can certainly be upset that all 3 of my proposals were killed (as I assumed they would be) I have to admit that I did enjoy nerding out on city government this afternoon, I love talking about these things almost more then underground art and punk rock. Heck, I even got a former Attorney General and Judge, Larry Long to vote for one of my proposals and another commissioner to vote for 2 of my proposals.

I will write a synopsis soon about what happened and why the CRC failed to bring these fair proposals to the ballot, but it all boils down to a disregard of the public and what the ruling class wants. Stay tuned.

Sioux Falls Charter Revision to meet Wednesday, Nov 10, 3:30 PM

The Charter Revision will be reviewing my 3 proposals and I will be present for questions. They have written preliminary language if they agree to put them on the ballot. While I did ask for 30 days for a director to become a resident, Commissioner Zylstra is recommending 6 months, which I could agree to. We will see how that plays out.

I also see that Joe Kirby is proposing that the mayor be removed from the council meetings as chair and that city council elections be decided by plurality (or ranked choice). I have never agreed with a run-off in the council races. Another bone head idea from Rex Rolfing. I have also said that the Mayor should only have VETO power and NOT break ties or run meetings. If it is a tie, the measure should fail.

The Sioux Falls City Council meets Tuesday, Nov 9 at 4 and 6 PM

The two big items under 1st reading are the wastewater bonds from the state (inevitable) and the garbage container ordinance. Neitzert is basically providing an amendment to leave it as is. I have often thought that it should be up to the consumer as to where they place the containers. If they want to place at the end of the driveway, fine. If they want to leave by house, also fine. There should be NO extra charges for a valet service. Since this will most likely remain private for the foreseeable future it should be up to the consumers to dictate what they want. As for the drivers getting injured for grabbing cans, that is part of the hazards of the job. Wear the proper footwear. My mailman wears cleated snow boots in the winter.

Charter Revision Commission changes meeting time for NO good reason

From today’s meeting, the good news is that they will be discussing my proposals* at November’s meeting. The bad news is that they changed the meeting time from 4 PM to 3:30 PM, I’m guessing due to the whining and crying of the 1st Amendment Hater City Attorney, Stacy Kooistra. This from the minutes of September’s meeting;

City Attorney Kooistra reminded the Commission of the process for Public Input and the need for items to be listed on the Agenda for discussion or voting purposes. He stated there may be a need to reschedule future meetings to earlier in the day to allow for additional time.

No mention of how I cut him off during public input by saying they couldn’t ask me questions.

During open discussion at the end of today’s meeting they discussed the change (I love how they must have dress rehearsal before the meeting to make sure they can slip this stuff in and make it look legit). Commissioner Carl Zylstra mentions he went and tried to find a meeting longer then last month’s meeting of 1 hour 30 minutes and he could only find one longer in July of 2019 which lasted 1 hour 48 minutes. They quickly moved into a discussion about moving the meetings to 3:30 PM so that they could have more time to discuss items before 5 PM which city attorney Kooistra argued was the time staff needed to leave (there is NOTHING in the Charter requiring boards to adhere to staffers work schedules, if I am wrong, please notate in the comments section and I will update).

Only Commissioner Anne Hajek (partially) objected and said that the later time is to better serve the public (attending). But it fell on deaf ears as they all agreed to have November’s meeting at 3:30 PM so staff could leave at 5 PM.

As I have argued these public meetings are for the PUBLIC, NOT the city staff and I was extremely disappointed in the CRC for caving to the whims of the city attorney and his ignorant objections to long meetings.

This is also contributing to the constant destruction of open and transparent government by this administration and his hitmen. Maybe no one participates in city government because the meeting times are inconvenient. Yup. And they continue their madness with this change.

*Commissioner Carl Zylstra suggested my proposal for having city directors have residency within Sioux Falls could be easily inserted into the charter. So I still have hope that at least one of my proposals will make the ballot 🙂

Sioux Falls City Council Agenda, Oct 4-6, 2021

The City Council and other boards have a full agenda this week;

• The Audit Committee has finally released some audits, been awhile. On Spectra (the people who provide concessions to several city owned entertainment facilities) they found a ton of non-compliance especially with insurance requirements. On the Midco Aquatic Center they have seen an over 50% drop in attendance since 2019 and around a 40% drop in revenue. They were also non-compliant on several fronts and like the Spectra Audit it seems our own Finance Department is not doing regular checks of compliance. For Travel expenses there was several instances of non-compliance. $137,000 travel reimbursements paid directly to travelers (city employees). Many of these results don’t surprise me. I have said the City Manager (The Mayor) is running a rudderless ship and when you have a poor city manager, it results in poor management under that person.

• The Planning Commission has decided to go full rogue by putting every single item on the consent agenda this month. Now items can be pulled for discussion by the Commission or Individuals from the public but I find this startling considering that all items are recommended for approval by the Planning Department and I am sure several Commission Members will recuse due to conflicts. Folks, this is what true cruise control government looks like. I am still puzzled why we even have a Planning Commission.

• The Charter Revision Commission will continue to review the Charter.

• City Council Informational will review building code changes.

• City Council Regular Meeting;

On the contracts and agreements (Item 6) in sub items 17-18 they are paying this consulting firm out of Florida to do this?

And of course sub item #38 where we are reviewing the Human Relations Commission.