Citizens for Reponsible Sales Tax

It's NOT about WHO filed the petition, it's about the PETITION itself, stupid

l3wis April 26, 2009 2Comments

Shocked! The Argus Leader Editorial board figured it out;

This isn’t about the merits of Citizens for a Responsible Sales Tax’s argument that Sioux Falls should lower its sales tax from 6 percent to 5.9 percent.

Government’s responsiveness to the many constituencies it serves should not be tied to whether those in the seat of power agree or disagree with a particular philosophy.

No matter how distasteful or inexpedient our public officials might find the citizens group’s anti-City Hall stance, the group has the same rights to clear and concise answers that those with a lot more money and political clout have.

Uh, we are not anti-city hall, we are against politicians that don’t represent us and put special interests first. It is blatantly obvious that the tax increase was about paying back special interest campaign contributers. Pay to play is perfectly legal in South Dakota, it’s unethical, but legal. So as citizens petitioning their government, we should be afforded the same rights.

It’s clear that signatures older than six months can’t be counted, so that seems to indicate some implied six-month deadline.

However, City Attorney Robert Amundson says he hasn’t studied the issue and indicates that he doesn’t plan to until the group files its petitions.

“I don’t represent her (Stehly). As soon as I get it done, I am ready to discuss it,” he said, referring the group’s co-chairwoman Theresa Stehly.

That’s appalling.

This is not a chess match. City officials should formulate an answer to the group’s question about the deadline and tell them that answer.

You are right BOB, you don’t represent Theresa, but you do represent citizens that support this, or at least democracy for that matter. You are trying to personalize this when you know it is simply about the law and answering an election question. You couldn’t make it more clear you are gearing up for a legal challenge.

I find it almost ridiculously comical that the Secretary of State can answer a simple question to the media and the citizens without himming and hawing, but a lowly city attorney appointed by his best friend can’t answer a simple question. Makes you wonder if BOB is playing games, or just doesn’t really know the answer – would seem kind of strange (and scary) for an ex-judge.

A City Councilor finally brings up the ‘C’ word

l3wis April 21, 2009 5Comments

As I suspected all along (even before I agreed to get on board with this) the city would consider challenging us in court. My suspicians got stronger when the City Attorney said he WOULD NOT give an opinion on the matter. Of course not, how can he challenge us if he would to publicly admit that what we are doing is OK? But finally, Councilor Costello brought it to a face;

Councilor Pat Costello said Monday there’s a “difference of opinion” about whether the group had a six-month deadline.

“When the petitions are filed, a determination will be made,” he said. “If it needs to go to court, it will go to court.

And that’s how a majority of this council and mayor treat their citizens, as the enemy. Ordinances, elections and citizenry initiatives are done to protect the interests of the citizens NOT the interests of beauracrats, that’s why this initiative scares the crap out of them, they don’t like their ill-informed decisions questioned. Yet they will shamefully use our tax money to fight their own citizens. We obviously need a housecleaning in 2010. The first thing our new mayor needs to do is replace the entire city attorney’s office.

I did find this part of the article humorous though;

City Council Chairman Bob Litz deferred comment to the city attorney’s office. Earlier this month, Litz said that Stehly and her crew had “played the game (and lost)” but had not made the deadline. Stehly responded Monday: “Tell Bob Litz the game is in overtime.”

Hey, Bob? How does that crow taste?

Petition Drive update

l3wis April 18, 2009 2Comments

At this point we are going to continue the drive. We had about 20 volunteers show up to the meeting today that was taped in it’s entirety by KELO TV news. We also had a suspicious visitor who turned out to be a lawyer with a major firm in town. He told us that he didn’t agree with the drive but said it looks like we have a legal right to move forward. He also made sure that he wasn’t in camera range.

Vernon Brown also showed up to listen, but Theresa did get him to agree ‘to look into’ the 6 month rolling date. Theresa also clarified to Vernon that she did not promise the city clerk verbally or in writing that we would be done April 10, and in fact, when Theresa filed the petition, the city clerk was not present only the assistants, so it wasn’t even physically possible to promise it verbally. I think Vernon was a little surprised by that.

Our goal is to wrap this up quickly, hopefully within a month.

Strategy Session Saturday

l3wis April 16, 2009 0Comments

4/16/09

 

WHO: Citizens for a Responsible Sales Tax

WHEN: Saturday, April 18, 2009 – 11:30 AM

WHERE: Caille Branch Library, 49^th Street, Sioux Falls

 

Citizens for a Responsible Sales Tax will be having a public meeting at the Caille Branch library on Saturday at 11:30 AM to discuss strategy for attaining the remaining signatures for their tax initiative petition drive. Any Sioux Falls residents wanting to know more about the drive OR are interested in volunteering are asked to attend. The Mummy dvdrip

 

Call Co-Chair Theresa Stehly at 332-1363 or email Co-Chair Scott L. Ehrisman at fb.art@sio.midco.net with any questions.

Strike 3, Your’e out!

l3wis April 15, 2009 3Comments

It’s looks like the city of Sioux Falls struckout trying to derail our tax petition;

1) PAID a consultant to mislead us about the constitutionality of the initiative

2) PAID a consultant to mislead us about bond interest rates(a bond they did not ultimately take out, because real people are not dying in floods)

3) Mislead us about the 6 month window and registration date.

According to city charter and ordinance 14-50;

Sec. 14-50.  Requirement of registration with city clerk to precede petition circulation for initiative or referendum in a municipal election.

     Persons seeking to propose an ordinance or resolution shall first register with the city clerk’s office before such petitions are circulated for signatures. Registration shall include the name of the organization, address, contact person, and language of the proposed ordinance or resolution. A copy of the proposed resolution or ordinance will become public when petition circulation effort commences.

 

There is NOTHING about the 6 month timeline starting on the registration date, it just simply says we must register the petition. So it seems state law and SOS Chris Nelson are correct. No wonder the city attorney’s office is ignoring us. If we attain the 4,800 signatures within a 6 month window we are good to go.

 

Looks like we are going into extra innings. I hope your’e ready to “play more games” councilor Litz.