Ethics
l3wis Sioux Falls Board of Ethics gave NO OPINION on Petition Gathering
I did not attend the meeting but was told by a foot soldier that the BOE told councilor Stehly they could not give her an opinion based on asking hypothetical questions. She did not tell them a specific petition drive she would be working on.
However she did argue that former councilor Staggers and Erickson have circulated petitions. Speaker of the House Mickelson lead a state wide petition drive and the county commissioners have circulated petitions in the past. The precedence is there. This isn’t rocket science.
It just sounds like they want to say NO but they need her to bring something forward solid so they can have a quasi-argument to say NO to.
Danielson writes guest column about ethics complaint
Bruce’s column appeared in today’s Argus Leader, read the whole column HERE.
The Home Rule Charter is our city constitution. In theory it is to protect us from abuse while giving local government more latitude to meet statutory needs such as fixing streets, utilities along with fire and police protection. I am a strong proponent of a balanced government structure, without authoritarians ruling the day or weak elected officials being pushed around. We need a balance.
1. The charter establishes a mayor to be elected by the people to lead the city government and its employees.
2. The charter created a city council to be a policy making body to set the rules for the mayor’s administration to follow.
3. To keep everyone on a straight and narrow path, the charter has a section called ethics to keep everyone in order.
The secrecy in SF city government is bad enough, but without a strong balance of ethics, we as citizens have NO recourse.
“Oh Bullsh*t”
Bruce got kicked out of the Board of Ethics meeting on December 22, 2017 he caused to happen. Why? This is what we always ask when secrecy is more important than the truth.
We all learned Sioux Falls city government based on secrecy enforced by the strong mayor form of rule.
There was a recusal problem leading up to the November 7, 2017 Sioux falls City Council meeting. Bruce asked several people that night why the recusal, then restudied the exhibits, talked with local media (to put it in context) and figured out a councilor did a boo-boo.
So what else could Bruce do but file an ethics complaint? Yup, another one was filed a couple of weeks after the fact on November 30, 2017 with the City Attorney’s office, for a review by the Board of Ethics. (there had been a deferral, later dropped by the developers)
This video is the result of the filing. The offending (in many other ways too) Councilor decided to keep she/he/it identity secret from the public. A “problem” now, before the filing, Bruce discussed the issue with many people, so it became an “open secret”. How can something publicly researched be made un-public? Like putting a genie back in the bottle, it can’t happen. Smart people can put two and two together and figure out what is happening if they want to know.
Add to the Friday board hearing fun, the accused in question decided to personally reveal to a local watchdog reporter who happen to be waiting patiently for the verdict. The Councilor’s “bullsh*t” comment was the confirmation. Like other Sioux Falls executive sessions Bruce has helped to reveal over the past few years, it’s easy to figure out what is going on by paying attention, then watch who goes in and out of the room.
This same councilor has repeatedly made promises of ethics investigations when other members didn’t do as commanded. Let’s just say, Hmmm….
Interesting findings from this session:
1. Once the complaint paperwork gets filed, the filer can no longer present evidence or corrections, and
2. The filer is kicked out of the room, not able to defend the filing, and
3. When the issue involves a City Council member, the City Attorney must recuse. Does this hold true for a mayor, directors? (again, Hmmm…..) and
4. Most importantly, the ruling sets a precedent allowing illegal activities of a Sioux Falls official to not be unethical.
Catch the impact of number 4? Think about the myriad of questionable city activities our local reporters are bringing to light Christmas week 2017. Are these questionably legal maneuvers now ethical, not subject to ethics sanction?
Bruce has asked why a Home Rule Charter community cannot get help with open meeting violations. We now have a ruling from our Board of Ethics saying screw you for asking.
UPDATE: Sioux Falls Board of Ethics to meet Friday, Dec 22, 2017
UPDATE: Joe Sneve covers everything I knew about it HERE. Rex Rolfing recused himself from a vote on a zoning issue, but a couple days before the bone head emailed his fellow councilors telling them how to vote. It got dismissed because the ethics board said it was an open meetings matter and out of their jurisdiction (go figure). You would think after 7-1/2 years Rolfing would have learned something about procedure and Robert’s Rules. (here is video of the super secret ruling – crank the speakers)
It looks like a confidential complaint, so I am not sure how it will be handled. Not sure what it is, but usually these kind of complaints have to do with a city employee.
