South DaCola

Editorial Cartoonist from South Dakota

Ethics

Ethics Sioux Falls

The Sioux Falls Board of Ethics doesn’t want us to think (or know) that they are A-Holes?

l3wis 2Comments

The ethics board chief advisors

I am amazed that in such a small town that we have such huge egos and arrogance by the few in power;

The Sioux Falls City Council wants to make the ethics complaint process more public and give the Board of Ethics less authority to impose penalties as it works to amend city law.

Right now, the board has the authority to impose several penalties on city officials or employees if they are found to be in the wrong.

The penalties include a reprimand, suspension or removal from office or a fine.

“They serve as the prosecutor and the judge at the same time,” Councilor Kenny Anderson Jr. said Monday at the council’s Public Service Committee meeting.

Oh, but wait, even though Kenny is right, and it is LEGAL, the boo-hoo ethics board doesn’t want you to think it is all their fault.

Chairman Michael McKnight said the board simply was following the city ordinance.

“We are the favorite whipping boy. What can we say? There’s not much we can say about the specific incident because the process is confidential,” McKnight said.

That is just it. Instead of just responding to the one complaint about the city employee addresses they went on a ‘fishing expedition’ and tried to find other ethics violations against Dr. Staggers. This WAS political, and it so f’ing obvious that heads should role. I mean, C’mon, these people are volunteers, boot their asses. The job of a GOOD and FAIR ethics board is to look into complaints and make recommendations. That’s it. Seems pretty simple to me. Instead, they have the city attorney’s office and their TOADS digging up empty graves like no tomorrow.

Huether and the council need to remove everyone from the ethics board and city attorney’s office and start fresh.

Ethics Sioux Falls Staggers

Witch Hunt

l3wis 7Comments

Looks like city attorney Tornow ate too much of the US Constitution. I never knew the fifth amendment could be so filling (screenshot from KELO-TV video).

Here’s an update on the ethics complaint against Staggers.

Tornow also says he thinks the city’s ordinance is in conflict with state law, which is why Staggers says he wants changes to the way the board of ethics operates.

“I wish your best in the consideration of the proposed ordinance which would make it clearer or more explicit in allowing an accused person of an ethics complaint to allow the complaint to be made public. This ordinance that needs to be passed,” Staggers said.

Well isn’t it your freaking job to follow state law? If you know it is in violation, as a lawyer wouldn’t you follow state law instead of protecting the city? You should put a gigantic sticker on the City Attorney’s door at city hall, “The Fifth Amendment is not allowed here.”

Ethicsboardminutes. This is a PDF.

ethicscomplaint. This is a PDF.

response-staggers This is a PDF.

Tornow needs to get a fire estinguisher for his pants;

Owen asked Tornow whether he felt Staggers had adequate notice of what the board was investigating. Tornow replied: “It isn’t how I feel like, it’s how I read the ordinance.” And he said it was “absolutely untrue” that Staggers didn’t receive proper notice, to which Staggers replied, “What are you talking about, Shawn?”

This guy tells so many lies, he begins to believe them. It infuriates me that he still is collecting a paycheck from my taxes. He should be fired, disbarred and ran out of town for his violations against the US Constitution.

s

Ethics Thune Tim Johnson US Senate

Five senators voted against the Credit Card Reform Act. Can you guess two of them?

Ghost of Dude 19Comments

As expected, the credit card reform bill passed the senate. In fact, the vote was 90-5.

Our senators showed us all who really owns them by voting ‘no’ on needed consumer protections, and in fovor of the credit card industry.  Johnson was the only democrat to vote against the bill, and Thune was one of four republicans – all from states that play a major part in the banking industry – to vote no.

The CC industry has now threatened that  consumers will have a harder time obtaining credit as a result of this bill:

The goal in the legislation should be to obtain the right balance: providing protections, while maintaining the important role of credit cards in providing loans to consumers and small businesses. Unfortunately, we believe the bill does not achieve that balance and will therefore cause an unnecessary decrease in credit availability.

But really, they have to be bluffing here. If you ran a business that had both customers who paid on time and customers who were total deadbeats, which group would you rather alienate; the ones who bring in steady revenue, or the ones who pay sporadically if at all?

If you are unable to responsibly use a credit card, having access to one will only make your financial problems worse. Maybe going back to the days when only responsible people had credit cards will be a good thing.

I have to roll my eyes at the local CC companies crapping their pants about jobs being effected. If you can’t find a way to turn a profit in the CC business without screwing your customers over, you shouldn’t be in business.

Ethics SF City Council Sioux Falls

SF Citizens can no longer ask for advisory opinions

l3wis 0Comments

But candidates and possible candidates will be able to ask for legal opinions about possible conflicts they may personally have. (Click on Council meeting, Item #29)

I’m still on the fence about this whole thing. I think that the councilors are shooting themselves in the foot by approving this change. If I were a councilor I would much rather have someone ask an ‘opinion’ about me before I voted on an issue then file a ‘complaint’ after the vote happened. I would think that would be much more embarrassing to have a complaint filed and have major ramifications if the vote was close.

I do agree the advisory opinions should be confidential and not released to the public, just the party’s involved so that it does not become a political football. I think that is a very fair revision.

I guess now councilors can vote on whatever they want without the public questioning their conflicts or motives, they are only allowed to question themselves, that’s convenient, huh?

An Argus reporter wrote about the vote, but it is as clear as mud.

« Previous Page — Next Page »

You Missed

1st Amendment Elections SF City Council Sioux Falls Trump

UPDATE: Let Sioux Falls Vote! Sign Data Center petition!

1st Amendment Elections Marty Jackley Mike Huether Rich Merkouris SF City Council Sioux Falls Uncategorized

Trust

1st Amendment Open Government Open Meetings SF City Council Sioux Falls

I have been telling council this stuff for over a decade

1st Amendment Music

First Ave Doc, many memories