Paul Ten Haken

TenHaken will not be attending Diversity Forum on Sunday

Paul says his faith prevents him from attending;

Paul TenHaken This event was promoted before I had the opportunity to accept and my schedule does not allow for me to be there. The mayor’s office is a 24/7 job, but Sunday’s are for faith and family and not campaigning. I have had a chance to meet many of you over these past few months and I look forward to talking with all of you in the near future.

While I won’t defend Paul’s excuse, because I do not attend religious ceremonies on Sunday, I have a feeling he knew the piling on would occur. All the better for Loetscher I guess.

I’m NOT behind ‘Paul Been Takin’

Like the fake Mike Huether twitter account, I can assure you I am not behind the Been Takin account. I have often told people if I parody a politician, I take credit for it. I have nothing to hide.

As for who is doing it? I have no idea, but would love to buy them a beer.

People have been bugging me all week asking if it is me – this is why I am responding in a post about my innocence.

It reminds years ago when the Argus basically accused me of being the graffiti artist ‘Disinform’ who as I understand has moved away. I never did get to meet him.

I had a little fun though with the accusation sending the AL reporter, Nester, on a wild goose chase for a couple of days of places I told him I had sitings. Man that was fun. I still snicker about that when I see graffiti painted somewhere.

How I miss the AL having naive reporters. Now they are just underpaid and lazy.

Disguised Donations (Guest Post Bruce Danielson)

Do you remember the 1968 Bee Gees song I started a joke or are we hearing John Fogarty singing Deja Vu (All Over Again)?  Here we go again. Aren’t we getting rid of a habitual storyteller who ran an administration based on what they could get by with? As someone who is not involved with either campaign, I have some questions to ask.

In 2010, a City Attorney and Director of Finance were hired to bend every rule possible to accomplish the questionably legal or at the very least the unethical making it seem ethical. Starting with a couple of 2014 Board of Ethics meetings I started asking questions about the abuse of “white lies” happening in city government.

SouthDacola wrote about and then I asked a question on Tuesday night about the legality of six children with no outside source of income “giving” $1,000 to a mayoral candidate. It reminds me of a mayor we have, who said his wife (who had no outside source of income) was investing in a TIF based private development he helped arrange. It was “legal” but was it ethical?

Does anyone else scratch their head when we have a candidate saying it’s OK to take seemingly unethical donations as long as it accomplishes an immediate goal?  If we are looking for a new start in Sioux Falls, why does this sound like something My Man Mike would say?

The state financing laws are weak and we know it. Why should we citizens allow it to be acceptable? Did our City Clerk actually talk to an attorney to understand this law? Here is the state law on Disguised Donations:

12-27-12. Disguised contributions prohibited–Misdemeanor. No person or entity may make a contribution in the name of another person or entity, make a contribution disguised as a gift, make a contribution in a fictitious name, make a contribution on behalf of another person or entity, or knowingly permit another to use that person’s or entity’s name to make a contribution. No candidate may knowingly accept a contribution disguised as a gift. A violation of this section is a Class 2 misdemeanor. A subsequent offense within a calendar year is a Class 1 misdemeanor.

According to our City Clerk’s office we have a technicality to deal with and not a moral one. The donor signed checks then giving the checks with someone else’s names in the memo field making it legal? Wow, where’s John Mitchell, Maurice Stans and Richard Nixon when we need them? Oh that’s right, Watergate happened. I know something about it, I was in Washington back then seeing the results of shady donations. I had to hand carry donation checks back to the naïve citizens who in good faith wrote these kind of checks. If it was questionably legal, it went back, no matter how bad we needed the money.

A friend and I talked about this problem for today’s city politicians and it came down to this common phrase today’s Christians proclaim:

What Would Jesus Do? WWJD is printed on trinkets of all types as a reminder to guide a person to do the right thing.

A campaign spending report from mayoral candidate Paul TenHaken shows contributions from a single donor of $7000. The annual limit for an individual is $1000. How did they do it? By saying 5 of the super donor’s minor children contributed a $1000 each. Then on top of that the donor’s business threw in $1000 to the slush fund.

This campaign is becoming an all or nothing effort to take over the government of Sioux Falls. Our city government is legally justifying a wealthy donor’s contribution to make it happen but it leaves the question: is it morally right? I may have been a political nerd at 12 and interested at 6 but six year old kids need to invest their $1000 in a good mutual fund for college. There is a reason no one is allowed to vote until they are 18 and contributions never used to be allowed in their names until they could vote.

How many six year old kids have $1,000 sitting around to give their favorite politician instead of buying an Xbox?

The current mayor has often gotten himself in trouble when he has done things that are barely legal but certainly not moral. The list is long but the Denny siding rip-off of taxpayers certainly tops the list. Was it a Million bucks or $1,000,000? Was it new money or did we just take it out of the savings account then slip it into the checking account for a cool headline?

The actions of a candidate during the campaign are indicative of how they will behave when they get elected. We do not need a Mayor who will do the legal thing but not the moral action. We’ve had enough of that in Sioux Falls.

The candidate needs to follow his or her self-proclaimed following of Christ and do the moral thing: send the money back. Campaigns have P.R. spin machines to make it look “right” so do the right thing. Tell the rich donor thank you but that’s not how we do things in Sioux Falls.

 

I agree with Belfrage, endorsements don’t matter, they may even hurt

Maybe on a National level, but in local politics, I don’t know. Sometimes I wonder if certain endorsements might hurt you if someone has already made up their mind to vote for you and see someone they don’t like politically endorse you.

For instance let’s look at both candidates;

TenHaken

 • Family Heritage Alliance, an organization known for it’s ultra conservative right-wing partisan stances. They opposed gay marriage and gay rights and host of other freedom issues that are unconstitutional. I heard Loetscher didn’t even bother responding to them. If that is true, good for her.

• Greg Jamison, while this certainly doesn’t hurt, he did come in 4th place, and Paul could garner his votes, the same could be said about the Anderson endorsement of Loetscher.

• Dave Munson, Not sure how much this helps either. Munson started the downward spiral of transparency at City Hall and Huether perfected it. Dave actually got in trouble for signing a 100% cost overrun on Phillips to the Falls without Council approval. He almost didn’t run for a 2nd term because of it.

Loetscher

• Rick Knobe, not sure a mayor from 34 years ago has much weight, but it certainly won’t hurt her.

• Andy Howes, a one-term city councilor that most voters probably don’t remember, but props to Andy for promoting some great rock shows in town 🙂

• Pat Starr, no doubt Pat has been doing a great job on the city council. He spearheaded the Glory House land deal and has held firm on many issues on the council when it comes to transparency. While I don’t think his endorsement hurts or helps Jo, it could hurt his relationship with a new mayor, especially if they are NOT Jolene. Hey Pat, I guess were in the same boat on that one 🙂

• Michelle Erpenbach, while I believe Jo when she says she will improve transparency in city hall, this is the LAST person you want endorsing you when it comes to transparency. Michelle supported the secretive operations committee and assisted in terminating Debra Owen, which was a violation of Open Meetings Laws.

As Belfrage points out, and as I do, not sure if the endorsement game is really that big of a deal.