I guess I didn’t have too many high expectations out of a retired insurance salesman anyway.
At the council meeting tonight during the parking ramp debate, Councilor Stehly showed an image of her postcard she recently mailed out that listed all the councilors contact information (city email addresses and phone #’s NOT private). Rolfing, being the ignoramus he normally is reiterated to the public that he has told Stehly not to use his public contact information on her mailings she pays for personally.
Not up to you Rex, it is public information. The tax payers pay for that service and we OWN your public email address and phone number, you do not. And since you don’t own them Rex, you have NO authority to tell Stehly whether she can use them or not.
I am deeply troubled by Councilor Theresa Stehly’s recent letterto the editor titled, “Secrecy in golf management selection a concern.†Unfortunately, this letter is a classic example of a politician stirring the pot in order gain nonstop publicity in our local media.
Publicity? Stehly has two and half years left on her council term and she is NOT running for mayor, what publicity is she seeking? The only thing Stehly continues to publicize is her support for open government, 100% of the time. It was her campaign issue that won her her seat.
The RFP process reduces the risk to those who compete in the process by protecting the proprietary information of those who are unsuccessful.
When doing business with the public and receiving public money for your services your proprietary information is NO longer private, it becomes public. If those who seek public contracts don’t understand that or agree to those terms, they have the choice NOT to participate in the process. It really is that simple.
Publicizing unsuccessful proposals would severely limit those willing to participate if any thus reducing competition and driving up costs to the taxpayers.
I actually believe it would have an opposite affect. If competition can see who is competing and their proposals it will only drive them to put together a better and more fiscally prudent proposal. It would actually not only save taxpayers money but we would get better services. We found this out with the Pavilion window replacement contract. Once the initial bid was discovered to be inadequate competitors were able to under bid it and save taxpayers thousands of dollars. Closed bids and committees only give us one option, a piss poor way to do business.
As a person who works as an estimator I and am consistently wanting to know what my competition is charging so I can be more competitive. In private business sometimes that information is hard to get, but don’t think we don’t seek it out. I have done government bids throughout the country for states, municipalities and the Federal government and we are always told what the competing bids and offers are at the end of the day. Rolfing’s analogy of local government RFP’s is certainly NOT the norm because it defies that whole nature of free enterprise, competition and a the democratic process. He is delusional, as usual.
I would like to conclude my letter by recognizing those who have served on these committees especially our citizen volunteers. Thank you for your willingness to serve even while some attempt to politicize your efforts. I also ask our citizens to please learn all the facts and hear from both sides of any issue.
So why are certain ‘citizens’ privy to this information, but not all of us? Elected officials who strive for open and transparent government are NOT politicizing anything, they are promoting good government, and I applaud them for it. I also find it ironic that Rolfing is asking citizens to learn all the facts first before drawing conclusions. Isn’t kind of hard to receive those facts when you won’t share them with us? Your assurance is not enough, we found that out with the siding settlement which was a gigantic lie.
Often times those who yell the loudest fear you hearing all the facts.
To that I say, “Well-behaved women seldom make history.” - Laurel Thatcher Ulrich.
Here is the first time the rippling siding is mentioned by Rolfing at a city council informational meeting. (FF: 24:00). Notice the answer from Mortenson if it is an ‘Issue’. The rep says, “I’m not saying that.”
It took Mayor Mike Huether’s tie-breaking vote this week to make it harder to win City Council elections.
The city’s top executive rarely casts votes on City Council matters, but it’s been happening at a greater clip since four new members were voted onto the 8-member legislative body last year.
And I guarantee you are going to see more of it. I suspect that since Mike, Michelle and Rex are lame ducks* they are going to be proposing ‘wish-list’ legislation all the way until the end of their terms, especially with Rex’s  success on Tuesday night, it will only embolden them. They have been salivating for awhile to get rid of public input and I also know that they are not fans of transparency. It will be interesting to watch what other crazy ordinances they propose, or what crazy ones pass. I suspect that many of them would be overturned by the next council, like the recent election threshold.
I told several councilors to prepare themselves for the onslaught.
UPDATE: It’s interesting Munson used his ties on budget or procedural issues primarily. Huether has used his in retribution, anti-citizen or plaything spending. Spreadsheet from 2006; Mayoral-tie-2006
*While Rex and Michelle have probably put death nails in their future plans for elected office, there is still a scenario for Huether. While I strongly feel that Huether really needed to announce his candidacy for governor last month, he may be looking at another approach. The primary isn’t until June. Could Huether think he really doesn’t need to officially jump into this until he absolutely has to? You never know.
During the debate over the election threshold to 51% (FF 1:00), Rolfing called public input ‘Garbage’ than went on to say that he felt ‘sick’ as well as councilor Erpenbach because SEVEN years ago they didn’t get 50% of the vote.
Stehly pointed out that if they felt so ‘sick’ about it, why did it take them SEVEN years to propose this. She also pointed out she has heard NOTHING over the past SEVEN years that this was a problem, from either Rolfing, Erpenbach or the public.
It of course passed, 4-5. Selberg, Rolfing, Erpenbach, Kiley and Mayor Huether voted to make our elections more expensive for candidates and taxpayers because Rolfing’s tummy hurt over the past SEVEN years.
I have seen councils pass some pretty crazy sh*t over the past decade but this takes the cake. It is a gigantic slap in the face of past councilors who have served since 1996 who didn’t get over 50% of the vote and a slap in the face of the taxpayers who have to fund additional unneeded elections that they most likely WILL NOT attend.
In fact, councilor Neitzert put up a graphic showing voter turnout over the past decade(?). Guess which municipal election had the highest turnout (41%) the Event Center. Which was only an advisory vote that didn’t have any legal precedent.
I said during public input that maybe instead of spending $80K on a runoff election, we should spend it on promoting municipal elections. But what do I know, I’m just a pile of garbage.
Let’s just stop pretending citizens can be involved in the process called city government.
A RexCam exclusive for you. Sioux Falls City Council members Rex Rolfing, Michelle Erpenbach and Rick Kiley making fools of themselves on September 12, 2017.
Why would we place such authoritarians in office? Why should we respect people who want to take away the rights of average citizens because they could not get their own way in an election?
We are seeing voters being purged from the rolls.
We are seeing intimidation being used to keep people from voting.
We see areas with no voting location.
We see voting locations moved from one location this election to a different location in the next.
These things are not happening in far off lands, these are thing happening right here in Sioux Falls.
The vote taken to change the way elections are settled in Sioux Falls is a way to restrict our access to the process. Listen to the buffoons talk about how illegitimate they felt when they won their first elections. Feel the pain two of them felt on their 2010 election nights. Why did they wait 7 years until their friend lost an election to decide to change the rules? Those of us who pay attention to these things know when to poor the barnyard out of our boots. We need to make sure one of these buffoons knows what it’s like to lose in 2018.
The mayor of Sioux Falls believes he is right as right can be, to limit the average citizens participation in the process. This is another reason why the mayor should NOT be sitting in Council meetings and breaking ties. If a tie vote happens, the proposal should just die until a majority compromise happens along. What do you think? Let’s band together to fix this Huetheristic mess called strong mayor government.
These people are pathetic, never let them return to elective or appointed office. They do not deserve the honor of pretending to represent us. I did this video to let all know how those leaving office want to put a lasting stamp on the process so we can’t be part of it.
