SF City Council

The Bizarre stuff folks do when running for local public office

You can always tell when someone local is running their own campaign(s) or getting extremely poor advice when they do silly things with their paperwork. So this Thomas Werner dude is running for school board, he has ran in the past for the legislature and failed. I can see why, he seems to be giving himself some very poor campaign advice. It’s too late to correct the F’up now, but it was a really stupid move. So the election for school board is May 13, which gives him just a few weeks to campaign. So what does he decide to do while running for school board? File his paperwork to run for city council. WTF? Do you want to be on the school board? Do you know how this looks? It’s like you already gave up on that seat. No wonder no one votes for you. There is NO voter confidence. So is this illegal to run for two different seats at the same time? In this case NO. But if the city council and school board were the same election and on the same ballot he could NOT run for a council seat and school board seat at the same time. I just shake my head sometimes when I see folks run their own campaigns. Maybe he will file paperwork to run for Central District city council, At-Large city council and Mayor. And if he wins all three seats he will save us a lot of money. No surprise his FB page is littered with Trump Junk.

First SF City Council candidate emerges

Mike Zitterich is running for central district city council. The election will either be next June or September. I also heard this will be a crowded race with the potential of 7 candidates running, which means a runoff.

I am filing this document today with the City Clerk Office. Mike Zitterich for Honest Government for the Central District. I will be updating my website in the near future to provide additional info.

I want to see from the City Council: 

  1. Financial Transparency, 
  2. Honest Government,
  3. I want to see more investigations done by the council of the government,
  4. I encourage a better dialogue/correspondence between city council and residents both during meetings, and outside the meetings,
  5. I see myself as the next Kermit Staggers, a strong opposing vote against large government bureaucracy’s, voices, more in line with residents,
  6. I want to see more planning and promoting of other Business Districts here in Sioux Falls ‘other than S.F.D.T’  – I want to urge other parts of the community to establish B.I.D organizations,
  7. I want to promote and push to change our T.I.F strategy, getting away from large projects to introducing smaller, single-family type projects 1 Block, 2 Blocks like the City of Sturgis, 
  8. I want to promote, and help lead to establish city-wide Natural Wildlife, Nature, Historic Program that introduces policies to promote our awesome natural wildlife, nature parks, our history, and the idea of adding camping and lodging parks throughout the city within our Department of Parks and Recreation, one that promotes Family and Youth Outdoor Entertainment. 

With your guidance, I would like input on how we could create a public office “Government Financial Transparency” to be made up of appointed members to audit and review ALL city departments, offices, agencies, all Nonprofits that take city funds, with the goal of trimming city expenses,, while using the savings to set aside and perhaps give back surpluses to the residents. 

With your guidance, I would like input on how to move forward with recommending changes to our charter that accomplishes two things – I want the City Attorney to become a “elected member” of the Governing Board, no longer appointed by a mayor, and one that services a 4 year term (two terms), while changing the charter to create a “odd numbered council” with no less than 2 At-Large Chairs, and any number of District Chairs (5, 7, 9, etc), with the Mayor and City Attorney as the other “Elected At-Large Chairs”. 

With your guidance, I would like input on the idea of creating an ordinance to make ALL “legal opinions” of the City Attorney Office to be public record, allowing residents to review them on the city website, just as the State Attorney General must do. This improves transparency, and hopefully urges the Attorney Office to be more accountable to the people, along with being elected. 

I also support lowering the 2nd Penny Sales Tax from 1.00% down to 0.75% to give back to the residents the chance to keep as much money in their pockets, and I urge the City of Sioux Falls to set the example on taking less property tax revenue, thus leading the charge to give back to the property holders the ability to invest in their properties, encouraging more residents to donate to the city treasury, private funds that could be appropriated by the City Council for future community projects such as flower gardens, community watch advisory committees, to public infrastructure supported by the residents. 

Mike Zitterich 

Omaha seizes control of Tzadik property

Mayor and City Council? Are you watching this? This is how you help and SERVICE your constituents;

The troubled City View apartments are in receivership — and may be headed toward a sale.

According to the court documents, City View’s owner owes the bank nearly $750,000 for past due interest, taxes, and insurance. Management originally borrowed $16.5 million but owe about $18 million in total.

The bank asked a judge to step in and have a third party manage the property, which is what led to the receivership.

Court documents indicate the bank requested the receivership hoping to satablize the apartments operations. It has also started a process that could lead to the sale of the property.

This should have happened in Sioux Falls a year ago. But with our piss poor state laws on consumer protection (more like business protection) they just kind of sit on their hands. And if you are really doing something THEN TELL US!

Looks like we are having a June municipal election in 2026

As you know, the council and mayor have to pick a new election date because our brain dead, barely on life support, clem, hillbilly, theocratic morons of a legislature decided they needed to f’ck with local control, and gerrymander an election. They really want cities to have their elections in June when mostly Republicans show up essentially gerrymandering a non-partisan election. They also know that most cities will pick the June date because their lazy ass public servants don’t want to stick around for a couple more months (like our mayor has been crying about for weeks). Also, June primaries are bad for voter turnout, mostly because only half of the constituents show up. So voter turnout would not be improved (their argument to move the election).

I took a poll of the council on this, and the results are NOT good. I will break you the news, the votes are just not there for a November election. I know some councilors are supporting a November election, but they have asked me to keep that to myself, which I will respect. Our mission is to convince at least 4 more councilors to support a November election and give good reasons why. You can CONTACT them HERE. Leave voicemails and emails telling them to support a November election. Time is of the essence, I think this will be on the agenda for the first meeting in May.

I think cities should have stand alone elections and if they promoted them properly they would be well attended. But when you have a Militant Closed Government Bozo running the city, the public is not only mis-informed, but simply NOT informed. Ignorant people only vote by accident.

Do ALL Downtown SF Businesses support Saturday metering?

The short answer is NO, and probably why they skirted this move administratively instead of bringing it in front of the council where DTSF businesses could air their grievances in the public square. I supported this based on 1) That DTSF (the org) reassured the council that DT businesses support this* 2) it will ONLY be on Phillips and you can still park for free in the ramps (which I think will gradually be used more due to the Saturday metering on Phillips).

*At first glance I am hearing that only about half of DTSF businesses support this, the rest are ‘wait and see’. This of course is from random conversations I had with DTSF business owners, workers in DTSF and some city staff. Nothing scientific.

I have no idea what kind of support it has.

Which brings us to the crux of the issue. Besides being the council’s duty to vote on new taxes and fees, and a First and Second reading would have allowed people who own businesses DTSF and work DTSF to share their opinions. Maybe most of them support it? I don’t know, and we never will because the process was not followed and the council, once again, allowed a precedent by the mayor’s office. Tsk! Tsk! I sometimes wonder if Trump is our shadow mayor.