I saw the above bike DTSF this past weekend so I inquired about it from a city official. The city bought 2 but not sure what they paid (they retail on other sites for about $4K without all the whizz-bang cop extras). A bike in this class should run you about $2,500 without police sirens.

The bikes come in 750 or 1000 watt, the city chose the 750 which I would assume would give you a longer charge because you are using less power. I would have just went with the 1000 watt to have that extra power and bought backup batteries for the bikes so you have a spare charged, you can even rig bikes with dual batteries.

It is pretty obvious to me this company uses ‘bike cop’ mantra to sell these units, but they are really no different then a regular E2.

With all the sustainability boloney floating around you would have thought the city would have had a big presser about the bikes . . . oh that’s right, you look pretty foolish telling people they can’t ride their E2s on the trail when you are riding your E2 on the trail (for the record I have only seen the bike on the street).

I was NOT at the meeting tonight, so the only copy I have is this screenshot from David presenting the claim to the city at public input (he is the last person to talk at the end of the meeting).

It sounds like a potential civil rights lawsuit. David did say he was ‘considering’ taking action, so he hasn’t filed an actual suit against the city, but notified them that he may.

From his testimony and presentation this is about how the SFPD treats people. Even if David sues and loses the case, at least the noise from the suit will let some sunshine into our police force.

I have heard rumors that since Chief Thum took over he has been trying to clean up the bad officers with some success, but he knows it is a Herculean task. Let’s just say that Thum is probably feeling more like a house cleaner then a police officer these days.

The SFPD has neglected properly training and reprimanding officers for decades and so now there is years of institutional bad habits that will probably take twice as long to remedy.

There is also a rumor circulating that several top officials with the SFPD and SFFD are walking out the door with the mayor in 2026. Some are scheduled retirements some are NOT.

If this is true, it will be a great learning opportunity for the new mayor new councilors in 2026, lets just hope they are all NEW and not USED.

*I corrected the year from 2024 to 2026.


I’m a little surprised that I have NOT heard an announcement yet. The election is less then a year away and I was at least expecting one major announcement by now. And if you are running for an open seat, you would be wise to be the first to announce, because people will remember you because you will be the media darling for several days.

I wonder if one-term Jensen will run for mayor? I see that Pitty Patt put up a post about how Jensen is running for the legislature and NOT seeking a second term on the council. Nice smoke and mirrors. We all know you can’t run for mayor and city council at the same time. So Pitty, I call Bullsh!t on you!

UPDATE: I decided to do an unscientific study today. I rode from 11:30 AM-12:30 PM on one of my one-speed bikes, 10 miles from Cherry Rock Park circling South to West 12th street. This is what I counted;

I found ZERO; One Wheels, Electric Scooters or Wheelchairs, Electric Foot Scooters or Electric Skateboards, E-I or E-III bikes or regular foot scooters (I have seen all of these vehicles in the past just not today).

Regular bikes (no assist or light weight for fast riding); 61

Walkers; 44

Children riding bikes; 12

Dogwalkers; 9

E-II (assist plus throttle); 8

Light weight road bike (riding over 20 MPH); 7

Baby Strollers; 5

Joggers; 4

Regular skateboard; 1

I found no surprises while I took this survey, most of the users are regular bicyclists and walkers which is normal. As for the riders of E-II bikes they were all in their late 60’s to early 70’s. It was 4 individual riders and 2 couples. They were maintaining a speed of around 20 MPH which is no surprise since that is the max speed setting on most E-II’s.

Yes, that is a picture of me riding my E-Bike on the bike trail. I had no idea Lalley was taking photos for his article until he asked my permission to use the photo. We will get to the nuts and bolts of his article in a moment, but apparently this line in his piece didn’t sit well with the SFPD;

The reality is that any law is only as good as the willingness of the government to enforce it.

(Looking at you, casual marijuana user.)

Or at least publicize it.

There is no guidance out on the trail system currently beyond the general rules of the road and ride at a safe and courteous speed.

So the SFPD responded to the article today on their favorite place to inform the public (I didn’t find one single comment that thinks enforcing E-Bike rules is a good idea);

It seems all you have to do is lightly mock the SFPD about enforcement of a useless ordinance and they snap into action. It is going to be fun watching officers hand tickets to grandparents riding E2 bikes pulling their wagon with Ms. Kitty in it. Will they also be giving speeding tickets to wannabe Lance Armstrongs for booking over 30 MPH on the trail on there 18 lb carbon fiber road bike?

The ordinance has been in effect since 2018 and I am pretty sure it has NEVER been enforced. There is also NO signage on the rec trail telling folks the speed limit or the restrictions of authorized vehicles.

In other words NO enforcement and NO notification . . . except on Facebook 🙂

When you get into discussions about the repealing the ordinances, councilors and other whiners in the bike community complain that it is complicated because of all these classifications, different emerging vehicles and technologies and the interaction with pedestrians.

But after reading over 90 comments with 99% of them in favor of eliminating the ordinance you wonder what kind of input the council got from the public when crafting this five years ago besides a handful of whiners? It’s time to start listening to the market on this. The E-Bike industry is one of the fastest growing in the United States, but once again the Sioux Falls attitude of go it alone, I know better then the rest of the country, is contributing to this.

There is also an attitude, especially at City Hall these days that climate change is NOT real and anything electric is bad. I often suggest to these people they should just run their homes on coal. If electricity is bad for a bike or car, isn’t it bad for your home? C’mon climate change denier, buck up, show us what you really think!

They are really overthinking it and only need to look at other communities for assistance. I would start with something very simple, get it on the books, and over the year study what needs to be tweaked and revisit it with changes;

  1. Repeal all current restrictions, re-write from scratch
  2. Post the speed limit of 15 MPH on the trail
  3. Paint a white center line with pavement signage every 1/4 mile that says KEEP RIGHT
  4. Allow Class II and Class III bikes, AS long as they maintain the speed limit, have pedals and only use pedal assist (NO THROTTLING). This is a simple setting on the bike.
  5. Allow electric vehicles that CAN be ridden at a safe speed (this will be the hardest part of crafting the ordinance)
  6. Have monthly enforcement on Saturdays where police hand out warnings for speed.

I know it seems laughable that an ordinance has been on the books for almost 5 years and there has been no public notification (signage) or enforcement. At least the person running the FB page for the SFPD was paying attention, better get them a challenge coin 🙂

While the administration continues to peddle the ‘report-to-work lockers and garage substation’ concept the rest of the policing community refers to them as ‘precincts’;

Sioux Falls City Hall anticipates spending tens of millions of dollars in the coming years and decades on new police facilities around the city.

Two years after opening what’s referred to as a report-to-work station in southern Sioux Falls, Mayor Paul TenHaken and the Sioux Falls Police Department are now eyeing a future with even more standalone police facilities apart from the central law enforcement headquarters downtown.

More than $4 million is marked in the city’s five-year capital plan for a police substation in southwest Sioux Falls, near 41st Street and Faith Avenue. But unlike the report-to-work station that opened in March 2021 near 57th Street and Louise Avenue — an unstaffed garage with locker spaces where officers begin and end their shifts — the substation planned at 41st Street and Faith Avenue will serve as public-interfacing facility.

Word semantics aside, a former city employee pointed out to me it would make more sense to build these substations with the firehouses, even if we have to add on to them. I have also suggested that we go whole hog and just implement a public ambulance service in coordination with the police substations and firehouses. It also goes back to my suggestion of cross training our officers and firefighters to perform other duties.

We all know the current ambulance contract will expire in a couple of years and it would only make sense to prepare for the public option now. That of course would take strategic planning in a public open forum.

I wasn’t in the courtroom or read any of the evidence presented, but I found this statement odd;

Larson was charged with simple assault after arresting a man outside of Wiley’s in Downtown Sioux Falls in July of 2021.

Larson was accused of pushing Samuel Sykes’ head against the cage in the police vehicle and punching Sykes in the groin while trying to latch the seatbelt.

Court papers say it was caught on video – video the judge did not see.

“That’s evidence. The video should have been in court, period. He’s saying something about the video, I’m saying something about the video, the attorney that I had was saying something about the video. Where’s the video at?” Sykes said.

I am wondering why the video would not be admissible in court? Also notice the charge was reduced to simple assault and he plead NO CONTEST which isn’t really an admission of guilt.

Obviously the judge felt he was guilty of something, or he would not have denied the suspended imposition and gave a sentence, BUT you also wonder if this was a way to cover up police brutality of a white officer assaulting a black citizen you know, like when the DCI clears South Dakota officers of NO wrongdoing . . . every . . . single . . . time.

The city also thought Mr. Larson was in the wrong since they terminated him. Did they review the video?

We also know very little about what lead up to him being arrested and if he resisted.

The city was pushed to use body cams and they are now, maybe they can also use the actual footage for courtroom evidence?

Hopefully more details arise as to why the video was not permitted in court.