State Funding

Government Secrecy costs A LOT of money!

Well, you know the old cliché, Lawyers are professional liars. They brought those talents to Pierre to try to get an open settlements law killed in committee;

“Transparency is a good thing, but at what cost?” said Sioux Falls lawyer Steve Siegel, who represented the trial lawyers. Siegel noted that parties in lawsuits use confidential agreements to keep embarrassing information out of the public, and he noted that the South Dakota Newspaper Association was in favor of the bill.

I guess we only have a right to information if it isn’t embarrassing? Only a lawyer would come up with such a ridiculous excuse. He also apparently tried to peg the SDNA as a tabloid and gossip rag organization. Hey Steve, they represent NEWS organizations, not the National Enquirer.

They also tried to use the tired old excuse that keeping things secret saves money. LOL. How would we know if the settlements are kept secret?;

David Bordewyk, the executive director of the South Dakota Newspaper Association, pointed to the secret settlement that Sioux Falls negotiated with contractors over flawed exterior panels on the Denny Sanford Premier Center. That settlement only became public because a lawsuit had not been filed. The settlement agreement showed that Sioux Falls officials mislead the public about receiving $1 million in cash from the contractors.

That settlement, in which we got $1 million of our own money back, cost taxpayers well over $100,000 to defend it’s secrecy in court. In fact, the Federal government forbids secret settlements because government secrecy tends to cost them billions of dollars a year.

This isn’t about saving money (a lie) but it is probably about embarrassment. We had a mayor who probably signed off on bad siding, and in order to cover it up he lied about a supposed settlement. And even after the city lost the Supreme Court case, the shame and embarrassment didn’t seem to bother him at all, in fact, in true Trump style he doubled down on the lies and to this day has refused to admit if he singed off on the Shi**y siding.

Opening up these settlements will save taxpayers in South Dakota millions of dollars, and maybe the ‘public embarrassment’ will keep these settlements to a bare minimum, if they are not truly deserving. But I don’t think the recipients are the ones that will be embarrassed, it will be the corrupt politicians who got our tit in a wringer to begin with, and to that I say OPEN THE BOOKS!

UPDATE: Sioux Falls City Councilor Starr comments on the Municipal League suit

UPDATE: I guess the hearing has been called off, and Taylor is NO LONGER banned. Still waiting to hear more details. I wonder if our AG stopped eating cookies for a couple of minutes and read the constitution instead.

Pat called into the B-N-B show this morning (towards end) and expresses his feelings on the issue;

“I’m concerned as a taxpayer,” Starr told The Greg Belfrage Show this morning. “It’s a great group for the municipalities to come together across the state. This just distracts from the organization that does this for us.”

Starr said it, unfortunately, the parties have had to go to federal court to determine for what he calls “a personality conflict.”

“I think you expect professional decorum on both sides,” Starr said. “I’m disappointed.”

But he said he needed to back Taylor, as she has free speech rights and works for “his” organization.

“To ban someone indefinitely is overreaching and probably one of the reasons she used to for the terminology,” Starr said.

I think both Taylor and Haugaard were out of line, they should just make up and move on. But instead, it’s going to cost taxpayers coming and going;

So, win, lose, or draw, South Dakota taxpayers will be paying indirectly for the two sides’ attorneys.

If we had an AG’s office with at least a half a brain that actually understood the Constitution, they would have sent a polite letter to Haugaard telling him his actions were unconstitutional and that he had no right to ban Taylor. Then send a letter to Taylor telling her she was no longer banned. Pretty simple. The postage may have cost the taxpayers a couple of bucks, but problem solved. So now we have two publicly funded institutions fighting it out in Federal court over a clear violation of 1st Amendment rights. Not only is it ‘Whacky’ it’s down right stupid. I think our state house is not only full of ‘Whackies’ but it also is full of the mentally challenged, mentally ill and just down right ignorant. Put that in your pipe and smoke it Steve.

SD State Legislature won’t fund education properly but want schools to buy plaques that violate church and state

God, Guns, and Abortion, that is all the legislature seems to be concerned about. Now they want schools to violate separation of church and state, yet provide NO funding mechanism;

FOR AN ACT ENTITLED, An Act to require 1 the national motto of the United States to be

2 displayed in public schools.

3 BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF SOUTH DAKOTA:

4 Section 1. That chapter 13-24 be amended by adding a NEW SECTION to read:

5 Beginning in the 2019-2020 school year, the national motto of the United States, “In God

6 We Trust,” shall be displayed in each public school. The display shall be located in a prominent

7 location within each public school. The display may take the form of a mounted plaque, student

8 artwork, or any other appropriate form as determined by the school principal.

9 For the purposes of this section, a prominent location is a school entryway, cafeteria, or

10 other common area where students are most likely to see the national motto display.

While some may argue that the term ‘GOD’ doesn’t talk about a specific religion, I still think it borders on violation of the separation clause. What’s even worse is that the legislature wants schools to apparently fund this on their own without providing a funding mechanism. A sign or plaque that is prominently displayed could cost anywhere from $75 to $750 dollars. This is a waste of educational dollars. If I was one of these schools I would take a highlighter to a dollar bill and put it in a frame and hang that up. In America, we only have one true God, and it is green.

Rex Rolfing, still delusional

I have been waiting for Rex to return from the Orange Juice state to actually campaign in person (still haven’t seen him). He is is relying on the ‘R’ behind his name, a few yard signs and this recent mailer to put him over the top.

Got a really good chuckle out of his ‘VISION’

Just go to sfmeetings.org and type in Rex Rolfing, and see his voting record for yourself.

Fiscally responsible. WOW! In the 8 years (2008-16) Rex served on the city council he voted for EVERY single fee and tax increase. He also voted for millions in TIFs and bonding, including the Indoor Pool, Huether Tennis Center ($500K), Administration building that we did not need and the The Denty that has never paid it’s mortgage EVER through revenue.

Rex wouldn’t know what fiscal responsibility was if it hit him like a Jesus snow plow.

He also did ZERO to improve workforce while he served on the council, except voting for an expenditure to put billboards of the former mayor’s face all over Minneapolis.

He also followed the marching orders of his former boss and police chief by ignoring our drug and crime issues for 8 years.

Besides the glaring hypocrisy of Rex’s vision, we also forget that;

• He trumped up false ethics violations towards councilor Stehly, in which he had a freak out session where the puck under the gavel went flying thru the air. He even made light of it later by pretending the bone above he is chewing on in the picture was a gavel and started rapping it on the table like a gavel after covering the end in tin foil.

• Rex said publicly he doesn’t want his contact information on mailings even though his city owned council email address and phone number are public information.

• Lastly, his only (non)accomplishment on the council was passing a silly ordinance about having a majority instead of a plurality in council races, which only makes elections more expensive for both taxpayers and candidates (hopefully the city council will overturn this soon, but I see they are waiting until after the election so they won’t make him look bad-chickensh*ts).

Let’s face it. Rex is NOT fiscally responsible, he is NOT ethical, he does NOT believe in government transparency and he is willing to throw anyone under the bus he doesn’t agree with.

There is whole host of other things I could say about this VOID of leadership, but I won’t. I will leave you with a paragraph from a postcard I also got today from his competitor, Kelly Sullivan;

She pretty much sums up Rex Rolfing and his ilk in one sentence. Living in a bouncy house.

Do as I did as a D13 voter, fill only one box out for the House Race. Kelly Sullivan.