State Legislature

1st Amendment Citizens for Reponsible Sales Tax food tax Gas Tax Media Property Taxes SF City Council Sioux Falls South Dakotans State Legislature Taxes

The 1st Amendment and the Sioux Falls City Council

l3wis February 6, 2025 1Comments

It seems I am spending a lot of time these days talking about the role of the council and the 1st Amendment. The thing that always puzzles me is that the 1st Amendment is NOT complicated, but folks struggle with it.

So today HB Bill 1050 got killed, by a ONE VOTE in taxation committee. Several folks were instrumental in killing this bill. It would have pretty much put a $450M tax debt on the citizens of Sioux Falls if passed. I posted Greg Neitzert’s written testimony after the hearing. I truly believe that testimony changed minds, and Cathy B’s telephone testimony cinched the deal. I also emailed the committee suggesting amendments and solutions (I think it would be good for small towns, but NOT SF.)

After this I assumed city hall was reeling, trying to figure out their next steps (I will post later about the future of the Riverline District).

But things got really interesting.

I’m going to leave the constituent’s name out of this for privacy reasons, and the city councilor, because I think it applies to the ENTIRE council.

Their is a constituent that emails the mayor and the council quite a bit, he is very involved in local politics, and I don’t always agree, but he always CC’s me in the emails so I am a media witness (I think I told him to do this). I have several concerned citizens that CC me when sending emails to the city council and I encourage you to CC me, witnesses are important.

fb.art@sio.midco.net

I sometimes do a reply all to their emails if I feel something needs to be clarified or piled onto.

After I posted Former Sioux Falls City Councilor Greg Neitzert’s* submitted written testimony to the taxation committee on the blog this constituent emailed the council with Greg’s testimony and a brief statement about his work. This person called the council ‘CORRUPT’ three times, but in fair context and NOT harassment. Then he said that Greg has ‘LARGE BALLS’. Trust me, I spit out my coffee when I read that, but it’s NOT a threat or harassment. In fact, Neitzert saw the email and thot it was funny. So a newly elected city councilor wasn’t having it and reported the email to Human Resources as harassment. HOGWASH! Not only is this constituent completely harmless they wouldn’t hurt a soul, but that doesn’t matter. This NEW councilor seems to think that he is a city employee and has the same protections, he does not, YOU ARE ELECTED and must follow the constraints of the 1st Amendment and the US Constitution. Now if such an email was sent to an unelected city employee, that would be an issue. So the city’s HR department warned this constituent if they send anymore ‘Harassing Emails’ they will be blocked. First off, they don’t have that authority because this person is NOT a city employee, secondly, sending an email about concerns is NOT threatening. It often puzzles me that they put their hand on a bible and swear an oath to the Constitution but have no idea what is in the document. If you can’t handle the heat in the Carnegie Kitchen may I suggest resignation. Nobody will miss yah. The irony of all this is this councilor was in a similar situation at a former employer. Kettle meet Black.

*Full disclosure, I worked on Greg’s first term campaign coordinating his messaging, graphic design, marketing and direct mail, it was one of the most successful campaigns I was involved with, we kicked ass and took names!

1st Amendment Parody Political Satire religion Satire Separation of Church and State South Dakotans State Legislature

10 Commandments in Schools to be printed on edible paper

l3wis February 6, 2025 3Comments

IMAGE: Amazon.com

I guess the legislature figured they could kill two birds with one stone. Not only will kids be able to read about the moral high ground on their classroom walls if their parents don’t pay their school lunch bill they can just eat the 10 Commandments poster. I kid of course, but this article about failing to fund school lunches puts it in perspective. Since schools will be mandated to display the posters and ‘teach’ about the 10 commandments there will be incurred costs, and I can guarantee they will be well North of the $616K wanted and needed to help fund school lunches. I actually think you will never see one single poster in the classrooms because there will be a lawsuit and the law will be thrown out.

Sioux Falls South Dakotans State Legislature Taxes

UPDATE II: SD House Bill 1055 needs to be killed

l3wis February 5, 2025 4Comments

UPDATE II: I emailed the committee members and told them this was a bad idea. The sponsor was the only one to respond after I told them I think this bill was written for Sioux Falls;

Not written for Sioux Falls.

So I asked WHO it was written for;

Written for all cities.

Well, Mike, that means it was written for Sioux Falls. I find it ironic that city hall recruited a legislator from Ft. Pierre who has a close relationship with our city attorney. I am just speculating here but it just seems odd that they purposely recruited a small town legislator to pass this instead getting some Sioux Falls legislator sponsoring this, it would have had a bad look. And here’s a kicker, two Democratic legislators from SF also say they support this. Baffling that our legislature wants to have a $400 million dollar tax increase on the residents of Sioux Falls. Each penny in Sioux Falls nets $91.5M a year (end 2023 is their latest for this data). So it appears SF really could build it in 5 years if the tax was implemented which would net $457M which is very close to the estimated costs to build a CC. And this bill wasn’t written for SF. They are full of it.

————————–

Or amended to only include smaller towns who may need to build a fire station;

authorize municipalities to impose a new tax to fund capital improvement projects.

This is a 3rd penny tax move so we can borrow $400 Million for a Convention Center. The committee hearing is Thursday morning, I encourage anyone who may be there to speak against this bill, it could cost taxpayers in Sioux Falls $400M.

Advocates,

Please help oppose HB1050. It would allow cities an extra whole percent sales tax for special projects.

The problem: It takes food off tables. That should be enough said.

• Food insecurity is on the rise in South Dakota. It is already a herculean effort for non-profits to meet the need. Feeding SD saw increases last year in families coming for food, student backpacks with weekend food, school pantries, and senior boxes.

• Sales tax is harder on lower-income households than on those with upper-incomes. South Dakota has the 6th most regressive tax structure in the nation.

• Sales tax is very regressive, especially where it’s on groceries. Lower-income households pay a bigger portion of income on food. We have the nation’s 4th highest grocery tax.

• Already, the total(state+city) food tax you pay over a year could buy all your food for over 3 weeks.

• This one percent would be a 50% increase in city sales tax.

• South Dakota is a low-tax state, but not for the lowest-income group. [https://itep.org/whopays-7th-edition/ ]

Other background info:

Legislators console themselves by noting that the bill requires a public vote, has a 5-year limit on the special tax, and a 2-year gap before the next one. But is a short-term hunger increase ok?

Cities are already allowed 2% sales tax. Cities are not allowed to have a different rate on food. States may, but not cities. So there’s no use suggesting that amendment. [Streamline sales tax rules]

No matter how much we might appreciate the legislators who are on this bill, HB1050 is one of this year’s bills toughest on our low-income neighbors. A legislator’s name on a bill doesn’t mean he/she will continue to support it. Feel free to ask them to vote No on it.

What I don’t know is whether this would be useful for small towns. But for sure, Sioux Falls city leaders always have expensive projects they would love to fund, even projects that aren’t necessarily accessible to low-income residents.

Thank you for speaking up. Low-income people don’t have lobbyists.

Cathy Brechtelsbauer for the Advocacy Project

“No other tax so directly takes food off tables.”

On sales tax by long-time director of Feeding South Dakota, Matt Gassen

Education funding South Dakotans State Funding State Legislature

More evidence the SD State Legislature is out of touch with constituents

l3wis January 28, 2025 10Comments

The sad part is that they don’t care and are on a mission from God;

By a 36%-58% margin, voters oppose “a school voucher program, also known as education savings accounts, where the state gives parents tax dollars that pay for their student to attend a private school or be homeschooled rather than a public school.”
This opposition includes parents of public school students (21% of the electorate), who oppose the proposal by a 33%-58% margin.

When I talk to parents that home school or send to private school (Chritian) they are opposed to them also. They understand that it is a CHOICE to send their kids to whatever school they want to and enjoy that freedom. They feel that public funding should only be for public schools and this is a slippery slope. I would agree. Of course the legislature claims public schools are ‘indoctrinating’ students. Which I found laughable since public school kids are not forced into Mass during the school day. Let’s talk indoctrination. This will likely pass with the 10 Commandments, and once again the SD State Legislature which is 90% right wing nutzos, didn’t listen to the voters just the Bible stuck up their arsses.

food tax Property Taxes South Dakotans State Funding State Legislature Taxes

Legislative Update by Cathy

l3wis January 24, 2025 0Comments

Bills are still coming. You’ll see here a number are concerning already. Let’s be speaking up.

A. Sales tax.

Please. Let’s have no sales tax rate changes until we see what happens with the cost of living under the upcoming tariffs, like in all these bills:

HB1050, to allow cities to add another whole % tax for special projects. This raises the cost of living (food and other basics), makes SD taxes more regressive (harder on lower-income folks), benefits bigger towns more than smaller ones.

HB1019, to increase the state’s sales tax from 4.2% to 5.0% (besides city 2%), and use funds to reduce property tax. Several unfairnesses: Most of the benefit goes to high-end homes, where “relief” may not be needed. Higher sales tax disproportionately requires more from lower-income households. Worst, it’s highly reliant on renters (31% of SD households), who would get NO benefit. And, replacing property taxes(school tax) is not a proper use of sales tax. HB1019 moves school tax around with no benefit to the schools. Property tax is a concern, but relief needs a different funding source and some focus on need.

__Expect a bill to make the .3% sales tax cut permanent. Remember that the revenue the state is foregoing for this cut would have been enough to take the state food tax to 0%. So first, let’s see what tariffs do to the cost of living.

B. Property tax.

As listed above, HB1019, to cut prop.taxes using higher sales tax. Property tax payers have real concerns about recent increases. (In Minnehaha Co. statements went out this week. To me the increases seem to have stopped skyrockting. What do others think?) See notes above about this bill’s wrong revenue source.

SB44, to renew the Sales or Property Tax Refund for Senior Citizens and People with Disabilities and make cost-of-living adjustments. This program helps but needs to reach more people. A higher income cut-off would really help, like at least the same cut off as for SNAP(food stamps).

C. School vouchers

HB1009(educational empowerment accounts) and HB1020(education savings accounts). Both are first decided by House Education committee. They started on 1009 but did not finish. Of course, new programs should not be started when the state is short of funds. The cost to schools is not only the diversion of these millions from public education, but also schools lose the usual state aid for each student. Object to these Rep’s in House Education: Amber.Arlint@sdlegislature.gov, Heather.Baxter@sdlegislature.gov, Roger.DeGroot@sdlegislature.gov, Josephine.Garcia@sdlegislature.gov, Lana.Greenfield@sdlegislature.gov, Jim.Halverson@sdlegislature.gov, Mellissa.Heermann@sdlegislature.gov, Travis.Ismay@sdlegislature.gov, Phil.Jensen@sdlegislature.gov, Dylan.Jordan@sdlegislature.gov, Logan.Manhart@sdlegislature.gov, Kathy.Rice@sdlegislature.gov, Tesa.Schwans@sdlegislature.gov, Mike.Stevens@sdlegislature.gov, Nicole.Uhre-Balk@sdlegislature.gov,

D. Medicaid

HJR 5001 to make voters re-vote again on our ballot decision to finally have Medicaid expansion. Legislators want us to let the state drop it, if federal funds for it change. Legislators are messing with our vote again, even before federal fund changes.

E. Citizen rights

All these are attacks on our citizen rights to amend our State Constitution.

HJR 5003 to require 60% to pass. It passed the house and goes to Senators.

HJR 5004 and SJR 504 to make it harder to get the needed signatures.

The 1st Amendment and the Sioux Falls City Council

10 Commandments in Schools to be printed on edible paper

UPDATE II: SD House Bill 1055 needs to be killed

More evidence the SD State Legislature is out of touch with constituents

Legislative Update by Cathy

You Missed

Circus at Falls Park?

Maybe the Easter Badger took Noem’s purse?

Detroit Lewis wants to give you a Pedicab ride, but it is gonna cost yah

Looks like we are having a June municipal election in 2026