It has been brought to my attention that a small southeastern town city administrator is pushing to get a bill submitted (hasn’t been yet) taking municipal referendum and initiative signature requirements to 20 percent of registered voters from 5 percent. This will eliminate yet another safety net to keep city councils in line. That would change the required signatures in Sioux Falls to jump from around 6k to over 24K. Ironically it would take more signatures in Sioux Falls to get an initiative or referendum on the ballot then the amount of people who typically vote in a municipal election.
I often remind people that 1) we need to make the referendum process easier not harder and 2) and signing a petition doesn’t mean you approve of the initiative just your right to vote on it. For example, I signed the slaughterhouse petition even though I already knew I would vote against it. Direct Democracy is a beautiful thing and any opportunity we have to use it and promote it is good for the public.
Several years ago, now retired Minnehaha County Commissioner, Jeff Barth suggested that Sioux Falls City Councilors impose an ordinance that requires employers within the city limits list their salary in want ads. Not only is it a good idea, employers who do list wages usually get better and more applicants. We all know why some don’t list the salary, because it ain’t squat and most people see thru the ruse and don’t apply. Senator Reynold Nesiba is proposing such a thing statewide;
A private employer with one hundred or more employees shall disclose in each job posting the hourly or salary compensation or range of the hourly or salary compensation and a general description of all benefits and other compensation to be offered to the hired, promoted, or transferred applicant or employee. Such disclosure shall not affect the applicant’s ability to negotiate compensation or benefits.
As you can see, this would only affect larger employers. While a great idea that has proven to have beneficial opportunities to employees and employers it will likely die in committee because one of the legislators wives on the committee will cry about paying her 10 year old niece minimum wage to make goat cheese soap candles in the barn.
The state Government Accountability Board dismissed a complaint Tuesday regarding Gov. Kristi Noem’s use of state aircraft, citing no sufficient legal definition of “state business.”
Isn’t law prickly? Judges conveniently throw out a complaint saying a law doesn’t exist. So if that is true, how do thousands of state employees show up to work each day and know what to do if a legal definition of state business doesn’t exist?
Game wardens could argue fishing all day with a state patrol boat is ‘state business’. Or a highway patrol officer could give UBER rides during their down time. Why not? There is NO definition of state business. And do you trust this legislature to fix it? They are still trying to figure out what the definition of ‘elected representative’ means.
In October, Nesiba said the current law allows the attorney general or a state’s attorney discretion to look at “state business” and what it means.
I guess these judges are struggling with defining the state’s legal definition of ‘state business’
Noem has faced scrutiny for a number of her uses of state aircraft, including flights from Custer and back again during the weekend of her daughter’s 2019 wedding at Custer State Park. Noem has also used a state airplane to attend several political functions in other states.
If you do a five second Google search you will find this handy piece of information;
Official state business or “state business” means any activity conducted in conformance to these rules and directed and controlled by a state agency to advance the lawful policies and purposes of the agency.
I don’t have a fancy law degree or a judgeship under my belt, but I am pretty sure flying your nephew to your Daughter’s Jewish Gun Rights CPAC Wedding extravaganza isn’t the definition of ‘state business’. Maybe if the 4th judge decided not to recuse themself the 4 of them could have took turns typing the definition into the Google search engine?
That’s because several chairs in the committee room where the votes took place were adorned with holy crosses ahead of the meeting.
And now, the well-intended gesture by Sioux Falls Rep. Sue Peterson and others is drawing the attention of the South Dakota Legislature’s Executive Board, which will consider if action is necessary should the oil substance used to make the markings be unable to be removed.
When are these politicians going to figure out they can’t use taxpayer funded property as if it were their church? But there are other issues besides separation of church and state;
“We were simply praying and blessing the room in which leadership elections were going to be held,” she added (Sue Peterson). “It appears that someone is trying to make a mountain out of a molehill and shame me for my Christian faith.”
Even if you ignore Sue’s little Jesus moment, she also may have damaged taxpayer property, and she could be charged with a crime.
There is nothing wrong with a legislator having faith in a religion, there is also nothing wrong with them praying before a meeting, I actually support an invocation (invented by Ben Franklin, a deist). I wouldn’t even of cared if she passed out New Testaments at the meeting, BUT, you cannot defile or decorate taxpayer owned property with religious symbolism (or any symbolism) BECAUSE WE OWN IT!
I think a fitting punishment would be making Sue lick the crosses off the chairs. Maybe she could bring her son Robert who has been actively licking his wounds after the slaughterhouse ordinance failed.
“Because it would exempt the first $100,000 in valuation from taxing,” Ladner said. “Rather than a proportional cut, South Dakotans with smaller home value will get a bigger percentage tax cut from this mechanism.”
In Sioux Falls that would be about $1,500 a year tax break. Of course, I doubt this even gets out of committee considering towns, schools and counties will push back on it. It would help a lot of first time homebuyers getting into a starter home and the elderly on a fixed income.
l3wis 