Theresa Stehly

Should the city gift the old ice complex to the Glory House?

Starr

As I argued last night at the city council meeting during public input, the city would have true value in the old building by selling it or gifting it to the Glory House;

“One of the options is to allow the Glory House to expand. The Glory House is just adjacent to this piece of property,” Starr said.

The Glory House, which helps former inmates find jobs to get back on their feet and transition back into society, is already working with a developer to tear down the old building and construct 50 to 75 affordable housing units here.

“Over 80% of the people who graduate from the Glory House have full time jobs, what they’re having difficulties with is being able to find a place to live,” Starr said.

“We’re not in the land speculating business, we’re in the human services business as far as I’m concerned,” Starr said.

As I said last night, this is truly a ‘value’ issue for taxpayers. By keeping former ex-cons out of jail, we save the taxpayers money, a lot of money. It only makes sense to sell them the property. Even Erpenbach nodded her head at me in agreement while speaking of the issue. I think this will get a majority of the council to approve this sale. Ironically, while everyone is throwing Stehly under the bus, her and Starr were the first to look into this issue.

Authoritarians on the March, September 20, 2016

The sign of a despot losing control is when the gavel flies. The Sioux Falls City Council Informational meeting on September 20, 2016 showed a city leadership spiraling out of control. When City Council members are told what to do, who they can talk to and what they are to believe something is rotting down deep.

Before you start watching the video, click on it so you can view it full screen. This is our first use of a five camera blend to show you the action of the room. Notice when the city attorneys join the video and how even Fiddle Faddle gets into the act and appears to yell out something with the crowd.

Those of us who have followed city government for years have known this day was coming. City Council leadership takes their marching orders from the mayor’s office and his directors. You can see it when Rex Rolfing looks to the mayor’s attorney for guidance as Theresa Stehly uses her open discussion time to bring up the illegal use of the Executive session process. We have been documenting the abuse of the secretive executive sessions to hide the public’s business from the public.

The secret executive session was called to discuss ethics but in fact was a scheme to go after Stehly to set her up as an example. YOU MUST OBEY OR ELSE!

Why shouldn’t we hear this? What is so secret about ethics? Is it actually kind of oxymoronic (get your dictionary out Rex) for our town to teach one version to the council but not explain it to us?

The abuse of council members, the public and the process must stop. A past council member once told Cameraman Bruce explained the rule passed down by the mayor, “Councilors are not to intervene on behalf of constituents.” If this is the case, why do we even have a city council?

Bully Council Chair Rex Rolfing gets handed his A . .

If I were to say I haven’t known about what has been going on for awhile, I would be lying. In fact, I’ve known about this kind of (council) intimidation well before Huether even took office. When councilor Kevin Kavanaugh threatened to press charges against then mayor Munson who was running for a second term over middle of the night contract deal on Phillips to the Falls, he was brow beat by a group of ‘concerned citizens’ to back off. He did.

Since then, when councilors don’t play ‘reindeer games’ they get bullied and beat up. Theresa is just the latest casualty, but she wants this kind of intimidation to end;

“I have been bullied, intimidated and threatened. … I have been told not to talk to the media. I have been told not to advocate for the citizens,” she said while reading from a prepared statement.

As I have stated, elected officials are legally guaranteed by the US Constitution to 1st Amendment rights. In other words as long as they are not telling the public or the media about confidential contracts or voting on items they speak about (conflicts of interest), they are free to speak about the issues. When they use their free speech to benefit themselves or to sway votes or meetings, then they are in violation (Federal courts have ruled on this).

As far as I can tell, Stehly has not done any of those things. She has spoken honestly to the public and the media about issues facing our community. She has NOT used her speech to benefit herself or others. She is for transparency, period.