US Constitution

City of Sioux Falls reacts to the Daily case

While I liked most of the city attorney’s testimony during the public services meeting about the changes to the city’s administrative appeals process, I was a little concerned about the city attorney’s statement in the opening (paraphrasing) “Due process is open to interpretation (in reference to code enforcement)” DAN DAILY CASE

HUH? Let’s review;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Due_process

http://www.lectlaw.com/def/d080.htm

This guy has a law degree? Innocent until proven guilty? Do you know what that means?

This says it best;

The idea that laws and legal proceedings must be fair. The Constitution guarantees that the government cannot take away a person’s basic rights to ‘life, liberty or property, without due process of law.’ Courts have issued numerous rulings about what this means in particular cases.

In other words, government cannot tell you how much fucking concrete you can pour on your own property. Do you understand? It is equivelant of someone telling you how much you should clean your toilet.

It’s go time: Daily vs. The City of Sioux Falls

You can listen as the SD Supreme Court weighed in on this case .

So why has there been no media about the case? Because we know the SF MSM are tools, and the city has turned that tool away from the case.

This is what I know so far;

• The City filed a 7 page brief citing 4 obscure cases.

• Daily’s attorney submitted a 38 page brief citing 35 state court cases, 13 US Supreme Court Cases, 2 other cases, 6 constitutional provisions, 8 SD statutes, and 3 city ordinances.

I’m no lawyer, but I think we know how this will turn out. Then maybe the media will pull their heads out and consider this a REAL story.

Whose rights were violated? LMFAO!

I want your due process rights in my belly!

OMG! I’m sure Dan Daily’s head probably exploded after reading this article;

A fired city attorney and current state legislator who once defended the constitutionality of Sioux Falls’ grievance procedures is suing the city for violating his due process rights.

The irony of this is so thick, I’m not sure what to say. I’ll let you battle it out in the comments section. Keep it clean, Dan.

Will Mayor Huether’s code enforcement rampage backfire on him?

It now is no secret that Mayor Huether is ramping up code violations, not only on complaint basis but it seems proactively. He has pronounced it himself in the media and city employees and private citizens said they have seen the effects already. But won’t this all backfire on him and the city financially if they don’t fix the code enforcement mess?

I wrote a negative red-light camera letter to the Argus Leader almost four years ago. Former Sioux Falls Mayor Dave Munson sent a tough-guy code enforcer on a vendetta against me. It took four citations, four city hearings, four years of litigation, four circuit court dates and $40,000 in legal expenses to exonerate myself. In the process, I showed home rule charter is not democracy.

Mr. Daily sent me the original – unedited version of the letter . . . oh the Gargoyle Leader and their editing pen.

Traffic Camera Case

I wrote a negative traffic camera letter to the Argus some 4 years ago.  Munson sent out the tough guy code enforcer vendetta.  It took 4 citations, 4 city hearings, 4 years of litigation, 4 circuit court dates, and $40,000 in legal expense to exonerate myself.  In the process, I showed Home Rule Charter is not democracy.  Present city procedure ignores the South Dakota Civil Procedures Act and 2 amendments to the U.S. Constitution.

For the camera case, Circuit Court interpreted and applied the law.  The class should be compensated for illegal citations and litigation.  There should be punitive damages.  My situation (above) was 4’s and I suggest a $4 million judgment.   The city plans 10 more cameras.  This case should first go into state court to answer constitutional questions and evaluate city civil procedures.  The assistant city attorney has violated citizen’s rights in city hearings and obstructed justice in circuit court cases.  He represented an unfounded and improperly noticed ethics complaint against a city councilor in order to influence an election. There should be a state Supreme Court ethics hearing and reprimand. The city turned off the camera and, after ignoring 3 prior court orders, finally complied with one.

If the mayor will not repeal home rule or if state court doesn’t revoke it, I suggest a new mayor and term expired council members in 2014 who advocate:

‘REPEAL HOME RULE, RETURN TO CONSTITUTIONAL DEMOCRACY’.

Munson oligarchy became tyranny then a full blown dictatorship.  The mayor makes all decisions such as policy, budget, tax increases, and non-competitive bidding.  The city council has become puppets meant to mimic democracy.  At one time, during Munson, Home Rule Charter could have been amended into a viable concept.  Considering misapplications and citizen torment, it should now be abandoned.  Then, city administration can be welcomed back.  If they apply and can answer a few constitutional questions, they can be reinstated as U.S. citizens.

Daniel R. Daily, Citizen and Constitutional Plaintiff