Win a $25 dollar gift card

by

This Walmart thingy is getting weirder by the day.

Love how all the questions lean towards Walmart and don’t ask any questions about property and citizen rights. BTW, South Dakota’s largest AD agency, Lawrence and Schiller is putting out this poll;

Hello and good afternoon!
Do you have a few minutes to share your opinions with us, this afternoon or evening?   A new survey is available, but the window to participate in this one is pretty short. The poll is regarding current public opinions within the Sioux Falls community, and will only take 2-3 minutes.  I will randomly draw a name tomorrow afternoon and send out a $25 Retail Gift Card to the winner.
To take the survey, please click here: http://questionpro.com/t/AKJaTZQM64
As always, thank you so much for your time and for participating in the Lawrence & Schiller consumer advisory panel!  We greatly appreciate your feedback and opinions.
Posted in: Sioux Falls, Walfart

Local Ad Agency gets rewarded with pay to play AGAIN

by

Haven’t we been down this road once already? It was only 3 years ago that Rounds got busted doing this, and now his buddy DooGard is doing it also with the SAME ad agency! (From the TheAntidote);

lucrative state tourism contract as well as a tidy little contract to promote the University of South Dakota in a variety of forms of advertising including billboard advertising.

That all sounds a bit fishy. An advertising firm works for Republican candidates and those candidates, turned elected officials, reward the advertising firm with millions of dollars in state taxpayer funded contracts.

Now throw in this new and even more disturbing wrinkle.

The Daugaard’s political campaign ads, who are now making taxpayer funded ads because of lucrative state contracts including advertising for the University of South Dakota, are now putting Daugaard into their advertising plan to promote the University – free exposure for Daugaard at taxpayer expense from a contract Daugaard’s campaign advertising team got from the state after Daugaard was elected.

A Perfect Example of What Is Wrong With One Party Government.

Lawrence and Schiller is an advertising firm based in Sioux Falls.

Lawrence and Schiller makes political ads for Republican candidates for office – including Dennis Daugaard’s campaign for governor of South Dakota in 2010.

That fishy smell just got downright putrid.

The University of South Dakota has a reported $1.5 million three year contract with Lawrence and Schiller to promote the University. As part of their work for the University, Lawrence and Schiller has designed billboard copy with Daugaard’s smiling face, identified as “Governor Dennis Daugaard BS – 75” and the slogan, “We will serve the people” along with the tag word, “Onward” and a new USD logo – a rather pedestrian, plain and nondescript one designed by Lawrence and Schiller.

What’s wrong with that picture? Everything.

The arrogance of it is offensive. It is as if Daugaard is saying to South Dakotans, “I won. So, I can now reward my campaign buddies with taxpayer funded state contracts, but cynically, those same taxpayer contracts can promote me as well. It’s great being governor of a one party state.”

The practice should be banned and Democrats in the legislature ought to sponsor legislation in the upcoming session to do just that.

But what is perhaps as offensive with this new billboard campaign is that Daugaard is no friend of the University of South Dakota. His first budget as Governor slashed funding to the University while it raised tuition on every student that attends the U.

So how did Lawrence and Schiller take care of that little public relations problem: spend taxpayer dollars on billboards suggesting Daugaard is a friend of the University of South Dakota. That is just plain wrong.

Pay to play is bullshit, but it is still legal in SD. And apparently the same offenders continue to rear their heads. What is more troubling is that we are paying a private company that much money to promote a public university.

1) What is wrong with their own marketing department that is already receiving taxpayer money?

2) Where did this money come from since the state is broke and cannot spend any money on education?

Maybe we could hire L & S to come up with a focus group to research the topic.

 

Posted in: Daugaard

Sioux Falls Municipal Election first financial reports are in . . .

by

. . and like a kid in a candy store I have been reading them and looking at contributors. Nothing really glaring, but I encourage you to read them yourself, seems like some people in SF have a lot of money to throw away on wannabe municipal politicians.

Here are the raw numbers (The Gargoyle Leader someone how came up with higher numbers then me);

MAYOR

Pat Costello: $75,496 (his contributor list reads like a who’s who of SF construction and development)

This quote by Pat in the Gargoyle really made me laugh;

“Despite raising the most money in 2009, Costello said he expects to be outspent in the race. His donations came from people of “all walks of life” who he said responded to his leadership as a councilor and businessman.”

Oh yeah? “All walks of life” Well he is telling the truth, except most of those people walk on the wealthier side of life, here is just a few names you may recognize;

Dana Dykhouse (First Premier), Kelby Krabbenhoft (Sanford), Greg and Phyllis Heineman (Skyforce), Jim Soukup (Soukup Construction), Dan Kirby, Peter Hegg, Tim Dougherty, Vance Goldammer (Prominent Republican Lawyer), Rick Lessnau (Sioux Falls McDonalds), Tom Muenster, Scott Lawrence (Lawrence and Schiller), Frank Alvine, Don Dunham, JR. (Dunham Companies), Jim Burma, Bob Correa (Music Service), Tom Walsh (SD Burger King), Larry Canfield, Al Schoeneman (Schoeneman’s), Jeff Schershligt (Cherapa Place), De Knudson (City’s Chief Babbler), Kevin Schieffer (Formerly(?) of DM & E), Paul Schiller (Lawrence and Schiller co-founder, and major pain in my ass)

Bill Peterson: $34,744 (This one surprised me, a little, I didn’t know what to expect, but I never thought it would be that much. Hey, doesn’t Kirby owe you some money for writing that flawed home rule charter for him?)

Mike Huether: $25,000 (this number is a little wishy washy because he did not fill out his final total)

Vernon BrownKnows: $13,000 (I got a good chuckle out of Vernon’s contributor list . . .  sloppy seconds.)

Kermit Staggers: $1,050 (This does not surprise me, and I applaud Kermit for being modest about his campaign, I have often said money is what corrupts campaigns, elections and politicians, I think it would be great if he won mayor and spent the least. Remind me Kermit to cut you a check, BTW.)

Janoct Ajda: $0 (C’mon Janoct, you couldn’t at least get your mom to give you a couple of bucks?)

COUNCIL RACES

Jim Entenman: $15,575 (like I said in my predictions, I know Jim will raise a lot of money, and spend a lot, but doesn’t seem odd that a guy who has NO competitors has fifteen grand in the pot? Still couldn’t but a decent Harley for that)

Bob Christensen: $10,541 (This one surprised me a little, I expected less, but hey, if I ran a barber shop I would have a ‘shake for a contribution’ die.)

Sue Aguilar: $9,620 (no surprise here, Sue is rich, has rich friends, blah, blah, blah)

Michelle Erpenbach: $7,120 (Michelle’s contributor list is a very interesting read, Tom Daschle was one of her contributors, wonder if he wrote in the memo line on the check, “Sorry I voted for that stupid fucking Iraq War .”

Clarence Kooistra: $625

Charles Gaetze: $0

James Milne: $0 (didn’t file)

There was also two PAC’s involved this year. The money they raised is no surprise, but their contribution list is fun to read (SEE BELOW)

SECOND CENTURY PAC (A PAC mostly funded by lawyers. The graphic shows who they contributed to)

2ND-CEN

SIOUX EMPIRE FRIENDS OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING (A PAC that promotes affordable housing. I have an idea, stop giving money to politicians and start spending it on affordable housing. The graphic shows who they contributed to)

SEJ

Posted in: SF City Council, Sioux Falls Mayor Race

Gov. Mike ‘Pants on Fire’ Rounds backpeddling again;

by

My friend Joy Crane wrote an interesting letter to the editor today about the ‘actual’ costs and revenue of tourism in our state;

A subsection under Goal 1 includes Progress Indicators, which list the actual monthly tourism and Deadwood gaming tax revenues collected from April 2007 to April 2008. A footnote states that these monthly deposits of revenue are used to fund the South Dakota Office of Tourism. The total 13-month tax revenue added up to $9,228,592.

The Jan. 11 Argus Leader article about South Dakotans feeling the money pinch in regard to Gov. Mike Rounds’ new budget contained the following: “Heidepriem, though, suggests there are notable savings to be realized. While the state Constitution ‘doesn’t say a word about tourism, we are spending $12 million this year promoting tourism in a no-bid contract with Lawrence and Schiller. Is it more important to fund K-12 education or tourism? I know what the founders tell us,’ he says.”

It appears Rounds is spending more on the annual Lawrence and Schiller no-bid contract than the total annual tourism and Deadwood gaming tax revenues collected to fund the Office of Tourism.

Well it seems Lousy & Shister are at it again, sucking off the taxpayer tit.

The Mitchell Daily Republic also did a story about it, I would have a direct link, but their site is having issues today.

Posted in: Lawrence and Schiller, Rounds, State Funding, State Legislature, State Tourism

SD education funding three ring circus

by

Once again Mike Rounds refuses to cut his do nothing-big government programs in Pierre to help fund education;

Democrats have said they want to cut elsewhere in state government to find money for aid to schools. Senate Democratic Leader Scott Heidepriem of Sioux Falls said state government in previous years has forced agencies to cut spending by a certain percentage, and that approach could work again.

“It’s so simple it’s amazing to me,” Heidepriem said, adding that he doesn’t believe the Republican governor is willing to control the size of state government.

It doesn’t surprise me one bit. Even when the economy was good, Rounds refused to properly fund education, now he has an excuse and he is going to run with it.

While more than 90 percent of Democrats said they wanted to boost state aid to schools by more than the 3 percent recommended by Rounds, only about a quarter of Republicans said they believed state aid should increase by more than that.

Even if the legislature gets a super-majority to be veto proof on an education bill (which I don’t see) Rounds will still find a way to overstep the legislators, just like he did with the blender pump tax and laptops (how did that work out for yah, Mike). He simply doesn’t like to be told what to do. This will be a true test for the legislators. Will the typical Republican cheerleaders like Krebs cave to their favorite state Republican? Will the Dems do more then mouth off to the media and internets about how much of a brat Mike is? (seriously, that’s my job, not yours.)

It’s time to show Rounds that he has been extremely ineffective as a governor and quite possibly, unethical (another thing legislators are too chicken-shit to do something about).

POVERTY HAS AN EFFECT ON EDUCATION FUNDING

One has to wonder though, maybe education funding is sufficient in South Dakota. Student test scores are always pretty decent, but high school dropout rates are high. One reason may be the growing problem of poverty in our state.

A couple weeks back a SF School district representative gave a presentation to the city council about poverty in Sioux Falls. Some scary stuff, here are a few highlights.

– 40% of caucasion children in the SF school district are on FREE or reduced lunches, and that number is as high as 75% in minority community.

– Supt. Dr. Homan doesn’t like to have late starts with bad weather because she wants to make sure these kids get something to eat for breakfast.

Some of the other numbers are hard to swallow to. A lot of these kids also have little winter clothing to wear, and often go hungry on the weekends. The amazing part about it is, it is not discussed much by our local or statewide politicians, it is kind of a ‘silent problem’. After the presentation, one councilor even had this to say, “Thank you for the presentation, but what is this council supposed to do with this information?” And maybe this is the problem. I think politicians think if at least 51% of people in the community are doing OKAY, we can ignore the minority. I find it ironic that Sioux Falls spends more per year on mowing an acre of parkland then they do educating a child. Who knew grass was more important than a decent education? Nice priorities, Huh? I also wonder how much money in education funding is going towards feeding, counseling and healthcare for some of these kids? Something that parents should be responsible for, that is, if they can afford it. The problem isn’t just funding education properly, it is also about creating a business atmosphere in SD that creates more living wage jobs. Government can’t create higher paying jobs, but they can help attract those kinds of businesses. Just imagine if we spent half the money we do on tourism for business development, what kind of impact that would have on the state? (of course than Lawrence and Schiller would have to go out and find real clients).

It’s time for our legislators (it’s too late for the governor) to realize the root problem of education funding – Poverty and low wages.

Posted in: economy, Education funding, Governor Rounds, Heidepriem, Rounds, State Funding, State Legislature