Published in the Argus Leader

Scott L. Ehrisman • Sioux Falls • September 2, 2008

American citizens have a constitutional right to free speech. The First Amendment guarantees that right, and no state, municipal or parliamentary procedure rules, ordinances or charters trump the U.S. Constitution. It is the highest law of the land, and only the U.S. Supreme Court can rule otherwise.

I want to commend many city staffers and a few councilors for promoting transparency in government, especially City Clerk Debra Owen and Councilor Kermit Staggers. This city is fortunate to have them working for us.

Sioux Falls Mayor Dave Munson, however, is testing the Constitution and specifically the First Amendment by citing bogus parliamentary procedure at recent City Council meetings.

Any citizen in Sioux Falls or even in the metropolitan area is allowed to address the council on any topic before the start of regular business at a council meeting. Munson asks citizens to adhere to a five-minute rule for that testimony, but this is merely a courteous rule – not a constitutional one. Yet Munson has timed me and several other citizens to the second and cut us off exactly at the five-minute mark whether we are done testifying or not. He even has used a plain clothes police officer to intimidate citizens. In fact, the last time I spoke, the officer followed me to my chair and hovered over me briefly.

The use of intimidation to end testimony is a possible violation of the First Amendment and should not be tolerated. As long as a citizen does not threaten elected officials or use inflammatory language, officials must allow the person to finish his or her grievances whether they agree or not.

I’m sure Munson’s actions against free speech stem from his bloated capital improvement plan budget that is 14 percent higher than last year’s and his unbridled drive to increase retail taxes during a slowing economy. Many citizens have voiced their concerns about the amount of pork for special interests contained in the budget and the need for a tax cut – not an increase.

This lame duck mayor is trying to squelch criticism before the larger citizenry catches wind of his budgetary abuses and the Sept. 8 vote on the retail tax increase. One citizen even pointed out the capital improvement plan budget hearings were mysteriously not rebroadcast on CityLink.

Last I checked, Mr. Mayor, Sioux Falls still falls under the rule of the Constitution. Please stop censoring your critics at public meetings. It just makes you appear thin-skinned and arrogant.

If you can’t take a little criticism from the people who pay your salary, you need to resign.

13 Thoughts on “Freedom of speech stifled at council meetings

  1. don’t let up, scott. keep the heat on munson’s bullying and poor management.

    thankfully, my councilman, gerald beninga, has been responsive to his constituents and maintains his opposition to the tax increase.

  2. Ghost of Dude on September 2, 2008 at 6:57 am said:

    I think this tax thing will fail and the council and mayor will have to find another way to fund their projects.
    Now just isn’t the time to be talking about spending more money. When the economy bounces back, it’ll be time.

  3. It’s time to find out who are the fiscal conservatives are!

  4. There is also a possible story coming out in the AL about the conflict of interest with Litz and Jamison on the development fees. Trust me, I will also bring it up again on September 8th, with Police escort of course!

  5. Ghost of Dude on September 2, 2008 at 7:37 am said:

    You may need that police escort to protect you from Bob.

  6. The nose twister, yeah right.

  7. Angry Guy on September 2, 2008 at 10:34 am said:

    I still think we should filibuster.

  8. They better hire a few more cops

  9. Ghost of Dude on September 2, 2008 at 11:49 am said:

    I’m bringing popcorn.

  10. Rumor has it they are going to push up the vote to September 15th at tonight’s meeting. I think I am going to file a conflict of interest complaint. I have to take a look at the form first, then I will decide. I guess a SF Lawyer contacted all of them about it and Litz had some long excuse and all Jamison said (in an email) was ‘Good Night’. Nice, huh? A citizen points out you may have a conflict of interest and all you have to say is ‘Good Night.’? Dumb.

  11. EggBert on September 2, 2008 at 4:08 pm said:

    Once again, keep your nose out of city affairs, you hippy! Also, did any of you folks see that Sarah Palin, Bristol (her 17-year-old pregnant daughter), and Pam Fixture, the president of Missouri Right to Life has joined up with Pastor Steve and the Unrrruggghh of the Sioux Falls Alpha Team? Ha, ha, – You good old boys are going down in this fight! Consider yourself Pro-women choiceless losers!

    Sincerely,

    EggBert Ti.F.I.G.

  12. Ghost of Dude on September 3, 2008 at 6:34 am said:

    Hitching the party wagon to the pro-life movement is a big mistake. This is why we need a third party.

  13. That’s why I think if he would have chosen Tom Ridge as his running mate he may have clinched the election. We will see what Palin does tonight, I heard they are flying in Bristol’s boyfriend, Levi to make an appearance on the stage; Republicans, the party of no shame.

    I love how all of Palin’s kid’s names are stolen from the movie EWOKS. Last night on the Colbert Report he recited all of their names and then called one of them ‘Snack Chips’ Hilarious!

Post Navigation