2016

Signatures be Damned, September 13, 2016

l3wis September 15, 2016 5Comments

6,400 voter signatures were turned over to an evasive, uncaring, untrustworthy city of Sioux Falls government and what happens? The majority of the City Council on September 13, 2016 essentially said go home and leave us alone.

The April Council had been played like a cheap fiddle by the administration and their leadership by postponing the bonding date to October 1. The 5 to 3 July successful repeal vote of the Council was dramatic, successful but short lived when the mayor vetoed the action the next week. The repeal leaders had given up.

One idea was floated by members of the 5 but who could do an impossible thing like a 5775 signature petition drive to force a vote? The petition drive was born at the only moment it could have. When there was an action to fight. Any sooner and it would have been in conflict with everything else already in action.

The effort to collect the signatures was fought from the moment of the Mayor’s veto on July 27 by the town’s administration. The lack of support from the city clerk shows how little he understands about the rights of citizens. Even with the issues petitioners received, 6,400 signatures were collected in less than 20 days with more than 95% verified. Bravo Sioux Falls voters for caring!

The citizens of Sioux Falls are continuing to learn how little those encased in the power process care about the future of the town or population. As long as they can borrow money without oversight, who cares? Every time the power group seduces another member to do their dirty work, it shows another reason why a corrupting system needs to be fixed.

We brought in new Council members this year who used this project and the fight against it, as center pieces of their reform of process campaigns. At the one yard line, all suited up, with several more plays available, our strongest players collapsed when hit with feathers. Looks like we brought pillows to a game instead of footballs. Asleep at the wheel of power with one yard to go? Nice play.

But how do you feel?

Why passing the Advisory Vote was important

l3wis September 14, 2016 3Comments

It’s nice knowing you have won when the game hasn’t even finished.

I get why the opponents voted against the advisory vote, or at least I understand ‘some’ of their arguments. Basically ‘if’ the bonds sell on October 3, the election would be moot.

But that is still an ‘IF’ and why they should have voted for it anyway. They made it sound like it was a ‘done deal’. It is not. Councilor Stehly said it best, ‘Defeatist Attitude’.

Here are some things to consider;

• This is election would cost the taxpayers nothing if it has to be repealed

• The mayor still has time to delay the bond sale

• A judge could issue a temporary restraining order on the bonds

The way the council spoke on Tuesday night, they acted like the bonds have already sold.

But the most damaging part to voting down this election is that there was NO solidarity shown amongst the 5 councilors that stuck together in the past. I believe and attorneys much smarter than I think that showing that solidarity on Tuesday night would have gone a long way in a courtroom on September 28.

But according to the other 3, we have already lost.

As I said Tuesday night during public input on this item, there are no winners are losers when it comes to this issue, this isn’t a ‘fight’ about the mayor vs. the council or the city clerk vs. Bruce Danielson. This is simply about allowing the citizens to vote on a project that will cost us well over $40 million at the end of the day.

As one of the commenters said last night “What are we scared of?”