South DaCola

Editorial Cartoonist from South Dakota

2017

Sex State Legislature Wollman

Sexy Lawmakers?

l3wis 5Comments

(Image: KSFY) Crap, Bridget busted me, what is that saying I learned from theatre class?

Oh the irony of dragging Nesiba through the mud for having an adult sexual relationship but the smoke and mirrors being put up with Wollman that he is such an angel because he admitted to it.

I believe Wollman that it was consensual, but it was not professional. Notice how HE lies at first to KSFY, then realizes he is busted since so many people blew the whistle on him, then decides to tell the truth (thinking) KSFY wouldn’t publish the first part of the interview. While all these people want to give Wollman credit for being honest, as you can see, he had no choice. If no one would have tipped off the press, Wollman probably would have never said anything.

Besides the lying, and unprofessionalism, I also thought it was improper for him to NOT inform the two young ladies he had sex with before spilling the beans to the press (on the fly). That’s all we need is another congressional hearing about touching wieners.

We will see if the Republicans realize he really screwed up and punish him or sweep it under the rug like IM22, EB-5, Gear-UP, Native Foster Kids, etc, etc, etc.

The irony is it shows what are lawmakers are really up to in Pierre. F’ing around.

1st Amendment Open Government Open Meetings Sioux Falls Sioux Falls Parks and Rec

Will the Sioux Falls parks board meetings get ‘truly’ recorded?

l3wis 2Comments

While it may have been a small victory to have Parks Board meeting recordings posted online, they don’t have to do video. This is the stickler. You may not know what is going on because you will not be able to determine who is saying what.

Hopefully the council will be able to amend this and require video. Knobe weighs in;

The Sioux Falls City Council mandate requiring parks board meetings to be recorded and put online does not go far enough.

Let’s back up a step or two and look at the bigger picture. City Council and Planning Commission meetings are broadcast live and then archived. This has been going on for decades. As mayor of Sioux Falls from 1974-84, I implemented live broadcasts of City Commission meetings. It is now standard operating procedure in most local governments nationwide.

If we are going for true transparency, then let’s broadcast the parks board meetings live. Let’s add live broadcasts of a few other city boards, such as Library, Health, Metro Communications. Each of these boards spend public money and implement policy.

I suggest the administration and City Council create a five year plan to allow for the live airing of as many city board meetings as possible. I think there are two locations within city government where live broadcasts can occur: Carnegie Town Hall and the City Link Studios on Phillips Ave. It shouldn’t be too hard to move these board meetings to those locations. Some adjustments in the meeting space for lighting and microphones may be necessary, but certainly not financially prohibitive.

Some in city government and some citizen board members may think this action is punitive, or that we don’t trust them. I am NOT coming at it from that perspective.

Most of the time city government has a good story to tell. Giving more citizens access to that good story,  builds confidence and trust. Something we desperately need at all levels.

I don’t always agree with Rick, but he nails it.

Ethics Sioux Falls State Legislature

Do we have this in Sioux Falls? Conflict of interest laws

l3wis 1Comments

So the Rapid City council has decided they would try to follow state law;

A new conflict-of-interest policy for the Rapid City government that will be considered by the city council tonight includes provisions outlining the need to disclose all financial interests annually, but also contains a secrecy clause for officials seeking an opinion from the city attorney about possible conflicts.

The conflict-of-interest policy is a direct response to changes to state law adopted by the 2016 South Dakota Legislature, according to the city attorney’s agenda item summary. Those changes require recipients of state grants to adopt and enforce a conflict-of-interest policy. The city receives several million dollars per year in state funding or in federal funding funneled through the state, the summary said.

The policy states that a conflict of interest may exist when an official or an immediate family member has a personal or financial interest clearly separate from that of the general public on a matter facing the official.

It covers officials who are elected or appointed to city boards, committees, commissions and positions within city government and states, “Such conflicts of interest may be financial or personal, direct or indirect, and the existence of a conflict of interest is dependent upon the unique facts of a particular situation.”

But if you watch the RC council meeting (FF: 1:21) you will notice it gets sticky when it comes to the secrecy clause, but still passes anyway. One of the council members has an issue with the ‘secrecy clause’ saying it is out of line with open government. The clause states;

Secret opinions from city attorney

If an official has a question as to whether a conflict exists, he or she may  seek an opinion from city attorney Joel Landeen on the matter. The opinion will not be made public unless a majority of those on the city council or whatever board or committee the official serves on votes to make it public.

“If any official desires assistance to determine if that official, or another official, has a disqualifying conflict of interest, the official may request an advisory opinion from the City Attorney’s Office,” the policy states.

“Such opinion shall be made available to all members of the city council, or the board, committee, or commission about which the opinion is provided, but shall not be available for public inspection unless a majority of the members of the city council or the board, committee, or commission to which the opinion is provided votes to make such opinion public.”

Like I said, though there was an objection by councilman Peters, it still passes. It reminded me of when they went after council woman Stehly without informing the public they were questioning her ‘conflicts’. Ironically, they were hunting Stehly down for ‘speaking’ out of turn with citizens instead of actually having ‘financial’ conflicts.

Notice the spaghetti never stuck to the wall with Stehly. The reason is citizens are more concerned if government officials are getting their bread buttered then if they are helping people by merely speaking to them.

Rapid City moved in the right direction, we will see if our fine elected officials (mayor and council) will adopt such transparent laws, or if they will continue to hide their personal investments.

These laws address the financial aspects (PDF documents of the law);

Conflict-RCC AND Cnflict-State

« Previous Page — Next Page »

You Missed

Downtown Sioux Falls Homeless Mayor TenHaken Sioux Falls

UPDATE: Was the Mayor TenHaken’s presser about panhandlers or manhandlers?

Downtown Sioux Falls Sioux Falls Sioux Falls Parks and Rec

UPDATE: Did the City of Sioux Falls get permission from the CORPS of Engineers?

Downtown Sioux Falls Music Sioux Falls

I Really Get Into It: The Underage Architects of Sioux Falls Punk & the Black Crowes

6th street Bunker Bridge Bunker Ramp Downtown Sioux Falls food tax Homeless Mayor TenHaken SF City Council Sioux Falls

Is the TenHaken Administration one of the most fiscally irresponsible & corrupt in Sioux Falls history?