During last Tuesday’s council meeting (1:29:50) councilor Kiley seemed concerned that the new flag would interfere with ‘other organizations’ attempts to ‘rebrand’ the city. He went on to say that he was at a Chamber Mixer and asked if the Chamber’s ‘ISSUES’ committee (whatever that is) took on the rebranding issue, and said that they didn’t have any plans to rebrand. As I understand it, the conversation the Chamber had was they were NOT going to rebrand the city, but wished that the city had more consistency in their identity (Logo). But the Chamber is NOT involved at this point from what I understand.
So where did this rumor come from? Ironically, it seems I am the only one who has brought this up publicly.
My suggestion would be that the city DOES pursue a new identity, but instead of hiring an expensive consultant or ad agency, my suggestion would be to have a city wide competition to rebrand the city. And once the winner is picked we hire the proper legal counsel to clean it up and make it official. After that, my only suggestion would be that the city re-letter all of the city vehicles ASAP (we have our own sign/vinyl shop) and change all the appropriate stationery and city signage.
#KeepTheSealAsIs
#DontLetTrumpRepaintAirForceOneEither
Oh, and I do like your evolutionary “Forward Sioux Falls” flag, however (But maybe “Forward” might be a little too “Chamber?”). But anyhow, which primate in that flag do you think we are at this stage in our history? The one that is the furtherest to the left or the one that is the second furtherest to the left?
But come to think of it, sense there has been a recent bear siting in Sioux Falls* and we have a new bear exhibit at the Zoo, maybe we should just adopt the California flag with a few minor modifications….
*
http://www.southdacola.com/blog/2018/05/bear-siting-in-sioux-falls-area/
A city this size with half a billion in debt, constitutional illegitimacy, and zero transparency doesn’t need rebranding. It needs bankruptcy and a new charter. With a record of ignoring 6400 petition signatures, dozens of court case loses, running a doctor out of town because he’s forced to tear down his million dollar house, false imprisonment, lack of public assistance, private giveaways (TIF’s), and 6 indoor tennis courts built privately for the mayor; rebranding is an insult.
Apology’s, reorganization, and a new charter is what’s expected and deserved.
Daily Spin: I commend your having taken on the city in an epic legal battle. I usually appreciate your sarcasm, irony, vitriol, ridicule & contrariness. But I can’t let a thinly veiled & inaccurate defense of the McKennan Park purveyors of mcmansion mayhem go unchallenged. 1) Mrs. Sapienza is the MD, not her kept man-child husband. 2) KelbyAnn Krappenhoft & Sanford need to pay heed to a very teachable moment here, & admonish the MD’s they woo from elsewhere that a king’s ransom salary should suffice in stroking their god complex egos; throwing ostentatious & legal cheap shot elbows in their private lives won’t fly here. 3) While the City arguably dropped the ball big time in permitting an unrepentant brat to assault a charming century-old neighborhood with his “what’s-mine-is-mine-and-what’s-yours-is- negotiable-and-just-beg-forgiveness-but-never-ask-permission”mantra, the Sapienza’s bear the ultimate responsibility for taking a high stakes gamble & losing big time. They haven’t been run out of town – they’ve been taught an expensive lesson…for which their neighbors paid an equally if not larger price. Given their wholly unrepentant attitude, it is doubtful they’ll learn anything from it. NO COMMUNITY needs neighbors like this. Sanford should have come down HARD on them long before the issue ascended to the court-clogging calamity it did. This friendless couple are supremely deserving of fleeing in well-deserved shame.
Blasphemo: I don’t find your comments disagreeable. (Not quite a double negative–but getting close (?). But I am not on the world stage either.)