Tonight at the Findings of Fact special meeting of the Sioux Falls city council, Councilor Brekke offered an alternative resolution (above) of NOT dismissing Neitzert, but also not punishing him. After Councilor Starr seconded the motion, himself, Brekke and Selberg voted for it, which was a reversal of what Selberg voted for at the end of the original hearing.
Not sure why?
I thought at first maybe he misunderstood the vote (he was attending the meeting via phone), but I am not sure that was the case, because he paused and sighed before voting for it (which tells me he supported it) after it failed in a 3-4 vote, Selberg did vote for the dismissal, Brekke and Starr did not.
If Selberg needed clarity on the amendment he could have asked for it before the vote, he did not, he also could have rescinded it immediately after the vote or even at the end of the meeting, he did not. I’m curious what his change of heart was?
Maybe it was my testimony? LOL. In which I pointed out that throughout the findings it is clear he violated the ordinance. So why the dismissal? Never did get any discussion from the entire council on why they felt a dismissal was appropriate and we likely never will.
But there was also a strange moment in which Councilor Neitzert’s wife testified. I won’t disparage her, I’m sure it’s not easy being in her position, and I sympathize with her, I also wonder how many times she has asked Greg to just accept what he did and move on.
But she made a reference to people on Facebook questioning their family life, finances and even marriage. Whoaaa! I had never heard this.
Listen folks, while Greg did violate the ordinance, this wasn’t a capital offense, I even said in my testimony that he doesn’t deserve punishment, just accept what you did and apologize.
Sometimes politics can get personal, but this action by Greg wasn’t personal, it was just an ethics violation of city law. Pretty black and white.
Either the majority of the council who voted to dismiss this is really corrupt or really freaking stupid.
I’m guessing both.
Good post Scott. This morals lacking Council felt that they just had to have this dismissed. They need to keep his record clean to prevent any skeletons from appearing in his closet when he campaigns for Mayor. We can only hope the citizens remember these things. Hopefully, those same citizens see how he is being groomed by Mayor no-tie and his other puppets.
Reminds me of the OJ trial. Not guilty because he was a football hero but found liable financially in a private trial. Neitzert must pay his legal expenses.