South DaCola

Editorial Cartoonist from South Dakota

2020

Alex Jensen Christine Erickson Mayor TenHaken Open Government Open Meetings SF City Council Sioux Falls

UPDATE: Mayor TenHaken and the Sioux Falls City Council continue their ‘HATEFEST’ on Transparency and Open Government

l3wis 16Comments

UPDATE: As you can see the council and mayor are moving forward with their plans (Items #40-41) on a night when most people will be paying attention to the election. The items are also misleading because in the titles it says NOTHING about moving public input or meeting time moving. Only if you read the red notes you will see the changes.

This change could also be construed as unconstitutional in the public input ordinance;

Notice that currently public input at the beginning of the meetings doesn’t allow you to comment on pending business coming up in the rest of the meeting, which is also unconstitutional, but they are saying with this NEW ordinance that you can’t comment on what happened during the meeting though the items have already been voted on and the business of those items is closed. The SCOTUS has ruled very recently that you can discuss ANY city business at public input whether it is on an agenda or not. I think they said as long as a citizen is commenting on business that is ‘germane’ to that government body, it is allowable. I guess now the Mayor thinks he knows better than the Supreme Court. Not only do they suck at transparency, they are getting very sloppy legal advice.

——————————————-

I just found out this afternoon that the mask mandate isn’t the only controversy coming on Tuesday. There are two items that will probably get first readings on Tuesday night also that have not been presented to the public in an informational, which is no surprise. I knew that both of these were coming after Stehly’s seat was bought by the banksters and developer welfare queens, and they have to do with shackling citizens;

• The first is a move rumored to be brought forward by Councilors Erickson and Jensen that would move the regular council meetings to 6 PM. This of course would give citizens very little time from when they get off of work to attend the meetings on time in person and an obvious assault on open government.

• The second is rumored to be proposed by Mayor TenHaken himself to move public input to the end of the meetings.

I have no doubt both will get the 5 votes they need to pass. These actions come after just a few weeks ago the Mayor ended the traditional mayor/director meetings with council leadership on Friday mornings and also the move to remove red notes from ordinances that are being changed.

This of course is NO surprise since this mayor and council has had a full on assault on transparency and their hatred of open government and more importantly citizen input and advocacy. They despise more than anything else and won’t be happy until they lop off the citizens rights to dissent their government, or at least make it more challenging to do so.

Messing with public input and citizens rights to advocate for themselves is a whole new level of disgusting behavior by this administration and city council. I would ask if they have any shame, but you know the answer.

So why are they so Hellbent on silencing the public? Because they have several plans to hand over MORE of your tax dollars to the elite who fund their campaigns and they are tired of the public making that process messy and in the open.

And if you think the steamrolling won’t happen, wait until Starr leaves the council (hopefully) and they replace him with another rubberstamper.

Prepare for your taxes and fees to rise exponentially while your voice and services get stifled. This is what happens when you let a non-partisan government get controlled by political hacks of the Republican Fascist Party with no governing experience and deep, deep, deep hatred of citizen activism and transparency.

We have a virus destroying our city alright, and the only way to stop it is with lots of Sunshine.

Elections South Dakotans

2020 Election Predictions

l3wis 13Comments

I’m not going to do endorsements since most of you have already made up your minds, but I will go over a few predictions;

In the presidential election, I have no doubt that Trump will win South Dakota and get our 3 electoral votes (even if one of the electors is hiding under a rock while there is an ongoing(?) investigation). But I do believe Biden will take Minnehaha County with at least 52% of the vote. It’s unfortunate that all the hayseeds in our state don’t wise up.

I also think Biden will take the popular vote nationwide, I actually think he will get at least 10-20 million more votes then Trump. The sticky part is the swing states and the electoral college. It looks as though Biden still has a route to electoral victory even if he loses Florida and Texas. I agree with Biden on this one, he needs to fight to the end and hope it rings true. No matter who wins the Presidential election it is time for us to rid ourselves of the electoral college. This will be a hard fight, because the red rural states, like ourselves, will fight it.

I also think the Dems will keep the House and flip the Senate, with at least 2 extra seats.

Locally, I think Kelly Sullivan (D13) and Michael Sabe (D9) will be re-elected to serve in the state legislature.

While the SD GOP has been like attack dogs on Pat Starr with false allegations and flat out ridiculous lies, I think most people support him for Minnehaha County Treasurer. It will be close, and the only reason is because of straight ticket Republican voters. But I think he will pull it off with at least 52% of the vote or higher. I also wonder why his opponent has gotten virtually ZERO endorsements from the party she belongs to? The unfortunate part is we will miss him on the Sioux Falls City Council, and I can’t even fathom what person will be recruited to be appointed to serve out his remaining 3 years. I wouldn’t doubt that the RS6 already have some people lined up in case Pat leaves. It’s going to be a very lonely place for Councilor Brekke. But on the bright side, I think Pat will continue the same level of ‘personal’ customer service Nelson has provided, but make it even better with more advances in technology. I think if there is ever a perfect replacement for Pam it is Pat.

I have no doubt that Medical Mary will pass with at least 65% of the vote or higher, I also have NO doubt the State Legislature will gut the initiative just like they did with IM22 and make it almost impossible for you to get a prescription for MJ and even if you do, good luck finding a provider for your script. So why would the Legislature do this, well, because they are a bunch little whiny bi*chs that only are for things if it makes them money, it has little to do with them being a bunch of right wing radical wing nuts. Just look at the crying game they played when their personal businesses couldn’t get their hands on the Rona money. Do you really think a beer distributor was suffering during this pandemic? Puhhhhlleeese. That money should have been distributed to individuals across the state instead of low wage employers who may or may not trickle it down to the rest of us. But you know the line from these peeps, they used it frequently in 2008 when raises were not forthcoming, “You should just consider yourself lucky you have a job.” While they take massive tax write-offs for a temporary loss in profit. Sorry, kind of went down a rabbit hole on that one, but like I said, our Republican controlled legislature won’t do anything unless they can line their pockets, and there is NO money in Medical Mary.

As for Recreational Mary, I think it will squeak out a victory, but it will be tight and we may not know the results for several days. My only confidence that this will pass is from what I am seeing in polling. The polling has stayed consistent at that 51% since this summer. I also find some confidence in the fact that only 44% are against with 5% undecided. I think this campaign was well-organized and well-funded compared to the past, and I also think the green wave across the country is changing people’s minds about legalization. Also, if you are 21 or older, you may not have to worry about IM26 getting gutted, because you can go and buy the good stuff without a script. Yes folks, believe it or not, pot makes you feel good, whether you are suffering from pain, terminal cancer, seizures or you just want to relax, and believe it or not, while addiction can be an issue with it, the side affects of casual use are far, far, far less than legal drugs like alcohol and opiates.

I do think the legislature will do everything in their power to regulate the sh*t out of the legalization since they can’t kill it because it is a Constitutional Amendment, but I think the biggest uphill battle will be cities having the ability to regulate zoning, and your only choice may be growing your own plants. I think this is foolish for a number of reasons, first the obvious, WHY IN THE HELL DID BRENDAN JOHNSON GIVE CITIES SO MUCH POWER?!! When I read this in the Amendment, I just shook my head, this is what happens when you have moderate to right Democrats write laws, a milky, watery substance is produced, secondly, cities would be wise to embrace this revenue, because I can guarantee if NO dispensaries exist in our state people will continue to purchase on the black market or simply buy in Colorado. In other words we would lose out on the tax revenue. Even if that all occurs, fortunately we will benefit from the justice costs involved with it, I think counties across the state will save millions by not arresting, prosecuting and jailing MJ users. As for the myth that traffic fatalities will go up, this has been proved in other states that is only a myth. And why? Because legalization is NOT going to automatically create a bunch of new users who will be driving. I actually find this argument the most egregious, South Dakota has some of the most lax DUI laws in the nation. If we are soooooo concerned about intoxicated drivers in our state, maybe we need to make those laws tougher? I know people who have gotten between 3-7 DUI’s and never spent a day in state prison. Why is that? Because of the alcohol lobby in our state, which controls our state legislature. If the Chamber, and the State Medical Association is so concerned about this, maybe they should focus on making those laws stricter . . . oh, that’s right, they haven’t done a damn thing! Kettle, meet black.

By the end of next week, I think our country and state will be turned upside down by this election and I think it will be weeks before we learn who will win in a lot of these races. Remember, the Electoral College doesn’t need to ratify the votes until December 8th, so put your big kid pants on, cuz it’s going to get hairy over the next month.

Corona Virus Mayor TenHaken SF City Council Sioux Falls

Will the Sioux Falls City Council Proposed Mask Mandate put Mayor Stoneless in a Pickle?

l3wis 2Comments

As you may or may not know, Mayor TenHaken has to break ties on the council, and he may have to exercise one of his toughest next Tuesday or the following Tuesday. Next week is the first reading of the Sioux Falls mask mandate proposed by Councilors Mutt and Jeff, uh, I mean, Soehl and Kiley. If you count the votes on the council, it looks like they have a solid four votes that approve of the mandate in Starr, Brekke, Kiley and Soehl and probably a definitive NO in Councilor Erractickson and probably her ethically challenged lap dog Nutzert. Jensen and Selberg will be your swing votes on this. I could think either would cave to save the mayor from having to vote on this, if not both, but as of right now, it looks like he will have to break the tie. My prediction is he will vote against it, because he is so scared of the business community in town and Noem. What is ironic about this is, I actually agree with Soehl, if you want to see your businesses continue to stay open, especially during the busy holiday season, a mask mandate will help with this. You never know, the business community may finally give their blessing to this mandate after all.

Where I am on the fence is, is it is going to be very, very, very difficult to enforce this. Police officers will literally have to catch you in the act of NOT wearing a mask, I compare it to our useless fireworks within city limits ordinances. While I think putting the mandate on the books is good, I think the enforcement needs to be handled different. I actually think businesses should have the right to hire security and BAN people who won’t wear a mask. This of course brings us to the Constitutionality of mask mandates.

I believe it is well within the Constitutional rights of any private business or non-profit to mandate masks. It’s called FREE enterprise. I have often believed that private retailers and restaurants can limit who they do business with (as long as they are not discriminating because of protected class-obviously non-mask wearers doesn’t fall into those classes), and I think this is how the ordinance should be written, allowing them to require masks and if anyone refuses the violators can charged with trespassing instead of a mask violation. Where I think it violates constitutional rights is requiring masks in public, like in parks, on the sidewalk, etc. I think the city can limit mask use in Public buildings with a health exemption, but outside in public spaces, that’s a little tricky and doesn’t pass the civil rights smell test.

I also think with the way the Home Rule Charter is written, it will be hard to get someone to pay a citation, I think a trespassing violation would be a lot easier to collect on. I think if they do issue citations, they should be warnings only. This pandemic will soon pass, and chasing people down for mask fines or even trespassing after the virus is managed seems a bit of overkill and not worth the taxpayer expense, you know, kind of like destroying people’s records for smoking a joint.

There is going to be a lot of ‘bull’ thrown around over the next couple of weeks about this, and to be quite honest, I think we are too late on this, but I guess anything can help at this point. But we need to craft this carefully not to trample civil rights.

2nd Amendment Marijuana South Dakotans

Is Amendment ‘A’ a ‘Secret Plot’ to ban gun ownership in South Dakota?

l3wis 10Comments

If you thought the lies the radical right wingnuts were spreading about Pat Starr were outrageous, it gets even better. While they may not be lying about what the ATF says about marijuana drug use, I have to say this is a pretty big steeretcccch;

In the current version of form 4473, on the BATF website, Question 21e, it asks firearm purchasers “Are you an unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana or any depressant, stimulant, narcotic drug, or any other controlled substance? Warning: The use or possession of marijuana remains unlawful under Federal law regardless of whether it has been legalized or decriminalized for medicinal or recreational purposes in the state where you reside.”

First off folks, whether recreational Mary Jane becomes legal in our state or not, I’m sure it will have ZERO affect on gun owners who currently use or will use in the future. It would be like telling out-of-state hunters we won’t issue them licenses anymore if they are drinking while hunting or enjoying some ‘ladies of the night’ after the hunt. I can just hear Bob the Banker from West Virginia, “Do you think I come to South Dakota every year to hunt a dumb Chinese bird that tastes like crap!? I come to hunt alright, but it’s a different kind of tail.”

So while the law may be factual and true, I doubt many gun owners will be calling the ATF to let them know that they are now buying pot legally instead of off the black market.

This is the kind of ridiculous crap the extreme radical right opposition cooks up, and what makes it even more funny is they think it will deter people. The people who already think like you are already voting against Amendment A, guns or not.

But hey, as I told someone today, one more reason to vote for Amendment A; Gun Control. And I would rather see more pot plants and less guns in our state any day of the week.

Corona Virus SF City Council Sioux Falls

Is a Mask Mandate coming to Sioux Falls?

l3wis 21Comments

I got word today that a pair of City Councilors may be preparing a First Reading of a mask mandate for the November 3rd meeting. Of course, we would have to wait a full week before a 2nd Reading would occur.

A recent survey (I think by one of the public colleges) said that 58% of respondents approve of a mask mandate. I actually think it is a lot higher, because when I go out shopping I see well over 80% of people wearing masks.

The two councilors working on the mandate ordinance are NOT the dynamic duo of Starr and Brekke.

I am assuming the mandate will be very weak, in other words it will be a mandate, but the police will NOT enforce and no penalties will be handed out. It will be a mandate with no punishment.

I guess I will have to wait an see what it looks like. But I think even a strongly suggestive mandate is way past due. Like I said above, I think most people support a mandate, and it is just a small very loud group of libertarian wing nuts who think people are taking away their civil liberties. These people obviously have NO idea what civil rights are about. This is about slowing the spread and saving lives and has nothing to do with what party you are in.

« Previous Page — Next Page »

You Missed

Crime Downtown Sioux Falls Homeless Mayor TenHaken SF City Council SFPD Sioux Falls

It was only a matter of time

Denny Sanford Premier Center Mayor TenHaken Sioux Falls

The SF Storm gets the boot, Stampede is likely next

Trump

Liberal Tears

Downtown Sioux Falls Sioux Falls Sioux Falls Parks and Rec

What the heck are they building next to the Steel District?