January 2024

Is the Sioux Falls School District trying to hide something besides the Title Nine litigation?

Recently the ACLU of SD presented an informative guest column on 1st Amendment rights;

Freedom of speech, the press, association, assembly, and petition: This set of guarantees, protected by the First Amendment, comprises what we refer to as freedom of expression. It is the foundation of a vibrant democracy, and without it, other fundamental rights would wither away.

That 1st paragraph pretty much sums it up. Notice the mention of ‘the press’. This is important.

The rumor going around is that a local journalist prepared a story about the Sioux Falls School District and the school district became unglued and threatened the entire news organization if they ran the story.

So guess what? No story.

Just like the Title Nine lawsuit, a total shutdown of communications with the public.

What makes this even more distressing is the news organization* allegedly caving after being threatened. The 4th Estate should not cower to these folks, especially local governmonkeys. In fact, I would say it is their duty to cover important public policy stories regardless of the topic or policy.

I have suspected for a very long time certain local government leaders in this community control the media and get stories killed and we might finally have the pudding.

It’s one thing to have closed government with all four branches in Sioux Falls, it’s entirely another thing for our local news to pull a story because they were threatened, and what does this say about the peeps running the school district? Do they have a bullying policy when it comes to the media?

What do you think Bob Woodward would have done in this situation?

Recently a local government public servant (who does not serve on the school board) asked me who forms policy for the school district? The Board or the Administration? I told him I could not answer that question, but my speculation is the administration handles it, shoves it down the board’s throats and if they dissent the Super threatens to quit her around $400K a year job.

Don’t let the FREE cheese sandwich hit your behind on the way out the door.

*I am aware of the name of the alleged news organization, the reporter, and the ‘story’. But unless they choose to run it there is not much I can share. It also has nothing to do with the Title Nine litigation. Ironically, I was told today, as I have been snooping around for more sources, there are multiple stories the District is actively trying to squash.

South Dakota Legislature moves to expand private school funding

Though multiple studies have been done to show that funding private schools with public funds doesn’t really improve student achievement or helping poor kids get a private education. In fact, most who use the program already can afford to send their children to private school and private schools have a choice of what their student body looks like (they don’t have to accept students with mental, learning or physical disabilities).

Further more, this is public tax money that could be collected for public education, and since we are almost dead last in teacher pay, it would help with that.

As for going ‘full voucher’ in South Dakota I have argued that since I have NO kids and pay property taxes, I should either get a tax rebate or a voucher for higher education. Seems like a logical argument. Well, my idea is just as ludicrous as vouchers. We all pay into the system because a good public education system lifts all boats (and creates less Trump voters). It is an investment in the future workforce that will be supporting us when we are drawing our entitlements.

What goes around comes around.

Here are some great segments about the farce of the voucher program. No surprise our ignorant legislature would vote for this.

UPDATE: Will a ‘Vision’ on Riverline District be soon?

UPDATE: My worst fears came true. It seems they will be proposing to build a new convention center at the Riverline District and demolishing or repurposing the old convention center. Not sure this is the bold vision I was looking for.

I got word today that the administration has been meeting with councilors privately to discuss the Riverline District. I have no idea what that final vision is or what is being discussed. The mayor has said an announcement will be soon.

I have speculated they will propose a rec center or similar multi-use facility at the location eliminating any chance of an indoor facility at Frank Olson or Keuhn Park. I may be completely off kilter on my prediction, but I think after the miserable roll out of the proposal initially they are looking for something that the citizens can embrace.

The Riverline District, no matter what it is, is just a scheme for a developer to bilk taxpayers for another project we don’t need.

The bigger issue I have is the private meetings with councilors. This is the game the mayor’s office has played for several years and it is tiresome.