Elected officials should avoid social media. I used to tell this to Theresa all the time. I will defend Leah on one point; She is an elected official and if she wants to play on TurdBook all day, that is her deal, and they ain’t much you can do about it. Mayor Munson used to say, “Mayor is 24/7, 365 day a year job.” In other words, as an elected official you are always on duty.
This one isn’t that controversial, but the list changes quite often as you can see;
UPDATE: David told me this week he did a video interview with a local videographer and after it is edited, produced and posted to YouTube I will share.
I got word yesterday that all charges against David were dropped before the hearing.
Ever since this happened I have had several conversations with David about the incident. Initially, as I understand it there was three charges against David, two were dropped pretty quickly but the 3rd charge didn’t get dropped until this week.
I told David after he gets the all clear to send me a guest post about his side of the story.
One of the reasons I never posted about this when it happened is because I know David, and didn’t think he did it, but felt it must go thru the court system before I comment on it.
I think the media owes David a massive apology jumping to judgement. Domestic disputes occur several times a day in this community, why isn’t the media reporting on that? Oh because David is ‘weird’. Funny how the media will report a candidate for mayor alledgedly involved in a domestic assault situation but won’t say anything about Marshall Selberg ILLEGALLY living out of his district for a year. I guess the David thing is a bigger story.
Once again, our Food Truck media in Sioux Falls can’t see the story in the forrest.
While I think MOST of the council is against this, it will be interesting to hear the council discuss this item (#79) the italics are the changes;
30.015 ADDRESSING THE COUNCIL; TIME LIMIT.
(a) Public input shall be allowed for any item on the regular agenda. Each person addressing the city council shall step up to the microphone in front of the rail, shall give his or her name in an audible tone of voice for the record, and unless further time is granted by the presiding officer, shall be limited to three minutes on any ordinance receiving a first reading; and on the date of final adoption by the city council, five minutes shall be allowed. If the regular agenda item is quasi-judicial as defined by state law or a zoning ordinance, the private applicant shall be invited first to provide public input and allowed an additional three minutes for rebuttal following public input. Rebuttal by the applicant shall only be allowed to respond to earlier testimony provided during public input. The city council has the right to overrule the presiding officer’s use of discretion pursuant to Robert’s Rules of Order Newly Revised (latest edition).
I am against this because there is also a process in place with Robert’s Rules that allows the chair of the meeting to call up an applicant or ANY inputer to the podium for additional testimony. I not even opposed to that applicant physically raising their hand to talk more so they can be recognized by the chair. But giving more time to the proponents is unfair to the process. Leave it as is. If you need more information, call them up. This is NOT broken.
I guess ONE applicant complained. We don’t need to be changing public input because one whiny person complained. I know who it WAS, and they WERE NOT a developer just a business owner trying to destroy a residential neighborhood around his office.
They did a good segment on all the corruption going on at city hall. Stehly said that the city directors and developers are running the city. Duh. I wonder how their annual HIGH TEA meeting went this year.
l3wis