Dean ‘No Goats’ Karsky is at it again, suggesting that the public waits until the very end of a council meeting before airing their concerns. (FF: 19:00) His reasoning? He doesn’t think city directors (who we pay with our taxdollars) should have to wait thru public input, because it would make things ‘smoother’. He also thinks people should have to sign their name if they are giving public testimony. Why? If they state their name before their rant, good enough for me. Why do some city councilors think the public’s opinion is unimportant and bothersome? Who elected you? Oh that’s right, Dean just had to kiss a few councilor’s asses to get elected.

Most people who come to give public testimony are doing it on their own time. City directors and other contractors doing business with the city are compensated very well by us to attend these meetings. The (volunteer) public should be able to air their concerns at the beginning of the meetings. Any attempt by the city council to change this will come with great resistance. GREAT RESISTANCE!

Use your brains for once and leave it as is. It is not broken and does not need to be fixed.

UPDATE: This is the document outlining the different public input variances. As you can see, all of the SD towns listed have them at the beginning of the meeting. And heck, the county doesn’t even have a time limit; public input spreadsheet

20 Thoughts on “SF City Council still looking at moving public input until end of meetings

  1. This won’t happen and I’m going to personally see that it doesn’t. The MOST public input at an average meeting takes less than 20 minutes.

  2. Shrimp Taco on January 31, 2012 at 12:50 pm said:

    A better application of Karsky’s logic – why don’t they move “City Council Open Discussion” to the end of the 4pm meetings? Then we don’t have to listen to him and the other councilors pontificate while the public is made to sit and wait for the presentations on the agenda. He’s paid to sit there, we’re not.

  3. Councilor Karsky’s comments yesterday told me that he is not very “politically astute”. Dissuading public opinion in the middle of a campaign for the Northwest seat doesn’t seem like a very smart move! I hope that his constituents are listening to him………because he really doesn’t want to hear from you!!!!!

    I was at the meeting. I got the impression that he was trying to impress his “boss”, Evan Nolte, head of the Sioux Falls Chamber of Commerce (who BTW was also in the room)!!!!!!

    To anyone who plans on giving “PUBLIC INPUT” on the issue of public input beware of that spreadsheet that City Clerk Sue Roust presented yesterday……….I can guarantee you that there will be Councilors who will use it to try to stop public input altogether or to alter the way in which input is currently given.

    And, BTW, that spreadsheet is now a public document……….

    It was not available to the public (on paper) at the meeting yesterday and it is not available on SIRE.

    WHY!!??

  4. CR, I understand your concern and have sent an email to Sue requesting clarification on whether or not that document will be made public. I think your question is valid but did you send her a note before you asked that question? Just asking…not trying to start a fight with you. We’re on the same side (most of the time)

  5. I added the doc, thanks for sending that to me Andy.

    I also heard today that Quen Be De Knudson is considering running against Kermit. I can’t wait to bring up all of her complaining and TV watching during the meetings.

  6. Andy Traub on January 31, 2012 at 3:03 pm said:

    I disagree that it isn’t broken. Two things are broken. The public really has become disrepectful towards the Council and the Mayor. Second, the Mayor has reacted to those who speak by either avoiding eye contact (that’s what he does to me) or adding comments to theirs (what he does to Tim). It has gone from an open forum where constructive ideas can be expressed to a name calling forum where personal grievances are aired.

    I do NOT think the answer is moving the commenting to the end of the meeting. I would expect the council to ask citizens to be more respectful when they comment and the Council/Mayor to also be respectful. Things have deteriorated. This might fix the problem people but it won’t be good for the public at large.

  7. It has deteriorated because of Mike, not because of the public.

  8. Alice15 on January 31, 2012 at 3:35 pm said:

    I – on the other hand – think it is who of the city directors to listen to public input. For gosh sakes Karsky, tax payer dollars – ie my money – pays their salary. Don’t you think city directors should have a pulse on the public? You really don’t get it. This isn’t about your time, city director’s time (who all make 6 figures) or any other volunteer board or committee with the city that seems agendas should be cut shorter because of “their” time. If you don’t want to put in the time for the people you serve – don’t run for office, don’t put your application in for city boards and committees, and don’t accept an appointment by the Mayor. If I take the time out my day to come address the city (of which I am not paid for), please make it about “my” time and not yours.

  9. They wouldn’t know the 1st Amendment if it hit them over the head like a sledgehammer.

  10. LOL! Listen to the beginning of the CRC meeting today, when Gregerson says, “Are we live?” BAHAHAHAHA. If you listen to the entire meeting, he goes on to breathe into the phone and make all kinds of grunty sounds. Here’s the deal, I am cool with teleconferencing, but unless you are speaking, shut off the frickin’ microphone!

    http://docs.siouxfalls.org/sirepub/mtgviewer.aspx?meetid=1656&doctype=AGENDA

  11. And I will defend him, I am sure this wasn’t his fault, the clerks could have controlled his microphone.

  12. rufusx on January 31, 2012 at 8:54 pm said:

    These folks think public input is a problem? I do note that some situes don’t allow public input. Seems strange to me. When I lived in LA in the 90’s, I used to watch the city council meetings on public access TV. They had the same policy that the City of Sioux Falls currently does. It doesn’t seem to be a problem – but it is often comical.

  13. A citizen schooled the mayor today about citizens 1st Amendment rights. Not sure if they got thru to him, but this line, I hope he heard. “Many Americans have died to secure our freedom of speech . . .”

  14. Where did that happen?

  15. I can’t go into detail, but it did happen.

  16. Speaking of the Mayor………..

    I attended the neighborhood meeting for West Sioux last night. The room was packed…..they had to open up another room for the overflow. The anxiety level was so high you could have cut it with a knife.

    I had no idea what those folks are already putting up with….parking in the neighborhood, speeding through the neighborhood to get from Western to Kiwanis, litter, “Pheasant’s fireworks”, Crow Fest………

    Many of them expressed concerns about this only being magnified by the new EC………

    And, of course, the Mayor and his Team told them that they don’t currently have a lot of the answers, BUT they wanted to reassure them that “everything will be OK and most likely even better for their neighborhood.”

    They didn’t appear to be buying it!!!

    After the meeting, a young man engaged the Mayor in a very passionate conversation about his concerns, and I suggested to the Mayor that this probably was symbolic of how high the emotions are going run about the issues that the West Sioux folks are going to encounter with the new EC………….

    He basically went off on me for expressing my opinion!!

    I think that the best thing that they could do for themselves now is to form a neighborhood association (like Pettigrew, Whittier and All Saints) so that they can speak with “one voice” to resolve the many issues that they are going to encounter.

    Remember, this is one of the oldest neighborhoods in Sioux Falls filled with lower income seniors who have lived there for decades and young families looking for starter homes.

  17. I agree, they need to get organized.

  18. Andy Traub on February 1, 2012 at 8:55 pm said:

    They need $300,000. Then they can make stuff up and people will believe it. It works for getting elected and building events centers.

  19. Andy – I hear you on that one. A lot of these groups should have had their poop in a group before the election, too late now, we have to eat this giant turd sandwhich now voted in by the South siders that never have to experience the headaches involved with this project.

  20. Pingback: Is the city slowly chipping away at Owen’s hard work? (H/T – Crafty Ruckus) — South DaCola

Post Navigation