I am Bruce Danielson, I live out in the west side of town. I’m not in part of any one of the neighborhoods that have any of these questions….
As members of four current Sioux Falls citizen petition efforts, we ask the following:
The city of Sioux Falls, as of the September 2013 voter purge, had approximately 50,000 active registered voters or voters who actively go to the polls since 2008.
We meet here today as a group of active citizens to file a petition on behalf of the 25,000+ petition signers who have decided to help guide the city into the future. Our petition signers asked us to help them with issues close to their hearts. These issues have been raised because we have a city administration and bureaucracy not responding to the citizen requests for a place in the decision process.
Our signers have felt excluded in all of these issues brought forward since 2012.
On Tuesday, at the February 4, 2014 City Council Informational meeting, we witnessed members of the administration admitting to exclusion of the public in their decision to push forward, on a swimming pool concept the petition signers have not placed on the April 2014 city ballot. Sioux Falls city Director Kearney let it be known he has ‘cleared’ his schedule to persuade, educate or lead the public in the administration’s pro-pool debate.
We saw this action when the snowgate petition gatherers were told by city employees and contractors how their superiors were interfering in their process. The citizens watched as city leaders worked data for the results they needed. The snowgaters only asked for a citizen debate on a benefit to be utilized by all.
The Shape Places debate and zoning issues had to fight the building, zoning and police departments plus the mayor’s office to get the petitions done in the 20 days set by law.
In the end, each of these efforts was successful in reaching the ballot. Now we are joining together in submitting a new petition. This petition drive will commence because we have found our city charter and state law do not stop government officials from interfering in the citizen’s right to openly debate the issues.
Now we present the citizens of Sioux Falls a question. Do you want the elective representatives and employees of the City of Sioux Falls to use tax dollars collected from them, to be used to interfere in our open citizen dialog?
Why shouldn’t the citizens of Sioux Falls, once an issue is placed for open consideration, have the public discussion and debate without government interference? This is what we ask for, the American way.
UPDATE: Bruce responds to the quote city attorney Fiddle-Faddle recited in the Argus today:
‘The cornerstone of democracy rests on the foundation of an educated electorate’: – Jefferson
In answer to City Attorney Pfeifle, we are not educated voting adults who can’t discern fact from fiction, or truth from lies?
We have government employees using the power of their positions trying to tell us what to think and then to do. A bureaucrat with an edifice building agenda gets to tell us the owners of the society what debate we are to have on any issue. Are to be led by the nose like livestock, to the slaughter also? We have asked for a real chance to be part of the decision process.
We ask only for true debate on these four issues and any others future generations bring to the forefront. We do not wish debates clouded by government employees using our tax money fighting our messages.
So yes, let’s have a spirited debate Mr. Pfeifle. You as a private citizen, not using the power and money of your office. We are just average Americans of Sioux Falls, SD who wish to form opinions based on the facts debated in open forums. Once the people put forth their petitions for public acceptance, debate and then legal votes recorded, the government is the impartial observer with no voice in the debate.
Referendums and initiatives are designed to be the people’s equilibrium to entrenched power. Fellow citizens of Sioux Falls have placed four issues before their neighbors and we now start a fifth. We would not have considered this latest effort had city officials not spent so much money, time and power to shut down our Constitutional right for a fair and open debate.
So quote our founding fathers to cloud the debates. For every cute, out of context quote, another could be added. Let’s have a real discussion.
Direct democracy is NOT the American way. Ancient Greece is the last time this was the way a government was structured.
If you all organize a little longer and get the council to consist exclusively of YOUR (yeah – right) candidates elected (Schwann Staggers, etc.) – will they abdicate their own official responsibilities and ask that EVERYTHING be put to a “vote of the people”?
Exactly rufusx.
The way I see this going if this petition becomes an ordinance is the way of how the Events Center debate was done by Build it Now. A well funded group of businessmen with a chip in the pot will just form a campaign. I can see it all now. Build It Indoors, Restore Shape Places, Build Walmart at 89th and Minnesota NOW, etc. And why can not this same group invite a city expert in to discuss the issues in a public forum. Not spending city money then.
I totally agree with the right to petition. And if some feel the pendulum has swung too far one way, so be it. But this petition appears to be an effort to stifle debate or at least a method for petitioners to overturn city decisions with no input from the potentially aggrieved party, the majority of the citizens who voted for the people running the city government.
I don’t see it as stifling debate at all. In fact, there will be plenty of debate between SON & WM and between the Outdoor pool people and the Indoorers. That is what this petition is about. Let citizen driven ballot initiatives be debated by citizens, not city employees and politicians using MY money.
Besides, the city shouldn’t be using MY money to debate anything, the debate isn’t between what city officials WANT and the citizens, it is between the citizens, let them fight it out, let them spend their own money, let them educate us on why we should vote for or against an issue.
If the city was truly ‘educating’ us, this petition would be moot.
• When the city was ‘educating’ us on the EC, did they ever present the CONS of building a new EC? Nope.
• When the city starting ‘educating’ us on an outdoor pool, why did they have to present and indoor pool? Not on the ballot.
• Planning department employee Jeff Schmidt was on the 100 Eyes show ‘educating’ us, and said “If Shape Places doesn’t get passed by the voters, it will take us back to 1983 zoning laws. False statement. The zoning laws get amended/updated every year by the council, probably hundreds of times since 1983.
This is the issue, city employees using OUR money are not educating us, they are presenting information to sway voters towards the result they want, and that is not a fair use of my taxdollars.
Did this group start up because of the Spellerberg pool issues?
Harry, it’s the Staggers/Stehly Tea Party ag’in caucus.
BTW, Dave Pfeifle is a good guy.
Actually, Bruce volunteered (I think) and collected signatures for all 4 initiatives. It has nothing to do with one peticuliar group.
I totally believe that Fiddle-Faddle is a great guy, but attorney? Not so much. His performance at the ‘Open Meetings Commission’ in regard to the termination of Debra Owens (I attended and sat 3 feet behind him) showed his true talents as an attorney and how far he will go to ‘stretch the truth’ for the city and administration. He looked like a fool, and the commission showed no mercy on him and his interpretation of the law, or should I say, an opinion of a previous State AG, which Fiddle-Faddle claimed was ‘case law’.
BTW, the city and Dave were reprimanded.
Rule by petition is rule by 5% of the voters. Screw the idea of representative democracy.
Ruf, keep pulling straws, just make sure to stir me a vodka tonic.
25,000 + signed the four petition. Not an election, a petition.
I know you are an engineer, so you can do the math.
13wis,
That’s 25,000 REGISTERED VOTERS who signed the four petitions…. a fact which attaches additional significance to the number.
I also was at all of the Open Meeting Commission meetings regarding Debra Owen’s termination. Your impressions of those meetings are accurate.
I attend many city meetings and understand most local issues in depth. The four petition drives originated from citizens who believed they are not being heard by the Mayor, his Administration and many on the City Council.
Have there been improvements made regarding transparency, yes, but there is still a long ways to go.
Just one recent example of this is the January 2014 Park Board meeting. I should not have had to notify the Mayor and the Park Board that they were in violation of South Dakota’s Open Meetings Law.
This is not an isolated incident. I have attended Park Board* meetings on a monthly basis for the past seven years. They are required to provide the public with one paper copy of all that is being covered on the agenda. This almost never happens. Out of fairness, they are not the only city board that does not follow open meetings law, the Board of Historic Preservation is also in violation. Just two examples, and I’m certain there are many more that others could cite….
*Remember, the Park Board advises the Mayor and Council about how to spend millions of tax dollars each year.
All of this feeds the public’s perception that there is a lack of transparency in our community’s local government, hence, there are two initiated measures and two referred measures on April’s ballot. And, an additional potential initiated measure for November 2014.
I am constantly surprised by comments on this blog and from fellow citizens expressing “fear of a public vote”. Isn’t it in fact wonderful as voters we have that option built into our State Constitution over 100 years ago.
To clarify the last paragraph of my previous comment:
Refers to the fact that the initiative process was built into our State Constitution, which I believe was adopted in either 1898 or 1899.
Yep – slightly more than 5% of registered voters. 4 petitions -mostly signed by the SAME 6,000 people. If you sign more than one petition – that does NOT make you two people.
Likewise, if you only sign one of them that does NOT mean you agree with all 4 of them.
FWIW DL – I am not an engineer – I am a social scientist. I know way more about statistics than most engineers.
We will see if it is 6,000 of the same people. I know they are creating a database of all 4 petitions just to see how many of the people signed 1, 2, 3 or all 4.
Thanks Rufusx for pointing out that 1 person could sign more then one petition. I was thinking the same thing. Plus just because a person signs a petition does not mean they support the petition as some people will sign any petition put in front of them (some just to get the person out of their face). Also some people are given false information when the petition is handed to them – as in the case of Spellerberg pool – and yes I heard things from people who signed the petition.
Our city leaders are listening to the people, but they can’t do what everyone wants. They can’t please everyone. They are looking out for the whole city.
“I was thinking the same thing. Plus just because a person signs a petition does not mean they support the petition as some people will sign any petition put in front of them”
Harry, I would agree. I have often signed petitions I don’t agree with, but felt voters should decide. People act like a citizen asking them to sign a petition is the end of the world, or ‘bugging’ them. Quite the opposite. We run ‘used’ to run the show, now it seems elected officials think it is there game. Dumb.
This country, our state, and the City of Lennox are organized as representative democracies. That means the people do not directly write laws or ordinances, or carry out their requirements – no. Representative democracy means elected and appointed officials represent – or are symbolic of – the people as a whole. Their job is to represent the will of the people. How do they do that? Well, that is task is accomplished mainly through votes of the elected or appointed officials. They vote on behalf of the people they were elected to represent. One thing they vote on is the creation of laws and ordinances. Those laws and ordinances in effect represent the formal documentation of “the will of the peopleâ€.
You can substitute the name of any city you like – I picked this out from a letter I wrote a while back.
I am disappointed. I came here read the trashing of Pat Lalley.
This town and state are a representative democracy. But as the post states clearly we have the Constitutional ability to redirect the government’s leaders efforts when they stray through the use of the Initiative and Referendum.
If you as an official of the town of Lennox, Tea or Pukwana are not happy with a policy direction the ‘leaders’ have taken, the SD constitution allows us the ability to right the ships of state….
And, rufusx, our South Dakota State Constitution provides a means for citizens who disagree with the decisions of elected officials to force a public vote, better known as the initiative and referendum processes. (see South Dakota State Constitution, Statute ON-3-1 and City of Sioux Falls, South Dakota, Code of Ordinances, Section 6.03)
I’m well aware that the state of SD constitution allows that. Doesn’t necessarily mean it is a good effective formpof government. ESPECIALLY when it gets to the point that there are dozens of initiatives/referenda taling place in a short time. And don’t come back with the “it’s the horrible government” -those folks were all ELECTED by the majority – far more than the 5% it takes to derail their agenda.
I am noit opposed to the initiative/referendum process – I do believe the % of voter signatures should be much higher – 15%? 20%? STILL not a majority -but 5% is RIDICULOUSLY LOW.
Apparently ruf has never worked on a real petition drive. Try getting 5% or 5,500 good signers then talk about how easy it is.
I have indeed worked on a number of petitions circulations. Most recently the move to raise the minimum wage in SD (required substantially more to 5,500 signatures – they were really easy to get.) and currently my own nominating petition to run for elected. Again – I’m 10 away from filing – have put about an hour into it. Getting the majority of actual votes from the entire electorate is quite a bit more difficult. Evidently testor’s never done that.
rufusx
“I have indeed worked on a number of petitions circulations. Most recently the move to raise the minimum wage in SD (required substantially more to 5,500 signatures – ”
It required more signatures because it is a statewide issue, not local, Big Difference!
rufusx
“currently my own nominating petition to run for elected. Again – I’m 10 away from filing – ”
What are you running for?
Wow ruf, you are running again? you need the 50 to 100 signatures to do it? Good for you!
You probably did collect a few signatures for the Dems efforts for minimum wage improvement. Once again, good for you. Did you organized the extensive Dem effort or just carry a couple of petitions? There is a big difference. It took the Dems and their allies 6 months to get it done.
You constantly prove you listen to right wing media. The meme passed around every time the people rise up to question anything on their media outlets is the same. If the people get in the way and question authority, they must be put down. If they use the Initiative or Referendum, they are interfering and must be stopped by all means. If the people keep placing these things on the ballot, it must be too easy. We better tighten it up. We must keep the people in line! Thanks ruf for letting everyone know where you stand!
In the elegant words from the AL you are telling us, Butt Out!!
testor – I got 260 signatures. I never listen to right wing media. I am not opposed to the initiative/referendum process itself. I am opposed to the idea of the clique that has developed in in Sioux Falls that seems to want to refer EVERYTHING, simply because they know they can – and they are doing it more or less as a hobby/semi-professionally.
Oh, I know, you’ll prefer to call it “community activism”, but really – it’s just a pissing contest with the city council/officials – and you’ve learned you don’t have to have that much of a stream to dominate the trough.
“Sioux Falls that seems to want to refer EVERYTHING, simply because they know they can – and they are doing it more or less as a hobby/semi-professionally. ”
First off, Stehly has never received a penny for her work, and has spent hundreds of dollars of her own money and hundreds of hours of her free time. They votes were not there on the council to get Snowgates passed, it had to go to a citizen vote.
As for your comment about a ‘Pissing match’ I think when the city decides to ignore an entire neighborhood for a large company that gives little back to the community except collecting sales taxes for the city, it seems the CITY is the one starting the pissing match, SON tried to avoid a petition drive and went through the process as best as they could, they had to no choice but to do these two drives. The only one pissing into the wind on this one is the mayor and his goons. The petitioners are practicing their rights afforded to them in a democracy, hardly a pissing match.