South DaCola

Editorial Cartoonist from South Dakota

1st Amendment

1st Amendment Public Works SF City Council Sioux Falls

Try not to wear gold watches when pleading your case

l3wis 13Comments

Last night during the public input time at the council meeting Vitaliy Strizheus who owns an unfinished house the city is scheduled to demolish on Monday came to plead his case to the council and public. I have avoided posting about this because 1) I really don’t care about the lifestyles of the rich and famous of Sioux Falls and 2) I do not know the details of the case including accusations that the city is discriminating based on race and what Constitutional property rights he may have. The city has a track record on this after ignoring their own building codes and allowing an oversized mansion to be built in McKennan Park.

Hopefully a Federal judge will block the demolition so we can get a clearer understanding of what is going on. But taking 10 years to complete a home is unacceptable and there should be consequences. Not sure charging taxpayers $85K to demolish and all the litigation expenses is really beneficial to the defendant or the public. I think this could have been solved in a different manner. Why can’t the city just take the home and sell it on auction?

But what I found most intriguing is while this guy is begging the city to spare his home he dawns a gold watch. He should have taken a queue from this guy at last week’s public input complaining about the uselessness of the pothole hotline. Maybe Carhartt Kent had a gold watch under his coveralls but I am guessing NOT.

1st Amendment Lincoln County

1st Amendment case threatened towards Lincoln County Commission

l3wis 4Comments

Trust me, anytime I hear the name Shawn Tornow I usually want to crawl up in a corner and suck my thumb, but he might actually be onto something here;

Lincoln County’s public comment policy doesn’t just apply to specific issues that are discussed in executive session, but broad topics covered by executive session.

Tornow says that regular citizens wouldn’t even know they are running afoul of Lincoln County’s policy.

For example, members of the public might not know about anticipated litigation. They wouldn’t know about topics that were discussed in executive session, because they don’t have access to those meetings. Nor would they know about any other matters that are confidential by law.

In his 3-21 notice, Tornow says the policy is a violation of the First Amendment.

The 3-21 notice alleges that Commission Chairwoman Tiffani Landeen unlawfully cut off Montgomery during a commission meeting on Dec. 6.

“Your actions in this regard were unreasonable, unnecessary and, as my client firmly believes, actionable since her right to free speech and free expression at such a public meeting was unlawfully squelched,” the 3-21 notice says. “Consequently, this correspondence and resulting action became necessary in order to take action to right the wrong.”

I have been warning the city council that cutting off individuals because you are unhappy with the content of their presentation is a 1st Amendment violation. As Tornow points out above the public isn’t aware what the elected officials know due to the privacy of an executive session and elected officials don’t know what private citizens know or what they will say in public. I get it, decorum and threats of violence are serious things and should be handled (even though last night at the city council meeting a public commenter said SH!T three times during his input without being interrupted by the chair. Maybe since he was talking about it running downhill it was pertinent to the input about sewers? I chalk it up to no one actually listening to the gentleman).

At least Tornow and his client are affording the LCC the opportunity to remedy the situation without it going to court.

This is NOT rocket science folks. Instead of focusing on what people CANNOT say during public comment periods and making up rules as they go along, maybe we should focus on what they can say which is just about anything they want to, including feces running down hill.

The SCOTUS ruled on this in 2018 and several times before that. The ruling stands until it is challenged and overturned.

1st Amendment Open Government SF City Council

Local Governments across the nation are limiting public input due to MAGgots

l3wis 8Comments

This story in WaPo addresses something I have been seeing across the nation;

Across a polarized nation, governing bodies are restricting — and sometimes even halting — public comment to counter what elected officials describe as an unprecedented level of invective, misinformation and disorderfrom citizens when theystep to the microphone. As contentious social issues roil once-sleepy town council and school board gatherings, some officials say allowing people to have their say is poisoning meetings and thwarting the ability to get business done.

This tired old excuse comes up all the time especially at our local board meetings. I have told commenters as along as you are addressing the body as a whole and are NOT threatening physical harm, you can speak about whatever you want to;

In Rochester, City Council President Brooke Carlson said one of her primary concerns is making sure meetings remain welcoming to people of all viewpoints and identities. The council’s once-monthly limit on commenting has helped, she said, though it did not please regular speakers.

“You are supposed to be servants of the people,” one, Othelmo da Silva, told the board, according to a video of the meeting. “You should be here to listen to us for as long as you need to, because we are technically your bosses.”

That is a view shared by Barry Sanders, a city council member in Taunton, Mass. Last fall, the council briefly suspended public input after a speaker chastised a council member by name over a dispute that began on social media, violating a requirement that comments be “respectful, courteous and not personal in nature.” Sanders opposed the suspension.

“That’s what the First Amendment speaks to: the right of the public to have their grievances heard. Not the right of the public to say nice things about their elected officials,” Sanders said.

I am not opposed to complementing elected officials but the public comment portion of the meeting should be for bringing up concerns in our community. If you want to say something nice send them an email, text or card (you know that thing you used to put in an envelope with a stamp).

There are people in this community and those who sit on the dais that believe our community is so well run and safe they are surprised that someone would dare to show up to the meetings and question what they are doing. Just off the top of my head I can give you several issues these bodies need to tackle, including homelessness, affordable housing, wages, violent crime, public transit, food deserts, and the utter lack of open and transparent government.

There seems to be a fear if the public knows to much, they are dangerous, and now they are treating the City Council the same way by only giving them a few days to approve a 100% cost overrun. There is a reason governments ramrod projects and it isn’t because they are champions of transparent government, they are likely hiding the devil in the details.

If you truly want people to stop coming to public input, instead of banning it, make our city, county and school governments more transparent. It’s hard to bitch about something that is right in front of your face.

1st Amendment Augustana religion Sioux Falls

UPDATE: Augustana closes interfaith room for food storage

l3wis 9Comments

UPDATE: I figured once Herseth-Sandlin got wind of this all things would go back to normal;

Augustana spokeswoman Jill Wilson confirmed the meeting was canceled, that the students will get their room back and that Sandlin intends to call such a meeting to meet with students on the interfaith space in the future.

The interfaith leaders also suggested Augustana send its senior executives for training in religious and cultural sensitivity, and said the university should have handled the sacred items with due respect.

The students should be applauded for doing the right thing and contacting the media about the situation. Shedding light on injustice can open many doors.

——————–

Augustana can do what they want to. They are a private college. But in light of the recent crying over drag shows at SDSU and long hair at O’Gorman you kind of wonder what the true motivation is behind closing the room;

After contacting several administrators, we were told that the Interfaith Room was removed to give Sodexo, our dining service, more room. 

The Interfaith Room in the Commons has served as a place to discuss and learn about a variety of religious traditions, as well as to provide all students with a sacred place to pray and worship, regardless of their religious background. Christians, Muslims, Jews, Buddhists, Hindus, Baha’is, Sikhs, Agnostics, and Atheists have visited the space and contributed their perspectives and experiences to the campus community. It is a crucial part of the faith infrastructure on campus, one that cannot be replaced.

In my early 20’s I was a volunteer DJ at Augie’s radio station, KAUR. I remember how the University handled that closure, after a few protests they moved forward.

I am not sure of the outcome of this situation, but I find it a bit alarming that a private university that should embrace all faiths in essence are turning their backs on students of different faith.

And it isn’t about money. Augie has spent millions on their sports programs (something that has very little to do with religion or faith) and if they have this kind of money, I’m sure they can find another room to accomodate the students.

I think the closure of the room without any notice are grounds for non-Christian students to file an internal discrimination complaint. It would be different if the students were fighting to implement a new room, but to take away something this important without notice to the student body is troubling.

1st Amendment Mayor TenHaken Open Government Open Meetings Planning Commission

Sioux Falls Mayor TenHaken’s Administration oblivious to transparency

l3wis 11Comments

The one thing PTH has NOT kept secret; his total disregard for open and transparent government.

You would think after the failures of the bunker ramp due to the lack of financial transparency they would have learned something. Nope;

The city won’t say if or how many developers have expressed interest in buying or leasing the unfinished downtown parking ramp on 10th Street.

“Ultimately, this is how we set up the process,” said Dustin Powers, community development coordinator for the city.

Dustin, just who is this ‘WE’ you speak of? It certainly wasn’t the public that requested this process, or the legislative body, the city council. Maybe it was the mayor’s COS, who is a former executive for one of the largest developers in the city and state. Her former employer has ‘mysteriously’ received millions in tax breaks, land deals, TIFs, etc. since she was appointed. Are they on the short list? We will never know.

It’ll be a lot of behind-the-scenes work until the city chooses a potential buyer/lessee and makes that information public.

Yup. And once again we have learned nothing about the benefits of open government.

« Previous Page — Next Page »

You Missed

Downtown Sioux Falls Sioux Falls Sioux Falls Parks and Rec

Did the City of Sioux Falls get permission from the CORPS of Engineers?

Downtown Sioux Falls Music Sioux Falls

I Really Get Into It: The Underage Architects of Sioux Falls Punk & the Black Crowes

6th street Bunker Bridge Bunker Ramp Downtown Sioux Falls food tax Homeless Mayor TenHaken SF City Council Sioux Falls

Is the TenHaken Administration one of the most fiscally irresponsible & corrupt in Sioux Falls history?

Ballot Initiatives Curt Soehl food tax SF City Council Sioux Falls

Councilor Curt Soehl gets Curt with Finance Director