Janet Brekke

Sioux Falls City Council folds like a wet paper bag

At the meeting tonight the council decided that after councilor Brekke shot holes in their pay raise proposal and offered an amendment to reduce the pay raise by $30K (Proposal was $195K reduced to $165K and it is currently $130K) they voted for her amendment.

They did it, because I would assume they got an earful from constituents over the past week about how ridiculous the original proposal was. Even people I talked to over the past week that have no clue about what happens at city hall scoffed at a 30% pay increase and the fact that the mayor accosted me in the lobby of Carnegie Hall about it. Someone asked me, “What’s his deal?” I responded, “You would have to ask his chiropractor, or his pastor, I think they are one in the same.”

They passed this amendment to save face in hopes that citizens will vote for the lesser increase and they might, it certainly is more palatable.

I still reject it because little to no research was done on the original proposal and the whole thing needs to be thrown out. It was pretty freaking obvious the original proposal reflected a $1 per resident, which is something a 3rd grader would have concocted, or former Councilor Rex Rolfing.*

I’m glad it was reduced, but it was only reduced so it has a better chance of passing. I have already talked to some people with a strategy on how we will inform the public to vote this down. The council needs to go back to the drawing board.

In other news I have heard a couple things through the grapevine;

• There may be a group working on initiative to throw out Home Rule Charter in Sioux Falls. I am absolutely NOT involved, but I would be willing to support them in anyway.

• There is also talk that two more mayoral candidates may emerge. I am told both are male and Republican. I may know one of them, but uncertain who the other candidate is. I know there is a lot of frustration with Paul’s cruise control government in the business sector.

*In the past during a working session in which the council was discussing swimming pool fees, Rolfing pulled a number literally from his his behind, in which Erpenbach chewed him out about how he came up with it. She basically told him the numbers have to be based on study and research not what happens between his ass cheeks (she really didn’t say that, but she was pretty PO’d).

MJ Advocate Reistroffer proves the incompetence of the City of Sioux Falls Attorney Stacy Kooistra

So Emmett dropped this bomb on the city council last night;

Emmett Reistroffer, a consultant for medical cannabis businesses, believes the current interpretation of the new application process by the city attorney’s office could lead to out-of-state interests exploiting a loophole that could have a business entity or individual submit multiple applications and then squeeze out local business people.


Reistroffer told the City Council during public comment that to ensure a level playing field, they should limit the applications to one per location.

Emmett told me last week he had been in a back and forth with the city attorney’s office about this for weeks with no avail. This is why he showed up during public input last night to inform the council about the issues.

When the MED MJ ordinances were being debated, Councilor Brekke also questioned the City Attorney if the lottery system was even legal. Remember, Janet was the first full-time city attorney, she doesn’t take this lightly.

I have known for a very long time that our city attorney who is trained in military law, knows next to nothing about city law and also struggles with 1st Amendment Constitutional law. Usually if he doesn’t know the answer, he doesn’t answer the question which is happening a lot these days.

Sioux Falls City Councilor Brekke calls out public input 1st Amendment concerns

To my surprise, but something I have been concerned about, at the beginning of the city council meeting tonight, Brekke put on the record her objection to a section of how public input is conducted.

Remember when the city council moved public input to the back of the meeting recently (a 4-5 vote with tie-breaker from person of the year Mayor TenHaken) they specifically said that members of the public could not talk about decisions that were made final by the council during the meeting.

This is a clear violation of citizens 1st Amendment rights, as Brekke pointed out in her objection it concerns prior restraint;

Definition

In First Amendment law, prior restraint is government action that prohibits speech or other expression before the speech happens.

Overview 

Prior restraint typically happens in a few ways. It may be a statute or regulation that requires a speaker to acquire a permit or license before speaking. Prior restraint can also be a judicial injunction that prohibits certain speech. There is a third way–discussed below–in which the government outright prohibits a certain type of speech. Courts typically disfavor prior restraint and often find it to be unconstitutional.

Basically Brekke points out that since decisions were already made during the meeting, voted on and final, the public has a right to address them and the government (city council or mayor) cannot limit them.

Even though Brekke’s opinion is NOT alone (there are many Supreme Court rulings about this) City Attorney Kooistra vehemently opposed her and basically told her she was wrong. It surprised me, actually astonished me how little the city attorney knows about 1st Amendment rights. From the mayor’s performance during the objection, it is clear he has no clue what 1st Amendment rights are, that has been blatantly obvious for a long time, but for an attorney with a law degree that has practiced in the military and in the private sector I would think he would be aware where the Supreme Court stands on this issue.

If Mr. Kooistra really wants to try out his Constitutional chops on this one, I would love to watch him get pummeled by a free speech attorney when someone from the public challenges this when the chair tries to shut them down for this ludicrous and unconstitutional rule violation. He may just get his day in the spotlight. Well, Mr. Kooistra, you know what Andy Warhol once said, “In the future, everyone will be world-famous for 15 minutes.” Good luck.

Sioux Falls City Council violates meeting procedures than tries to claim Brekke is violating ordinance

As I have mentioned before, the procedures this city council goes by in the meetings because of it’s poor leadership of the chair (TenHaken) the clerk (Greco) and the city attorney (Koistra) gets sloppier by the day. I’m starting to think they should just have these meetings in Paul’s backyard by the fire pit, what’s the difference?

Brekke and Starr made several attempts to separate out Fiddle-Faddle’s appointment to the REMSA board from the other appointees so they could vote on it separately, they actually pleaded to do so, but the mayor thought he knew what he was doing, which he didn’t, as usual. So they forced them to vote NO on all appointees. Brekke actually told them that she would be absent from voting because of it, and Nutzert, of all people and Eratticson chimed in that Janet would be violating ordinance even though they just violated many procedures. Kettle meet Black, especially Greg. Janet walked out on the vote anyway, Starr voted NO.

Before the fiasco, Brekke pointed out the conflicts Fiddle could have sitting on the both the REMSA board and the Public Assurance Alliance, and they were all fair hypotheticals. Of course the entire council (including Starr and Brekke) talked about David’s high ideals. That is where I disagree with all of them, that guy doesn’t have a lick of integrity, he proved that by trying to cover up the supposed EC siding settlement.

Sioux Falls City Councilor Brekke proposes ethics training

What was interesting about Janet’s proposal was that not a single city councilor had a comment about her proposal, which means they will kill it if it gets before them, because not only do they hate transparency, they hate ethical behavior even more. Janet pointed out that there used to be ethics training for city employees, the BOE and the elected officials, but that ended when they fired City Clerk Debra Owen. I know, shocker. Janet’s proposal is below;