Sioux Falls

Mayor TenHaken releases identical statement about terminated officers within a month of each other

This was the statement he released on January 6, 2022;

Upon learning of Officer Larson’s actions, he did not work another shift for the Sioux Falls Police Department and is no longer a member of our Police department. The City of Sioux Falls immediately referred this case to be reviewed for criminal charges by the State Division of Criminal Investigation (DCI) as an independent agency. In order to protect the integrity of the ongoing criminal proceedings and the rights of all involved, no further details will be provided at this time. – Mayor Paul TenHaken

This was the statement he released today after an officer was arrested for Federal child pornography charges;

Upon learning of the allegations surrounding Officer Schauer’s arrest, he did not work another shift for the Sioux Falls Police Department and is no longer a member of our Police department. In order to protect the integrity of the ongoing criminal proceedings and the rights of all involved, no further details will be provided at this time. – Mayor Paul TenHaken

I don’t want to get into either case, I try to have a little faith in our justice system and both officers deserve their day in court. That is a discussion for another day.

But what I find strange is it seems Poops, his police department and his communications team decided to recycle the EXACT SAME STATEMENT.

Cruise Control government at it’s finest. I wonder if they also used Grammarly?

. . . and people make fun of my writing skills.

Besides the two cases being completely different on many levels (one officer wasn’t arrested until months later after the incident and no one knows when he was terminated), the other officer was arrested only about 4 days after being suspected of committing a crime.

This incredible lack of leadership is shown by how he handled to respond to two different situations with police officers in an identical manner.

I’m sure when he heard about this (probably yesterday) his first response was, “I didn’t sign up for this.”

It seems our new Police Chief has his work cut out for him. Makes you wonder why the last chief retired so suddenly to help run a food bank?

UPDATE: Is it time for the Sioux Falls City Council meetings to allow Public Input remotely?

UPDATE: I was told that the inputer was just there to complain about the healthcare institutions in general and NOT Covid. I guess she has contacted the council in the past about her struggles. I will say though that you can talk about anything at public input, especially things happening in our city and she was NOT out of line talking to the Mayor and Council about her issue.

Since the Covid scare started, our city leaders and some employees have had the comfort of being able to work remotely. In fact, I don’t think I can find a single council meeting since then that ALL 8 councilors were sitting on the dais at the same time. There has always been at least one absent or on the phone during the meetings.

I actually support this and it goes back to when my good friend and city councilor Kermit Staggers fell ill and they were giving him a hard time about showing up to meetings. In fact they were down right nasty about it.

Kettle meet black.

But I also believe what is good for the goose is good for the gander. I believe that citizens should be allowed to testify on any agenda item or for general public input remotely and shouldn’t have to give a reason why.

Trust me, there would have to be an ordinance written to allow this so it is handled with decorum;

• You would call in advance of what you would be speaking about, state your name to operator, the town of your residence and be told if there is any violation of decorum the chair reserves the right to hang up on you. You would also have to repeat this when you are taken off hold and allowed to speak.

• After your allocated time is done the phone would automatically hang up.

• Since there is a time delay, while you are on hold the meeting would stream in real time and you would be que’d up by the operator.

There are numerous reasons why people may prefer to testify remotely; mobility issues, snowbird, sick, disabilities, public speaking fears, etc.

It really doesn’t matter, if the council can do this whenever convenient for them, the public should be able to also. The state legislature allows it during committee hearings, I also think several other local boards allow it like the SF Parks Board.

PAUL ADMITS AGAIN TONIGHT HE DIDN’T SIGN UP FOR THIS

During public input tonight a nice lady approached the podium during general public input to talk about some issues at the local healthcare industrial complexes. I think she was getting to talking about the hospitals being understaffed due to Covid but was cut off at 3 minutes. After Paul cut her off he told her to take her issue up with them. She asked if the city government was concerned.

No. They are not.

Paul told us he didn’t sign up for this and that’s why the private healthcare providers again today had a press conference that did not include local leaders. Paul can’t be bothered with a pesky virus, he is busy handing out $1 rentals.

Failures of the RR Redevelopment negotiations rear their head again

And here we go, throwing more Federal money at the project and it’s an EMERGENCY even though the trains have tooting their horns through SF for over 100 years!

While I don’t oppose creating quiet zones throughout the city (even though we know this is probably for DTSF exclusively) it is pretty obvious we have to do this because we failed to remove the RR tracks from downtown during the negotiations. While it will make DTSF safer with the crossbars, the only noise it eliminates is the sirens from the trains, you will continue to hear them barrel down the track and cause traffic interruptions.

I have NO DOUBT the Feds will probably reimburse the state, but you have to admit since we didn’t successfully remove the tracks from this area to begin with, we are just playing a game of whack a mole and this is the latest.

So far the developer in this area has received millions in improvements to the River Greenway, a significant discount on the land, multiple TIFs (to build condos) and now another $5 million to create quiet zones next to those condos.

Here’s a concept DON’T BUILD CONDOS AND APARTMENTS NEXT TO A RAILROAD TRACK, or better yet work with our Washington delegates to get the tracks torn out. Nope, let’s just keep throwing tax dollars at small bandaids that doesn’t fix the bigger problem TRAINS RUMBLING THROUGH DOWNTOWN FOR NO DAMN GOOD REASON!

Who Appointed the Sioux Falls 2035 Downtown Committee Members?

I will give you the short answer, Mayor Paul TenHaken (Item #25).

The City Council will vote on a resolution approving the committee and its members. I asked a city councilor if the council was asked by mayor’s office for input. They said they were not asked but not sure about the other council members. I think it is unfair to the council not to have input on at least half of the picks (there are 16 members).

While you go through the list you will notice people on it that have something to do with downtown businesses and organizations. Two of the members even previously worked at DTSF. But two of the members have incredible conflicts of interest with the mayor, Kevin Tupy (Cresten Capital Holdings) and Natalie Eisenberg (CEO of Click Rain).

Natalie’s conflict is obvious since she now runs the company that Paul founded, but Kevin’s is a little more tricky.

Kevin with one of his investment partners, Matt Paulson, threw tons of money at Alex Jensen’s campaign, so he is politically connected to the city using his wealth for influence. He has also been buying up property downtown like a madman so he financially connected to how DTSF is shaped. Ironically Paulson’s director of StartUP Sioux Falls, Brienne Maner, also is an appointee to the committee.

Don’t get me wrong, there are many people on the board who have some financial interest in DTSF, and there is nothing wrong with that. The problem is Tupy’s connections politically and financially that make this appear unethical.

What often frustrates me about Paul’s appointments is he doesn’t really extend out from his inner circle, his youth council showed that, where NO O’Gorman students sit on the council and most are kids of friends of his.

I would hope the council asks why they were not asked to participate and about the conflicts.