#HOWDUMBCANYOUBE
l3wis 
State Legislature
Legislator Youngberg is either playing dumb, or maybe he is just this stupid
Just another clown in the Pierre circus
I can’t believe nobody showed up to this obscure meeting, at a obscure time in an obscure location;
Sen. Jordan Youngberg, chair of the task force, chalked the scant testimony up to a dwindling desire to explore the subject.
“You had a lot of people that were angry and upset to the point that I got a threat they were going to burn my house down over the repeal of this,” the Madison Republican said of the responses to legislative efforts to strike IM-22 in January. “Where is that passion now to come and talk this through and move forward as a state?”
So you give little notice for a meeting, on a Tuesday afternoon, at 5 PM in some obscure room on the far NW part of town and wonder why no one is there? You are kidding right? First off, 5 PM is a horrible time for a meeting. It should have been at least after 6 PM or on a Saturday. Secondly, Tuesday night is a busy government city meeting night with informationals, committee meetings and a council meeting. With school just starting, this is also another reason why busy parents could not attend. And the location? Some room in the center of the University Center campus? It should have been held at the DT library or Carnegie (on a different night). Of course Mr. Youngberg still seems to be baffled by the attendance;
South Dakotans and others also criticized Youngberg for holding the meeting at 5 p.m. and for not doing more to advertise the event.
A press release advertising the meeting was released to local media on September 5 and was shared on the state Legislature’s website. Youngberg after the meeting said he wasn’t sure what more he could’ve done to promote the meeting.
For starters, remove your head from your ass. How do these clowns get elected? They have no clue about citizen customer service OR transparency. I have a suspicion this was done on purpose, just like most things organized by the SD GOP, CONFUSE, LIE & DENY.
A new wind (smell) may be blowing over South Dakota in 2018
There are many stories circulating about the initiatives and referendums ‘circulating’ the state, but one seems to be standing out. I am hearing that ‘recreational’ marijuana is doing very well.
I have also personally opined that if rec gets on the ballot, it will pass. I wouldn’t even be surprised if it gets as high as 56% of the vote.
Besides the fact that people who smoke or have no problem with people who smoke voting for the initiative, there are many who don’t want to go through a prescription process to get the pain relief they need from a natural occurring drug. So who else would vote for rec use? Educators would get a dedicated 40% in revenue from the sale of the product. That could easily infuse over $20 million in the first year. There is also all the savings in law enforcement and incarceration, which should make police and state’s attorneys across our state very happy.
The only argument recently gaining steam against legal rec is ‘drug’ driving. Guess what, drinking and driving will still kill more people each year than any other kind of drug use. That and whether or not you are legally smoking and purchasing marijuana or not, just like drinking and driving, making it a legal product doesn’t change whether people will drive while using it.
Of course our last hurdle will be if our state legislature and AG will let this legally be put on the ballot, and if it passes, let it become state law. Like IM 22, if they override this, it would quite possibly be one of the stupidest things they have ever done (I know, where do we begin on that list).
Unlike Marsy’s Law and IM 22, the legislature, the citizens, the business community, and law enforcement best get ready, legal rec marijuana could be a stark reality next Fall in SD, instead of meddling with it or f’ing up this opportunity, let’s embrace it.
I guess anyone is better than Don Haggar
The governor appoints ANOTHER legislator. I don’t know how many that is in his two terms as governor, but It has to be in the high teens. Democracy at work folks.
The governor appointed Doug Barthel, former SF police chief to District 10 seat left empty by another Republican quitter Don Haggar.
I get pretty leary of former law enforcement in the state legislature. Remember the stellar term of Gene Abdallah? Yeah, that was wonderful, NOT.
I was pretty surprised to hear he was a Republican since most public servants that are not elected are independents, unless he changed his registration after he retired.
Doug had a pretty good term as Police Chief until his final years where he peddled the Mayor’s denial of a rising crime wave before the last mayoral election. He also wasn’t very honest about what happened at Tuthill Park and the ‘supposed’ shooting. A case that was dropped when he walked out the door. He also was pretty lax with the policy of police officers eating at the hospitals for free.
Doug is a nice guy and all, I just wish he would have stayed in retirement from public service.
County Commission
Elections
Michelle Erpenbach
Rex Rolfing
SF City Council
SF School District
Sioux Falls
State Legislature
Sioux Falls City Councilors Rolfing & Erpenbach may be proposing election changes
Yeah, worked for me, but I still want to ruin it for everyone else.
The rumors I am hearing from my Carnegie Hall moles is that this set of councilors want to change the 34% threshold to be elected to a council seat in a general election to a 51% threshold like the mayor. Not sure where this is even coming from, considering myself, or even other councilors, or the media have never thought there was a problem with the current threshold. In fact, maybe the better thing to change is to have the mayoral percentage match the council’s.
Before I get into the multiple arguments against this, let’s face it, this was cooked up by the mayor to make it harder for grassroots candidates like Stehly, Starr and Nietzert to run for office. Let’s say you win in the general but only get 40% of the vote and 2nd place has deeper pockets than you, guess who will probably win? This is clearly an elitist move, the public is certainly not that naive to think otherwise.
But let’s throw a little common sense behind this;
• A runoff election in NON-mayoral election years could cost taxpayers an extra $80K.
• It is already difficult enough to get people out to vote during a general muni election, think about getting them to come back 2-3 weeks later for a run-off.
• The state legislature, school board and the county commission all go by top vote getters.
• Ironically the two that are proposing this change are out the door this Spring and benefitted from the current set of rules. Rolfing won his first term in 2010 with 45.34% of the vote and Erpenbach won her first term in 2010 with 48.96% of the vote. If you look at other races since the 2000 municipal election, you will see that 7 other councilors won by receiving less than 51% of the vote. (DOC: runoffs)
Like I said, this is a ploy to keep the working class grass roots candidates down and the elitists with deep pockets or donors with deep pockets on the rubberstamp council.
Hopefully Rolfing and Erpenbach will have a change of heart and pull this ridiculous measure from future agendas, or they can face the music.