Theresa sent this out this afternoon to the mayor and media after the tragic incident at Falls Park;

Dear Mayor Huether and Director Kearney,

I am writing to voice my concerns about the tragedy at the Falls.  Citizens have also been expressing their concerns with adequate safety while preserving the beauty and access to the falls.

I am urging your support  of increased signage and a temporary barrier  during the spring season due to the  dangerous foam and slippery terrain at the site of the three tragic deaths. I will support appropriating funds to make these safeguards a reality, along with any effort to clean out the foam in the area.

A temporary Spring fence could be done in a way to enhance the beauty, while adding extra protection to visitors.

Our prayers go out to the family of visitors who lost their beloved daughter. Let us work as a community to ensure that this does not happen again.

Thank you for your consideration,

Theresa Stehly

I’m against permanent fencing, I think when they put up the chainlink fence around the Japanese Gardens at Covell Lake it ruined it.

I do agree though there should be a much bigger and prominent signage that is permanent, and maybe temporary fencing in the Spring when water levels are high around the dangerous areas. They have put in temporary fencing in the past after heavy rains. It’s not a matter of funding, the city has spent hundreds of thousands of dollars decorating Falls Park during the holiday season, we have the resources to put up temporary fencing. Another thing that could also be added to the larger warning signs is the potential hazards with just touching the water which has high levels of chemicals and E-Coli in it (the mayor has refused to put up the recommended signage in the past). If the rushing water doesn’t scare you, the possible health affects should.

It would be hard to clean up the naturally occurring foam.

But I also believe people must take some personal responsibility, and no amount of signage or fences can fix ignorance. If something looks dangerous, it probably is.

Theresa obviously knows the deadline is Friday, so she will need at least a couple of days to get signatures to turn in by Friday at 5 PM. So if she does decide to run, we will know by Wednesday for sure.

I know she has been mulling this over for a couple of months and we have had several ‘difficult’ discussions about the possibility.

She told me today, “I have had several citizens approach me asking me to run.”

Obviously if Stehly runs she is probably a shoe-in for the run-off. She would also probably be knocking out the chances of other candidates like Anderson and Loetscher.

I guess we will see what she decides.

What do you think? Can Stehly break the 50+1 threshold in a run-off?

Theresa sent a fantastic letter to the editor to the Argus;

This is a letter to my dear Republican friends who are serving in the South Dakota legislature:

Please leave the initiated measure process alone. Having led two successful petition drives in Sioux Falls, I can tell you first hand that it is a huge undertaking for a grass roots campaign. It is working just fine the way it is. It is a valuable tool that the citizens can use to inject their voices into the process. It also serves as a “checks and balance” mechanism against bad legislation. To think that just because we are elected, that we make the best decisions at all times is arrogant, elitist and an abuse of power. This multifaceted effort to stifle citizen involvement and strengthen the agenda of the “power machine” in Pierre is an assault on the good people of this state.

The energy coming out of Pierre this year is very concerning to me and to many of the good citizens of South Dakota. Please leave the initiated petitioning process alone.