South DaCola

Editorial Cartoonist from South Dakota

SF City Council Sioux Falls Video lottery

Video lottery & the hypocrisy of the Sioux Falls City Council

l3wis 4Comments

At the Sioux Falls city council meeting Tuesday night, there was another fight of sorts. It had to do with an attorney who represents several bar and casino owners in town who just can’t get over the fact they should have ONE employee per casino. In the rest of the state, where hillbillism is alive and well, towns are allowed to have an imaginary line in between licensed casinos, so basically they can have ONE employee run two casinos. The state only allows 10 machines per VL license. This is regulated by the state, and the state legislature has NO desire to increase that number, so munipalities like to bend the rules a bit and create weird boundaries between casinos, or should I say NO boundaries.

I think the state legislature should repeal video lottery. As we have seen in Sioux Falls, all they are, are magnets for trash, robberies and various other crimes. I laughed when the attorney who was representing the casinos said that they are ‘small business owners’. He said it like they were the corner grocery store in a small town just trying to get by. Most small businesses have a business model, you pay them for a service or product. Casinos simply take your money and you get nothing in return. I can almost guarantee the state takes in less taxes then are paid out for the problems caused by video lottery. But that is a discussion for another day. Item #15, which was a 1st reading passed for a 2nd reading hearing. It’s a reach around of sorts that would allow casino owners in Sioux Falls to have ONE employee for two casinos, like a lot of other towns in South Dakota. While it passed for a 2nd reading, I think Stehly and Starr made it clear they don’t support it and that it makes the casinos less safe.

But Item #15 isn’t where this ended. While a majority of the council seem to approve of this rule change, when it came to amending and adding to the legislative priorities list at the end of the meeting, they seemed to show their true colors of hypocrisy. Starr made a motion to add to the priorities list that basically state law should change so VL casino owners could have 25 machines per license. I literally laughed out loud, and laughed even harder when the council voted down his amendment, the exact same members who were for item #15.

And they wonder why I call them hypocrites?

SF City Council Sioux Falls

Turd Polishing Sioux Falls City Council

l3wis 12Comments

Just when you think the dysfunction with the council could not get much worse, they outdo themselves.

PARKING RAMP WILL BE GREAT SOMEDAY!

At the Budget meeting they had a presentation by Parking Director, Matt Nelson, who told the council that the bunker ramp will be great ‘someday’. Neitzert (who still thinks he did nothing wrong by voting for it) and Erickson agreed with Matt. I told them during public input that Nelson was polishing a turd.

I also told them I was frustrated that city staff was against starting some new programs. Police Chief Burns said that body cameras would basically cost to much and he would have to add staff. But hey, a $20-30 million dollar training center is ok. I told them that the cost would be worth it to protect officers and people who are arrested.

Planning Director Eckhoff also voiced concerns about starting a residential TIF program saying that remodeling houses doesn’t add much value. Oh, but million dollar condos have helped us out soooo much!

COUNCILOR SOEHL EMBARRASES HIMSELF

In a strange attempt to embarrass councilor Stehly with her SOS project resolution during the regular 7 PM meeting, without warning, Soehl guts her resolution by making the program voluntary. While I agree with a majority of the council we shouldn’t be using parking fines for charities, all the council had to do is just vote NO instead of gutting Stehly’s resolution (which they eventually did) once Starr challenged Soehl’s amendment for not properly noticing it. In Curt’s strange attempt to put Theresa in her place, he embarrassed himself by making a big deal out of a charity program. He looked like a class A, A-Hole.

AMENDMENTS TO THE LEGISLATIVE PRIORITIES HAVE NEVER BEEN CHALLENGED IN THE PAST

In an attempt to get back at Stehly and Starr for calling Soehl out on his little stunt, when they made amendments to the legislative priorities, they claimed they have not been properly noticed.

Huh?

The priorities have always been just ‘suggestions’ to the legislature. They are certainly not binding. If they made a 100 amendments it would not matter. Amendments have been made in the past. The city attorney, Kooistra really showed his lack of knowledge when it came to what should be noticed. Erickson actually came to the rescue by saying by deferring the priorities, the amendments now become proper notice. They deferred it for a week.

The crap coming out of Carnegie these days gets shinier by the day.

1st Amendment SFPD Sioux Falls

Misinformation being spread about Friday’s incident

l3wis 14Comments

I have watched the video of Mark Burgress being arrested several times, and there seems to be a lot of misinformation about what is actually in the video. We all know Mark was a cussing moron, that’s apparent. We also know that a judge could find him guilty of disorderly conduct (if police can actually prove he was interfering in their investigation), but some people, including Belfrage are trying to say there are other things happening in the video that are not.

For instance he said Mark was preventing the police investigation of the traffic accident. I didn’t see that. He was standing on a public sidewalk cussing, and they were actually about ready to leave the site before arresting him. Not once did I ever see Mark walk into the scene and try to physically interfere.

He also said they were questioning him, watch the video, they were trying to grab him even though they had no reason to. There is a difference between keeping a safe distance and questioning someone and trying to detain them. At no point did Mark ‘threaten’ the police with violence or with a weapon.

Belfrage also says that you should always follow police instructions. Not the case. While police have a right to ask bystanders questions, you have a right to NOT answer the question. Immediately after asking Mark a question they try to detain him before he can answer. Refusing to answer a question, as Mark did, is not a reason to arrest or detain someone. Mark actually asks them why they are trying to grab him, they have no response.

While we can certainly DEBATE the incident, let’s debate it on what actually happened in the video.

« Previous Page — Next Page »

You Missed

Uncategorized

UPDATE: Glad I could be of assistance

Art Sioux Falls

The City of Sioux Falls lacks transparency? Get out!

Mayor TenHaken SF City Council Sioux Falls Sioux Falls Parks and Rec

UPDATE: Mayor ‘Kick the Can’ does it again

Uncategorized

Why do some British people not like Donald Trump? By Nate White