Publisher Randell Beck continues to peddle lies about a good man

by

Looks like the publisher of the Argus Leader fell off again

With only one day left of Dr. Staggers eight year term as city councilor, the publisher of the Argus Leader can’t resist to punch Kermit in the gut one last time. This of course is no surprise. The AL, there editorial board, and Beck were successful in misleading the public about Dr. Staggers and even though they have pretty much ended his political career, they cannot resist to rub it in;

The 42 percent of voters supporting Kermit Staggers generally rallied around ideas such as limited government and lower taxes, spiced by opposition to public financing of civic amenities such as an events center and the aforementioned distrust of business.

While I agree 100% with Kermit on limited government and lower taxes (not sure who would want higher taxes?) saying that Kermit is against financing ‘civic amenities’ is a flat out lie. Kermit wanted to increase spending on roads and infrastructure, he wanted to install snowgates to plow our streets better, he wanted to continue to fund our parks, he thinks the city should fix what they own, the sidewalks and tree trimming. These are all ‘civic amenities’ that we all use. Indoor pools, hockey rinks and events centers are used by a very small portion of our community. What makes more sense? Spending the taxpayer’s dime on things that benefit us all or on stuff that only benefit a few special interest groups? I don’t understand this culture of handouts you constantly are cheerleading for?

Toss in the shameful whispering campaign that suggested Huether was plotting some sort of “gay agenda” – whatever that is – and the result was a loose-knit coalition whose influence could well rise in future elections as voter turnout declines.

So now you think Pastor DooHickey has influence in our city elections? LMAO! I agree we were a genuine ‘grassroots’ coalition (something you call loose-knit) but Dr. Staggers didn’t pay any of us a dime, we did it because we believed in him. He didn’t have to pay some big wheel strategist to convince people to vote for him like his empty suit opponent had to. As for voter turnout being low, didn’t YOUR MAN MIKE win the election? If Kermit would have won, it would have proven your theory to be true, but he didn’t. I also find it ironic that more people voted then subscribe to your newspaper. How did all of these people find their way to the polls without the great guidance of the all knowing, 100-eyes, Argus Leader?

“What’s that Lassie? You mean there is other sources of media in Sioux Falls besides the Argus? Please lead me to them?”

While Staggers worked hard to convince voters he was more than just Dr. No, it was hard to identify his ideas for change beyond gutting pesky zoning regulations, cutting support for nonprofits and eliminating the city subsidy for the Washington Pavilion.

Lie, Lie, and another Lie. Your own newspaper ran several stories about how big of a mess code enforcement has become in Sioux Falls. After running an image of the flow-chart of code enforcement in your paper many people commented to me that they thought it was a satirical image. It was not. The reason Kermit has fought so hard to ‘gutt’ zoning regulations is because they are a FUCKING MESS, and if you cannot see that you need to open one of your 100-eyes. And when did Kermit suggest he was going to get rid of the Pavilion’s subsidy? Were you even listening to your own interview of Kermit? He said he wanted to work with the Pavilion to make them more profitable and possibly ‘some day’ eliminate the subsidy. As for non-profits, Kermit has worked hard to give tax breaks and other incentives to private non-profits. Recently he offered an amendment to extend those incentives to the St. Francis House and the Union Gospel Mission, but the rest of the ‘progressive’ council turned him down.

Huether made it out of the general election thanks to savvy campaign management, a base of loyal followers and a year of hard work,

While I agree entirely and predicted Huether and Staggers in the runoff 5 months ago because of those very reasons it doesn’t hurt to mention he spent three times more then Kermit, and the consulting fee numbers have yet to come in. Kermit’s are already in; $0.

but ultimately won the runoff thanks to a widespread fear that a vote for Staggers meant turning the Pavilion into a parking lot

While I am sure Beck is using his own special brand of sarcasm that earned him a lawsuit from Dan Scott and Bill Janklow, it is still a disservice to continue to spread this bullshit about Kermit. Besides I can think of a better place for a downtown parking lot; The SE corner of 10th and Minnesota.

and building an events center the size and cost of a Quonset hut.

Mike’s plan and Kermit’s plan were almost identical (because Mike stole all of his good ideas from Kermit and repackaged them) except for one big difference, Mike wants to raise taxes to build and subsidize the EC, Kermit does not. Do you even know what a Quonset is?

That dread found special traction among business people, arts advocates and people who’ve moved to Sioux Falls from bigger cities.

It got traction because of columns like this that have relentlessly spread lies and misinformation about Kermit over the years. Mike never once answered a straight question with a straight answer. I followed this election for almost a year, I spoke with both candidates and gave both of them advice, I know the issues, but if you locked me in a room for an hour and asked me a series of questions on what Mike would do for our city, I wouldn’t have a clue on how to answer them. I have no idea what he will do, and that scares the shit out me. You plundered Kermit’s campaign because he did something that no other politician running for office does, HE TOLD THE TRUTH about the problems facing our city. And really? How can we move forward in Sioux Falls if someone is constantly telling us we need to fix the problems we face in our community? The first step to renewal is first admitting you have a problem, Kermit was willing to do that.

Beck, you have a problem, consider this your intervention.

Posted in: Mike Huether, Sioux Falls, Sioux Falls Mayor Race, Staggers

Voters were not confused about the Events Center proposal, that’s why they are opposed to it.

by

Looks like someone needs to be beat to death, again, and again, and again.

The Sioux Falls Events Center Task Force members just can’t stop beating the dead horse;

If an events center is built in Sioux Falls, it should be because citizens support it through a city election.

While we believe elections are the right way to decide such critical issues, elections also can bring misinformation. As leaders of the Events Center Task Force, we knew the timing of the recent city election would be challenging for our project.

So you are blaming the mayoral candidates for the misinformation?  BAHAHAHA! The two candidates who made it into the runoff opposed the plan, and rightfully so, the public understands it very clearly and that is why they are opposed to it. While neither Staggers or Huether have a clear plan of their own (even though Mike says he is gonna tell us about it any day now 🙂 They were clear about one thing; the TF’s plan sucks, big time.

Wrong location. Wrong Funding. Wrong Size. Well, you get the picture.

I know they don’t want all of their work to be in vain, but really guys, it is time to swallow your pride, or at least a stiff drink and admit defeat.

Posted in: Event Center, Sioux Falls

So just how much did Huether pay for consulting from Hildebrand Strategies?

by

Nobody will know until June 17, one month after Mike is sworn into office.

Mysteriously, consulting fees have been left out of his previous financial reports, which is no surprise. It is common practice for candidates to pay consultants fees and bonuses after the election results come in, mainly because you pay for results. If I had to guess, I would bet it will be around $50,000. This of course would put Mike well over spending three times more then Kermit. Ironically he didn’t buy a Pro-Mike vote but an Anti-Staggers vote. While Mike (Hildebrand) did a fine job of showing the negative aspects of Kermit, I just feel Mike really didn’t sell the public as to why he would be so great for the community.

While I wish him the best of luck, I also know it will be a tough road for Mike. I can hear the voters already who supported him, “Okay, we knocked out Dr. No for you, what are yah gonna do for us?”

Posted in: Mike Huether

Final thoughts on the Mayoral Election

by

(Screenshot from the final Argus Leader debate)

No matter what I said in the past about both candidates, make no mistake, both have worked very hard to get where they are today. I commend their enthusiasm and passion when it comes to Sioux Falls. While letter writers to the paper will tell you their candidate loves the city more then the other candidate, I would disagree. I think both of them love this city equally and really want to serve you.

THE CANDIDATES

Mike Huether literally came out of nowhere. I think his second place in the general election was no mistake. I predicted all along it would be these two guys in the end. After polling behind Vernon Brown he knew he had to turn up the heat and he did. He organized his base, the Democrats and got his message out. No matter how you feel about that, it really doesn’t matter, it worked and it may very well get him a victory tomorrow. Remember, while Obama lost in Lincoln county, he got the majority of the vote in Minnehaha county, this fairs well for Huether. But there are some factors to look at. Obama’s poll numbers are not the best right now and I am sure there is some disenfranchised voters who voted for him that wouldn’t vote for him today. I voted for Obama, but he was never my ‘first choice’. It was more like an ‘anti-Palin’ vote to me and I sometimes wonder if voting for Mike will be an ‘anti-Staggers’ vote for many? Hiring Hildebrand to run his campaign was a smart move. But what I can’t figure out is why it took so long for the media to say something about it? I knew about it months ago and was confirmed to me by Huether himself. I often wonder if people would have known about it before the general election if that would have changed the election results? While Mike has been very successful in this campaign, and the money he has spent (more then double of what Staggers has spent), his hardcore campaigning, his hiring of an expert campaign strategist and his ‘outsider’ label has helped him greatly. If he wins, it won’t surprise me one bit.

But don’t count Kermit out. While Mike has spent more money then Kermit, Kermit has campaigned just as hard, if not harder, in fact he has been campaigning for this job for years. It was unfortunate that partisanship was brought into the race, and I am truly disappointed in both candidates for doing it. It actually pains me to defend it on Kermit’s side, but hey, you have to fight fire with fire. I truly believe Kermit wanted to keep it out of the race, and I truly believe Mike did to. Mike was up against the wall, and it was a last ditch effort on his part to knock out Vernon. While voters will tell you that they hate partisanship and negative campaigning, it seems to be working for both campaigns. I know that both campaigns have not only energized their hardcore supporters but have also energized their base over the past two weeks (Dems and Repubs) I just hope this hasn’t disenfranchised the indies, the ones who will ultimately decide this race.

People on both sides of the debate have good and bad arguments for defending the practice. On the positive side, I don’t think there is anything wrong with bringing different social philisophical arguments into the debate. While I despise talking about abortion and gay rights in a mayoral race, let’s face it the next mayor’s job is to set policy. Sometimes that policy has nothing to do with Events Centers and Roads, sometimes it has to do with massive social issues like education, the homeless, job equality, etc. Do I personally agree with Huether taking money from the Unions. No. Do I personally agree with Kermit bringing up abortion? No. But they are both equally as guilty, just as much as I am guilty of stirring the pot on some of these issues.

Up until a week before the general election, Mike was my ‘second choice’ I told him that repeatdedly in emails and to his face and I will have to agree these are the two best candidates, and we should consider ourselves very, very, lucky to have these choices.

But why? I can clarify really quickly why I think Peterson, Costello and Brown lost. Peterson was unknown to the average voter, but don’t blame the average voter or the media. Peterson did very little campaigning. This was apparent to me when one of his supporters asked me to sign his petition to run. Gathering your own signatures is the best way to campaign and get a feel of the voters. Peterson failed big time in campaigning. Costello lost because of his ties to special interests. His lack of experience didn’t help much either. As for Brown, I will say this, his lack of funds really hurt him in the end, he also got to sure of himself after the poll came out. Mike outspent him and out organized him. I like Vernon and actually agree with him on many social issues facing our city, like the homeless. In a lot of ways Vernon and Mike agree on many issues, like spending money on quality of life projects like there is no tomorrow. The difference is Vernon has a voting record on the matter and Mike can dodge the question when he needs to. I think a lot of voters disagree with Vernon’s stance on projects like the Zoo. When our streets are falling apart, why are we buying new monkey crappers for the zoo? It just doesn’t make sense.

THE POSITIVES AND THE NEGATIVES OF BOTH CANDIDATES

While I have pounded Mike over the past few weeks on a whole host of issues (and to be honest with you, I didn’t think I was going to be able to dig up much dirt on him, boy was I wrong) There is some things I like about Mike. In the face of the public, he is very passionate, this is important. I also agree with him wanting to make investments within the city (though I think Kermit’s investment ideas are better). I also agree with him that the Events Center task force’s plan was flawed. In fact I sat next to him in one of the final meetings and we whispered back and forth discussing what was being presented, it was clear to me then, that Mike wasn’t buying the plan. I also agree that we must be fiscally responsible even though he repackaged that idea from Kermit, and the fact that a liberal Democrat talking about fiscal responsibility is an oxymoron, I think Mike knows that not only must he support the idea, I think he must implement it as mayor. It is pretty clear that Mike knows people are really pissed off about the economic shape of our city, and while Munson and other city officials pretend there is nothing wrong, the public knows better.

So why my opposition to Mike? It comes down to some basic things that have nothing to do with him being a Democrat, being partisan or taking union money. He has no government record. Zilch. All we have with Mike is promises. I was really unclear of how much Mike knew about government and particularly city government up until last week. Heck, there was a part of me that thought he might know more then he puts on. Hardly. Last week during the Argus Leader debate it became clear that Mike knew little about regulation (his solution was to hire more compliance officers) and very little about city budgets (one of the journalists asking the questions actually corrected him when Mike seemed confused about the Parks budget). While Mike touts his business experience, lets be clear, he worked in the marketing department at First Premier Bankcard, not the finance department. Do I want someone who can market our city well? Sure, but they must first understand how our city operates before they can sell it.

I will start out with Kermit’s negatives first. A majority of Kermit’s years on the city council have been very productive, but sometimes he barks up the wrong tree. While I appreciate him for not being a rubberstamper, there is just some things that need to be rubberstamped. I also think that Kermit sometimes is TOO conservative on financial issues, he sometimes pinched pennies instead of pinching dollar bills. For instance his stance on the new clubhouse for Prairie Green golf course. While I could give two-shits about a new clubhouse for a bunch of golfers, the facts are clear; the city courses make money for the city, let them build a new clubhouse. The new homeless shelter will save the city money in law enforcement, let’s build it. Kermit also is a great debater, which I love about him, but sometimes he just needs to admit when he is beat and turn the other cheek.

But why do I think Kermit’s positives outweigh his negatives? Because there is a multitude of them. Besides Kermit’s 21 years of public service experience, his intellect and knowledge of government, law and taxation is unmatched by anyone in the city. You don’t get to be a professor of political science for 28 years by being a dummy. But even better then that, Kermit has many progressive ideas to move the city forward, and they focus around the citizenry, something he has a proven track record in while serving on the city council for 8 years. The voters have agree with him when he has opposed some major policy changes. Like fee and tax increases, supposed quality of life projects, ordinance changes, etc. I could go on and on. Kermit has always sided with you, the citizen and not the special interests. This is commendable, and I think he will continue this policy as mayor. Kermit knows a city can only be great if it centers it’s greatness around superior customer service for it’s citizens, this means less taxes and fees, deregulation and more DIRECT services to the citizenry (like tree trimming, fixing sidewalks and roads and snowgates). These are REAL quality of life projects that help make all of our lives better.

But the one thing I like the most about Kermit is his honesty. You may not always agree with him, but you will always know he is telling the truth. This is a comforting trait in a politician.

I will take both candidates to task for their partisanship though. I really wish that Kermit would not have gone down that road, but I guess we will find out if it pays off tomorrow to fight fire with fire.

CONCLUSION

I want to end by saying I wish them both the best of luck, win or lose, and I hope no matter who wins (sorry I have no predictions this time) that I stand by what I have always said when I am knee deep in the political bullshit, I’m not a hater, If I end up hating a politician it just takes the fun out of what I do here. Am I cynical, sarcastic and foul sometimes? Sure, but the truth isn’t always pretty. This has been one of my biggest disappointments in the race, the editorializing of the candidates (both of them) by the local media and their constant blabbering about an Events Center and Quality-of-Life projects. We get it, you have an agenda, now let’s talk about the REAL issues.

I have had many great conversations with BOTH candidates over the past months leading up to this and have given BOTH of them tons of advice (yes to Mike to). I have enjoyed being in the middle of the debate and if I had to do it over again, I wouldn’t do it any differently, it has been a blast, and truly entertaining and life changing for me. NOW GET OUT AND VOTE!

Now I can finally get back to painting.

Posted in: Kermit Staggers, Mike Huether, Sioux Falls, Sioux Falls Mayor Race

Stormland TV News editorialized government travel story, with the help of sore loser, Darrin Smith

by

Meet Don ‘Hearst‘ Jorgensen

The propaganda wing of city hall, and now apparently Mike Huether’s campaign, Stormland TV news attempts to make Kermit look like a spendaholic because he spent $2,375 a year attending conferences that the city requested him to attend because none of the other members on the council wanted to go;

Sioux Falls mayoral candidate Kermit Staggers has been accused of saying no to a lot of different things as a member of the city council, but he surely doesn’t say no to travel.

According to these public records, Staggers has spent more of your tax dollars on travel than any other city council member.

Kermit Staggers, who wants to be mayor of Sioux Falls for the next four years, has been campaigning on responsible spending. But when it comes to traveling on taxpayer dollars, Staggers admits he spends.

Yeah, Don, why don’t you just say that you are voting for Mike Huether in your opening statements? After a few calls to the station by city clerk Debra Owen and a Staggers supporter, the 10 PM news changed there tune and admitted that Kermit attended these conferences AFTER they requested him to. But there is a lot of other information missing. First off, the council is allocated $16,000 every year for these travels, it is a POOL of money, there is no limit what one councilor can spend, Kermit chose to represent the city more at these conferences, which is a good thing, because the rest of them didn’t have any interest. Secondly, I heard when ‘Jorgie’ was investigating this story (that was handed to him on a silver platter from the Huether campaign) he was told by a city representative that this is common practice and about the pool of money but he ignored those facts and ‘Jorgie’ couldn’t resist to do a hit-job on Kermit.

So who handed this info to ‘Jorgie’? No other then, sore loser, Darrin Smith. You remember Darrin Smith? Don’t you? He was the last Democrat to fail in the mayoral election (I think he got 4th place, even Sweet Vernon the Velvet Hammer beat him). He was such a sore loser, he quit the council, and we got Bob Litz appointed. I can’t believe that the Huether campaign would use someone like this, a loser AND a quitter. Double whammie. But that is normal with Dems, when the going gets tough, they bail. When the Feds deemed First Premier Bankcards fee-harvesting schemes illegal, what did Mike do? He bailed. If Mike finds the job of mayor too hard, what will he do? Bail?

Lastly, I find it ironic that ‘Jorgie’ would get such a problem with Kermit’s travel expenses when the city has spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on consulting fees, and travel expenses for the several task forces we have adopted for a new events center who have failed to deliver us a solution.

Posted in: Event Center, Kermit Staggers, Mike Huether, Sioux Falls, Sioux Falls Mayor Race