The Sioux Falls Board of Ethics contrived an excuse last month to tell city council members that they shouldn’t collect signatures on municipal initiative petitions. The board ruled that the city council oversees the city clerk, and the city clerk oversees petitions, so that creates a conflict of interest.
Really.
Board member and former Minnehaha County auditor Sue Roust saw the hole in that logic right away:
All elected officials seeking re-election to a municipal office have to circulate petitions to get their names on the ballot, she said.
“I don’t see any difference there, and they have to do that,” Roust said. “Why is the subject matter of the petition leading it to having the appearance of impropriety” [Joe Sneve, “Ethics Board: City Councilors Can’t Gather Signatures in Petition Drive,” that Sioux Falls paper, 2019.08.16].
It looks like Sioux Falls city government has the same problem as South Dakota state government, doing everything it can to suppress the people’s ability to participate in government through petitions while imposing no similar restrictions on the politicians petitioning for office.
To underscore that, review the host list for far-too-early Sioux Falls city council candidate Alex Jensen:
City council member Christine Erickson is helping host an expensive fundraiser for Jensen to replace a sitting council member. She’s using the title of her elected office to promote Jensen’s bid.
An elected official can throw the weight of her official title behind an effort to collect big money for a candidate, but a council member cannot collect signatures from citizens to make their voice heard in a public vote? The Sioux Falls Board of Ethics needs to revisit its priorities.
I agree with the Sioux Falls Board of Ethics. Elected officials have their own legislative and executive duties that may conflict with an initiative generally or particularly. More importantly, the initiative and referendum are reserved powers of “the people,” as distinct from the power of officeholders. The entire purpose of the initiative and referendum is to serve as a check on legislative and executive mismanagement, overreach, and corruption, not to provide another avenue for those maleficent activities.
Officeholders need to stay in their lane, and not try to usurp the powers provided to the people. Fundraising is a regrettable activity, but it is part of the corrupt election system. That’s exactly why we need the initiative and referendum to stay the hell away from THOSE PEOPLE.
When you take a look at this “Hosts” list, you have to remind yourself this is a fundraiser for a nonpartisan race and not a Republican candidacy.
And you have to also remind yourself, that with Councilor Erickson’s name attached to this list, these fundraising Republicans – including the candidate – are attaching themselves to the politics of a bunker ramp; a boondoggle reality in Sioux Falls involving a $20 million parking ramp “to no where,” that Erickson approved of and apparently candidate Jensen and the other Republicans on this list adhere to.
Mr. Ehrisman of South Dacola meant to place this comment under this post:
Now Donald, you raise a point that the Board of Ethics appears not to have addressed, the proper separation of powers between elected officials and the people. I wondered about exactly that sort of conflict when Speaker Mickelson petitioned to put IM 24 and IM 25 on the ballot.
JKC, the Republcians recognize that making all elections partisan is the final act of their effort to exterminate the Democratic Party. Local government is the last bastion in South Dakota of sensible, pragmatic Democrats who prove every day that good government is good for everyone and who then gain some small advantage in running for higher offices. South Dakota Republicans will crush all bases of resistance to their good-old-boy network.
Mr. E is a pretty swell fellow and I often find that his points of view and his way of saying them make me think more deeply. Other times he’s a vulger bugger, but usually he’s a thought provoker.
“…it’s totally legal for Erickson to use her title as long as she is not using any tax dollars. As for the ethics of the whole deal, the RS5 is NOT interested in following those rules.” Truth, Mr. Ehrisman! Which brings to mind a concept uttered by one or more members of the Ethics Board at their recent hearing: “Just because something is LEGAL, doesn’t mean it’s wise to DO it.” This move by Councilor Erickson reeks of debased personal ethics. Her bio on the City Council web site touts her membership & active participation in a local church. She’s obviously missed out on their basic tenets including “love thy neighbor”, and she’s a wretched excuse for a Christian.
Cory, I totally agree with your assessment. It’s part of the GOP’s “Zero Tolerance” game plan, and whenever Democrats allow themselves to be co-opted by the GOP, or attempt to be GOP-lite, they only help the GOP to make the Democratic bench even smaller.
Cory, I think you and I both raised that question at the time G. Markey went on his initiative quest. The SD Constitution is silent on this, but the history is pretty darn clear. The initiative and referendum were to be the people’s process as a check on the misdeeds and failures of the Legislature and Governor. People in the latter part of the 19th century, particularly those in the Midwest, were very concerned about the corruption of state and local government. That was a big concern not only of the people but most legislators at the time. They were mostly concerned with wealthy corporations from out-of-state corrupting the state’s or localities’ officeholders. But they figured the people can’t be bought, and the initiative and referendum would protect the state from becoming a fiefdom of some wealthy special interests.
They never counted on the Legislature being so corrupt that they would take away the people’s rights to check that corruption through unconstitutional bureaucracy.
Another provision against corruption is non-partisan municipal, school and judicial elections. In most places where you have partisan elections you get machine politics, corruption, the spoils system and back scratching. Yeah, Republicans want to extend their corruption to the local level. That’s obvious.
I have to believe there is hope for saving democracy in this country on all levels, else I’d just curl up in a corner and whimper.
History is chock full of failed dictatorships, oligarchies and other forms of non democratic governments. My general recollection is that in the last 300 years or so, the life span of such things has been much shorter than various forms of democracies.
I think South Dakotans can save their democracy from the Kochs/SDGOP and Americans can save our federal democracy from the current attacks of Moscow Mitch/Massacre Mitch, the GOP, Demented Dotard and Pootie.
I’m not surprised by Erickson wanting Stehly gone. I knew this was coming after watching those two go at it in a yelling match outside of the council building one night. Stehly held her own against Erickson. I should pull up the video I took of the interaction.