Sibby Online

Mel Olson urked Mike Vehle, Vehle responds with deception

Here is some drama that erupted during the City Manager issue that was voted on tonight and soundly defeated:

City Councilman Mel Olson apologized Monday for earlier saying that people who want a city manager “hate democracy.”

Olson first made the statement publicly in an interview with The Daily Republic that was published Thursday. That evening, a Daily Republic media panelist at a public debate asked Olson if he “really meant” the remark, and Olson stood by it.

Then, Monday morning, Olson visited The Daily Republic’s newsroom and expressed his regret. He said he had already apologized to Mike Vehle, his opponent in Thursday evening’s debate.

“I shouldn’t have said they ‘hate democracy,’ ” Olson told The Daily Republic.

He added that he still disapproves of the apparent motives behind the city-manager proposal, even though his word choice was poor.

“I should have said they’ve ‘lost faith in democracy,’ ” he said. “But I don’t know if that’s any less offensive.”

Some city-manager proponents have said that although Mitchell currently has a mayor who is willing to work full time for part-time pay, that might not always be the case. Olson views that as a lack of confidence in the democratic process.

“Their argument seems to be that everything is fine, but it won’t be next year,” he said.

Mitchell voters will decide in today’s election whether to add a city manager to their city government. The polling place is Gertie Belle Rogers Elementary, which is open to voters from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m.

Under the city-manager proposal, the city would still have a mayor and an eight-member council, but the mayor’s day-to-day management duties would be handed off to the city manager.

The proposal arose from Focus 2020, a volunteer, long-range city planning group that began developing recommendations for various aspects of city affairs in 2009. Vehle, a state senator from Mitchell, was on the Focus 2020 subcommittee that recommended hiring a full-time chief executive to run city government.

At Thursday’s debate, Vehle took issue with Olson’s “hate democracy” comment.

“I was surprised you would go and say all those 1,700 people that went out and collected signatures hate democracy,” Vehle said to Olson at the debate, as the two men sat next to each other. “I think those are sound bites that are trying to irritate people.”

I was told by a person who helped collect signatures that about 75% of those who signed the petition was against a city manager, but were told they needed to sign the petition so they can vote no. So Vehle's accusation against Mel as applied to those 1,700 signers is completely false. Mel stated that those who were for the city manager hated democracy. That statement was not intended to be applied to those who opposed  a city manger, but were either tricked into signing or thought we should vote on it. Today, only 782 voted for it...far short of the 1,700 signers. Clearly Vehle wrongly lead us to believe that the 1,700 petition signers were in favor of a city manager.

The Mel Olson vs Mike Vehle debate over a city manager

Here is coverage on the debate betwwen Mel Olson and Mike Vehle on wether Mitchel should add a city manager:

When Mel Olson told The Daily Republic recently that people who favor hiring a city manager either consider current and former mayors incompetent or “hate democracy,” state Sen. Mike Vehle, R-Mitchell, noticed.

So, when Vehle squared off against Olson on Thursday night during a debate on the proposal to add a city manager to Mitchell’s city government, Vehle made his thoughts — and his surprise — at Olson’s comments known.

“I was surprised you would go and say all those 1,700 people that went out and collected signatures hate democracy,” Vehle said at the Mitchell Technical Institute amphitheater. “I think those are sound bites that are trying to irritate people.”

Vehle added that nobody on the committee that proposed adding a city manager ever said Mitchell’s current or past mayors were incompetent.

Olson stood by his earlier statements and said he does not see democracy as a sound-bite issue.

“If the mayor is not incompetent, if the ‘CEO’ is doing the job now, there is no need for a city manager, unless you don’t like the fact that we democratically elect a mayor that is accountable to the people for the running of the city,” Olson said. “To me, that’s a person who doesn’t like democracy.”

About 60 people attended the debate, which followed a forum featuring City Council candidates. The city election is Tuesday, and the polling place is Gertie Belle Rogers Elementary, which will be open from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m.

While Vehle, a retired banker, appeared in a suit and tie, Olson, an American history teacher at Mitchell High School, was clad in a blue polo shirt that also had white stars, making it look like the American flag.

Olson called the city’s potential city manager an “expensive, wasteful addition of bureaucracy” whose salary would take money away from other worthwhile expenditures.

“The fact of the matter is that a city manager would be the city’s highest paid employee, and the fact of the matter is that money is going to come out of somebody’s hide,” Olson said.

Vehle said eight of the state’s 10 largest cities employ a full-time chief executive. Mitchell and Huron are the only two exceptions, Vehle said, and they also have the highest tax levies.

In addition, all four of Mitchell’s living ex-mayors and current mayor Lou Sebert support the concept.

“The mayors haven’t always agreed with each other,” Vehle said. “Despite all this, there is one thing that they agree on: that a city manager would be the most effective and most efficient move for Mitchell’s future.”

The debate included a discussion of accountability. Vehle said the city manager could be terminated by the City Council at any time.

Olson said five of the eight City Council members would have to agree on the removal — in other words, the city manager would only have to keep four people in the city happy, he said.

“People would have no other recourse other than every three years, they could vote out the people who voted for or stood by the city manager, which means it would take you potentially six years to change a city manager because you only elect four city council people at a time,” Olson said.

Vehle responded that people could contact the council members from their ward and voice their displeasure with a city manager.

“If the city manager’s not doing a good job and everybody wants him out, your phone is going to be ringing off the hook,” Vehle said. “If you’re not responsible to what the people want, then you’re probably not a very good city council person.”

In his closing remarks, Olson responded by asking what specific reasons a city manager could be fired for.

“What’s the tipping point? How many phone calls does that take before you’re a bad city councilman?” Olson asked.

After a question regarding the funding of a city manager’s salary was asked, Vehle offered no specific answer but said he believes the money could be found.

“I don’t think you’re going to have a problem finding that money,” Vehle said.

Olson responded that the money must come from somewhere and could result in the delay of road repairs or other city projects.

“The idea that somehow the city has $100,000 in a suitcase somewhere with ‘city manager’ on the outside is just ridiculous,” Olson said.

Most questions came from a three-member media panel. One of the more pointed questions was submitted on a note card by an audience member who asked if Olson wants to someday run for mayor, and whether that ambition might be influencing him. Olson did not offer a definitive answer, opting instead to paraphrase a Teddy Roosevelt quote about never looking beyond one’s current term of office.

“Serve in every office like it’s your last,” Olson said, paraphrasing the ex-president. “I plan on running for re-election (to the City Council) when I’m up next year, and I have found people who look beyond the next election tend not to have to worry about that, because they get beat.”

Vehle said he will not run for mayor and is not influenced by any designs on that office.

“I have no intention to run for mayor and no desire to be mayor, whether there’s a city manager or not,” he said.

South Dakota Board of Education member refuses to look at research

Terry Sabers of Mitchell is on the South Dakota Board of Education. I gave him research that showed the dangers of Common Core Standards. Last Novemer he voted for it anyway. I also gave him research on the dangers of Senator Vehle's dangerous proposed governmental changes that come from the same International organization that pushed the Common Core Standards. Here is his response to my research:

Confused about a city manager? The scare tactics are at work in Mitchell again. They are raising “end of the world” concerns to sway the voters of Mitchell away from a very good move for our city.

We have many good things going on in Mitchell. We need a progressive move to keep our city moving in the right direction. To keep the retail growing and the office parks building, we need leaders that can focus on where we can take our city.

As you read from the Aberdeen mayor, a city manager is not a “king.” He serves the residents of our city through the City Council. He does research on options for the City Council. This frees up the council from some of the day-to-day activities to spend more time on planning our next progressive moves.

We are in an era of continually growing rules and regulations, so in an operation of $30 million — such as our city — it is hard to believe that we would not have a full-time professional to make sure we are working as efficiently as possible. They are trained to do just that. There are no businesses of this size (or even our schools) that even attempt to operate without the expertise of a professional at the helm. There are just too many things to be gained.

If you are confused, I can see why. Be careful of the vocal minority that is against most everything progressive. Follow the lead of the mayors, majority of City Council and The Daily Republic editorial board in supporting a city manager for Mitchell.

Deception on city manager exposed

Here was my letter to the Mitchell Paper regarding the City Manager vote:

Proponents for a city manager say that will make city government more efficient. Don’t be misled — that does not mean a smaller government. Reality is that making government more efficient by removing checks and balances, that are foundational for a large [not sure how that word got in, I checked and it was not sent to the paper that way] representative government that prevents excess and corruption, will set the stage for what happened in Bell, Calif.

Bell is now facing serious budget problems after its $800,000-a-year city manager was not checked by the council. The city manager set up a city-funded pension plan for him and 40 city employees that is a part of their financial ills. Apparently, the state pension plan was not enough. It is projected that the former city manager will get as much as $1.5 million a year from that state-funded plan.

Too bad Bell’s City Council did not stay on top of their budget. Mitchell’s mayor said, “I don’t think they (the City Council) spend enough time on the budget to know what’s in it other than big equipment.” Adding a city manager to Mitchell’s government will be the same recipe used in Bell.

And how many of our allegedly financially illiterate council members believe we can afford a new events center?

I have done my research on this issue and am putting a small part of it on as many doors as I can before Tuesday. Once you understand the real agenda, then voting “no” on the city manager is paramount — that is if you care about freedom, property rights and the representative form of government that protects us. Putting an unelected, appointed executive in charge only sets us up for tyranny and dictatorship. That is why this old European idea of government was rejected by our founding fathers. The city of Madison also rejected it in 1961.

Senator Vehle pushed for a City Manager for Mitchell

Senator Mike Vehle pushed for a City Manager for Mitchell, it just lost by a huge margin tonight:

Government is complicated business. The city of Mitchell runs a $30 million operation with 175 employees, and an organization that size deserves professional management.

I’m not the only person to think so — nationally, 53 percent of the communities Mitchell’s size have a manager.

In South Dakota, eight of the top 10 largest communities have a full-time executive, leaving only Huron and Mitchell with part-time executives. It’s interesting to note that those two cities, Huron and Mitchell, also have the highest tax levies of the 10 largest cities. Even though those other eight communities pay for full-time executives to administer their city, they still all have lower taxes than Mitchell and Huron.

A well-run city needs both strong political and strong professional leadership. With a city manager form of government, you still have an elected mayor and eight councilpersons in the same four wards, and they still must be responsive to the needs of the voters. The day-to-day administration and management of the city is handled by the city manager, allowing the mayor and council an opportunity to focus on policy and vision for moving the community forward. A city manager must be responsive to the community, or else the council will fire the manager. A mayor can only be replaced every few years, but a manager can be replaced at almost any time.

We all know that a successful $30 million business has to have someone dedicated full-time to its operations, but other governments and nonprofit organizations also use professional managers.

Our school district has both an elected board president and a professional full-time administrator (the superintendent).

Our hospital has both a board and also a professional administrator. It is worth noting that all five of the living former Mitchell mayors agree that we need a city manager. These are people who have sat in the mayor’s chair. They are also independent leaders who haven’t always agreed. Indeed, some of them have even run against one another. Despite all of that, they all agree a city manager is the most efficient and effective move for Mitchell’s future.

Therefore I urge you to join them and vote for a city manager form of city government on Tuesday.

Dusty Johnson exposed as a big government liberal

Today's Mitchell Daily Republic has coverage on those who oppose a City Manager style of government. This will be voted on by the city June 7. Mel Olson, former Democratic state legislator and current Mitchel City Councilman, is one who opposes the idea:

Olson said he is surprised that so many people with conservative political beliefs are leading the charge for a city manager. The committee that proposed the idea included Dusty Johnson, who is Republican Gov. Dennis Daugaard’s chief of staff, and Vehle, a Republican lawmaker.

“It’s just amazing to me as a Democrat that all these Republicans are advocating this,” he said. “I’m almost speechless at this.”

Steve Sibson, who has long been an observer and commentator on local, state and federal government, is another opponent of adding a city manager.

Olson goes on to expose some of the big government plans that the proponents seek to implement with an unelected executive-controlled city government:

Olson said he has heard people speak of “huge visionary projects” that a city manager could spur into reality.

But he said there are already discussions of adding an Olympic-size swimming pool, a community center and a new multi-million-dollar Corn Palace. Making such proposals a reality doesn’t depend on a city manager, he said.

Olson, a former legislator, said he is surprised by people who call for hiring another city employee to guide the future of Mitchell.

“I just don’t think government is the font of all wisdom,” he said. “I just don’t get it.”

Perhaps Mel will gain more understanding by reading through some research I recently provided him. My research makes it clear that the overall plan, once referred to as Metro 1313, is being brought in from the Council of State Governments (CSG) by Senator Mike Vehle. The primary purpose of the CSG is to elimate state sovereignty. Their City Charter removes cities from the state constitution so that they become controlled by "federal districts". This is called regionalization, which is a precursor to internatlonal control of all areas of the globe. Sounds like something Obama would be for, but in South Dakota it is being implemented by Republicans. The guise is "economic development", which is really an agenda controlled by the domestic arm of the Council on Foreign Relations, an organization created by the British Round Tables. Their goal is to regain control of the North American colonies they lost during the American Revolution.

Remember Governors Rounds saying we need to be a part of a "global economy":

Students must graduate with skills that allow them to think critically, solve problems, communicate, be leaders and use computers and other technology, Rounds said. Such skills are needed so South Dakota businesses can hire qualified workers to compete in the global economy, he said.

If South Dakota's schools cannot provide graduates with those skills, companies will move jobs to other locations around the world, Rounds said. Training in those skills will be integrated into existing courses such as math, science and language.

"If we start now teaching these critical skills, we have a better chance of being economically successful within our state," Rounds said.

South Dakota students are getting a quality education in basic skills, the governor said.

"We want to make darn sure that that quality education is responding to the needs of a business environment that is changing with the move to a knowledge-based economy, with the competition coming not just from surrounding states but from individuals who live around the world," Rounds said.

South Dakota is the fifth state to join the Partnership for 21st Century Skills, an organization that includes major corporations and education groups. Its members include Apple, Cisco Systems, Ford Motor Co., Microsoft Corp., Texas Instruments and Verizon.

And now Governor Daugaard has been handed the baton:

“South Dakota’s schools are already doing a good job,” said Daugaard. “But we can always strive to do better. I will lead the charge to strengthen our science, technology, engineering and math education.  This will give our students a solid foundation to compete in a global economy.”

We are just human capital in the eyes of the corporate elite. Education is not education. It is free job training for the global capitalists. And this is the exact opposite of a "competitive free market" economic system. Don't be deceived by Republicans who say they are in favor of capitalism. It is not the limited government brand they are talking about.

And now we can better understand why Dusty Johnson is the Governor's Chief of Staff and proponent of the City Manager for Mitchell. As I stated before, he is a faux conservative. And more and more true limited government conservatives are slowing finding this out.

Vehle believes frugal government means higher taxes

The Mitchell Daily Republic provides us with the true big government tax and spend agenda of DIstrict 20's three state representatives. Senator Mike Vehleagrees with the Governor's agenda of what appears to be limited government:

Vehle, who is entering his second term in the Senate after serving two in the House, said he felt Gov. Dennis Daugaard sounded the correct message when he called for fiscal prudence during his inaugural address Saturday.

Daugaard called for the state to rely on its tradition of self-reliance, persistence, determination and frugality.

“I thought he nailed it,” Vehle said. “There has to be some cuts somewhere. There’s actually going to be tough times now.”

Then Vehle takes a breath and speaks out of the other side of his mouth and advocates "new forms of revenue to keep the ship afloat":

He said he only favors using about 20 percent of the state’s reserves to cover the budget gap. Instead, he thinks state must look at cuts and finding new forms of revenue to keep the ship afloat financially.

“You’ve got to be careful when you use reserve funds, because those are one-time funds,” Vehle said. “You’ve got to have ongoing revenue for ongoing expenses. It’s like paying your mortgage out of your savings account.”

He has proposed a series of increases in the state gas tax and the fee for licensing vehicles in the state. Vehle tried to get those increases approved during the last session.

“Same bill. We’ll just see how it goes,” he said. “We might write in deferred dates to see how that goes, make it more palatable.

“I think a lot of people are acknowledging we have an issue but at this point they don’t want to be a part of raising any fee or tax,” Vehle said.

“Deferred implementation may work,” he said. “A good share of people are concerned and realize we are just kicking the can down the road.”

The other two District 20 legislators also promoted higher taxes. Here is Lance Carson's admission:

He said Vehle’s proposal to raise fees for license plates has some merit. Carson said he recently looked at the cost of licensing two vehicles and noted how inexpensive the cost was for that.

“I think the license plate fees need to go up,” he said. “The nice thing is that most of that comes right back, come to the counties.”

Tona Rozum, District 20's new House Representative, echoed the "nbew forms of revenue" including an increase in sales tax:

While budget cuts will surely be discussed, Rozum said new forms of revenue need to at least be on the table.

“I have talked to a lot of people, constituents, and there seems to be positive feelings for potential increase in state sales tax,” she said.

So there you have it, three big government tax and spin GOP liberals that District 20 sent to Pierre this year.

District 20 sends an Obama Democrat to State Senate

Even though Mike Vehle is a registered Republican, his policy positions and voting record [see how the Davison County GOP establishment tried to hide his voting record from District 20 Republicans] would make the Obama far-left secular socialists happy and proud. So while many voted for Kristi Noem and her message that the stimulus package was wrong, Vehle defended South Dakota spending it and still does not think the extra half billion of federal pork is enough. He plans to raise taxes and fees on South Dakota citizens. Here is the report from The Mitchell Daily Republic:

Vehle, who also served two terms in the state House, received 4,828 votes to defeat Democrat Susan Thie, who received 1,868 votes, and independent Steve “Sibby” Sibson, who had 1,726 votes. The percentages were 57-22-21.

The senator said he feels his moderate beliefs and approach were appreciated and supported by voters. [Moderate: a Republican who believes in the far-left secular socialist agenda of the Democrats?]

“I am always trying to find a solution to the problem,” he said. “You need to find common ground.” [And Vehle is going to Pierre promoting government being the solution. What was Reagan's position on that?]

Vehle, 60, said two issues, funding education and balancing the state budget, will be the primary concerns in Pierre.

“Education and budget will be the two biggest fights,” he said. “You would expect that, since education is the biggest share of the budget.

“I think we all are going to have to work really hard to balance the budget,” he said. “I think one of the issues is being able to work together so we get Democrats and Republicans working together on issues.”

Vehle said he hopes to be reappointed as chairman of the Senate Transportation Committee and wants to ensure the state’s highways and roads are kept in good shape. [In other words, we need to raise the gas tax and license plate feeds. Like I said, the Obama Democrats would be very happy if Vehle is successful.]

He said while the national trend was encouraging for Republicans, there was a bigger message in the votes.

“Remember two years ago they elected Obama because he promised change. Now they’re voting in a lot of Republicans because they want change,” Vehle said. “We need to make sure we make changes that are the best for the country. [Like Obama he means government is the solution. What was Reagan's position on that?]

“We can’t do this every two years. Once you win, then you’ve got to govern. It’s real easy to throw stones.”

Vehle said having two opponents made the race more challenging.

“That’s always a concern, anytime you had a three-way race,” he said. “No win is easy. I always am concerned about a race.”

Thie, 47, had gone to bed when she saw the election numbers going against her in her first race for office.

“They had Mr. Vehle in mind and I support that,” she said. “No regrets, that’s for sure.

“It was a great learning experience and next time I will be better prepared. It will definitely be a family decision, but I may give it another go.”

Sibson, 54, said while he wanted to congratulate Vehle, he planned to return to Pierre as a citizen lobbyist and will strongly consider another run for office.

“I think 20 percent — there’s a significant minority that feels my message was the right message,” he said.

“Definitely something to build upon,” he said. “I felt really good about the message and the people were connecting to that message. Each day I was picking up votes — I just simply ran out of votes.[time]” [In two years I will have way more time to campaign than I had this year. Plus I will have the experience from this year and a foundation of a base. All I need is Vehle to continue to vote to the far-left as he has in the past.]

Food for votes also applies to South Dakota's Legislature

From Bob Mercer:

The topic of South Dakota’s voter-bribery ban deserves further coverage in this space this week for two reasons.

First, nobody seems to mind that the ban doesn’t seem apply to the people elected by the voters to state office in South Dakota. We’ll visit that point at length in a few moments.

Second, new information has surfaced from state Attorney General Marty Jackley regarding the allegations of offering food as an inducement to get people to participate in early voting.

In this space last week this columnist focused solely on the Democratic-organized chili feeds and early voting rallies, which were held contrary to the high-profile warnings issued a decade ago that the practice was illegal.

In recent days Attorney General Jackley issued a statement that his office has received continuing complaints about offering of food in exchange for or to induce voting.

“Complaints have been submitted by both Republican and Democratic political parties, local law enforcement, and private citizens,” his statement said.

A few days later 18 Republican legislators publicly endorsed the proposal from Sen. Jason Gant of Sioux Falls, the Republican candidate for secretary of state, to make voter bribery a Class 6 felony punishable by up to two years in prison and a $2,000 fine.

Voter bribery currently is a Class 2 misdemeanor punishable by 30 days in jail and a $500 fine.

The idea of increasing the penalty as a deterrent was first suggested in this space last week. It wasn’t made in conjunction with Gant or the Republican legislators.

Since they’re in the mood to look at bribery reforms, perhaps they would be willing to consider cleaning up similar practices during the legislative sessions.

Offering food, and drink, is a daily event during the annual sessions. In fact, the Legislative Research Council has helped coordinate the scheduling.

On most mornings and most noons, buffet-style spreads are offered behind the Senate and the House chambers. Organizations provide the food, coffee and water.

These are opportunities for organizations with interest in legislation to meet and greet legislators and other state officials who come for the food.

Many organizations also provide small gifts to legislators such as jars of candy for their desks and coffee mugs and other tokens.

Many organizations also hold evening meals for legislators at locations away from the Capitol including banquets and come-and-go buffets.

Rarely does a legislator need to pay for a meal if she or he doesn’t want to use the perdiem expense payment all legislators receive in addition to their salaries.

There are other less-visible practices that are perhaps much more influential.

Some lobbyists host “drink rooms” at local motels, or in private homes, where legislators know they can routinely stop after each day’s work ends at the Capitol.

This practice likely dates back to the territorial Legislature.

Some lobbyists take individual legislators to breakfast or lunch or dinner to discuss matters. Some lobbyists actually host entire committees for dinner prior to hearings on bills in which the lobbyists have an interest.

Governors also host meals and gatherings for legislators to discuss strategy and to make the pitches for legislation.

And legislators in turn host events each session for lobbyists to attend and pay money. The Republicans and the Democrats both do this to raise campaign contributions.

One of the simmering controversies among members of the Legislature are taxpayerfunded trips for legislators to meetings of the American Legislative Exchange Council, a pro-business national organization that is largely funded by corporations.

Private sponsorships in large amounts also help underwrite national meetings of the National Governors Association, the Council of State Governments and the National Conference of State Legislatures that are attended by South Dakota officials and legislators.

The murkiness extends into political contributions. Take an assortment of examples from the current election cycle – all legal under South Dakota’s current laws.

Two legislators received unusually large contributions from political action committees.

The South Dakota Trial Lawyers gave $15,000 to one of their members, Sen. Nancy Turbak Berry, D-Watertown.

She succeeded in winning the Legislature’s approval of a measure last year that insurance companies opposed and trial lawyers supported. Only a veto by Gov. Mike Rounds prevented it from becoming law.

Rep. Deb Peters, RHartford, received $10,000 from the Warner PAC, whose only contributors this year were Tom and Sharon Warner of Rapid City.

Years of records show the Warners normally support Democratic candidates and specific social causes, such as the Equality South Dakota organization, which promotes an equal-rights agenda for gays, lesbians and other sexual orientations.

The Warners strongly support the Equality group, and Sharon Warner filed the group’s PAC report as well as the Warner PAC’s report. Peters sponsored the Equality group’s legislation during the 2010 session. It was defeated in its first committee hearing.

Peters was the only recipient of a donation from the Warner PAC this fall, and the only other one this year was Sen.-elect Angie Buhl of Sioux Falls, who won a Democratic primary and is unopposed this fall.

Loopholes in state laws on PACs have allowed very large contributions to flow from a handful of big givers such as the Warners, Gary and April Wenzel of Rapid City, state Sen. Stan Adelstein of Rapid City and banker T. Denny Sanford of Sioux Falls to candidates this year, including three running for governor, Republicans Gordon Howie and Dave Knudson and Democrat Scott Heidepriem.

Big money has been routed through PACs even to secretary of state candidates Gant and Democrat Ben Nesselhuf, who are running for the office that oversees campaign finance reporting and elections.

Rep. Jason Frerichs, DSisseton, is unopposed for election to his district’s Senate seat. He reported receiving $2,375 from nine PACs and three other candidates’ committees this fall. Altogether he reported receiving $4,885 in direct contributions.

He’s used the money for other political purposes, which is legal. Nor is it uncommon for unopposed candidates to receive campaign donations.

Special Interest funding a hot issue in the District 20 State Senate race

From The Mitchell Daily Republic:

District 20 legislative candidates show a great disparity on how they raised money — and how much they raised — to run for office this year.

The pre-election filing deadline for campaign finance reports was Oct. 22.

State Sen. Mike Vehle, R-Mitchell, raised nearly $15,000, with almost half of that coming from political action committees (PACs).

Independent Steve “Sibby” Sibson, one of Vehle’s two opponents in the race for the district’s one state Senate seat, has completely self-funded his campaign, contributing $7,953.50.

The third candidate in the race, Democrat Susan Thie, has raised nearly $4,000, with almost all of that coming from the Davison County Democratic Party.

District 20 consists of Davison and Aurora counties. The election is Tuesday.

Vehle had received $14,693.63 in cash and in-kind donations and spent $9,908.10 by the reporting deadline. He had $7,155.74 cash on hand.

Vehle raised $7,200 from PACS, including $1,000 from a PAC called Independent Community Bankers of South Dakota that is based in Mitchell.

He also received $750 from South Dakota RPAC, a Realtors PAC, and $500 from a South Dakota Association of Healthcare Organizations PAC.

Aside from the Mitchell PAC, almost all the PACs are based in Pierre. Vehle did receive donations from PACs in Rapid City, Sioux Falls and Deadwood.

He also received $650 from three PAC donations outside the state: $300 from the Burlington Northern Santa Fe PAC based in Fort Worth, Texas; $250 from WellPAC in Des Moines, Iowa; and $100 from the Otter Tail PAC in Wahpeton, N.D.

Vehle raised $6,140 in direct contributions, including $200 from former U.S. Sen. Jim Abdnor, R-S.D. Vehle worked for Abdnor in the 1970s.

Davison County Republicans gave him an in-kind donation of $1,175 by allowing him to use billboards. Vehle did not contribute any money to his campaign.

As of her report, Thie had raised $2,075 and had spent $395.66 of that at the reporting deadline, leaving her with $1,679.34 cash on hand.

Thie received $1,525 from the Davison County Democratic Central Committee.

She also received $250 from Cheryl Chapman of Rapid City, the chairwoman of the state Democratic Party, and $250 from the South Dakota Educators Political Involvement Committee. She contributed $50 herself.

Sibson had spent all $7,953.50 he contributed to his campaign by the reporting deadline.