Public Affairs Director Jon Michaels (since 1977) talks with Clint Brown, Director of B.A.M. and Institute jof Civic Biodesign, and Jordan Deffenbaughj, a Whittier resident and former city council candidate.

From Clint's facebook page

The Fence Isn’t the Problem—It’s the SymptomSomething unusual happened in Sioux Falls recently. A city council proposal that seemed, at first, like a routine bureaucratic decision—a $70,000 fence around a parking lot next to the Bishop Dudley Hospitality House—has become a flashpoint for public frustration.What started as a debate about crime and public safety has turned into a much larger conversation about how the city approaches homelessness, public space, and civic engagement.The tension in the public meeting at the library wasn’t just about a fence. It was about power, priorities, and a city leadership structure that didn’t anticipate—much less prepare for—this level of public pushback.And that tells us something important: this moment isn’t about a fence at all. It’s about something much bigger.When Latent Frustration Becomes Public OutcrySioux Falls isn’t a city that typically sees large-scale public protests. That’s why the strong opposition to the fence caught leadership off guard.But frustration doesn’t just appear out of nowhere. It builds over time. It stays quiet until something—a proposal, a policy, a moment—triggers a response.In this case, that trigger was a fence.The real frustration comes from a deeper, long-simmering belief that the city is managing homelessness, not solving it. That leaders are focused on optics rather than systemic change. That decisions are being made in boardrooms, not neighborhoods.For many residents, this fence is just the latest in a long pattern of temporary, reactive solutions that don’t address the root issues of poverty, housing insecurity, and addiction.And when those frustrations finally came out—when the dam broke—city leaders weren’t ready for the flood.A Lesson in Power: Who Benefits from the Fence?The clearest way to understand a civic controversy is to follow the power dynamics.So, let’s ask a simple question: who benefits from the fence?1. The Catholic Diocese Wins BigThe Catholic Diocese of Sioux Falls, which owns the lot, doesn’t have to pay for the fence—even though it’s their private property. Instead, the city foots the bill, using taxpayer dollars.The diocese also avoids the hassle of managing crime, loitering, and emergency calls on their land. Now, that responsibility falls entirely to the city.And if the diocese ever chooses to sell the lot, they now have a guaranteed interested buyer: the city of Sioux Falls. With land values rising due to nearby developments like the Riverline District, that’s a huge financial advantage for them.2. The City Gains Control—But At What Cost?From the city’s perspective, leasing the lot gives them enforcement power. That means police can remove individuals from the area, preventing congregation near the shelter.This may reduce some emergency calls in the short term, but the fundamental problem remains: people experiencing homelessness don’t disappear when you put up a fence. They just move somewhere else.Which leads us to the real losers in this deal.3. The Unhoused Are Displaced, Not HelpedThe people who use that lot—the ones struggling with housing insecurity, mental illness, and addiction—are being pushed further into invisibility.If the fence is built, where will they go?Not into housing, because affordable housing options in Sioux Falls are still severely limited.Not into shelters, because many are already full—or have strict entry conditions that some unhoused individuals cannot meet.Not into treatment, because substance abuse and mental health services are still underfunded and inaccessible for many.This isn’t a solution. It’s just pushing the problem into another undefined space.The City's Blind Spot: How Decisions Get MadeCity leaders expected little resistance to this proposal. That tells us something about how they assumed the public would respond.They assumed no one would push back.They assumed this was a minor administrative decision.They assumed residents wouldn’t question their priorities.They were wrong.The public meeting at the library was tense because people weren’t just objecting to the fence. They were objecting to a larger pattern of top-down decision-making.In Sioux Falls, major policy decisions often happen quietly, without much public input. Residents aren’t typically invited into the conversation until after a deal has already been struck.Public meetings then become performative—an opportunity to explain the decision, rather than a real opportunity for debate and influence.This approach works—until people notice.And now? They’ve noticed.The Right Questions to Ask Moving ForwardSioux Falls is at a crossroads. This moment presents a choice:City leaders can double down on their existing process, dismissing opposition as reactionary, and move forward with the fence.Or they can treat this moment as a wake-up call—a sign that residents expect more from their leadership when it comes to transparency, public engagement, and long-term solutions. So here are some better questions the city—and its citizens—should be asking moving forward: What are we actually trying to solve?Are we trying to make homelessness less visible—or are we actually working to reduce homelessness? Where are these people supposed to go? If we fence off the parking lot, are we prepared to offer an alternative space where people can safely gather and access services?Are we investing in symptoms or solutions?What if, instead of spending $70,000 on a fence, we invested that money in low-barrier housing, mental health outreach, or street medicine teams? Who gets to shape city policy? Are residents and service providers being included early in decision-making, or are they only being brought in after the fact?How can we change the way public input is gathered, so it happens before decisions are finalized? What Happens Next? The Sioux Falls City Council will soon vote on whether to approve the lease and fund the fence. But even if this fence gets built, the larger frustrations it has revealed won’t go away. This is a moment of reckoning. It’s about more than a parking lot. More than a fence. It’s about what kind of city Sioux Falls wants to be. Will we be a city that hides its most vulnerable people behind barriers? Or will we be a city that asks deeper questions, engages its citizens, and invests in real, long-term solutions?That choice is still being made. And as this conversation continues, the people of Sioux Falls should keep paying attention—because power, priorities, and public space belong to all of us. 

From Jordan's facebook page:

I messaged Zach DeBoer to see if he could come up with a rendering for an alternative to the City of Sioux Falls - Municipal Government City's $70,000 Fence idea on the Bishop Dudley Block. He sent this rendering a few hours later."The Dudley Commons" - a hybrid approach that keeps some security fencing while creating much-needed community space with basic amenities like toilets, seating, and shade.This builds on conversations many of us had through the Community Revitalization Collective in 2023, where we explored ideas for improving this block through community-led placemaking. What do you think? Could this work? Share your ideas in the comments. And with city council. I believe we can address legitimate safety concerns while still creating dignified spaces for everyone in our neighborhood. The City Council will be discussing the fence proposal on March 4th at 6pm for the final vote. Let's fill the room and share better ideas than a fence!FINAL VOTE: Tuesday, March 4 – Stop the Fence, Demand Real Solutionshttps://medium.com/.../for-consideration-the-dudley...

 

Public Affairs Director Jon Michaels (since 1977) talks with Clint Brown, Director of B.A.M. and Institute jof Civic Biodesign, and Jordan Deffenbaughj, a Whittier resident and former city council candidate.
From Clint's facebook page
The Fence Isn&rsquo;t the Problem&mdash;It&rsquo;s the SymptomSomething unusual happened in Sioux Falls recently. A city council proposal that seemed, at first, like a routine bureaucratic decision&mdash;a $70,000 fence around a parking lot next to the Bishop Dudley Hospitality House&mdash;has become a flashpoint for public frustration.What started as a debate about crime and public safety has turned into a much larger conversation about how the city approaches homelessness, public space, and civic <a></a>engagement.The tension in the public meeting at the library wasn&rsquo;t just about a fence. It was about power, priorities, and a city leadership structure that didn&rsquo;t anticipate&mdash;much less prepare for&mdash;this level of public pushback.And that tells us something important: this moment isn&rsquo;t about a fence at all. It&rsquo;s about something much bigger.When Latent Frustration Becomes Public OutcrySioux Falls isn&rsquo;t a city that typically sees large-scale public protests. That&rsquo;s why the strong opposition to the fence caught leadership off guard.But frustration doesn&rsquo;t just appear out of nowhere. It builds over time. It stays quiet until something&mdash;a proposal, a policy, a moment&mdash;triggers a response.In this case, that trigger was a fence.The real frustration comes from a deeper, long-simmering belief that the city is managing homelessness, not solving it. That leaders are focused on optics rather than systemic change. That decisions are being made in boardrooms, not neighborhoods.For many residents, this fence is just the latest in a long pattern of temporary, reactive solutions that don&rsquo;t address the root issues of poverty, housing insecurity, and addiction.And when those frustrations finally came out&mdash;when the dam broke&mdash;city leaders weren&rsquo;t ready for the flood.A Lesson in Power: Who Benefits from the Fence?The clearest way to understand a civic controversy is to follow the power dynamics.So, let&rsquo;s ask a simple question: who benefits from the fence?1. The Catholic Diocese Wins BigThe Catholic Diocese of Sioux Falls, which owns the lot, doesn&rsquo;t have to pay for the fence&mdash;even though it&rsquo;s their private property. Instead, the city foots the bill, using taxpayer dollars.The diocese also avoids the hassle of managing crime, loitering, and emergency calls on their land. Now, that responsibility falls entirely to the city.And if the diocese ever chooses to sell the lot, they now have a guaranteed interested buyer: the city of Sioux Falls. With land values rising due to nearby developments like the Riverline District, that&rsquo;s a huge financial advantage for them.2. The City Gains Control&mdash;But At What Cost?From the city&rsquo;s perspective, leasing the lot gives them enforcement power. That means police can remove individuals from the area, preventing congregation near the shelter.This may reduce some emergency calls in the short term, but the fundamental problem remains: people experiencing homelessness don&rsquo;t disappear when you put up a fence. They just move somewhere else.Which leads us to the real losers in this deal.3. The Unhoused Are Displaced, Not HelpedThe people who use that lot&mdash;the ones struggling with housing insecurity, mental illness, and addiction&mdash;are being pushed further into invisibility.If the fence is built, where will they go?Not into housing, because affordable housing options in Sioux Falls are still severely limited.Not into shelters, because many are already full&mdash;or have strict entry conditions that some unhoused individuals cannot meet.Not into treatment, because substance abuse and mental health services are still underfunded and inaccessible for many.This isn&rsquo;t a solution. It&rsquo;s just pushing the problem into another undefined space.The City's Blind Spot: How Decisions Get MadeCity leaders expected little resistance to this proposal. That tells us something about how they assumed the public would respond.They assumed no one would push back.They assumed this was a minor administrative decision.They assumed residents wouldn&rsquo;t question their priorities.They were wrong.The public meeting at the library was tense because people weren&rsquo;t just objecting to the fence. They were objecting to a larger pattern of top-down decision-making.In Sioux Falls, major policy decisions often happen quietly, without much public input. Residents aren&rsquo;t typically invited into the conversation until after a deal has already been struck.Public meetings then become performative&mdash;an opportunity to explain the decision, rather than a real opportunity for debate and influence.This approach works&mdash;until people notice.And now? They&rsquo;ve noticed.The Right Questions to Ask Moving ForwardSioux Falls is at a crossroads. This moment presents a choice:City leaders can double down on their existing process, dismissing opposition as reactionary, and move forward with the fence.Or they can treat this moment as a wake-up call&mdash;a sign that residents expect more from their leadership when it comes to transparency, public engagement, and long-term solutions. So here are some better questions the city&mdash;and its citizens&mdash;should be asking moving forward: What are we actually trying to solve?Are we trying to make homelessness less visible&mdash;or are we actually working to reduce homelessness? Where are these people supposed to go? If we fence off the parking lot, are we prepared to offer an alternative space where people can safely gather and access services?Are we investing in symptoms or solutions?What if, instead of spending $70,000 on a fence, we invested that money in low-barrier housing, mental health outreach, or street medicine teams? Who gets to shape city policy? Are residents and service providers being included early in decision-making, or are they only being brought in after the fact?How can we change the way public input is gathered, so it happens before decisions are finalized? What Happens Next? The Sioux Falls City Council will soon vote on whether to approve the lease and fund the fence. But even if this fence gets built, the larger frustrations it has revealed won&rsquo;t go away. This is a moment of reckoning. It&rsquo;s about more than a parking lot. More than a fence. It&rsquo;s about what kind of city Sioux Falls wants to be. Will we be a city that hides its most vulnerable people behind barriers? Or will we be a city that asks deeper questions, engages its citizens, and invests in real, long-term solutions?That choice is still being made. And as this conversation continues, the people of Sioux Falls should keep paying attention&mdash;because power, priorities, and public space belong to all of us.&nbsp;
From Jordan's facebook page:
I messaged <a href="https://www.facebook.com/zach.deboer?__cft__[0]=AZXf-fThaRQyw_6A7fVOALPl9ZZs4RINRqWo42XcreYl98gIVxkC-prDjd0rL37WbdPIFZ-txc6VitO60DZAUNJx7uguL5Fd_jGqiVT8-0eCO6SOQfKnz30tXLXjgDlaUUJW9Cm_61_Ya2hZkR3kvI902W76cQ5dwRaUFdimnkFdJhalP9bIXacrVzJNMC6TgGU&amp;__tn__=-]K-R">Zach DeBoer</a> to see if he could come up with a rendering for an alternative to the <a href="https://www.facebook.com/CityofSiouxFalls?__cft__[0]=AZXf-fThaRQyw_6A7fVOALPl9ZZs4RINRqWo42XcreYl98gIVxkC-prDjd0rL37WbdPIFZ-txc6VitO60DZAUNJx7uguL5Fd_jGqiVT8-0eCO6SOQfKnz30tXLXjgDlaUUJW9Cm_61_Ya2hZkR3kvI902W76cQ5dwRaUFdimnkFdJhalP9bIXacrVzJNMC6TgGU&amp;__tn__=-]K-R">City of Sioux Falls - Municipal Government</a> City's $70,000 Fence idea on the Bishop Dudley Block. He sent this rendering a few hours later."The Dudley Commons" - a hybrid approach that keeps some security fencing while creating much-needed community space with basic amenities like toilets, seating, and shade.This builds on conversations many of us had through the Community <a></a>Revitalization Collective in 2023, where we explored ideas for improving this block through community-led placemaking. What do you think? Could this work? Share your ideas in the comments. And with city council. I believe we can address legitimate safety concerns while still creating dignified spaces for everyone in our neighborhood. The City Council will be discussing the fence proposal on March 4th at 6pm for the final vote. Let's fill the room and share better ideas than a fence!<a href="https://www.facebook.com/events/1511309666491614/?__cft__[0]=AZXf-fThaRQyw_6A7fVOALPl9ZZs4RINRqWo42XcreYl98gIVxkC-prDjd0rL37WbdPIFZ-txc6VitO60DZAUNJx7uguL5Fd_jGqiVT8-0eCO6SOQfKnz30tXLXjgDlaUUJW9Cm_61_Ya2hZkR3kvI902W76cQ5dwRaUFdimnkFdJhalP9bIXacrVzJNMC6TgGU&amp;__tn__=-UK-R">FINAL VOTE: Tuesday, March 4 &ndash; Stop the Fence, Demand Real Solutions</a><a href="https://l.facebook.com/l.php?u=https%3A%2F%2Fmedium.com%2Fstrong-sioux-falls%2Ffor-consideration-the-dudley-commons-a-community-driven-alternative-to-the-proposed-fence-566dac68be67%3Ffbclid%3DIwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTAAAR38oCn38pHmg7sDIRfKynwzJDYdmyayvTp-ccU6OQuVf6njbgwxtw1Bd3k_aem_6JWP9RSenatr89ip82yQ2g&amp;h=AT1fz1RalQCOAh1LzRfsCPnlbIStafc9YxYnbux-OTmsqJA4Yz2Y2uCnoR5WXAeedaltpRtWFlZR4F7kHbzVxpiZ8rSdx3jr6kDBV7zF0oB330KabfbewmJ7S3kHsJlkEIaM&amp;__tn__=-UK-R&amp;c[0]=AT2bF0U0PYzc1zbE2WdJTKSGikHKWzQaVj8QKR6MF2qlAooit0V3LRSb7GnS5VirgnL2Ct05hLNhf9IOs2JwX_itYPuqY_YRf360bljNcsRcQtXRMiszgpnCYvwLGZh1EIjs50QKDTQ6WUfGMuHT5Yn9qCtYX0fJHpVaG1xjOYcWpNGL4IC__z7P1na9PVFDIotDfJ5ALp7O">https://medium.com/.../for-consideration-the-dudley...</a>
&nbsp;

A community issues and answering program that focuses on the city and people of the Sioux Empire.

Advertisement