For the record I haven’t taken a deep dive into the original plan or the new white washed one but there is one thing that is for certain;

SoDak 350 was one of those organizations that penned the letter. They were joined by Dakota Rural Action, the League of Women Voters of Sioux Falls, Citizens’ Climate Lobby – Sioux Falls, The Mindfill SD, and Common Grounds Indivisible. SoDak 350 Administrative Coordinator Arlene Brandt-Jenson said much of the language was also changed to remove phrases like “climate change” and “greenhouse gas.”

“The plan went from having several hard goals and goals that were implementable in our city, to more ‘exploring the feasibility’ and ‘assessing’. The time for assessing is over.” Brandt-Jenson said.

Actually the time for assessing climate change should have ended over 50 years ago and a plan should have been acted on. Then there was hostages and that Reagan guy. Back to square one.

The (in)action by the administration should be no surprise;

Brandt-Jenson points to a 2021 community survey for the need for action and hard goals. In that survey, at least 80 percent of those that responded said that they were concerned or very concerned about sustainability and environmental issues. Over 90 percent said that it is important or very important that Sioux Falls address sustainability and environmental issues.

Brandt-Jenson also said that the changes to the draft plan throw away much of the work by the committee through 2021 and 2022, which was made up of a diverse group of members.

“And it really negated months of work by that full sustainability committee. A committee that had stakeholders from all across the community. Educators, business people, the gas and utilities, electric utilities,” Brandt-Jenson said. “Why did we need this broad community that spent hours and hours, days and days working on this plan when all of that was negated in one stroke pen basically?”

Is this starting to look familar?

The Sioux Falls Arts Council in coordination with the Visual Arts Commission secured funding for a mural, set up a selection and jury process, employed 3 finalists and over a several month process picked a winner. And with one broad brush stroke, our supposed culturally conscience mayor said too much exposed brown skin and we need to stop this.

Most Republican business owners don’t believe in climate change, at least it isn’t convenient for them to believe, because sustainability takes effort and capital. It is also expensive to install solar panels or geo-thermal heating, but the dividends are provable.

This isn’t about the city gutting a plan or transparency, this is about politics. Somebody told the dictator in the corner office of 9th and Main that all this climate change crap is going to cost businesses. So instead of relying on a committee or experts city hall is relying on the tried and true method of ‘I know best.’

I know I have complained in the past about this administration re-inventing the wheel and using buzz words to name different departments, but climate change research has literally been around for decades, heck even before the mayor was born.

We already know what needs to be done. Just do it and stop playing political games.

*NOTE: I also find it interesting that after 15 years the Mayor’s executive assistant is retiring. I believe Julie was originally hired by Mayor Munson. I am starting to wonder who will be left at city hall when the new mayor is sworn in in 2024? City Hall is starting to look a lot like that building at 10th and Minnesota.

17 Thoughts on “Is the City of Sioux Falls wiping their butt with Sustainability Plan?

  1. Very Stable Genius on March 15, 2023 at 11:48 am said:

    Republicans believe there are winners and losers. Republicans believe that if climate change is real, whether man made or not, that it is to be profited from and not prevented. If you prevent it, then there is a concluding profitability which is attached to regulation, which then further lessens other profits, but if you accept it’s inevitability and then try to profit from it, then the potential profitability trail is endless… Well, assuming we can survive climate change, that is, but Republicans see themselves as “winners”. So, I guess they plan to survive somehow, or at least until the last man standing, which is the ultimate form of winning, I guess. Although, quite lonely…. ( I wonder what it is like to screw yourself in a business deal? )

    The Republican approach to climate change is a battle between finality capitalism versus infinite capitalism, with the GOP being advocates of the latter and obviously at any cost.

    Now, let’s talk about this comment:

    “….Actually the time for assessing climate change should have ended over 50 years ago and a plan should have been acted on. Then there was hostages and that Reagan guy. Back to square one….”

    Well, like I’ve often pondered. If only all of the helicopters would have worked in that Iranian desert back in April of 1980, then things would be so much different today, wouldn’t they?

    But let me conclude by saying we have a Republican mayor with congressional ambitions. So, he can’t sign-off on a real climate change measure if he wants to head to DC “someday” and have new reasons to talk to John King.
    Because like Dusty, he’s potentially in the same quandary, where Dusty only gets 59% of the vote in a Republican primary as the incumbent, but in the fall he has no Democratic opponent and gets 74% of the vote.

  2. D@ily Spin on March 15, 2023 at 3:05 pm said:

    Environment and climate change are federal policy. The city must focus on regional issues. They suck at what they should be doing. Keep them away from quality of life matters. They’ll take more levee money and build pickle ball courts.

  3. Fear & Loathing in Sioux Falls on March 15, 2023 at 3:48 pm said:

    It’s as if the GOP enjoys climate change the way an arms dealer enjoys war.

  4. "Woodstock" on March 15, 2023 at 3:55 pm said:

    “Say, did you see where Noem signed into law a provision which protects gas stoves?….. Yet, her political party didn’t want to give students free lunches”…… “So, then who are we cooking lunch for?”…. #PilotProject #PilotError #ProtectThePilot #ThePoliticsOfNaturalGas #GasErUp #WhatsCooking? #RottenEggs?

  5. Mike Lee Zitterich on March 15, 2023 at 4:39 pm said:

    I recall the plan from over a year ago, I was one of the residents who urged, and asked the City Council to vote NO on the Sustainability Plan last March 2022. This was also right before the “City Election” in April, and I had spoken to many of the future councilors about their take on the agenda, and weeks later, the item was pulled from the “agenda’ of a city council meeting, it had NO Support. For those of us who did read it, this was most definately BAD for business, let alone other aspects to Urban Development, it also included “Social Equity” which added further costs to the program. Who pays for much of those costs? Yours truly, Businesses, “Small Businesses” get hurt the most, and that alone, in an economic pandemic, one of which we have NOT fully recovered yet, this program was going to be very costly. I am one business owner who is thankful to scrap the plan.

  6. Clyde Climate on March 15, 2023 at 9:15 pm said:

    Mike doesn’t indict the efficacy of dramatic climate change. So, why care about the potential impact to small business if it won’t exist in the future with dramatic climate change?

  7. Vincent Van NO! on March 15, 2023 at 9:46 pm said:

    And with one broad brush stroke of Taupe paint…

  8. The Guy From Guernsey on March 15, 2023 at 10:27 pm said:

    VSG nailed it at the conclusion – this is all about maintaining for PTH viability for future political aspiration.

    You see, to spend money like a drunken liberal does not any longer disqualify a pol like TenHaken from claiming Republican bona fides in this state. Especially if you ladle government money to the correct pockets.
    conservative (small c) is simply a personal trait, not a philosphy and practice in governance.
    But to associate your name and political resume with some “woke $h#t” like a Sustainability Plan … well, turn in your ‘R’ card bud.

    Tough spot for PTH.
    He needs an image of a pol who ‘has’ a Sustainability Plan, albeit empty, to continue to appeal to the libs in Sioux Falls.
    But empty it must be … otherwise how can PTH possibly be a standard bearer in future races?

  9. A bit wokee on March 16, 2023 at 8:05 am said:

    How does Sustainability Plan equate to the race based word “woke”? Idiots are using the word as if it a naughty word your mother would have slapped you for using in 1st grade.

  10. My Mistake Mike on March 16, 2023 at 8:13 am said:

    First Mural-gate, now we get climate change denial.

    Honestly, I am surprised that PTH hasn’t ordered a new bed sheet diaper for the Statue of David.

  11. I’m confident that the “bed sheet diaper” is coming. Does anyone know, if State Representative Fred Deutsch knows about our David?

    ( and Woodstock adds: “If so, maybe Mike could assist, huh?”…. )

  12. Woker N' Poker on March 16, 2023 at 6:52 pm said:

    Does anyone know if the controversy with “woke” has impacted wok sales?…. What about Coke? #PepsiFree

  13. Is that you Vincent? on March 16, 2023 at 7:02 pm said:

    Yes, Taupeville is not the land of Van Gogh and his color. Rather, Hare-bourgeois Nord is the land of singularity and darkness reminiscent of the Dark Ages, or the similarity of a stricken land forced to be of all the same color so as to facilitate the run and hide of some drug dealers in a Rio de Janeiro ghetto.

  14. Mike Lee Zitterich on March 17, 2023 at 4:57 am said:

    No one denies that the climate does not change, the issue is we are NOT convinced ‘we’ have to tax people to death so that the Federal Reserve Capitalists can profit from it. I am ashamed by what Americans have come to be today. A faction of Americans have chosen to sell their soul down the river, taking federal monies, grants, and subsidies. Fact is, South Dakota will forever stand up to that faction, keep our income local,, let alone invested inside the State, meaning the Federal Govt cannot profit off S.D Citizens. That is why ‘we’ have created our Trusts, to keep the Federal “pricks” out of our affairs. Stop selling America to the Globalsts, we are a free country to do what we want. Under God, the People Rule.

  15. The Guy From Guernsey on March 19, 2023 at 1:07 pm said:

    I’m certain that one of the liberal South Dacola commenters will also provide correction to your mischaracterization, but dude – you have left so much low hanging fruit with the 3.17.23 post.

    The federal “pricks” have provided $14 billion (billion with a ‘b’) in COVID-related dollars to South Dakota. Money which has been almost gleefully accepted and spent by our faux boot-strappin’ (registered as-) Republican politicians and government.

    I suppose you intended your reply to be specific to global warming, but there again, the former chairman of the South Dakota Republican Party has been instrumental in leading the charge to construct a pipeline to transport carbon dioxide. Why? To profit from federal government money and tax credits by removing and sequestering carbon dioxide generated during production of ethanol from corn. All in the name of “reducing climate change”.
    How can you reconcile these behaviors by our politicians and government with your opinion?

  16. Mike, where do the massive federal ag payments to South Dakotans – and the number one economy in South Dakota – fit into your thesis?

  17. The Ghost of The Starry Night on March 20, 2023 at 3:13 pm said:

    “….to keep the Federal “pricks” out of our affairs….”

    I didn’t know that Mike was so pro-lesbian…. AND, can’t the “Globalists” take advantage of our liberal trust system as well?…. ( Wait a minute, Mike is advocating something that is ‘liberal’…. (?) 🙁 )

Post Navigation