Mayor TenHaken

What is the ‘real plan’ for the Dud House?

l3wis February 25, 2025 2Comments

Many people showed up to the meeting last night to find out what the real reason there needs to be this ‘lease’. Jordan Deffenbaugh attended the meeting, and his summary is below. I heard from a reliable city official that the plan is to move the Dud to the West side of town near the new Banquet. This neighborhood of course is no better off financially then Whittier (many trailer parks). While it would move people out of downtown, it would just create a problem for this neighborhood. I just shake my head with the lack of vision and foresight our city and non-profit leaders have, just to build a CC we don’t want. I think this is the city’s new soundtrack when dealing with the homeless.

A Response to the Bishop Dudley Block Fence Meeting

First off, I’m glad the meeting happened. The city has been avoiding real public discussion about homelessness for far too long. (And no, the “Homeless Forum last month doesn’t count. That was just city officials standing on a stage at the Orpheum, delivering a one-way presentation with no opportunity for feedback.)

So, unsurprisingly, emotions ran high last night. And also unsurprisingly, the city offered little in the way of actual data, scientific reasoning, or evidence to justify the fence.

The structure of the meeting itself made it clear: this wasn’t meant to be a conversation. Speakers stood at the front with a mic, talking at us like we were a classroom of unruly students. The city billed it as an “Informational,” meaning they wanted a monologue, not dialogue.

If it hadn’t been for my partner Sarah Joy asking point-blank whether there would be public input, the city wouldn’t have even pretended to open the floor. And honestly, bless the acoustics of the downtown library space. At least we could talk loudly enough to make sure we were heard, without waiting for permission to pass a mic.

? This Is Not Public Participation, It’s Informing, Not Collaborating.

The city’s approach to this meeting fits neatly into Sherry Arnstein’s “Ladder of Citizen Participation,” a framework that describes different levels of public involvement in decision-making.

Arnstein identifies three broad categories of participation:

• Non-Participation (Manipulation, Therapy) ? Where people are given the illusion of input but have no real influence.

• Tokenism (Informing, Consultation, Placation) ? Where people can express opinions, but decisions are still made without them.

• Citizen Power (Partnership, Delegated Power, Citizen Control) ? Where communities actually co-create decisions and policies.

The city’s handling of the fence issue is stuck at “Informing,” the lowest rung of Tokenism. They aren’t interested in genuine community input, only in telling us what they’ve already decided. A true participatory model would involve partnership, where residents, including those most affected, help shape policies instead of being lectured to.

This is why we need alternative spaces where real conversations can happen.

? This Is Not About Safety, It’s About Gentrification.

One Whittier resident at last night’s meeting shared a heartfelt concern:

“My children are afraid to play in their yard. My youngest daughter doesn’t want to be left home alone with the doors locked because of what’s going on in this neighborhood.”

I get it. Parents want their kids to feel safe. But let’s be clear: this fence doesn’t solve that problem. If anything, it could make things worse by pushing unhoused people further into residential areas instead of addressing the root causes of why they’re in crisis in the first place.

And that’s the piece of the story no one in city leadership is saying out loud:

? What is Actually Happening: Gentrification by Concentrated Public Services.

What’s happening on 8th Street follows a well-documented pattern used in cities across the country:

1. Concentrate services in one area – The city designates a single neighborhood as the “service hub” for shelters, soup kitchens, addiction treatment, and other social services. This floods the area with people in crisis while simultaneously reducing private investment.

2. Let conditions deteriorate – By failing to invest in infrastructure (crosswalks, public restrooms, shade, transit access), the city makes daily life in the area more difficult, not just for unhoused residents, but for businesses and longtime homeowners, too.

3. Depress property values – As crime increases due to economic desperation and lack of stability, property values drop. Homeowners sell at a loss, landlords neglect properties, and businesses struggle.

4. Introduce punitive measures – The city implements restrictive policies like fencing off public spaces, increasing police surveillance, and passing ordinances that make it harder for unhoused people to exist in the area.

5. Rebrand and redevelop – Once prices are low enough, developers swoop in, city-backed reinvestment starts, and the area is transformed into an “up-and-coming” district—often at the direct expense of the people who were displaced.

This strategy has played out across the country in cities like San Francisco’s Tenderloin, Los Angeles’ Skid Row, and even Omaha’s Park East neighborhood. In each case, the city claimed it was simply managing homelessness, but in reality, it was facilitating the cycle of displacement ? devaluation ? redevelopment.

? Sioux Falls is Following This Exact Pattern.

For years, the city has concentrated services along 8th Street, while ignoring basic infrastructure needs that would actually help residents, housed and unhoused alike. The area has been allowed to deteriorate under the pretense of “compassionate” centralization. Now, with the fence proposal, they are escalating the process, tightening control, displacing people, and clearing the path for redevelopment.

The fence isn’t a safety measure. It’s a signal, to developers, investors, and political stakeholders, that the city is ready for the next phase: rebranding and selling off the neighborhood.

If Sioux Falls leaders actually wanted to improve safety and stability, they would be investing in:

• Housing-first initiatives that provide permanent supportive housing

• Infrastructure upgrades like pedestrian safety, lighting, and transit access

• Community-driven solutions instead of unilateral, punitive decisions

Instead, they’re opting for a fence. Because the goal has never been to solve homelessness. It’s been to move homelessness out of sight, while setting the stage for profit-driven redevelopment.

? What a Human-Centered Approach Would Look Like?

The fence is not a human-centered design response—it’s a punitive response.

Human-centered design is an approach that focuses on the real needs and experiences of people when creating solutions. Instead of imposing top-down, punitive measures, HCD involves listening to the community, understanding root causes, and designing interventions that improve conditions for everyone, not just those in power.

Cities that take human-centered approaches, like Houston, Helsinki, and Vienna, have used housing-first models, pedestrian safety improvements, and community co-design processes to actually solve these problems. Sioux Falls could do the same, if leaders were serious about solutions instead of optics.

? What You Can Do: Show Up, Speak Out & Email City Council

The next week is critical. If you’re frustrated, you don’t have to sit on the sidelines.

? Wednesday, Feb 26 @ 6 PM – Join the Good NAtured Monthly Houseless Forum (921 E 8th Street) for a real, participant-driven discussion on homelessness.

Unlike the city’s “Informational” sessions, we’re hosting a real community forum, one where participation is not just allowed, but central to the process.

This event will follow the Open Space Technology and Future Forums models, where:

• The agenda is set by those who show up.

• Discussions are participant-driven.

• Everyone has an equal voice in shaping solutions.

? Tuesday, March 4 – Show up to City Council, or join City Council Bingo at Gist Wine Shop

• City Council Meeting @ Carnegie Hall – The fence issue is on the agenda. Public input matters.

• City Council Bingo @ Gist Wine Shop – A fun, engaging way to track what’s happening in local government.

? Email Your City Councilors Today

The city needs to hear from you. Let them know your thoughts on this fence, on real safety solutions, and on what’s missing from their approach to homelessness.

City Council email addresses will be in the comments.

Your voice matters. The only way we change the direction of this conversation is by showing up, speaking out, and demanding better.

Residents deserve to be angry. But they also deserve the full story.