SF City Council

Delbridge Museum Public Resolution – Tuesday, February 11, 2025, 6:00 PM

As you know Lenin’s Tomb of Dead Monkeys is headed to Notre Dame on Tuesday. A guest post from Mike Z;

On Tuesday, February 6, 2025 – the City Council is being asked to Adopt the following “Resolution” to Surplus, and Remove All Specimens no later than September 30, 2025.  For All those who wish to attend this City Council Meeting, this meeting will take place at the Carnegie Town Hall with all members present – The Mayor and Eight City Council Members.  The Meeting begins at 6:00 PM and each person shall have no more than 5 Minutes to Speak on this particular agenda item. “We” need at least 5 Council Members to Vote No on this Resolution to defeat it. 
I Highly Recommend that All Residents to whom wish to Speak to the City Council this Tuesday, hereby contact the City Council as soon as possible, recommending that the council vote “No” on the following resolution, while further, recommending a plan forward that instructs the city council to invoke its chartered powers as per Section 2.09 to Investigate the Situation using their subpoena powers to hold further, all public officials, officers, agents, employees accountable for their actions in relation to the Delbridge Museum, let alone, allowing them to subpoena any documents, public records, emails, other important items, enabling the community to gather all facts, truths, and understanding of what the Mayor’s Office, Department of Parks & Recreation, Great Plains Zoo, and Sioux Falls Butterfly House and Aquarium have been attempting to do between September 1, 2022 and September 30, 2024. 
The End Goal should be to instruct the City Council to bring forth a future ordinance to which does the following: 

  • Does Not Surplus the Delbridge Museum Taxidermy Collection
  • Directs City Government to Refurbish, Preserve, Maintain Ownership
  • Maintain Public Displays of Taxidermy on All Public Property
  • Directs City Council to Fund Permanent Home of Taxidermy
  • Keep the Taxidermy Within City Limits @ Zoo or Other Public Places
  • Honors the Gifting Agreement as Established by C.J Delbridge
  • Preserves, and Protects the Henry Brockhouse Family Desires, Memory

Below, is the Resolution in Question:
A Resolution that Promises to Surplus and Give Away the Brockhouse Animal Collection to Three Out-Of-State Institutions

A RESOLUTION DECLARING THE BROCKHOUSE ANIMAL COLLECTION SURPLUS AND AUTHORIZING THE GIFTING TO UNIVERSITY OF NOTRE DAME, INSTITUTE FOR NATURAL HISTORY ARTS, INC., AND THE ODDITIES MUSEUM, INC.

  • WHEREAS, Henry Brockhouse, a Sioux Falls businessman, was an avid hunter in the 1940s, 1950s, and 1960s, and, as a result, he acquired an extensive collection of mounted animals from six continents (the “Brockhouse Animal Collection” or “Collection”) which he displayed to customers and visitors for many years in his West Sioux Hardware store (“West Sioux”) until his death in 1978; and
  • WHEREAS, many of these species are protected under the Endangered Species Act, Marine Mammal Protection Act, Lacey Act, and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act; and
  • WHEREAS, in 1981, C.J. and Alene Delbridge purchased the Brockhouse Animal Collection from West Sioux; and
  • WHEREAS, between 1981 and 1985, the Delbridges gifted the Brockhouse Animal Collection in its entirety to the City with no reversionary interest; and
  • WHEREAS, the City has full legal ownership of the Brockhouse Animal Collection, which are listed individually in the document attached hereto as Exhibit A; and
  • WHEREAS, from 1984 to 2023, the City housed and publicly displayed the Brockhouse Animal Collection at the Delbridge Museum of Natural History (“Delbridge Museum”) located at the Great Plains Zoo campus; and
  • WHEREAS, over the years, the Collection has undergone several assessments by consultants to determine its current condition and to identify its needs with its advancing age as the animal mounts are 50 to 80 years old; and
  • WHEREAS, in 2023, the Zoological Society of Sioux Falls, the manager of the Great Plains Zoo, as part of its routine assessment of the Collection, sent in swab tests for chemicals and subsequently received lab results from Midwest Laboratories (“Lab”) that 79.5 percent of the Collection tested positive for arsenic, a chemical which had been used in the taxidermy process for the preservation of hides in the era when Brockhouse first acquired these animals in this Collection, which led to the closure of the Delbridge Museum in August of 2023 to explore other options; and
  • WHEREAS, in September 2023, Mayor TenHaken convened a work group to specify the next steps for the Brockhouse Animal Collection; and-
  • WHEREAS, the work group engaged A.M. Art Conservation, LLC, and George Dante Studios to assess the Collection. The site visit occurred February 5–9, 2024, and the report was finalized July 8, 2024; and
  • WHEREAS, over several months, presentations were made to the work group showing the following: (1) Canopy Strategic Partners’ analysis of visitors at the Great Plains Zoo usage data shows poor visitation to the Delbridge Museum at 2.8 percent of total zoo attendees spending 7 minutes or more in the Delbridge Museum when it was operational between the period of 2017 and 2023; (2) A.M. Art Conservation, LLC and George Dante Studios provided a cost proposal to restore the mounts which was estimated at roughly $850,000 (excluding cost for cleaning, transportation, and arsenic treatment); (3) 18 of the specimens were deemed “not recommended for treatment”; (4) a new building to store the Collection was preliminarily estimated to cost between $6 million and $7 million, which includes the diorama expense and 6-foot-tall glass partitions ($1 million) or the fully-enclosed glass systems ($2 million), which is the best practice to safely display the Collection; and (5) there would be ongoing annual operating costs to include marketing of the Collection after this major investment of $126,000/year.
  • WHEREAS, the work group recommended that state law be changed, which would allow disposition of the taxidermy mounts to out-of-state nonprofit organizations; and
  • WHEREAS, in early 2024, House Bill 1100, amending SDCL 6-13-15, passed and became effective July 1, 2024, which secured an exemption for taxidermy to allow the Delbridge mounts to be legally transported out of state, facilitating donation to other out-of-state nonprofit institutions; and
  • WHEREAS, on September 20, 2024, the City issued a Request for Qualification and Expression of Interest (“RFQEI”) to gauge interest from qualified entities for future ownership, management, preservation, and utilization of the Brockhouse Collection; and
  • WHEREAS, the City received six proposals in response to the RFQEI and no qualified 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization from South Dakota submitted a proposal; and
  • WHEREAS, the University of Notre Dame, the Institute for Natural History Arts, Inc., and Oddities Museum, Inc. find it desirable to acquire a portion of the Collection as follows: • 117 specimens—University of Notre Dame • 33 specimens—Oddities Museum, Inc. • 2 specimens—Institute for Natural History Arts, Inc.
  • WHEREAS, the University of Notre Dame, the Institute for Natural History Arts, Inc., and Oddities Museum, Inc. are all 501(c)(3) nonprofit organizations; and
  • WHEREAS, pursuant to SDCL 6-13-1, the governing board of a public subdivision may gift property which the governing board has, by appropriate motion, determined is no longer necessary, useful, or suitable for the purpose for which it was acquired; and
  • WHEREAS, pursuant to SDCL 6-13-15, any municipality may provide as a gift to any nonprofit organization that is recognized as an exempt organization under 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended to January 1, 1996, any collection of specimens preserved by a taxidermist that has been housed in a museum or other display owned by the municipality. The gift may include collection display and storage fixtures and related tangible personal property; and
  • WHEREAS, based on the above findings, the City hereby finds the Collection is no longer necessary, useful, or suitable for the purpose for which it was acquired; and
  • WHEREAS, the Sioux Falls Zoo and Aquarium Board met on August 23, 2023, and unanimously recommended the Collection be declared surplus; and
  • WHEREAS, the Brockhouse Animal Collection at Delbridge Museum work group met on January 17, 2025, and unanimously recommended the Collection be declared surplus and recommended the City Council authorize the gifting of the Collection to the University of Notre Dame, the Institute for Natural History Arts, Inc., and Oddities Museum, Inc; and
  • WHEREAS, the Parks and Recreation Board met on January 29, 2025, and unanimously recommended the Collection be declared surplus and recommended the City Council authorize the gifting of the Collection to the University of Notre Dame, the Institute for Natural History Arts, Inc., and Oddities Museum, Inc.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY OF SIOUX FALLS, SD: 
Section 1. That the recitals above are adopted as findings and are incorporated herein by reference. 
Section 2. The City hereby declares, pursuant to SDCL Chapter 6-13, the Brockhouse Animal Collection housed at the Delbridge Museum of Natural History to be surplus property and is no longer necessary, useful, or suitable for the purpose for which it was acquired. In support of this determination, the City found that one, all, or a combination of these factors listed in the recitals support a determination for surplus. 
Section 3. That, pursuant to SDCL 6-13-15, the Brockhouse Animal Collection identified in Exhibit A is hereby gifted to the following 501(c)(3) nonprofit organizations: the University of Notre Dame; the Oddities Museum, Inc., and the Institute for Natural History Arts, Inc. 
Section 4. The above-described Collection shall be divided as follows:

  1. 117 specimens—University of Notre Dame 
  2.  33 specimens—Oddities Museum, Inc. 
  3. 2 specimens—Institute for Natural History Arts, Inc. 

Section 5. The City shall publish this resolution with attachment after its passage. The attachment is on file and available for inspection in the office of the City Clerk.The division of the Collection is depicted in Exhibit A

As per the contracts being agreed to, All Specimens must be Removed from the Delbridge Museum no later than September 30, 2025

UPDATE: City of Sioux Falls will construct a $70K fence around The Dudley House

UPDATE: While discussing this with folks we realized there is also a huge conflict of interest with the city giving this money for fence construction. The director of the shelter, Madeline Shields, is a contract employee(?) with the city doing ‘Inside Townhall’ as their moderator. I tried to get her removed because of this conflict several years ago (a raccoon could host the show) but no dice. So now we are giving money to city employees’ pet projects? WOW! I would also be curious what she get’s paid to do a 20 minute show once a month? Any guesses? Apparently $70K. I also had a conversation with a city councilor about this saying I approved of fencing for the employees but that should be the expense of the BDH. Obviously it would have to be withdrawn or amended at Tuesday’s meeting, not holding my breath.

Hey, just make sure you don’t put the fence posts in 5 gallon pails, that’s a NO NO. Item #20, read the explanation HERE!

Essentially we will lease the parking lot for $1 a year and pay for the fence and maintenance. A better approach would be tearing out the parking lot and put in a pollinator garden. This will just make the place look like a prison, and the folks that are now using it for shelter will just move into other parts of the neighborhood and downtown. When you tell a homeless person that can’t sleep on a certain sidewalk, they will just find another sidewalk. You are solving nothing and you may exacerbate the problem. Right now most of them are full view at that location, kick them out and they will disperse all over causing an even bigger problem. Be curious who the brain child that cooked this up? But I do agree employees of the BDH need a fenced in parking lot, but they can pay for it themselves. We keep throwing money at this issue for all the wrong reasons.

CITY OF SIOUX FALLS ALREADY APPROVING SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS AND IT IS ONLY FEBRUARY!

Item #22, well this isn’t good. A little early to start digging into savings. I have a feeling we will be seeing a lot of this this year. (Note, the $2.5 Million is a donation to us from a private party).

The 1st Amendment and the Sioux Falls City Council

It seems I am spending a lot of time these days talking about the role of the council and the 1st Amendment. The thing that always puzzles me is that the 1st Amendment is NOT complicated, but folks struggle with it.

So today HB Bill 1050 got killed, by a ONE VOTE in taxation committee. Several folks were instrumental in killing this bill. It would have pretty much put a $450M tax debt on the citizens of Sioux Falls if passed. I posted Greg Neitzert’s written testimony after the hearing. I truly believe that testimony changed minds, and Cathy B’s telephone testimony cinched the deal. I also emailed the committee suggesting amendments and solutions (I think it would be good for small towns, but NOT SF.)

After this I assumed city hall was reeling, trying to figure out their next steps (I will post later about the future of the Riverline District).

But things got really interesting.

I’m going to leave the constituent’s name out of this for privacy reasons, and the city councilor, because I think it applies to the ENTIRE council.

Their is a constituent that emails the mayor and the council quite a bit, he is very involved in local politics, and I don’t always agree, but he always CC’s me in the emails so I am a media witness (I think I told him to do this). I have several concerned citizens that CC me when sending emails to the city council and I encourage you to CC me, witnesses are important.

fb.art@sio.midco.net

I sometimes do a reply all to their emails if I feel something needs to be clarified or piled onto.

After I posted Former Sioux Falls City Councilor Greg Neitzert’s* submitted written testimony to the taxation committee on the blog this constituent emailed the council with Greg’s testimony and a brief statement about his work. This person called the council ‘CORRUPT’ three times, but in fair context and NOT harassment. Then he said that Greg has ‘LARGE BALLS’. Trust me, I spit out my coffee when I read that, but it’s NOT a threat or harassment. In fact, Neitzert saw the email and thot it was funny. So a newly elected city councilor wasn’t having it and reported the email to Human Resources as harassment. HOGWASH! Not only is this constituent completely harmless they wouldn’t hurt a soul, but that doesn’t matter. This NEW councilor seems to think that he is a city employee and has the same protections, he does not, YOU ARE ELECTED and must follow the constraints of the 1st Amendment and the US Constitution. Now if such an email was sent to an unelected city employee, that would be an issue. So the city’s HR department warned this constituent if they send anymore ‘Harassing Emails’ they will be blocked. First off, they don’t have that authority because this person is NOT a city employee, secondly, sending an email about concerns is NOT threatening. It often puzzles me that they put their hand on a bible and swear an oath to the Constitution but have no idea what is in the document. If you can’t handle the heat in the Carnegie Kitchen may I suggest resignation. Nobody will miss yah. The irony of all this is this councilor was in a similar situation at a former employer. Kettle meet Black.

*Full disclosure, I worked on Greg’s first term campaign coordinating his messaging, graphic design, marketing and direct mail, it was one of the most successful campaigns I was involved with, we kicked ass and took names!