Dixie Hieb lays out the job of the board, and what their decisions ultimately mean in reference to Terrace Park;

I have complete confidence that our City’s Parks Department and Confluence, the landscape architecture firm involved with the project, will develop a plan that both improves accessibility and protects the historic integrity of Terrace Park. I believe the planning and approval process is an opportunity to serve both of these goals, but characterizing the process as a battle between opposing groups serves only to undermine these goals. All of the parties involved care deeply about Terrace Park, and together we will find solutions that maintain the historical character of the park for generations to come.

I couldn’t agree more. This isn’t about fighting the city, this is about preserving our city. That takes transparency and cooperation.

By l3wis

10 thoughts on “Chair of the Sioux Falls Board of Historic Preservation writes a letter of clarification”
  1. I agree. What’s important is preserving the character of Terrace and other parks. We lost Spellerburg to social upper class swim teams. Keep our other parks but be sure they are maintained as much as Denny Dome.

  2. There’s no discrimination in Sioux Falls if you’re a doctor or banker relative. Otherwise, Huether owes you a favor or you contributed to his campaign. As for the rest of us, we look forward to the day we can afford a home in a suburb city where there’s no tyrannical persecution and neighbors are neighbors according to definition and not Huether designation.

  3. All the park board members are in the social upper class (country club) as is Don Kearney, head of the parks department and Mike Crane, head of the park board. They also all reside in the southeast portion of the city.

    It is time and appropriate for regional representation on the park board. The needs of the average citizen deserves equal representation.

  4. Change the ordinances so all city boards are picked by City Council members instead of the Mayor.

    It still wouldn’t be a perfect system, but it should spread the board members across the city and split the board power across the council instead of leaving it all in the hands of the Mayor.

    This Mayor has proven it’s too easy for him to interfere behind the scenes and affect outcomes, whether it’s the ethics board or the parks board.

    Apparently absolute power does corrupt absolutely.

  5. Actually, NaF, the city council DOES have final say on all of these mayoral appointments. The mayor submits his recommendations to the council, which gets the final vote.

    Sad thing is the council has become so disengaged from the process that it usually rubberstamps the mayor’s recommendation with little, if any, comment.

  6. Mistake is right. The council has final approval, but NEVER question the appointments. In fact in the 10 years I have been watching meetings, I have never seen an appointment questioned. Even when the Finance Director from SDN was being investigated, and councilor Vernon Brown knew about it, he wasn’t removed from the audit committee as an appointment.

  7. I guess if we see you turning blue, we will know why.

    BTW, as I have read this letter a few more times, and re-watched the video of the meeting and what ‘actually’ went on, I get the feeling that Dixie had either a ‘ghost writer’ or a helpful ‘editor’. Not sure where Mike finds the time.

  8. I would hardly characterize Spellerberg Park as having a “historical” nature. It has been in my own lifetime – and not all that early in it – that it was created. For many years, it was essentially just a big hill with some trees. Sherman Park, just a few blocks away, is one with real historical significance, and it has been altered over the years as well. The retention basin in Spellerberg had already significantly altered its “natural” state.

Comments are closed.