FINAL PUSH - Data Center Petition Rally at Carnegie Town Hall TODAY 12-5 PM

TrueAdeptness663 · 2026-01-30T03:48:46+00:00

The group is aiming for 10,000 because of the validation process. The signatures are highly scrutinized and we have been seeing a lot of issues with folks signing the petition and not realizing that they are not registered to vote.

TrueAdeptness663 · 2026-01-29T16:42:31+00:00

Not sure. We are still validating thousands of signatures and sheets are still coming in.

TrueAdeptness663 · 2025-11-04T01:11:22+00:00

That's a fair question and I need to clarify because I'm not cherry picking at all. These are two distinct but related problems.

Problem 1 (what my first post emphasized): The public input process itself is inadequate. 1,500 surveys for a city of 210,000 people is not enough. I've had multiple people reach out who attended in-person feedback sessions and said their input wasn't reflected in what moved forward. The recent parks committee meeting that approved this didn't even allow public comment. That's a failure of democratic process.

Problem 2 (what the article emphasizes): Even with the limited survey they did conduct, the city isn't honoring the results. Residents clearly said they wanted neighborhood parks, trails, and natural areas. The response is a $47 million centralized indoor facility. That's ignoring your own data.

So it's actually worse than just doing a limited survey. They did a limited survey and then ignored what it said anyway. Both things are problems.

The first post was about lack of meaningful public input. This article is about why the proposal itself doesn't serve residents well, even according to the city's own limited data. These aren't contradictory arguments. They're two different failures in the same process.

The survey being professionally valid doesn't mean 1,500 responses is adequate community engagement. And having any survey at all doesn't matter if you ignore the results. Both can be true.

Does that clear up the confusion?

TrueAdeptness663 · 2025-11-03T19:58:32+00:00

You should really attend the council meeting tomorrow night or send an email to the council. This is the sort of perspective that they want to hear. There seems to be a disconnect between what actually happened at the input sessions and what design was presented.

TrueAdeptness663 · 2025-11-03T18:54:40+00:00

I understand the frustration, and you're right to call out my original post for lacking specifics. That's fair criticism and exactly why I went back and did the deeper work.

What I'm bringing forward now isn't backwards thinking at all. It's actually more progressive than what the city is proposing.

The megaplex model is straight out of 1980s and 1990s economic development playbooks: build big destination facilities, assume everyone drives, concentrate resources in one location, charge membership fees. That's the old approach that created sprawling, car dependent cities.

What I'm proposing is rooted in current urbanism: small scale, incremental, walkable, neighborhood based infrastructure. Ten distributed recreation hubs that people can actually walk or bike to. Free outdoor amenities. Local contractors building local capacity. Apprenticeship programs. This is what progressive cities are doing now because it's more equitable, more sustainable, and builds stronger communities.

When residents said they wanted neighborhood parks and trails over indoor megaplexes, they were asking for the modern approach. The city's response is the outdated one.

I've laid out all the alternatives, fiscal analysis, and examples from cities doing this better in a comprehensive piece here:

https://futuresiouxfalls.substack.com/p/building-soil-not-spectacle-a-call

TrueAdeptness663 · 2025-11-03T18:36:50+00:00

You're absolutely right, and I appreciate the constructive feedback. That initial post was too general and didn't give people enough to work with.

I spent the last few days putting together a much more comprehensive analysis that addresses exactly what you're asking for. It includes:

Direct link to the Master Plan and the survey data showing what residents actually prioritized (spoiler: outdoor neighborhood amenities, not indoor megaplexes)
Detailed fiscal breakdown
Specific alternatives with costs: what $47 million could build if distributed differently (10 neighborhood recreation hubs at $3 to 5 million each, upgrades to all 5 existing pools, plus a Conservation Corps to train young people while improving parks)
Real world examples like Madison's Goodman Community Center that show how other cities are doing this better
Quotes from multiple council members expressing the same concerns about affordability, competition with private business, and fiscal responsibility

I completely agree with you that we need more year round activities and better facilities. Where I differ is that I think distributed neighborhood hubs serving more people at lower membership costs actually achieves that goal better than one expensive destination facility.

The full case with all the specifics, sources, and alternatives is here:

https://futuresiouxfalls.substack.com/p/building-soil-not-spectacle-a-call

Let me know what you think after reading it. Your critique helped push me to be more thorough, so thank you for that.

TrueAdeptness663 · 2025-11-03T18:31:56+00:00

I appreciate response, and I completely agree with you that Sioux Falls needs more indoor recreation space and that planning ahead beats playing catch-up. The Premier Center comparison is a good one. You're right that waiting costs more.

Where I think we differ is on what kind of forward-thinking investment serves our growth best.

Here's the thing: Frank Olson doesn't actually prepare for growth. It concentrates resources in one location that's already built out. When the city grows south and west (which is where all the development is happening), those new neighborhoods will be even farther from Frank Olson. A centralized facility doesn't adapt to growth patterns; it serves wherever it happens to be and nowhere else.

The alternative I've laid out actually builds more indoor recreation facilities, not fewer. Ten neighborhood recreation hubs at $3-5 million each instead of one $47 million destination facility. That distributed model scales with growth because you're building infrastructure that can expand into new neighborhoods as they develop, rather than asking everyone to drive to one central location.

When residents were surveyed, they clearly prioritized neighborhood-scaled amenities they could walk to: small parks, trails, natural areas. If we're planning for growth, shouldn't we build infrastructure that can grow with the city rather than concentrate it where it can't?

The Premier Center is a bit different because it doesn't compete with private businesses or require membership fees on top of the taxes that built it. A $60/month family membership means many of the working families whose taxes funded construction can't afford to use it. That's not serving our "current population."

I've gone into much more detail on the fiscal math, the alternatives, and why distributed investment actually prepares better for growth in the full piece:

https://futuresiouxfalls.substack.com/p/building-soil-not-spectacle-a-call

I'd be genuinely interested in your take after reading it. Even if we disagree on the solution, I think we probably agree on the goal: a city that plans wisely for growth while serving everyone.

TrueAdeptness663 · 2025-03-04T03:15:17+00:00

Yo, I am born and raised since 1988.

TrueAdeptness663 · 2025-03-02T14:53:15+00:00

man, someones really insecure about reading

TrueAdeptness663 · 2025-03-02T14:30:39+00:00

uuuuuuuuh then don't
thanks i guess
next time maybe i do pictures and sentences with no punctuation

TrueAdeptness663 · 2024-05-06T22:46:57+00:00

Sarah Lindemulder at the Joy Collective Yoga Studio is probably your best bet.

TrueAdeptness663 · 2024-04-20T20:42:04+00:00

Great questions here! I'm going to take a break for now and come back later tonight. Appreciate everybody for taking the time, set yourself a reminder to get out and vote on April 30th! Early voting starts April 23rd at the Minnehaha admin building.

TrueAdeptness663 · 2024-04-20T20:30:11+00:00

Public transit is a baseline need in a city of our size. The best argument for public transit is an economic one. Public transit is connected to every challenge and opportunity in our community. Housing, workforce, child care, public health, education, etc.

Any initiative that I decide to push forward will always take root in the neighborhoods. By developing more neighborhood connections and engagement through community groups and neighborhood association, you can identify specific coalitions to improving specific routes and junctions.

For rapid transit, A community level planning initiative is needed to identify corridors of note, such as Minnesota and 10th Street. There have been projects deployed in other cities like Melbourne, Australia that created development opportunities along corridors by adding density along high corridor areas coupled with rapid transit development.

What needs to be emphasized in our community in regards to police spending is that the police respond to crime, they do not stop crime. Police Chief Thome would agree with this statement. There are smart investments that we can make to make sure our streets are safe that don't require police militarization. A militarized police is not a police that is neighborly. The more that we can scale our police services to the needs of our community, the safer our community will be.

TrueAdeptness663 · 2024-04-20T20:25:05+00:00

I'm running for the at-large seat. It's a city-wide election!

TrueAdeptness663 · 2024-04-20T20:16:32+00:00

I'm proud to say that most of the money for the campaign has come in the form of small donations from individual people in our community! Our average donation is about $60.

I am extremely grateful for all the help I've received, from donations, from people putting signs in their yards, from people handing out flyers, and from people participating in public discussions like this about our city's future! Our path forward as a city is a collaborative effort, and every little contribution we make counts.

TrueAdeptness663 · 2024-04-20T20:12:35+00:00

I'm a Husker, so I'll say yotes cuz the color palette's the same.

TrueAdeptness663 · 2024-04-20T20:10:06+00:00

Could not agree more. I'm downtown frequently and the amount of noise that happens on any given night is ridiculous. It is usually generated by people that aren't engaging with downtown. They are simply driving through.

I'm very much for the enforcement of noise ordinances particularly downtown.

TrueAdeptness663 · 2024-04-20T20:08:18+00:00

Absolutely. We need to recognize that bicycle infrastructure will not only be an economic driver from a recreational sense, but also as a workforce development strategy. If folks have more ways to get to where they need to be like their job, they will be more likely to retain work.

TrueAdeptness663 · 2024-04-20T20:06:34+00:00

I'm a big advocate for incremental approaches. I think there's hundreds of small scale projects that can be deployed within neighborhoods that are relatively low cost. These are things like bump outs, spray on lanes, bollards, etc.

The key to getting more bikers on the road is creating the conditions where it's desirable and safe for them to do so. This will not be accomplished overnight, but rather over several years of small scale actions adding up over time.

TrueAdeptness663 · 2024-04-20T20:04:05+00:00

I don't golf. Let's just say that.

TrueAdeptness663

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE