Let's rise together
Rising Together with Vince Danh
Menu
2026 Election GuideGet involvedMeet VinceBlog

Early voting is open. Last day to register: Monday, Oct. 19. Check your registration

← All posts

Oct. 5, 2026 ยท 7 min read

The Smithfield ruling in plain words

A judge says the city skipped its own rules when it approved Smithfield's new plant. I supported the move. Here's what the ruling means.

Smithfield is part of the story of Sioux Falls. The plant on the Big Sioux has been there since 1909. Thousands of our neighbors work there. Many of our families got their start there.

So when a judge ruled on the plan for Smithfield's new plant last week, a lot of people asked me the same thing. What does this mean?

Here's my best attempt at a plain answer.

First, a quick recap

In February, Smithfield announced it will leave its downtown site and build a new $1.3 billion pork plant in Foundation Park. That's on the northwest edge of the city, near where I-29 and I-90 meet.

The downtown plant sits on about 120 acres. Smithfield has until July 2030 to move out. After that, the land is set to be redeveloped, with help from a $50 million gift from T. Denny Sanford.

In March, the City Council approved a special permit for the new plant. More than 20 rural homeowners near the site, out by Crooks, sued the city in April.

Where I stood

I want to be upfront about something. I supported this move.

Back in March, I spoke in favor of it at the Planning Commission and at City Council, more than once. I believed then, and I still believe, that keeping thousands of good jobs in Sioux Falls matters. So does opening up 120 acres of downtown for whatever comes next.

I also assumed the city was doing every step its own rules require. According to this ruling, it wasn't.

That doesn't change why I supported the move. But it does change how I think about my part in it. Supporting a project and holding the process to a high standard are not opposites. I should have asked more questions about how we were getting there, not just where we were going.

What's a conditional use permit?

Our city has zoning rules. They say what can be built where.

One rule says heavy industry, like a meat plant, has to sit at least 1,000 feet from land zoned for homes. The new plant would be about 842 feet away.

Map of the proposed Smithfield site in Foundation Park, bounded by Marion Road, 258th Street, Memory Lane and Derry Road, with homes along 258th Street

The proposed site sits just south of homes along 258th Street. Map by Rising Together, using City of Sioux Falls GIS data.

A conditional use permit, or CUP, is how a city says yes to a project that doesn't fit the normal rules. It comes with conditions. The city is supposed to look closely at the impact on neighbors and plan ways to soften it.

What the judge said

Circuit Judge Ann Hoffman ruled that the city didn't follow its own rules when it approved the permit.

According to the ruling, the application was a single page. It didn't include things the city's own code requires, like a neighborhood meeting, a site plan for odor and litter, a water impact review or a fire department report.

The judge also pointed to Sioux Falls' own long-range plan, which calls heavy industry next to homes "highly incompatible." She wrote that the two uses being so close "requires mitigation to minimize the impact." She didn't find that plan in the record.

She did not find that anyone on the council acted out of bias or for personal gain. This was about the process.

What it does not mean

This ruling does not stop Smithfield from building in Sioux Falls. It does not cancel the move. It does not change the plans for downtown.

What it does is undo the permit and send it back to the City Council to decide again. This time, with the homework the rules require.

Even Pattie Guthrie, one of the homeowners who sued, put it this way: "Does it mean that Smithfield won't come here? No, it doesn't say that. Is it as much as we had hoped for? No, but it's a start."

What happens next

The city attorney said the city "respects the court's decision and will carefully review the judge's opinion." Smithfield said it had no immediate comment.

From here, the city has two paths. It can appeal to the South Dakota Supreme Court. Or the council can take up the permit again and do it by the book. We don't know yet which way it will go. I'll share it here when we do.

Why this matters for all of us

You don't have to live near Foundation Park for this to matter.

Last week at The Quarry, I wrote that the right order is to listen first and build second. This ruling says something similar. When a big decision affects people's homes, the steps the city skips are often the ones where neighbors get heard.

Both things can be true. I know, because I hold both. Smithfield's move is one of the biggest economic decisions in our city's history. Thousands of jobs ride on it, and so does the future of downtown. And the people who will live next to it deserve a real seat at the table.

Getting the process right protects everyone. It protects the neighbors. It protects the workers. It even protects the project, because a decision made the right way is much harder to undo.

How to stay in the loop

  • Watch for it on the council agenda. If the permit comes back, it will go before the City Council again, and council meetings always have time for public input. Agendas are posted at siouxfalls.gov.
  • Read the reporting. South Dakota News Watch has a clear write-up of the ruling. For the big picture on the move and downtown's future, Sioux Falls Simplified has a great explainer.
  • Tell me what you want to know. Got a question about Smithfield, the new site or the downtown land? Send it my way and I'll dig in.

It's always been our city, and now is our moment. Let's rise together.

Sources

Cover photo: Smithfield Foods pork processing plant, Sioux Falls by Tony Webster, CC BY-SA 2.0.

Vince DanhCommunity builder, storyteller, and Sioux Falls' unofficial hype man.

Have a tip or a story idea? Email issues@risingtogethersf.com.

Let's rise together