The Top Hat property itself is not just another downtown parcel. It has long functioned as a neighborhood gathering place and remains part of the older social and commercial fabric of Sioux Falls at a time when much of downtown has been transformed by large-scale development, institutional expansion, and surface parking. That does not decide the legal question of designation, but it does explain why the process deserves public attention.
Our publication has formally started the historic-designation process for the property at 508 S. First Ave. in Sioux Falls, filing materials with the City of Sioux Falls and separately forwarding documentation to the South Dakota Historical Society for review.
What happened next is the reason this story matters: the city’s initial response was that Sioux Falls does not do historic designations at the city level, that it only deals with alterations to properties already listed on the National Register, and that designation itself simply follows state action. That position is difficult to square with the plain language of Sioux Falls’ own ordinances.
This matters for more than one reason. The question here is not only whether 508 S. First Ave. qualifies for historic recognition, but whether Sioux Falls follows the preservation process it has already written into law. If the city has a local designation framework on paper, the public has a right to know whether that framework is being applied in practice.
Start with Sioux Falls Municipal Code Chapter 151, the city’s historic-preservation chapter. It does not describe a state-only system. It expressly creates a local register. Section 151.035 states that “the city hereby creates the Sioux Falls Register of Historic Landmarks,” also called the local register. The same chapter lays out local designation criteria in § 151.036, including whether a property is associated with significant events, important people, distinctive architecture, master craftsmanship, a significant historic entity, or the potential to yield important historical information. In other words, the code does not just regulate already-designated places; it establishes a city-run designation framework.
The ordinance is even more specific about who may start the process. Under § 151.037, nominations for inclusion on the local register are made to the Sioux Falls Board of Historic Preservation on a form prepared by the board, and they may be submitted not only by the owner or the City Council, but also by a board member or “any other person or organization.” That language matters. It means a local nomination is not limited to state officials, and it is not limited to property owners alone. The city code itself contemplates that outside organizations can initiate a local-register nomination.
The next steps are also local. Section 151.038 requires the board to notify owners of property nominated to the local register at least 14 days before the hearing and requires published notice in the city’s official newspaper. Section 151.039 says the board must adopt a resolution recommending whether the property does or does not meet the designation criteria, and § 151.040 requires that determination to be mailed to the owner and, if the board finds the criteria are met, forwarded to the City Council for official designation by ordinance. Finally, § 151.042 says the City Council shall either reject the recommendation or designate the property on the local register by ordinance within 60 days after receiving the board’s resolution or an owner appeal. That is a city-level designation process, spelled out step by step in the municipal code.
State law points in the same direction. South Dakota Codified Laws chapter 1-19B authorizes municipalities to create historic-preservation commissions and to act locally. SDCL 1-19B-2 says a municipality may establish a historic preservation commission. SDCL 1-19B-20 says a local governing body may adopt an ordinance designating one or more historic properties. SDCL 1-19B-53 says local governments may impose regulations or restrictions for the protection, enhancement, preservation, and use of historic properties. Those state statutes are enabling laws for local action, not barriers to it.
What the city appears to be referencing instead is a different legal authority: the review of work affecting properties already on the state or national register. SDCL 1-19B-62 allows a municipality to require review of undertakings that may encroach on, damage, or destroy property already included on the state or national register. That is important authority, but it is not the same thing as local designation. Sioux Falls’ own board application page reflects that alteration-review role, stating that certain structural projects on historic properties and in historic districts must be reviewed by the Board of Historic Preservation. But that project-review authority exists alongside — not in place of — the city’s separate local-register process in Chapter 151.
The city’s own records also show that a local register exists in practice, not just on paper. § 151.048 lists 18 properties, districts, parks, and sites that have been reviewed by the board, reported to the City Council, and placed on the register of historic places. Meanwhile, the South Dakota State Register of Historic Places master list, last updated in December 2024, shows a smaller set of Sioux Falls entries in Minnehaha County. That gap is exactly what you would expect if local designation and state designation are separate legal categories rather than one automatic, lockstep process. The National Park Service says the same thing plainly: National Register listing does not automatically invoke local landmark designation, which means local governments retain their own preservation systems.
Put simply, the contradiction is hard to ignore. The city code appears to establish a local designation process, yet the city’s initial response suggested that Sioux Falls does not do historic designations at the city level at all. That discrepancy is not a technical footnote. It is the central issue.
Our outreach to the state also fits the published process. The South Dakota Historical Society says its preservation office works on nominations to the State and National Register of Historic Places, and its National Register guidance says anyone can nominate a property by starting with the State Historic Preservation Office. The National Park Service likewise says nominations can come from property owners, historical societies, preservation organizations, governmental agencies, and other individuals or groups. At the same time, the National Park Service confirms that owners have an opportunity to object, and that if an individual owner objects, the property cannot be listed in the National Register, though it may still move forward for a determination of eligibility. So the state specialist’s comment that owner support is preferred was not unusual; it reflects a real part of the state and federal nomination landscape.
None of this means 508 S. First Ave. is guaranteed to be designated. Eligibility still has to be evaluated, the board still has to act, and the City Council still has to make a decision. But it does mean the public deserves an accurate description of the process. Sioux Falls’ own code says the city has a local register, says nominations may be filed by organizations like ours, and says the Board of Historic Preservation and City Council each have defined roles in deciding whether a property should be added. Our filing did not invent a process. It used one the city already wrote into law.
This is also only the beginning. In the next phase of our reporting, we will examine how city and state officials responded after the filing, what standards were cited to us, and whether those standards appear in the governing law at all. That question extends beyond a single building. If written preservation rules can be narrowed, expanded, or informally rewritten depending on the property in front of officials, then the issue is not just historic designation. It is whether the public can rely on the law as written.
