A night spent with author and actor Tom Roberts was delightful and educational for area youth last week; a long-time member of the Legion Auxiliary, Lois Wiese, was honored; we meet one of our librarians at the Garretson Public Library; and the Garretson School Board voted to extend administrative contracts. Plus, an area student received an all-expense paid trip to D.C. and Youth Wrestling will be sending 23 to State, and much more!
E-Edition Subscribers and Mail-Edition Subscribers Access More Features!
The front page is always free! Subscriptions ensure the future of this newspaper, a valued piece of the community.
E-Edition subscribers get access to a Subscribers' Area, and are able to view extra photos, articles, and an issue of this week's paper in both a Flipbook and PDF format. Mail-Edition subscribers receive access to full front page articles and extra photos, as well as full archives.
The Garretson Gazette sends a weekly newsletter to let you know when the next issue is available, along with a weekly run-down of the week's articles. To receive the Gazette in your email inbox, please ensure you enter our email address () into your "safe emails" list and subscribe to our newsletter using the form below. Thanks!
A night spent with author and actor Tom Roberts was delightful and educational for area youth last week; a long-time member of the Legion Auxiliary, Lois Wiese, was honored; we meet one of our librarians at the Garretson Public Library; and the Garretson School Board voted to extend administrative contracts. Plus, an area student received an all-expense paid trip to D.C. and Youth Wrestling will be sending 23 to State, and much more!
You can receive your newspaper through email!
The Garretson Gazette sends a weekly email letting you know when this week's issue is available, along with a run-down of each week's articles. Please ensure you enter our email address () into your "safe emails" list and subscribe to our email newsletter using the form below. Thanks!
Mr. Heumiller named Garretson’s Teacher of the Year
by Jordan DeWitte, GHS Blue Ink staff writer
Every year teachers are able to nominate each other for the “Teacher of the Year” award. Mr. Johnson then chooses the teacher of the year from those nominations. Students and teachers all feel that this individual goes beyond and above meeting the standards for this award. With that being said, the 2024 teacher of the year is Mr. Heumiller.
Jacob Heumiller, Garretson School District's 2024 Teacher of the Year
He is happy to be named teacher of the year and is very much deserving.
Mr. Heumiller stated, “It surprised me. There are so many amazing teachers here that deserve it as well.”
Mr. Heumiller started college at Briar Cliff in Sioux City. He then finished his schooling in Vermillion at USD. Afterwards, Mr. Heumiller came to Garretson in hopes of making the small-town relationships that come with a small school. He is originally from Salem, so being in Garretson isn’t far from home.
Teaching is Mr. Heumiller’s passion, and it is obvious. His classes are enjoyable and students are guaranteed to laugh at least one of his jokes or find enjoyment in playing some sort of game. Many students like when he plays games in class.
“We play Wordle almost every day,” said Alyssa Olson. Others mentioned games like Hurdle and Blossom. These are all word games that make people think but also are fun for students. Any extra time in his classroom is filled with games to keep students engaged.
Jake Jones explained, “My favorite thing about Mr. Heumiller is that he’s loose and chill, not so uptight.”
Many students feel this way, not just Jones. Mr. Heumiller is easy to talk to and cares a lot about his students.
Olson said, “He is a very good listener and always is interested in what you have to say.”
Teachers also feel that Heumiller deserves the award.
Mrs. McGee stated, “His first year was also my first year. Because of that, I did some teacher training with him, and it was great. He is patient, and very knowledgeable.”
Mr. Hughes explained, “He’s a leader with a compassionate, genuine love for what he does and his students.”
As Garretson teacher of the year, Heumiller will give the main address at graduation in the spring. Garretson is very lucky to have such an amazing teacher, and just all around good person in their community. Congratulate Mr. Heumiller on his achievement, and thank him for being amazing!
On Monday, the Garretson City Council met in regular session. While much of the one-hour meeting appeared routine, many of the items involved were those that encourage the community to keep moving forward in planning and development. The council also set their equalization meeting and received information on issues with utility billing.
Prior meetings with economic development and city leaders have helped to identify areas for improvement in Garretson. //file photo by Garrick A Moritz, Gazette
The meeting began with updates on utilities and the city website. For Committee Reports, billing clerk Sonya Swanson reported that natural gas prices were up substantially for February, increasing by $0.28 per ccf to $1.46. Luckily, February was a warmer month, which helped to keep usage down.
City Finance Officer Paetyn Dreckman reported that the software that takes online utility bill payments went through an upgrade, and due to security reasons, it was unable to transfer billing details. This has forced all on-line payment users to re-enter their billing information, and several users, especially those on automatic payments, had not yet done so. This is causing a backlog of late or non-received payments.
When asked by councilors what had been done so far to rectify the issue, she stated they had sent several emails, included that information in mailed utility bills, and posted notices on social media. Dreckman reported that their next planned step was to acquire a list of those users who had not updated their information, and she and Swanson were going to begin calling them.
Dreckman also pointed out continued problems with meter readings, which have been occurring for a while. Oftentimes, Swanson can catch it when she's processing the billing, but not when it's through electronic billing. Dreckman said a quick phone call or email to city hall can easily rectify the issue.
The final update Dreckman had about utility billing was the naming and list order of the charges. Currently, the order of charges and the names of the surcharges are confusing, and she is hoping to work with the utility billing processor to re-order and adjust the names of those charges to help clarify them.
Dreckman then reported that the newly-remodeled city website should hopefully go live by the end of the week at CityofGarretson.com. It is being set up by the same company as the school's website, Apptegy, and has its own standalone app that is now available in the Google Play and Apple app stores. To download, head to your app store and search "City of Garretson." The app will look familiar to those who already have the school's app, and will run much the same way.
Next was sewer and streets updates. The City Maintenance Supervisor position has been renamed to Public Works Director, and will be headed by Jordan Doane. Doane reported to the council that they have begun to seek out companies for chip sealing, and that summer pool preparations have begun. City Building Inspector JR Hofer was hired in February as a Public Works Manager, effectively taking over Ryan Nussbaum's former position in the maintenance department.
After a first reading amending city council appointments, the council approved a garage placement variance and a liquor license transfer. The liquor license will now be held by Kimberly Konda, who recently took over The Treasure Chest. The business sells local wines along with other regionally-made and local-interest items.
Then, the council set its Equalization Meeting date. It will be held on Wednesday, March 20 at 6:30 p.m. at City Hall.
To further the city's goals in development, the council was then asked to approve the submission of a $2,500 grant application for traffic control devices, such as flashing stop signs or school zone signs. Discussion was held on what type of devices could be purchased, their likely costs, and areas of town that could benefit from one. The council opted to have the city employees move forward with the application prior to deciding where to use any received funding.
The council also formally approved receipt of the $600,000 Community Access Grant that was reported on by the Gazette in January, and were informed by Cole Gebhart of Sayre Associates that advertising for bids on 4th Street would be starting within the next two weeks, with a closing date of April 3. If things move along on schedule as the engineers hope they will, construction could begin in early June. Gebhart expressed Sayre Associates' intent to hold a public meeting at the Legion once the bid has been awarded, so that residents can ask questions and learn more about the construction schedule.
In the two final areas of development, South Eastern Council of Governments (SECOG) representative Sophie Johnson presented on a regional effort they are doing to pursue federal grants for safe roads and streets, and Dane Ekdom of ISG presented the final Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) to the council.
Johnson informed the council that SECOG would be applying for a Planning and Demonstration Grant from the U.S. Dept. of Transportation to assist in developing a Safety Action Plan. The Action Plan would include "adopting innovative technologies and strategies to promote safety", and participation in the SECOG project required a $2,500 cost share and commitment letter to participate. However, for that investment, the city would be eligible to apply for grant funding for road safety projects.
"I'm going to be clear, you're not going to get a new road from this," Johnson clarified. "You're not even going to get resurfacing, likely. It's for safety improvements."
She continued, "So it'd be like rumble strips, high friction surface treatments, lighting, signage, sort of like the traffic control grant that we were discussing earlier today. Sidewalks, maybe a bike path depending on what the report says, signal improvements, shoulder widening, those types of things."
The council opted to move forward with the commitment. Next, Ekdom presented on the final CIP. He pointed out that just because this was a final draft didn't mean the document wasn't allowed to change and evolve. It was meant to outline and prioritize the city's needs and plans, and to put into one place many of the documents that were scattered, such as sewer permits, water rights, and utility maps. It also outlines outstanding city debts and breaks down surcharges and payment plans. It's a comprehensive document, and a digital link can be requested by calling or emailing city hall. After his presentation, Ekdom asked the council to be ready to vote on the final draft at the next meeting.
Due to the Easter holiday, the April meeting of the council will be moved to Monday, April 8 at 6:30 p.m. at the Legion. It is open to the public, and all are invited.
Article continues below
Enjoy this free article! The Gazette is proud to present the local news of Garretson, South Dakota, giving its subscribers news of interest, school coverage, and local/statewide government coverage. Your support of the Gazette and its advertisers ensures this coverage will continue into the future. Consider getting your subscription today! E-edition subscribers get access to their issues sooner than anyone else, both on this site and in your email inbox.
A state senator has been banned from the House of Representatives floor and lobby for the last week of the 2024 legislative session for placing a bottle of syrup on another lawmaker’s desk.
Sen. Tom Pischke, R-Dell Rapids, was informed of the action Monday in a letter from Speaker of the House Hugh Bartels, R-Watertown. Pischke’s action was a violation of decorum, Bartels said.
Sen. Tom Pischke, R-Dell Rapids, on the state Senate floor during the 2024 legislative session. (Makenzie Huber/South Dakota Searchlight)
Pischke placed the bottle of syrup on Rapid City Republican Rep. Kristin Conzet’s desk days after Conzet motioned to defeat a commemoration celebrating the late Nancy Green, whose likeness was used to create the Aunt Jemima advertising character, which was formerly used on syrup and other products.
The commemoration was introduced by Rapid City Republican Rep. Phil Jensen with co-sponsors Pischke and Sen. Jim Mehlhaff, R-Pierre. It stated, in part, “that Nancy Green was a remarkable woman whose story has been sadly erased by politics.” However, some lawmakers saw the resolution as intentionally provocative.
The Aunt Jemima brand was discontinued in 2021 in response to criticism that the caricature of a Black woman perpetuated outdated and offensive portrayals of African Americans.
In South Dakota, it only takes one lawmaker to table commemorations.
The House ban is an “overreaction,” Pischke said.
“I was simply giving a gift to my good friend,” he told South Dakota Searchlight.
Banning Pischke from the floor was the “only recourse,” Bartels told South Dakota Searchlight.
“Decorum is probably one of the biggest rules in the House that we try and enforce, and the Senate does as well,” Bartels said. “Everything decorum-wise matters in the Legislature, whether it’s the last day or the last five minutes.”
A member of Senate leadership told South Dakota Searchlight there is no plan to discipline Pischke in the Senate.
South Dakota Searchlight is part of States Newsroom, a network of news bureaus supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. South Dakota Searchlight maintains editorial independence.
PIERRE — With most of this year’s legislative session in the rearview mirror, some lawmakers are making a final push on a trio of bills they describe as an effort to balance the interests of both opponents and proponents of a carbon dioxide pipeline.
In Republican-dominated South Dakota, the bills have pitted the party’s traditional support for economic expansion and lower regulatory burdens against its commitment to property rights and local governance. The issue becomes even more complex and contentious when Republican views on federal spending to combat climate change are factored in.
Those complex motivations led some Republicans to file and support bills that would block or significantly hinder carbon pipelines. That legislation failed. House Majority Leader Will Mortenson, R-Fort Pierre, said if lawmakers don’t pivot to support the remaining bills — which would bolster protections for landowners, without blocking projects — they risk accomplishing nothing on the issue this session.
“All this opposition can lead us to a place where we get nothing done for farmers, nothing done for ethanol, that we get nothing done for counties, nothing done for regulatory certainty,” Mortenson said Thursday during a leadership press conference. “If we want to kill everything, that’s where we’re headed.”
Mortenson is a prime sponsor on the three remaining bills, along with Senate Majority Leader Casey Crabtree, R-Madison.
Affected landowner Jared Bossly (in vest) and others attend a hearing Sept. 11, 2023, in Fort Pierre where the Public Utilities Commission rejected a permit application from Summit Carbon Solutions. (Joshua Haiar/South Dakota Searchlight)
One of their bills, Senate Bill 201, was sent to a conference committee Thursday that will work to reconcile the House and Senate differences, while the other two bills in the package underwent amendments in the Senate Commerce and Energy Committee. That leaves all three bills pending with just one week left in the legislative session, aside from a day later in March to consider vetoes.
All the bills are related to a multi-billion-dollar pipeline proposed by Summit Carbon Solutions, which is headquartered in Iowa. It would collect carbon dioxide from ethanol plants in South Dakota and some neighboring states and pipe it to North Dakota for underground storage. The project would take advantage of billions in available federal tax credits that incentivize the removal of heat-trapping carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.
Summit plans to apply again for a permit in South Dakota after its initial application was denied by utility regulators, in part due to conflicts with county ordinances that require minimum distances known as “setbacks” between pipelines and other features.
The project has also faced opposition from landowners concerned about safety, including risks associated with potential leaks, and property rights. Summit could go to court and use the power of eminent domain to gain access to land from unwilling South Dakota landowners. Bills to prevent Summit from using eminent domain have failed each of the past two legislative sessions.
Setbacks and county surcharges
As currently written, Senate Bill 201 would force the state’s Public Utilities Commission (PUC) to overrule counties if their pipeline rules are too burdensome. The commission of three elected officials is responsible for pipeline permitting in the state.
The House of Representatives approved its version of the bill 40-30 on Wednesday after a nearly two-hour debate.
Current law says the PUC “may” overrule counties’ setbacks. The legislation says the commission “must” overrule setbacks if they “are unreasonably restrictive in the view of existing technology, factors of cost, or economics, or needs of parties,” or if the county actions are preempted by federal law.
As originally introduced, the bill would have removed counties’ power to impose setbacks on projects including carbon pipelines. The bill was amended by a House committee.
The bill also allows counties to impose a surcharge on pipeline companies of $1 per linear foot.
Proponents say the bill balances economic development with property rights. Opponents fear it undermines those rights and local control.
Predicting a bumpy road ahead for the bill, Rep. Chris Karr, R-Sioux Falls, said during the House floor debate, “I can about imagine what’s going to happen to this thing when it goes to conference.”
Surveying protections
Three bills considered Thursday by the Senate Commerce and Energy Committee would add protections for private property owners when pipeline companies conduct surveying, ensure better terms for landowners in agreements with pipeline companies, and add financial protections for landowners subjected to eminent domain.
Two of the bills were amended and one was defeated.
One bill that passed the committee 8-1 would amend the state’s laws regarding land surveys on private property for public utility projects.
The bill stipulates that any person or entity looking to conduct an examination or survey on private property must have a pending or approved siting permit application with the state.
Secondly, the bill mandates a 30-day written notice to the property owner. The notice must include a detailed description of the property areas to be examined, the anticipated date and time of entry, the duration of presence on the property, the types of surveys and examinations to be conducted, and the contact information of the person or agent responsible for the entry.
Furthermore, the bill introduces financial compensation for landowners. As originally introduced, any utility seeking to enter private property for surveys would have to make a one-time payment of $500 to the property owner, in addition to covering any damage caused during the examination. The bill was amended Thursday to say the $500 requirement would only apply to carbon pipelines.
Property owners would also be given the right to challenge the survey or examination by filing an action in circuit court within 30 days of receiving the written notice. Additionally, upon request, the results of the survey or examination would have to be shared with the property owner.
The legislation excludes the state or its political subdivisions from the requirements, focusing instead on private entities.
Easements
Another bill that passed 7-2 specifies how carbon pipeline easements are to be granted, recorded and terminated. An easement is an agreement to access private land. Summit says it has easements with about 75% of the landowners on its route in South Dakota.
As originally written, the bill said carbon pipeline agreements would not be allowed to exceed 50 years and would automatically terminate if not used for the transportation of carbon dioxide within five years from their effective date. Plus, landowners would be entitled to annual compensation for granting the easement, set at a minimum of $1 per foot of pipeline each year the pipeline is active.
However, both the 50-year easement cap and the minimum $1 per-foot compensation were removed by the committee.
Sen. Casey Crabtree, R-Madison, said “we know the lifetime of this is 50 years, easily,” and therefore a more reasonable cap should be determined at a later date. He said the $1 per linear foot surcharge for counties in Senate Bill 201 would translate to $42 million for all impacted counties “that can be used to offset property taxes” for landowners.
Pipeline opponents felt the changes were unfair, with Chase Jensen of Dakota Rural Action calling the amended legislation “lip service bills” that do not accomplish a true compromise between pipeline opponents and proponents.
Another bill was defeated 6-3. It would have required entities using eminent domain to cover some legal costs for landowners.
A divided party
Comments on the House floor Wednesday showed how far apart some Republicans are on the legislation and the broader issues in play.
Rep. Scott Odenbach, R-Spearfish, said proponents of SB 201 are “rolling over for Biden’s Green New Deal.” He said the pipeline and carbon sequestration are part of “an effort to define carbon as a building block of life and to be able to regulate everything we do.”
Mortenson later reminded fellow lawmakers that “we’re not setting federal climate policy today.” He said during Thursday’s leadership press conference that if what comes out of a conference committee is not an authentic compromise that helps landowners, he will back out of the deal.
“If there’s not real benefit in this for the farmers, then I’m out,” he said. “There’s definitely a line in the sand for me.”
South Dakota Searchlight is part of States Newsroom, a network of news bureaus supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. South Dakota Searchlight maintains editorial independence.
As bills move through the legislative process, it is worthwhile to know when a bill becomes law. Once passed by both the House of Representatives and the Senate AND signed by the Governor, most new laws go into effect on July 1. Some bills contain emergency clauses, such as for reimbursement of disaster recovery costs. Those generally go into effect immediately upon signature by the Governor. Putting an emergency clause on a bill requires that it receive a 2/3 vote to pass. Other legislation may have delayed enactment dates. These go into effect on the date specified in the bill.
Last week I wrote about SB 201 and the concerns I had about its consequences. On the day before we voted on SB 201 Representatives each received over 1500 emails. Mine were approximately 80-90% opposed to SB 201.
This week there was the discussion over three bills pertaining to the carbon dioxide pipeline. The bills will determine the future of the CO2 pipeline and private property rights. These bills were introduced by House and Senate leadership. Each bill has been amended and the negotiations continue.
HB 1185 is an effort to update South Dakota’s existing surveying laws. The bill attempts to increase applicant/landowner communication, clarify landowner compensation, specify when and where a survey may be conducted, and the amount of time the survey will require.
HB 1186 was originally designed to protect property rights by establishing minimum terms for carbon pipeline easements and securing a $1/linear foot annually for the landowners. The structure of the bill was comparable to what the Legislature established when wind and solar easement minimum terms were codified in the late 1990s. For example, the bill contained provisions that capped the easement and that a carbon pipeline easement is void if no permit has been granted by the Public Utilities Commission within five years after the effective date of the easement. The bill was amended to remove the cap on carbon dioxide pipeline easements and the $1/linear foot annually to landowners.
SB 201 was heard in House Commerce and Energy as well as the House floor. The bill was created to establish requirements for linear transmission facilities and would allow counties to impose a surcharge on pipeline companies. The bill also provided landowner protections such as indemnification and liability for damages. The bill, as amended, ultimately passed the House of Representatives 40-30, and will now head to conference committee to sort out each chamber’s differences. This bill has been promoted as a “compromise”; however, property owners receive little in the bill that they do not already have under existing law while pipeline proponents receive a new level of development certainty.
By the time you read this, we will be down to our last couple of days of the legislative session. I will close with the following Ronald Reagan quotes. “Government’s first duty is to protect the people, not run their lives.” And “There are no easy answers, but there are simple answers. We must have the courage to do what we know is morally right.”
It continues to be an honor to represent the 25th District. Information on the content and status of all bills is available on the state web site https://sdlegislature.gov. I can be contacted at .
Week 8 - 2024 South Dakota Legislature Report
25th District Senator Tom Pischke
The 8th week of the 2024 legislative session ended on February 29th. At this point, many of the policy related bills have either passed or died and we are now mostly working on spending priorities and putting together a budget.
While the session may be winding down, there are still many exciting conversations and things going on. This past week, we celebrated the 2023 Dell Rapids Quarriers with Senate Commemoration 812. The commemoration reads as follows:
On November 11, 2023, the Dell Rapids Quarriers won a second consecutive 11A state football championship; and the Quarriers were the number one seed going into the playoff tournament and finished the 2023 season with a record of 12-0; and the Quarriers advanced to the state championship after defeating the Madison Bulldogs 52-0 in the first round and the Sioux Falls Christian Chargers 22-14 in the second round; and the Quarriers dominated the state championship game, outscoring West Central by thirty-four points in the first half, en route to a final score of 42-6; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT COMMEMORATED, by the Ninety-Ninth Legislature of the State of South Dakota, that the Dell Rapids Quarriers are the 2023 State 11A football champions. Congratulations boys on a heck of a season!
As always, if you are interested in following along with any of our committees or chambers this session, there are two great ways to do that. First, visit www.sdlegislature.gov as this is the Legislature's home page where you can find any information about session that you are looking for. On the front page you will find a schedule of committees and when the House and Senate will be meeting and what's on the agenda for each meeting. You can also find listings of all the bills that we will be working on this session. Additionally, if you want to listen into a committee or chamber you can click on the South Dakota Public Broadcasting icon next to that scheduled meeting to listen live. The Second way to listen and watch is to visit www.SD.Net where you can find all the live audio from the committees and the live audio and video streams from the House and Senate Chambers.
Finally, if you have any questions about how to find information about a bill or committee, or any questions at all about session please contact me. I can be reached most anytime by phone at 605-999-2948 and by email at . If you do call and I’m unable to answer, try sending me a text and I will call you back later. Additionally, if you email, please include that you are from District 25 and what town you're from. We get 100s of emails a day and I cannot reply to them all, but if I know that you are from our district, I will get back to you! Lastly, if you are planning a trip up to the Capitol for a visit during session, please let me know so that we can find a time to meet up while you are here! Have a great week and God Bless!
Average teacher compensation would only have to rise half as much as state education funding under the new terms of legislation advanced Thursday morning by a committee of South Dakota senators.
Thursday afternoon, the state House reiterated its preference for the bill’s earlier language, which would require the rate of average teacher compensation increases to match the rate of annual state funding increases.
The differing versions of the legislation set up a battle over teacher pay next week, which is the final week of this year’s legislative session except for a day to consider vetoes later in March.
Thursday’s action began when the Senate Education Committee voted 5-2 to endorse a bill meant to increase teacher pay in South Dakota. The committee amended the bill to “provide for flexibility but also accountability” for school districts, said committee member Sydney Davis, R-Burbank.
The legislation would set a statewide minimum teacher salary of $45,000, beginning July 1, 2026. That minimum standard would increase each year by a percentage equal to the annual increase in state education funding approved by the Legislature and governor.
The bill formerly would have required school districts to also match their increases in average teacher compensation — including pay and benefits — to the annual increases in state funding. The amended bill would reduce that obligation to half of the annual increases in state funding. For example, if the Legislature passed a 4% increase to education funding, school districts would have to raise teacher compensation by at least 2%. That requirement would begin July 1, the beginning of fiscal year 2025.
School districts that fail to meet the bill’s requirements could risk an accreditation review or suffer a $500-per-teacher deduction in state education funding. But they could also request a waiver and work with the state School Finance Accountability Board to come into compliance. The bill does not include any additional money for schools beyond the regular, annual increases in state funding approved by lawmakers and the governor.
The amendment allows wiggle room for school districts to pay for other positions or services, lobbyists told lawmakers — such as career and technical education programs, paraprofessional salaries or bus driver salaries. It also lessens the impact on the few school districts that receive minimal state funding (because their local property taxes and federal funding cover most or all of their costs) or school districts experiencing declining enrollment and therefore seeing decreases in state funding.
Hours later, the House of Representatives “hoghoused” a bill — which is a term for striking the entire language of a bill and replacing it with a different bill — and replaced it with the language of the teacher pay bill from before it was amended Thursday morning. The hoghoused bill passed the House 60-7 (gaining two more votes since it originally passed the chamber last week).
Rep. Tony Venhuizen, R-Sioux Falls, told his colleagues that the House-approved version of the bill prioritizes teacher pay and ensures that increased state funding “gets from us, through to the school, into the pocket of teachers,” which is “the most important thing we’re doing.”
“The House is just really reiterating our position that if we give an increase to the schools, they need to give a commensurate increase to teachers,” Venhuizen told South Dakota Searchlight. “We’re willing to talk to our friends in the Senate about that, but amendments that water that down mean that less money will go into teachers’ pockets, and that’s very concerning to us in the House.”
Senate Education Committee Chair Kyle Schoenfish, R-Scotland, told committee members Thursday morning that he didn’t think the House-approved legislation would make it through the Senate without an amendment.
“50% acknowledges you can’t throw all your money into one basket here, so I think this is a good amendment to keep the discussion going,” Schoenfish said.
Proponents said there are more discussions needed and work to be done before the bill can head to the governor’s desk.
Watertown Republican Rep. Hugh Bartels, who has been in discussions to amend and find compromise on the bill since it was first proposed, told lawmakers that while the House likely wouldn’t agree with the amendment, it’s something they can continue to work on in the legislative process.
Rep. Roger DeGroot, R-Brookings, told committee members that South Dakota is underfunding public education “a great deal.” He said the state is underfunding education by roughly $56 million, based on an “unsubstantiated” analysis of school districts passing opt outs (in which taxpayers elect to pay more in property taxes than state limits otherwise allow) or dipping into their capital outlay fund (typically reserved for buildings and construction) to pay for general fund expenses.
Christine Stephenson, a Rapid City Area Schools board member who spoke for herself and not the board, was the sole opponent to speak against the bill. She told lawmakers that inadequate funding must be addressed in the coming years — especially if the bill is signed into law.
Stephenson cited statistics from the U.S. Census Bureau showing that South Dakota public schools spend the least amount of money per student compared to surrounding states. North Dakota, for example, spends 37% more on education per student than the Mount Rushmore state.
According to the National Education Association, South Dakota ranks 49th in average teacher pay (out of 51, due to the inclusion of Washington, D.C.).
That’s despite the passage of a half-percentage-point increase in the state sales tax rate in 2016 as part of legislation to raise teacher salaries. The legislation sent an infusion of money to schools that pushed South Dakota up a few places in national teacher pay rankings, but the state has slipped in the rankings since then. Last year, legislators and Gov. Noem reduced the state sales tax rate from 4.5% to 4.2%.
Sen. Davis said discussions about adequate education funding are for future sessions. This bill focuses on teacher pay accountability and addressing expiring provisions from the 2016 law that were intended to ensure such accountability.
“I know we’ve heard a lot of questions on sustainability of a bill like this and I think, in the future, this type of bill will lead to future discussions of funding, funding per student, and how we fund education,” Davis said.
The House and Senate have next week to work out their differences and pass a bill to Gov. Kristi Noem, who has spoken repeatedly about her desire for action on teacher pay.
“We’re very comfortable with the plan we have,” Venhuizen said. “We’ll keep talking to the senators, but we think we have the best plan and we’re hoping we can move it forward.”
What started as a cavalcade of petition campaigns for South Dakota’s November 2024 ballot has become more manageable for voters to follow.
South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem meets with families following an announcement in Rapid City to eliminate sales tax on groceries. (Photo: Matt Gade/Rapid City Journal)
Of the eight citizen-led ballot questions approved for circulation, three will definitely meet the signature threshold to make the ballot, according to News Watch analysis and interviews with political leaders and ballot sponsors.
Those three measures are the constitutional amendment tolegalize abortion, the constitutional amendment to establishopen primaries and the initiated measure to eliminate South Dakota’ssales tax on groceries. That comes with the caveat that legal challenges could still occur, particularly with the abortion bid.
The latest effort to legalize recreational marijuana in South Dakota is making a late surge in signature gathering and also has a chance to qualify for the 2024 ballot, according to News Watch analysis of all the petition campaigns.
“People are discovering how hard it is to actually get something on the ballot,” said South Dakota Open Primaries chairman Joe Kirby, a Sioux Falls businessman and government reform advocate. “Getting tens of thousands of signatures, especially given South Dakota weather, is not an easy task.”
The citizen-led measures will be joined by one legislative resolution from the 2023 session, a proposal tochange outdated male-only references to South Dakota’s governor and other officials in the state constitution and statutes.
Legislators also passedSenate Joint Resolution 501 during the current session, an effort to amend the constitution to impose work requirements for Medicaid eligibility.
That means five or six ballot questions will be put to voters in the general election on Nov. 5. That's on par with the average number (5.6) qualifying for on-cycle South Dakota ballots since 2000. The highest numbers of certified ballot measures during that period were 11 in 2006 and 10 in 2016.
The number of verified signatures needed to qualify initiated measures for the ballot is 17,508, which represents 5% of the total vote for governor in the last gubernatorial election. Constitutional amendments require 35,017, which is 10%.
The deadline to submit signatures is May 7, and they must be certified by the Secretary of State’s office before officially making the ballot. In the case of the abortion amendment, it’s anticipated that legal challenges to certification will necessitate judicial review.
Here’s a look at the status of this year's citizen-led ballot efforts:
Likely headed for 2024 ballot
Open primaries
The campaign to establish “top-two” primaries for governor, Congress and state legislative and county races is well-funded and largely non-partisan, guided by political veterans representing Republicans, Democrats and Independents.
It’s also staying under the radar as the proposed abortion amendment draws most of the headlines and counter-messaging.
“It’s nice to have more controversial issues out there,” said Kirby. “But I think what’s really happened for us is that the stars have aligned. Republican leadership in South Dakota sees this as a solution to some of their problems.”
The theory is that open primaries, rather than incentivizing candidates from taking extreme positions to win a partisan primary, will help lower the volume to produce officeholders more reflective of the general electorate.
This comes at a time when ultra-conservative factions such as the South Dakota Freedom Caucus have gained more traction within the Republican ranks.
Freedom Caucus chairman Aaron Aylward, a state representative from Harrisburg, told News Watch in January that the proposal would essentially create "two general elections in South Dakota" and thus was unnecessary.
“If the backers of this amendment are worried about having options at the ballot box, why isn’t the focus placed on getting people from all parties ready for the general election?” Aylward said.
The only other public opposition so far has come from South Dakota Republican Party chair John Wiik and U.S. Sen. Mike Rounds, who told News Watch in a March 1 statement that “our current primary system has served us well."
Republicans Sen. John Thune and Rep. Dusty Johnson told News Watch that they will not be taking a public stance on the proposed amendment.
South Dakota Open Primaries has collected about 42,000 signatures as of March 1 and expects to meet its goal of 50,000, said Kirby. The group has several dozen volunteers but gets the “vast majority” of its signatures using paid circulators.
The petition drive has been boosted by the support of Unite America, a nonprofit based in Denver that advocates for election reform and has contributed about $450,000 to the open primary effort in South Dakota.
Abortion amendment
There has been plenty of political friction surrounding this effort to reverse the state's near-total abortion ban and enshrine access to abortion in the South Dakota Constitution.
Opposition has come from expected places, such as a "Decline to Sign" campaign from anti-abortion groupLife Defense Fund and legislative efforts to allow petition signers towithdraw signatures that have already been submitted to the Secretary of State for certification.
Dakotans for Health, the progressive group behind the petition, told News Watch that it willlikely file a lawsuit if House Bill 1244 allowing signature withdrawal passes. Groups such as theLeague of Women Voters of South Dakota have questioned the bill's constitutionality and emergency clause, which would allow it to take effect immediately and not be referred to voters.
Getting enough raw signatures won't be a problem for Dakotans for Health, which has used volunteer and paid circulators to compile more than 50,000 signatures as of March 1, according to co-founder Rick Weiland. He added that most of those signatures have gone through in-house validation as the group prepares for legal challenges as part of the certification process.
"There's a pretty narrow strike zone, and we're well aware of that," said Weiland, referring to the heightened scrutiny the amendment faces. "But we're confident we'll make it and the voters will get a chance to decide."
A November 2023 poll of registered voters co-sponsored by South Dakota News Watch showed apotentially close race, with 45.6% of respondents supporting the proposed constitutional amendment and 43.6% opposed.
Rep. Jon Hansen, R-Dell Rapids, who serves as vice president of South Dakota Right to Life and co-chair of the Life Defense Fund, viewed those results as a positive for the anti-abortion movement.
“This poll makes clear that the majority of South Dakotans do not support the extreme abortion amendment, including the majority of women who have decided to oppose it,” Hansen said in an emailed statement to News Watch after the poll was released.
Grocery tax repeal
Dakotans for Health is also sponsoring an initiated measure to prohibit the state from collecting sales tax on "anything sold for human consumption, except alcoholic beverages and prepared food."
Thestatewide poll in November co-sponsored by South Dakota News Watch showed that 61% of registered voters support the proposal, which would eliminate the 4.2% state sales tax on groceries. The measure would not affect the up to 2% sales tax on groceries charged by municipalities in South Dakota.
The proposal is staunchly opposed by the Republican-dominated Legislature, which approved a cut in the state’s general sales tax rate from 4.5% to 4.2% during the 2023 session that's due to expire in 2027.
Thefiscal note for the grocery tax measure indicates it could reduce annual state sales tax receipts by $124 million. Opponents said that couldstress the state's budget when combined with the rate change on general sales tax.
Weiland notes that Gov. Kristi Noem promised a grocery tax cut as part of her 2022 re-election campaign, a plan ultimately rejected by lawmakers. The governor took the rare step oftestifying for her grocery tax repeal bill during the 2023 session, insisting that the budget was strong enough to absorb lost revenue and that voters wanted the tax repealed.
“She’s taken a lot of wind out of the sails of the opposition,” said Weiland, who said his group has collected more than 20,000 signatures for the measure. “She has made it clear that this will not be a financial burden and that it's something that the people want.”
Jim Terwilliger, Noem’s top budget official as commissioner of the Bureau of Finance and Management, told News Watch that Noem doesn’t support the ballot initiative because ofconcerns about the wording.
He added that the governor “still believes a repeal of the grocery tax is the best tax relief for South Dakota families if it is done in a responsible manner,” though she didn’t mention the repeal in her budget message or State of the State address as part of the 2024 session.
Too close to call at the moment
Marijuana legalization
Two pot-related measures were approved for circulation: one to legalize the “possession, use and distribution of marijuana" for recreational use and another to repeal South Dakota’s medical marijuana program.
Neither sponsor responded to interview requests from News Watch or provided estimates of signature totals. Of the two, the initiated measure to legalize recreational pot is considered a viable contender to make the ballot.
Petitions for the cause have become more visible in recent days at signature gathering sites such as the Minnehaha County Administration Building.
That signaled a reversal from 2020, when pro-legalization Amendment Apassed with 54% of the vote, clearing the way for recreational marijuana to hit the market. Medicinal pot was also approved by voters that year in an initiated measure.
Noem’s administration challenged the recreational marijuana amendment, saying it violated the state’s requirement that constitutional amendments deal with just one subject. That argumentprevailed in a 4-1 decision at the South Dakota Supreme Court.
Not ready this time around
Protection of ballot measures
A proposed constitutional amendment that would prohibit the Legislature from repealing or amending voter-passed measures for at least seven years won’t see the ballot in 2024.
Sponsor Brian Bengs, who ran for U.S. Senate as a Democrat in 2022, told News Watch that his group is “not aggressively gathering additional signatures" at the moment. He added that the petition effort could re-emerge for 2026 or later.
The Initiated Measures Protection Amendment was conceived as a means of preventing state legislators from trying to thwart the will of voters.
Bengs said his group collected “many thousands of signatures” but encountered people who incorrectly concluded that the measure was connected to the proposed abortion amendment.
“To preclude such confusion and increase the chance that each initiative is objectively assessed by voters on its own merit, we have transitioned to a passive approach to signature collection,” said Bengs.
South Dakota Legislature term limits
State Sen. Brent Hoffman, R-Hartford, did not provide a specific update for how many signatures his group has collected for the proposed amendment that would limit state legislators to eight years in each chamber or a maximum total of 16 years.
“Since I’ve been focused on service in the Legislature, our statewide team of volunteers will wait until the end of the session to release data or a statement,” Hoffman told News Watch.
That period of inactivity, with the deadline looming May 7, points to a steep uphill climb for the measure to make the ballot.
South Dakota 2024 election schedule
South Dakotans will vote on the ballot issues in the Nov. 5 general election.
Statewide races in the June 4 primary election include a Republican race for U.S. House of Representatives between incumbent Rep. Dusty Johnson and challenger Justin McNeal and a Democratic primary between Zach Kovach and Bert Olson. Republican Kristie Fiegen, chair of the Public Utilities Commission, also is up for re-election.
Here are key dates in this year's election schedule:
April 19: Absentee voting begins for primary election
May 7: Ballot measure deadline
May 20: Voter registration deadline for primary election
June 4: Primary election
Sept. 20: Absentee voting begins for general election
Oct. 21: Voter registration deadline for general election
Voter registration for the City of Garretson General Election to be held on April 9th, 2024, will close on March 25, 2024 at 5:00 pm. Failure to register by this date will cause forfeiture of voting rights for this election. If you are in doubt about whether you are registered, call the County Auditor at 605-367-4220.
Registration may be completed during regular business hours at the county auditor’s office, municipal finance office, and those locations which provide driver’s licenses, food stamps, TANF, WIC, military recruitment, and assistance to the disabled as provided by the Department of Human Services.
Voters with disabilities may contact the county auditor for information and special assistance in voter registration, absentee voting, or polling place accessibility.
Paetyn Dreckman
Finance Officer
City of Garretson
Published twice at the total approximate cost of $21.73 and can be viewed for free at www.sdpublicnotices.com. 3-7-24-1tc
Edison Township: ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS
Edison Township is requesting bids for road work in year 2024.
1. Blading township Roads – cost per mile.
2. Snow Removal – cost per hour
3. Dirt Work – cost per hour.
4. Hauling Gravel – cost per ton delivered on Township roads.
5. Right of way removal – cost per hour.
Contact Township Supervisors for location of pits to be used.
For further specifications contact the Township Supervisors.
Bids will be opened Monday, March 18, 2024 at 6:30 p.m. at 48198 251st St. before the equalization meeting.
The Township reserves the right to accept or reject any or all bids.
Adam Stiefvater
Township Clerk
48259 255th Street
Garretson, S.D. 57030
Published twice at the total approximate cost of $17.89.
2-29-24-2tc
NOTICE OF MEETING OF LOCAL EQUALIZATION BOARD
SDCL 10-11-13
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN That the governing body, sitting as a Review Board of Equalization for The Municipality of Garretson, Minnehaha County, South Dakota, will meet at the Garretson City Hall in said taxing jurisdiction on the 20th day of March 2024 for the purpose of reviewing and correcting the assessment of said taxing district for the year, 2024.
All persons considering themselves aggrieved by said assessment, are required to notify the municipal finance officer no later than March 14th, 2024, of their intention to appeal their assessment.
Paetyn Dreckman
Finance Officer
City of Garretson
Published twice at the total approximate cost of $17.89 and can be viewed for free at www.sdpublicnotices.com. 3-7-24-1tc
Edison Township: Notice of Meeting as Equalization Board
Notice is hereby given that the governing body, sitting as a Review Board of Edison Township, Minnehaha County, South Dakota, will meet at the John Bly shed located at 48198 251st St. in said jurisdiction on Monday, March 18, 2024 at 7 p.m. for the purpose of reviewing and Correcting the assessments of said taxing district for the year 2024.
All persons considering themselves aggrieved by said assessment are required to notify their clerk of the local board in writing and must be postmarked no later than Thursday, March 14, 2024, of their intention to appeal their assesment.
Given under my hand this 16th day of February, 2024.
-Adam Stiefvater Township Clerk
48259 255th St.
Garretson SD, 57030
3-2-23-2tc
HIGHLAND TOWNSHIP NOTICE OF MEETING OF LOCAL EQUALIZATION BOARD
SDCL 10-11-13
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN That the governing body, sitting as a Review Board of Equalization for the Highland Township in Minnehaha County, South Dakota, will meet at the Highland Lutheran Church in said taxing jurisdiction on the 18th day of March, 2024 at 7:00 pm for the purpose of reviewing and correcting the assessment of said taxing district for the year, 2024.
All persons considering themselves aggrieved by said assessment, are required to notify the clerk of the local board in writing no later than March 14th, 2024 of their intention to appeal their assessment.
Highland Towhship
Jill Fedders-Ellefson, Clerk
48470 246th St. Sherman, SD 57030
2/07/2024
2-29-24 2tc
Notice of Meeting of Local Equalization Board SDCL 10-11-13
Notice is hereby given that the governing body, sitting as a Review Board of Equalization for Palisades Township, Minnehaha County, South Dakota, will meet at the Garretson Fire Hall on the 19th day of March, 2024 at 6 p.m. for the purposes of reviewing and correcting the assessment of said taxing district for the year of 2024.
All persons considering themselves aggrieved by said assessment are required to submit an Objection to Real Property Assessment from to the township clerk Bert Danielson in writing no later than Thursday, March 14, 2024, of their intention to appeal their assesment.
