South Dakota
Eminent domain bans draw support in North and South Dakota – Oklahoma Energy Today
We’ve reported how several eminent domain bills have been introduced in the Oklahoma legislature which convenes its 2025 session next week.
Legislators will trail two other states where eminent domain for development of energy projects drew opposition. The South Dakota House passed a bill 49-19 to ban the use of eminent domain for carbon pipelines, sending the legislation to the state Senate. (South Dakota Searchlight)
The South Dakota Searchlight reported the proposed $9 billion Summit Carbon Solutions pipeline drew opposition over the possible use of eminent domain. However, the bill that received approval this week would not prevent construction of the pipeline.
“They just don’t get the supreme power of eminent domain to force their projects down the throats of South Dakota people,” said House Speaker Pro Tempore Karla Lems who owns land near the proposed pipeline. The Summit pipeline proposes to transport some of the CO2 emitted from 57 ethanol plants in five surrounding states and move it to an underground storage site in North Dakota.
The North Dakota legislature plans to hold hearings this week on a series of carbon pipeline bills, including one prohibiting the use of eminent domain during development. The bills were sparked by the same Summit pipeline.
One bill, House Bill 1414 specifies that the state may not use eminent domain for carbon dioxide pipelines and revokes common carrier status for carbon pipelines, reported the North Dakota Monitor.
Under the bill, solar, wind and hydrogen energy projects would also not be allowed to use eminent domain.
South Dakota
South Dakota House fails to pass bill requiring cash for school events. But it could come back
House Bill 1017, which would require school districts to accept cash payments for admission to school events, failed Thursday despite receiving 34 supporting votes and 32 dissenting votes on the House floor.
Two representatives — Republicans Jessica Bahmuller from Alexandria and Spencer Gosch from Glenham — were excused from the vote. There’s also two fewer legislators in the House after Tony Venhuizen became lieutenant governor and Herman Otten from District 6 declined to serve the term for which he was elected.
So, 34 wasn’t a high enough threshold to pass the bill on Thursday, even though it was the majority at the time.
Speaker of the House Jon Hansen said shortly after the vote that “the intent to reconsider is hereby noted,” so lawmakers may reconsider the bill per joint rule 5-11 on the next legislative day, Feb. 3.
That’s after Rep. John Sjaarda, R-Valley Springs, brought an amendment to limit HB 1017 to apply to events that aren’t sold out, remove the Board of Regents and Board of Technical Education from the legislation, and put a $200 maximum in the bill. That amendment passed in the House.
Sjaarda said he brought HB 1017 after seven large schools in his area stopped accepting cash, which he said impacts accessibility and fairness at local schools.
He did not specify which local schools opted for that policy but in the House Education committee hearing for the bill Monday, testifiers discussed it was related to Brandon Valley, Harrisburg, Sioux Falls and Tea Area school districts’ partnerships with Iowa-based company Bound that provides mostly digital and cashless ticketing.
But those schools have testified that they work ahead of events and with athletic directors to accept cash for those who wish to use it to pay for events. Brandon Valley Superintendent Jarod Larson said that his schools still take cash for events.
Sioux Falls School Board of Education president Carly Reiter said Monday that the concerns brought by a very small number of people who spoke in favor of HB 1017, and against the district’s policy in August, weren’t “great enough” considering the benefits the district’s change to cashless ticketing gained for hundreds of other people.
She said athletic directors at schools have gone “above and beyond” to accommodate requests for paper tickets or to pay for tickets with cash.
What did local legislators say?
Rep. Erik Muckey, D-Sioux Falls, said the intent of the bill is good but agreed that the House shouldn’t override local control and didn’t want to enforce something statewide that is a local issue.
Rep. Brian Mulder, R-Sioux Falls, said the bill was a “knee-jerk” reaction to something new. He suggested the Legislature let local schools fix their policy before implementing a statewide law.
Rep. John Hughes, R-Sioux Falls, said a mandatory cashless policy takes more money from families and schools and gives more money to banks.
Rep. Keri Weems, R-Sioux Falls, said the Legislature is part-time because it gives a lot of control to local entities and urged parents with problems getting their children into local activities and events to contact their local school boards to change their policy.
Legislators across state differed on local control
Rep. Terri Jorgenson, R-Rapid City, said she supported the bill because she felt it was a privacy issue and that use of credit cards and digital means is tracked as opposed to cash.
Rep. Roger DeGroot, R-Brookings, said he agrees people should accept cash, but said the House shouldn’t tell districts what to do.
Rep. Josephine Garcia, R-Watertown, said board members failed to help the people who said they couldn’t use cash.
Rep. Tony Randolph, R-Rapid City, said cash has been part of the economy “forever,” that he didn’t understand the objections to the bill, and said he didn’t see it as a local control issue.
South Dakota
Obituary for Craig Reed Lloyd at Miller Funeral Home & On-Site Crematory
South Dakota
Bills to publish voter lists online and protect voters’ contact info both pass SD House • South Dakota Searchlight
PIERRE — The South Dakota House of Representatives advanced a bill Wednesday that would make the state’s list of registered voters free and available to the public online, and another bill that would restrict access to registered voters’ contact information.
The two bills, which would amend some of the same sections of existing state law, are yet to be reconciled. Both bills now head to the Senate.
The House voted 37-31 to advance the bill that would make the voter registration list freely available online, after debate over funding and privacy implications.
The bill would mandate the Secretary of State’s Office to publish the list online, with weekly updates, and to maintain historical archives. Supporters said the bill would reduce barriers to election oversight, citing costs of current voter lists, which are priced at $2,500 per request and up to $3,000 for absentee data.
GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.
Rep. Heather Baxter, R-Rapid City, proposed the bill. She said free access to voter rolls is important to secure elections.
“I’m just asking for it to be of no charge since we’ve already paid for it as taxpayers,” Baxter said.
Rep. Jana Hunt, R-Dupree, said the $2,500 fee is too high for South Dakotans, including political candidates who use voter lists in their campaigns.
“It’s the people in South Dakota that can’t afford a $2,500 fee for voter information. It’s the candidates in this room that struggle with that fee,” she said.
On that note, Rep. Will Mortenson, R-Fort Pierre, said the bill has more to do with getting campaigns voter information than election integrity. He voted against the legislation.
“Let’s think about who actually accesses these voter files,” Mortenson said. “Let’s be honest: It’s mostly candidates or activist groups or special interest groups. And so we’re going to say, ‘Well, if we’re going to cut a fee, we’re going to start by benefiting the politician before we start benefiting the people.’ And I don’t think that’s right.”
The fees collected to obtain the voter registration list are used for upkeep and technical support for the state’s Total Vote system, which is used statewide by county auditors and the Secretary of State’s Office to manage voter registration and election data.
The bill does not include funding to offset the lost fees. The Secretary of State’s Office — which spoke in opposition to the bill during its initial committee hearing — said the total fees came to about $100,000 last year.
Opponents also said implementing the changes might require new software, hardware and additional staff to manage archives and fulfill data requests.
Lindley Howard, McPherson County auditor, said during the committee hearing that she is concerned eliminating fees might transfer a financial burden to local governments.
Rep. Tim Reisch, R-Howard, said publicly posting a voter registration list including the birth year of voters could result in scammers having a catalog of elderly South Dakotans provided by the state, for free. He voted against the bill in the committee and the House.
Reish said during the committee hearing that he is all for greater election transparency, “but this bill goes way beyond that.”
Conflicting legislation
The bill that would forbid public access to voters’ phone numbers and emails passed 40-28.
Rep. Mike Weisgram, R-Fort Pierre, proposed that bill. He said the goal is to limit the number of political texts and emails voters are subjected to during elections.
The bill would prohibit public access to telephone numbers and email addresses on voter registration forms, in addition to existing protections for Social Security numbers, driver’s license numbers, and full dates of birth.
Weisgram said the bill ensures that disclosures of voter registration information cannot be exploited by campaigns or commercial interests.
Opponents said the bill is unnecessary because providing a phone number or email address on voter registration forms is already optional. But supporters said many people feel obligated to fill out all the blanks on the forms.
Rick Weible with South Dakota Canvassing — a group that says it advocates for “election integrity” — spoke against the bill during its committee hearing. He said the data is already available through other sources, so barring the state from giving it out does little good.
“Cat’s out of the bag, because I’m also aggregating data from Facebook, X and all the other social media where, oh yeah, your phone number is part of your account,” Weible said.
Weisgram said those arguments ignore the intent of the bill.
“What’s more important? A campaign, or the people’s personal information?” he said.
Rep. Taylor Rehfeldt, R-Sioux Falls, voted against making the voter registration list available for free online and in favor of the bill restricting access to voters’ contact information. She told South Dakota Searchlight she was frustrated to see the bills pass in an unreconciled form.
“We should be figuring it out,” she said. “And obviously today, we did not, by passing two bills that conflict with each other.”
Support our legislative coverage
Our ability to cover the South Dakota legislative session depends on donations from readers.
-
News1 week ago
Judges Begin Freeing Jan. 6 Defendants After Trump’s Clemency Order
-
News6 days ago
Hamas releases four female Israeli soldiers as 200 Palestinians set free
-
Business7 days ago
Instagram and Facebook Blocked and Hid Abortion Pill Providers’ Posts
-
Politics6 days ago
Oklahoma Sen Mullin confident Hegseth will be confirmed, predicts who Democrats will try to sink next
-
Culture3 days ago
How Unrivaled became the WNBA free agency hub of all chatter, gossip and deal-making
-
World6 days ago
Israel Frees 200 Palestinian Prisoners in Second Cease-Fire Exchange
-
Nebraska6 days ago
3 years of the Nebraska Examiner: Looking back for inspiration and ahead to growth, with your help • Nebraska Examiner
-
News1 week ago
A Heavy Favorite Emerges in the Race to Lead the Democratic Party