(The Middle Sq.) – South Dakota’s Interim Guidelines Evaluation Committee voted down a proposed rule Tuesday that will have elevated admission prices to the South Dakota State Truthful.
The change would have elevated gate admission for adults from $6 to $10 and $4 to $5 for kids aged 6-15. Tenting charges for each electrical and non-electric websites would enhance by $50. The worth for a weekly household worth pack would rise from $80 to $130.
The elevated prices would generate $196,690 within the first yr and $286,690 yearly within the following years, based on a fiscal notice filed with the committee. The speed will increase are wanted to offset rising prices and had been thought of earlier than the COVID-19 pandemic, stated Peggy Besch, South Dakota state fairgrounds supervisor.
Advertisement
Sen. Jean Hunhoff, D-Yankton, stated the elevated prices weren’t talked about when lawmakers appropriated $721,582 to the honest for fiscal yr 2023. She stated she was not against growing admission costs however thought the request ought to have gone earlier than the Legislature.
“Should you knew it, you need to have put it in your price range after which come again and ask for it,” Hunhoff stated. “I feel the state of South Dakota has put loads of {dollars} into our state honest. And it is necessary to us. However I feel you must relook at the way you do this.”
Rep. Kevin Jensen, R-Canton, referred to as the proposal “extraordinarily troubling.”
“It simply looks as if a lot of this enhance if going to fall on households which might be already having a tough time,” Jensen stated. “I perceive your prices are going to go up. I perceive all people’s value, gasoline, every little thing goes to go up. Yearly when there is a rise it is the 4-H households that take the brunt of it and it has been a frustration for a very long time.”
Hunhoff made a movement to disclaim the request. Her movement was authorised by a vote of 4-1 with Sen. Timothy Johns, R-Lead, casting the one dissenting vote.
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.
Advertisement
More: House committee passes bill requiring South Dakota schools take cash for events
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.
Advertisement
More: Sioux Falls School District faces opposition to cashless ticketing system
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.
More: Superintendent contract, legislation and more: 6 things to know from Monday’s school board meetings
She said athletic directors at schools have gone “above and beyond” to accommodate requests for paper tickets or to pay for tickets with cash.
Advertisement
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.
Advertisement
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.
Craig Lloyd, owner and co-founder of Lloyd Companies, passed away at Dougherty Hospice House on Wednesday, January 29, 2025, in Sioux Falls. He was 76. Funeral Services will be held 400pm Monday, February 3, 2025, at St. Mary Catholic Church, 2109 S. 5th Avenue. The visitation will be from 300pm
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.
Advertisement
GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.
Advertisement
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.
Advertisement
“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.
Advertisement
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.
Advertisement
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.
Advertisement
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.