Connect with us

South Dakota

State officials peppered with questions on price tag for new men’s prison • South Dakota Searchlight

Published

on

State officials peppered with questions on price tag for new men’s prison • South Dakota Searchlight


Lawmakers expressed frustration Tuesday in Pierre over the uncertain price tag for construction and operations of a proposed men’s prison in Lincoln County.

Members of the Legislature’s Appropriations Committee also had pointed questions for Department of Corrections officials on alternative sites for the project, which has sparked a lawsuit from nearby neighbors and represents the most expensive taxpayer-funded capital project in state history.

“I’m just flabbergasted that we’ve not yet wrapped our arms around this as a total package,” said Rep. John Mills, R-Brookings.

Wealth of controversies, outbreaks of violence spark questions on prison oversight

Advertisement

Lawmakers have already dedicated more than $569 million to the project across the past two legislative sessions, including $62 million in preparatory spending. The rest sits in an incarceration construction fund.

The guaranteed maximum price for construction is expected in early November, DOC Secretary Kellie Wasko and Finance Director Brittni Skipper testified on Tuesday. That fixed price wouldn’t change, Skipper said, even if inflation or other construction costs increase.

Some lawmakers, including Sen. Jim Bolin, R-Canton, struggled to understand how a company could make such a promise. 

“If you’re talking about an $800 million project, maybe more, if you make a mistake on that, you can bankrupt your whole company,” Bolin said.

Skipper told Bolin the DOC has a construction manager at-risk, JE Dunn and Henry Carlson Construction, who will build three years of projected inflation into the promised price.

Advertisement

“It’s in their contract to provide to us a guaranteed maximum price,” Skipper said, noting that the DOC has a similar arrangement for a new women’s prison under construction in Rapid City.

Rep. Chris Karr, R-Sioux Falls, was one of several lawmakers to push Wasko and Skipper about the potential ongoing costs associated with the prison once it’s complete. Karr and other committee members asked about prison population growth and staffing projections.

“If we’re going to make this huge investment, are we going to be able to house everybody?” Karr said.

Wasko said she doesn’t trust inmate population projections any further than five years out. 

She said too many things can change, including when lawmakers create new felony crimes or toughen penalties. They did that with 2023’s “truth in sentencing” bill, which now forces those convicted for violent offenses to serve most or all of their prison terms.

Advertisement

“Our rate of incarceration is not slowing down. It’s actually speeding up,” Wasko said. 

South Dakota Department of Corrections Finance Officer Brittni Skipper, left, and Corrections Secretary Kellie Wasko testify before the Legislature’s Appropriations Committee on July 30, 2024. (Courtesy SD.net)

Even so, she said, the 1,500-bed proposal would offer the agency breathing room, as it’s designed to be a maximum-security facility capable of managing overflow from other areas of the system. The prison would take on most of the inmates now housed at the penitentiary in Sioux Falls.

Rep. Tony Venhuizen, R-Sioux Falls, said he understands that projections can change, but also said it’s important for appropriators to have a better sense of what they’re committing to.

“This could be a pretty considerable ongoing cost, and I do think at some point during the next session, we’re going to need a ballpark of what that might be,” Venhuizen said. 

Advertisement

Skipper said the previous ballpark estimates anticipated 130 more employees and approximately $15 million in ongoing funding.

Sen. Red Dawn Foster, D-Pine Ridge, wanted to know if the DOC had consulted with the state’s Supreme Court, Unified Judicial System or Attorney General’s Office to drill down on what to expect in terms of offender population growth. 

Wasko said the DOC hadn’t reached out to those agencies to talk about projections.

Opposition won’t cause state to change prison location, official says

Steve Haugaard, a Republican former lawmaker and one-time primary candidate for governor, seized upon that point during his testimony, which he offered via video feed later in the afternoon.

Advertisement

Haugaard argued that lawmakers were spending too much money on prisons without clear goals for managing corrections and criminal justice as a whole. Haugaard argued that “the building is going to control the overall policy,” and said policy guidance ought to come first.

Upon hearing that the DOC hadn’t consulted with the courts or attorney general, he said, “I just wonder what are we doing?” Haugaard said.

“We don’t have a corrections policy that’s firmly in place,” Haugaard said. “And from what I can see from those stats from the past 40-plus years, we didn’t respond to the ever-increasing spike in incarceration rates.”

Wasko said, as she has in the past, that South Dakota stands out from many other states for harsh penalties. But she also said that as a member of the executive branch, her responsibility is to manage an offender population, not to influence its size.

“There’s a judicial branch, the legislative branch, and I’m the executive branch, and there’s reasons for that,” Wasko said. “I would not be responsible for anything on the front end of incarceration.”

Advertisement

Wasko got backing on that point from Rep. Rep. Linda Duba, D-Sioux Falls, said the courts, prosecutors and lawmakers need to be proactive in criminal justice policy. She said the new facility is needed to make space for treatment and rehabilitation programs.

During another line of questioning, Karr asked about recent heavy rains and the possibility of flooding. He wanted to know if the proposed prison site is in a flood plain. 

Haugaard also keyed in on flooding potential, as did Kyah Broders, one of the Lincoln County residents suing the DOC over its site selection process.

The area did see several road closures during the heavy rains, she said Tuesday. 

“Adding sewage ponds and tons of concrete will only compound this issue in the future,” she said.

Advertisement

Skipper said the site is not in a flood plain. She showed the committee a photo of the land shortly after the historic June rainfall that wreaked havoc on communities in southeast South Dakota.

“You can see from those photos that there was minimal water damage to the site, without any soil being moved or anything being done,” Skipper said. 

The site of a proposed new men's prison in Lincoln County, showing water after a major flood. (Courtesy South Dakota Department of Corrections)
The site of a proposed new men’s prison in Lincoln County, showing water after a major flood. (Courtesy South Dakota Department of Corrections)

In response to an email about the rainfall, DOC spokesman Michael Winder sent the photos shown to the lawmakers and wrote that the project’s civil engineer “will prepare the design for watershed from the property that would include any stormwater runoff.”

Bolin asked what might happen if Broders and her fellow prison site opponents succeed in forcing the state to apply for a county zoning permit and the county refuses to grant one.

“We do not have a valid or developed plan B if that ruling does not come through for us,” Wasko said.

Advertisement

Bolin, who is not returning to Pierre for the next legislative session, closed out the prison site update portion of Tuesday’s meeting by returning to the influence harsh penalties have on prison populations.

Bills meant to get tough on crime and “lock them up and throw away the key” have appeared in nearly all of his 16 years in Pierre, Bolin said.

For future lawmakers, he said, “If you really believe that, you’ve also got to be prepared to pay the bill.”

 

Advertisement

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX

Advertisement



Source link

South Dakota

Trading property tax for sales tax: Legislature moves forward with parts of homeowner relief package

Published

on

Trading property tax for sales tax: Legislature moves forward with parts of homeowner relief package


PIERRE — Two pieces of a property tax reduction package prepared by South Dakota’s legislative leadership and the executive branch are moving forward, but one bill failed during votes on Monday as lawmakers began the final week of the annual legislative session.

The House of Representatives voted

42-27

in support of

Advertisement

Senate Bill 245

, which would pull future revenue from a scheduled sales tax increase from 4.2% to 4.5% next year into a relief fund for homeowner property taxes, and use nearly $56 million in one-time money to seed the fund before the sales tax increase.

The Senate supported

House Bill 1323

, which would reduce the number of petition signatures needed to force an election on a local government’s decision to levy property taxes beyond limits set by the state. The Senate passed the bill 19-15.

Advertisement

Both bills have to return to the opposite chamber for consideration of amendments.

The Senate rejected

House Bill 1253

, which would cap annual assessment growth for owner-occupied homes and commercial properties at 5% annually and reset assessments back to market value every five years. The bill failed with a 9-24 vote.

The bills are part of a broader,

Advertisement

five-bill legislative package

targeted at property tax relief.

Another bill

in the package, which would allow counties to implement a half-percent sales tax with proceeds going to homeowner property tax credits, is awaiting the governor’s signature after he proposed it and it received both chambers’ approval.

The legislative budget committee is scheduled to consider a fifth piece of legislation in the package on Tuesday.

Advertisement

The bill

would reduce maximum property tax levies for school districts.

Sales tax bill overcomes concerns about future budget needs

SB 245 would capture revenue from the impending sales tax increase to deposit into a “homeowner property tax reduction fund” meant to reduce property taxes levied by school districts. The Legislature and then-Gov. Kristi Noem reduced the state sales tax rate three years ago but scheduled the reduction to sunset in 2027.

House Speaker Jon Hansen, R-Dell Rapids, told lawmakers on Monday that the bill would be an “investment in the people,” because it’ll give South Dakota homeowners more money to spend as they choose. Hansen, the bill’s sponsor and a candidate for governor, said that would lead to more spending and, therefore, more sales tax revenue. The state relies on sales taxes, while counties and schools rely on property taxes, and cities receive revenue from property taxes and sales taxes.

Advertisement

Some opponents said the legislation would favor wealthier, property-owning South Dakotans rather than lower-income renters.

Rep. Mike Weisgram, R-Fort Pierre, speaks on the House floor at the Capitol in Pierre on March 9, 2026.

(Photo by Makenzie Huber/South Dakota Searchlight)

Rep. Mike Weisgram, R-Fort Pierre, worried that automatically diverting future state revenue to reduce homeowner property taxes would come at the cost of other priorities, such as annual funding increases for state employees, Medicaid providers and public schools — which are known as the “big three” budget priorities. Lawmakers often

aim

Advertisement

to increase funding for the groups by 3% or inflation, whichever is less. An inflationary increase this legislative session would be 2.5%, according to the state Department of Education.

“We are just clawing to get 1.4% for the big three,” Weisgram said. “I don’t think any of us are proud of that.”

Hansen said the decision “is not an either-or” situation.

“We can help the property taxpayers in the state who desperately, desperately need it,” Hansen said, “and then I trust fully that this state is going to continue to grow and that we are going to be able to meet the needs of our core obligations of this state.”

The bill was introduced as an amendment to placeholder legislation last week, and it will head to the Senate for approval. The Senate narrowly rejected a

Advertisement

similar proposal

earlier this legislative session.

Senate approves lower signature threshold to force election on excess taxes

The version of House Bill 1323 that passed the Senate would set the number of petition signatures needed to force an election on an excess tax levy (often called an “opt-out”) for a local government at 2,500 or 5% of registered voters within its jurisdiction, whichever is less. The current threshold to refer decisions by a local government is 5% of registered voters in the district, without a 2,500 signature cap.

The bill’s sponsor, Sen. Taffy Howard, R-Rapid City, said it will still be difficult to refer decisions by a local government to voters.

Advertisement

“You’re talking dozens and dozens of volunteers, weeks of organized effort,” Howard said. “There’s not a lot of people that have been through that and can even organize that kind of effort. So it’s not a trivial bar.”

Because the bill was amended since it last appeared in the House, it’ll now go to the House for approval.

HB 1253 intended to provide South Dakota homeowners and commercial property owners predictable increases in their property assessments, which factor into property taxes they pay, over five year periods.

But opponents said the change would shift the property tax burden onto farmers and ranchers and surprise homeowners every five years when assessments would be re-based on market value, which could lead to double-digit increases in assessments.

This story was originally published on

Advertisement

SouthDakotaSearchlight.com.

______________________________________________________

This story was written by one of our partner news agencies. Forum Communications Company uses content from agencies such as Reuters, Kaiser Health News, Tribune News Service and others to provide a wider range of news to our readers. Learn more about the news services FCC uses here.





Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

South Dakota

Political Pulse: South Dakota Senate Majority Leader Jim Mehlhaff on data centers, property taxes and more

Published

on

Political Pulse: South Dakota Senate Majority Leader Jim Mehlhaff on data centers, property taxes and more


RAPID CITY, S.D. (KOTA) – State Senate Majority Leader Jim Mehlhaff joined Political Pulse over the weekend.

Mehlhaff weighed in on property tax proposals, data centers, and effort to repeal the death penalty and speculation that Kristi Noem could run for Senate.

The interviewed was taped on Saturday.

See a spelling or grammatical error in our story? Please click here to report it.

Advertisement

Do you have a photo or video of a breaking news story? Send it to us here with a brief description.



Source link

Continue Reading

South Dakota

These 15 South Dakota counties will see DUI checkpoints this month

Published

on

These 15 South Dakota counties will see DUI checkpoints this month



The monthly law enforcement effort helps to reduce alcohol-related deaths on the road.

play

The South Dakota Department of Public Safety is raising awareness this month on the dangers of drinking and driving.

Sobriety checkpoints take place statewide every month, usually hitting about 15 counties, in hopes of reminding motorists to “make responsible choices and avoid driving after drinking alcohol, whether or not a checkpoint is planned in their area,” says DPS communications director Brad Reiners.

DPS also announces ahead of time which counties will be monitored, most often Codington, Lincoln, Meade, Minnehaha and Pennington counties.

What is a sobriety checkpoint?

A sobriety checkpoint is a law enforcement effort that stops vehicles at pre-determined locations to identify and arrest impaired drivers as necessary.

Advertisement

These police stops are not based on unrelated violations of the law (ie., speeding, reckless driving, no seatbelt). Rather, officers are stopping any vehicle in a set pattern in a highly visible location that a driver will approach and must comply with.

Beyond arrests for driving under the influence (DUIs), including breathalyzer tests (PBTs) to determine blood alcohol level (BAC) as needed, the systematic effort is designed to “reduce impaired driving and improve roadway safety,” Reiners said.

South Dakota counties where checkpoints will take place in March include:

  • Beadle
  • Brookings
  • Brown
  • Clay
  • Codington
  • Day
  • Hughes
  • Hutchinson
  • Jones
  • Lawrence
  • Lincoln
  • Lyman
  • Meade
  • Minnehaha
  • Pennington

How many sobriety checkpoints took place in Minnehaha County in 2025?

Other than confirming counties ahead of time, Reiners says time, day and exact location of each checkpoint cannot be confirmed.

Advertisement

Here’s a look at totals from sobriety checkpoints in Minnehaha County in 2025.

Reiners says the number of vehicle stops is merely based on how many happen to drive through a checkpoint that day:

  • January: 30 vehicles stopped, 3 PBTs, no DUI arrests
  • February: 18 vehicles stopped, 1 PBT, no DUI arrests
  • March: 150 vehicles stopped, 9 PBTs, no DUI arrests
  • August: 49 vehicles stopped, 1 PBT, no DUI arrests
  • September: 105 vehicles stopped, 14 PBTs, no DUI arrests
  • November: 63 vehicles stopped, 2 PBTs, 2 DUI arrests

How many fatal, alcohol-related car accidents are there in South Dakota?

According to the South Dakota Department of Health, among 365 alcohol-related deaths in 2024, 19% were because of a transportation/machinery accident, the second-most common cause.

The leading cause of alcohol-related deaths in 2024 was poisoning/toxic effects, at 24%.

Counties that most often experience overall alcohol-related deaths include Buffalo, Mellette, Corson, Oglala Lakota and Dewey counties.

Overall, males make up 65% of alcohol-related deaths in South Dakota from 2015-2024, almost two times higher than the female rate, with ages 30-69 at the highest risk.

Advertisement

Operation: Prairie Thunder not involved in sobriety checkpoints

DPS officials say the S.D. Office of Highway Patrol, the South Dakota Highway Patrol (SDHP) and local law enforcement agencies support DUI checkpoints, which are funded by the South Dakota Office of Highway Safety (SDHS).

Although Operation: Prairie Thunder (OPT) recently completed its 11th saturation patrol in Watertown on Feb. 26-27 – missions that bring together the SDHP with the city, county and federal law enforcement partners – SDHS officials stated last week that “sobriety checkpoints are not conducted as part of Operation: Prairie Thunder.”

Rather, OPT consists of targeted saturation patrols focused on criminal activity in a variety of communities.

Since its inception in August of last year, here’s a look at where total numbers stand for OPT, provided by the DPS.

Advertisement

Ongoing Operation: Prairie Thunder running totals

  • 443 arrests
  • 281 individuals in custody with a drug charge
  • 162 in custody without a drug charge
  • 473 individuals with a drug charge
  • 192 charged and released

Operation: Prairie Thunder criminal drug apprehension totals

  • 1,109 drug charges
  • 318 felony drug charges
  • 791 misdemeanor drug charges
  • 81 felony warrants
  • 168 misdemeanor warrants

Operation: Prairie Thunder ICE contacts

  • 93 contacted
  • 95 interviewed
  • 71 in custody
  • 9 apprehended for cartel / gang
  • 10 identified for cartel / gang
  • No human trafficking arrests
  • No recoveries

Operation: Prairie Thunder traffic enforcement

  • 42 DUIs
  • 5 reckless driving
  • 2,244 citations
  • 2,725 warnings

The South Dakota governor’s office announced last December that operations will continue into 2026.



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending