Charlie Adelson, who’s serving a life sentence in the 2014 plot to kill Florida State law professor Dan Markel, has been moved again apparently — this time 1,800 miles or more from the scene of the crime.

Florida Department of Corrections online records show Adelson, a once-successful traveling periodontist from Fort Lauderdale, as being incarcerated somewhere in South Dakota. No other details are listed.

The 47-year-old Adelson was convicted of first-degree murder, conspiracy and solicitation last November, after an eight-day trial at the Leon County Courthouse.

He had been held at the Wakulla Correctional Institution Annex outside Crawfordville, but was moved in February to the Columbia Correctional Institution Annex in Lake City.

The Florida Department of Corrections did not respond immediately to questions about Adelson’s incarceration.

State has moved prisoners out of state for safety reasons

The department has a history of moving inmates in particularly notorious cases to out-of-state prisons for safety and security reasons.

Zachary Wester, a former Jackson County deputy convicted of planting drugs on unsuspecting drivers, was moved in 2021 to the custody of Hawaii, which houses its prisoners in Arizona. Wester now is incarcerated in Colorado.

Markel, Adelson’s former brother-in-law and the father of his two nephews, was fatally shot by hired hitmen July 18, 2014, in the garage of his Betton Hills home. The murder occurred as Markel was feuding with his ex-wife, Wendi Adelson, and her family, including Charlie Adelson, her brother.

The hit men, Luis Rivera and Sigfredo Garcia, and Charlie Adelson’s ex-girlfriend, Katie Magbanua, were convicted in the murder. Charlie Adelson’s mother, Donna Adelson, was arrested in connection with the murder plot shortly after her son’s conviction. Her trial is set to start in September, court records show.

Contact Jeff Burlew at jburlew@tallahassee.com or 850-222-1697.

Editor’s note: This is the ninth in a series of stories on children that Jackie Hendry, producer and host of SDPB’s “South Dakota Focus” is writing for South Dakota News Watch. Each month, she previews the upcoming show.

SIOUX FALLS, S.D. – Thousands of South Dakota high schoolers are planning their first steps into adulthood this graduation season. Some may follow relatives into the family business of farming, law or teaching. Others, like Cordelia Rieck of Sioux Falls, plan to join the family business of raising families.

The number of day cares in South Dakota has almost halved since 2009, from 1,195 to 646 in 2020, according to the Kids Count Data Center. As conversations about the lack of child care access and affordability intensify across the state, the Rieck family is among the dozens of families in South Dakota that run in-home or family day cares. That journey began years before Cordelia was born.

After Karen Rieck and husband Justin moved to Sioux Falls, they went to see a movie. Karen had a few years of experience with child care at that time.

“Oddly enough, we had gone to see ‘Daddy Day Care’ in the theater,” said Karen. “And that’s what got my brain going. Like, ‘Really, you can do this. You can do child care out of your home. You don’t have to run a center.’”

A week later, the Riecks were creating a business plan. That was 21 years ago.

Today, Mrs. Karen’s House Childcare and Preschool is a state-registered family day care with capacity for a dozen children. When the “South Dakota Focus” team visited in April, the children’s ages ranged from 6 years to a pair of 5-month-old twins. Karen said the in-home setting emphasizes a feeling of family, which was attractive when she and her husband started the venture.

“Family in general is important to us, and we want to be able to instill that with the kids that we help raise,” she said.

In fact, a connection made through one of their clients helped the Riecks expand their own family. They’d previously been told having children would be difficult, if not impossible, based on some health complications. Then, in the early days of their child care operation, they watched the child of a pharmacy assistant.

“She’s the one who introduced me to a physician who was able to figure out what was wrong,” Karen remembered with a smile. “Needed some help, but I have four kids now.”

‘I’ve always had somebody to play with!’

Those kids have grown up alongside the kids who attend Mrs. Karen’s House Childcare and Preschool. The Reicks’ firstborn is Cordelia. She graduates from Sioux Falls Roosevelt High School this month.

“She was born into family child care,” said Karen. “We literally had her on a Thursday at 6:27 p.m. and our doors were open on Monday.”

“Well, I’ve never had a bad experience of going to somebody else’s day care,” Cordelia explained matter-of-factly. “I always had somebody to play with!”

Cordelia still plays and helps with the day care kids before and after school.

“I come back and all of them, they bombard me at the stairs. I don’t even make it up the stairs, and they’re just all over me. It’s great,” she said.

When it came time to decide what to do after high school, Cordelia knew one thing for sure: “I just wanted to help people. I didn’t care how.”

As a child, she’d considered being a doctor or veterinarian. Today, she shudders at the math and science involved.

“And I was like, ‘You know, I want to help people. I can help children.’ Because first of all, I love children and children usually love me because I am a child,” Cordelia joked.

Few early childhood degree options

South Dakota does not require child care providers to hold higher education credentials for licensing purposes. But research demonstrates a relationship between a child’s earliest years and their future learning outcomes, so many providers and parents want to see child care staff with some level of specialized education.

Are government subsidies the solution to the child care crisis? Lawmakers weigh options.

Legislative leaders agree that the ongoing child care crisis in South Dakota represents a significant workforce problem. Advocates are worried they lack a sense of urgency.

Some child care and preschool providers have begun requiring a one-year Child Development Associate as a minimum credential to lead a classroom, though there are more intensive options.

South Dakota State University in Brookings offers the only four-year degree specialization in early childhood education in the state. Northern State University in Aberdeen began offering a two-year associate degree in early childhood education last year, along with scholarships sponsored by the state Department of Social Services.

Ultimately, Cordelia decided on an early childhood specialist associate degree from Southeast Technical College in Sioux Falls.

“I wanted to stay here because I wanted to help here,” she explained.

Cordelia acknowledges that none of her high school classmates are considering a career in child care.

“They go, ‘I’m not having kids, so why does that pertain to me?’” she said. “It’s really irritating sometimes because sometimes they’re really arrogant about it.”

Recent coverage of low wages for child care providers likely doesn’t help.

In 2021, U.S. Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen said child care workers earn in the bottom 2% of occupations in the nation. That has contributed to staff burnout, which perpetuates the lack of child care providers. A 2022 report from South Dakota’s Department of Social Services put the turnover rate of direct care staff at 88 percent. However, that same report shows the lowest turnover rate among group family day care providers, at 60 percent. It’s unclear the turnover rate for registered family day cares like the Riecks’.

Karen Rieck believes her daughter has seen both the challenges and the benefits of running a family day care.

“Having Justin and I both home all the time, she actually got to have us here,” she explained. “She had that friend group here that she grew up with. … I think she also sees on those days when it’s 30-below and we’re standing here with our hot cup of coffee and people are coming to us, and we didn’t have to go out in that. There’s perks to that.”

As excited as Karen is to have Cordelia follow in her footsteps, she’s also excited for her to blaze her own trail.

“To go from being someone who never thought I would have kids, to Cordelia … we thought we were losing her at 12 weeks,” Karen said through tears. “I’ve seen her grow up and just become an amazing person, and even when she turned 18, that was so hard for me. She doesn’t need her mommy anymore! Part of that moving into the child care world, she’s still gonna need me, but I want her to do her own thing and create who she is.”

In the meantime, Cordelia looks forward to high school graduation and the next steps – even if few of her peers are working toward the same goal.

“The average teenager does not care at all. It’s kind of sad because they don’t have any of the childlike experiences after their childhood. I get to experience them every single day,” she said.

South Dakota’s teacher shortage a matter of pay and pipeline

Advertisement

While the Legislature works to address teacher pay, groups like Educators Rising tap current students to consider a future career in education

How to watch ‘South Dakota Focus’ on SDPB

The next episode of “South Dakota Focus” airs on Thursday, May 23, at 8 p.m. Central time / 7 p.m. Mountain time. It can be viewed on SDPB-TV 1, Facebook, YouTube and SD.net.

The episode includes:

• A Build Dakota scholarship winner graduating from the surgical tech program
• A youth center in Fort Thompson providing job and mentorship opportunities
• Stories from South Dakota high schoolers on what’s next after graduation

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Senate on Wednesday rejected efforts to roll back guidance from the Treasury Department regarding how state and local governments can spend funding approved by Congress during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The 46-49 vote on the Congressional Review Act resolution ended an attempt by several GOP senators to block the Biden administration from changing the definition of “obligation” as it relates to State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds and the timeline for spending some of that money.

Missouri Republican Sen. Eric Schmitt said during floor debate that the Treasury Department’s change in guidance, which was released in November, was trying to “pull a fast one” on Congress.

“Treasury’s attempted sleight of hand to keep the COVID spending spigot on is an insult to Congress and those who believe in our Constitution, as well as a complete misuse of taxpayer dollars,” Schmitt said.

The fund for state and local governments, Schmitt said, was intended to assist with “revenue shortfalls tied to the COVID-19 pandemic” and the law clearly stated that “all costs incurred with money from this fund must be incurred by Dec. 31, 2024.”

The interim final rule that the Treasury Department released around Thanksgiving extended that deadline by two years for “administrative and legal costs, such as compliance costs and internal control requirements,” he said.

“This rule ensures that funding does not go to bridges or broadband, but to bureaucrats,” Schmitt said.

Projects affected in multiple states

Oregon Democratic Sen. Ron Wyden spoke against the CRA resolution during floor debate, saying it could have impacted 17 projects in Georgia, 160 in Michigan, 342 in Ohio, 50 in Arizona, 404 in Montana and 73 in West Virginia.

“Nationwide there could be thousands of projects closed. Tens or even hundreds of jobs lost,” Wyden said. “This one is one of the most unusual votes that I’ve seen recently, a true head scratcher.”

Wyden said he didn’t “see a good reason for the United States Senate to backtrack on solid, bipartisan progress and have this chamber act in a way that leaves more of our nation’s infrastructure in a state of disrepair.”

Schmitt said during a press conference before the vote that the claim the CRA resolution would have impacted projects already underway was a lie.

“Essentially the obligations that are committed before the end of 2024, according to existing law, will be honored,” Schmitt said. “What this says is that you can’t extend that out into ’25 and ’26. That was never the congressional intent here.”

Kansas Republican Sen. Roger Marshall, also speaking at the GOP press conference, said the CRA resolution would claw back about $13 billion and went as far as calling it “illegal spending.”

“The clock is going to run out, but Joe Biden is trying to circumvent the law once again,” Marshall said, adding that the COVID-19 pandemic is over and spending from those laws needs to wind down.

Counties, cities opposed

Schmitt introduced the two-page CRA resolution in February along with Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee, Mike Braun of Indiana, Tom Cotton of Arkansas, Joni Ernst of Iowa, Bill Hagerty of Tennessee, Ron Johnson of Wisconsin, Cynthia Lummis of Wyoming, Marshall and Rick Scott of Florida.

The National Association of Counties, the National League of Cities and the Government Finance Officers Association urged lawmakers to vote against the CRA in a written statement released Wednesday before the vote.

“The $350 billion SLFRF provided $65.1 billion to every city and county in America, and since 2021, localities have used these crucial resources to meet the unique needs of residents and support long-term economic prosperity,” the statement read.

The three organizations wrote that the Treasury Department’s interim final rule “recognized the importance of flexibility in facilitating the effective rollout of recovery funds, including our ability to use funds for certain personnel costs and to re-obligate funds where necessary.”

The White House released a Statement of Administration Policy on Wednesday, saying that President Joe Biden would veto the CRA had it reached his desk.

The CRA resolution, it said, “could result in projects being canceled midstream, reduced project management and oversight, and higher costs as state and local governments are forced to contract out programs.”

“Nearly all SLFRF funds have been committed to projects, including infrastructure and disaster relief projects made eligible by bipartisan legislation,” the SAP read. “S.J. Res. 57 would create unnecessary uncertainty for recipients that are executing on projects, jeopardize important work underway, and inappropriately constrain Treasury’s ability to address ongoing implementation issues.”