She cited conflict in 2022 but returns without explanation

A trust controlled by a South Dakota regulator’s relatives still owns land along a proposed carbon dioxide pipeline route, but the regulator has not recused herself from the project’s second permit application in the state after recusing herself from the first one.

Two years ago, South Dakota Public Utilities Commissioner Kristie Fiegen disqualified herself from Iowa-based Summit Carbon Solutions’ first CO2 pipeline application. She cited state law prohibiting commissioners from participating in hearings or proceedings when they have a conflict of interest.

Fiegen wrote a recusal letter in February 2022 that said the pipeline “would cross land owned by my sister-in-law (my husband’s sister) and her husband.” South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem assigned State Treasurer Josh Haeder to fill in for Fiegen.

In September 2023, Haeder and the other two commissioners rejected Summit’s initial application in South Dakota, citing the route’s conflicts with several county ordinances that mandate minimum distances between pipelines and existing features.

Summit reapplied in November 2024 with an adjusted route. Fiegen has not filed a recusal letter in the new application docket, and she participated in a procedural hearing about the application Dec. 17.

Fiegen did not respond to questions from South Dakota Searchlight about her participation in the new docket.

Public Utilities Commission spokesperson Leah Mohr said “ex parte” rules bar Fiegen from discussing the matter. Those rules prohibit direct communication with commissioners about dockets they’re considering. Mohr also declined to discuss the matter, and declined to discuss how conflicts of interest are defined for commissioners.

The Attorney General’s Office declined to say whether Fiegen’s participation complies with state law, or whether she sought the office’s legal advice.

Defining a conflict of interest

The chapter of state law Fiegen cited in her 2022 recusal is specific to public utilities commissioners, and it leaves conflicts of interest undefined. It says “if a commissioner determines” the commissioner has a conflict, the commissioner should file a recusal letter.

A 2016 law required the South Dakota Board of Internal Control to create a conflict-of-interest policy for use by state agencies.

The policy says officials involved in quasi-judicial actions such as reviewing a permit application must be “disinterested and free from actual bias or an unacceptable risk of actual bias” and must abstain if “a reasonably-minded person could conclude” they are not impartial.

Land owned by Fiegen’s relatives

The $9 billion Summit pipeline would span five states — including Iowa — and transport some of the CO2 captured from the production processes at 57 ethanol plants to underground injection sites in North Dakota. The project would capitalize on federal tax credits that incentivize the prevention of heat-trapping carbon emissions.

The originally proposed pipeline route in South Dakota would have crossed three parcels of land in Minnehaha County owned by Fiegen’s sister-in-law, Jean Fiegen-Ordal, and Fiegen-Ordal’s husband, Jeffrey Ordal, plus another three parcels of land in McCook County owned by the Jeffrey A. Ordal Living Trust, for which the couple serves as trustees.

Summit said it paid $175,000 in total compensation for easements and future crop damages on the land owned by the Ordals or their trust. An easement is an agreement granting access to land.

Summit said $88,000 of the money went to the Ordals. The company did not disclose further details, but public records show the Ordals completed a sale of their Minnehaha County land several months after signing the easement documents in 2022.

The new pipeline route would cross the same parcels of land: the Minnehaha County land that Fiegen’s relatives no longer own, and the McCook County land that the Ordal trust still owns.

This article first appeared in the South Dakota Searchlight.

SIOUX FALLS, S.D. (Dakota News Now) – South Dakota’s legislative research council has posted over twenty bills filed for the 2025 legislative session.

One of these bills focuses on getting ahead on immigration policy in the state.

Senate Bill 7 aims to proactively snuff out any sanctuary city policies in the state of South Dakota.

Currently South Dakota does not have any cities that are considered sanctuary cities, nor has there been a notable attempt to establish one.

“South Dakota is not a sanctuary state, and we shouldn’t have sanctuary cities inside South Dakota when it comes to immigration policies,” Sen. Casey Crabtree (R) Madison said.

This means that South Dakota local law enforcement must comply with all federal immigration laws and cooperate with federal immigration authorities when requested.

Senator Casey Crabtree, the prime sponsor of this bill says it’s designed to fall in line with President Elect Donald Trump’s immigration policies

“This bill makes sure we are in line with what they are trying to do as we secure our southern borders and make our communities safe,” Crabtree said.

South Dakota would join over a dozen states, including neighboring states Montana and Iowa, that have banned sanctuary city policies from their state.

“It’s about making sure we are keeping our communities safe overall…and we want to make sure we don’t have issues with this as we go into the next four years,” Crabtree insisted.

Crabtree says he expects many of his republican colleagues to join him in his effort to pass this bill.

So far, the bill already has 11 other lawmakers that have attached their names as a sponsor.

Copyright 2025 Dakota News Now. All rights reserved.

RAPID CITY, S.D. — For the second time in less than a week, Rapid City Police detectives are investigating confirmed incidents of gunfire in the city with confirmed property damage, but no injuries. The two most recent incidents both happened during the predawn hours of New Year’s Day. Detectives are asking for help from residents in the area.
The first incident happened shortly before 2:00 a.m. Patrol officers in the 300 block of Curtis Street heard gunshots and tracked them to the area of Haines Avenue and Van Buren Street. They spoke to a witness who said two male subjects began firing a pistol before continuing on foot down Van Buren Street. Investigators found several shell casings in the area, as well as damage to the tire of a vehicle parked along the street.
The second incident happened about an hour and a half later near the same intersection. The person who called in the report told officers that they had been driving on Haines Avenue when they saw two males crossing the road. The witness said the two then turned, fired several shots at the vehicle, and ran eastbound on Van Buren Street. Officers noted several bullet holes in the vehicle. the witness described the two assailants as short, juvenile Native American males. One was described as wearing a black sweater and dark pants. The other was wearing a gray sweater.
Fortunately, no one was injured in either incident.
Detectives are investigating both incidents, identifying and interviewing witnesses and working to find video from the area. They ask that homeowners with security or door bell cameras review their video for any suspicious activities involving two youth matching the witness description. Because of the proximity in both time and location, detectives are also trying to determine if the two incidents are related.
The New Year’s Eve night incidents follow a

similar random gunfire incident

Friday night. RCPD Chief Don Hedrick

announced late Tuesday evening

that three suspects — two male adults and one male juvenile — had been taken into custody in that incident.
Rapid City Police say they are giving the two newest incidents their highest priority and are using “every appropriate investigative resource.”
Anyone with video or any other information about either incident is asked to contact police at (605) 394-4131, or send an anonymous tip by texting the letters “RCPD” and the information to 847411.

Our newsroom occasionally reports stories under a byline of “staff.” Often, the “staff” byline is used when rewriting basic news briefs that originate from official sources, such as a city press release about a road closure, and which require little or no reporting. At times, this byline is used when a news story includes numerous authors or when the story is formed by aggregating previously reported news from various sources. If outside sources are used, it is noted within the story.