GOVERNOR LARRY RHODEN MAKES FIRST ADDRESS TO JOINT SESSION OF THE LEGISLATURE

PIERRE, S.D. – In his first address to the South Dakota Legislature as governor, Larry Rhoden promised a collaborative and respectful approach to governing, stressing the importance of open communication between the Governor’s Office and the Legislature.

“I am going to think before I speak, and I am going to be honest and direct,” said Rhoden, speaking of how he plans to interact with lawmakers, the media, and tribal leadership during his tenure.

Rhoden, 65, who took office Saturday after a long career in public service, also shared personal stories about his background and values, emphasizing his commitment to conservative principles. He reaffirmed his stance on key issues, including his opposition to abortion, support for the Second Amendment, and advocacy for limited government.

The Union Center rancher stressed the need to rebuild tribal relations — his predecessor was banned by all nine of the state’s tribes from entering their reservations. He highlighted the State of the Tribes address given earlier this legislative session, where Sisseton Wahpeton Chair Garrett Renville called for unity.

“Today let’s reset, today let’s rebuild… I could not agree more. We have had our ups and downs over the years, but I am asking our tribal leaders to make a fresh start with me,” Rhoden continued.

On the annual budget, Rhoden expressed support for the proposal put forth by former Gov. Kristi Noem in December, which includes more than $70 million in cuts, funding for a new men’s prison, and work requirements for welfare recipients. He said he would work to restore some of those cuts, while fostering an open dialogue on the state’s financial priorities.

Rhoden also addressed the controversial issue of carbon pipeline legislation, saying he supports landowner rights while considering the future needs of agricultural producers.

Rhoden is set to announce his pick for lieutenant governor Wednesday morning. He emphasized the need for loyalty, honesty, and a shared vision for the state in his second-in-command.

 

SOUTH DAKOTA SENATE NARROWLY ARRPOVES 10 COMMANDMENT BILL

PIERRE, S.D. (SDBA) — A divided South Dakota Senate approved a bill Tuesday requiring public schools to display the Ten Commandments, setting up what could be a constitutional showdown.

After over an hour of passionate debate over religious freedom and local control, senators voted 18-17 to require the biblical laws be posted in every classroom and taught alongside other historical documents.

“Many of us breathed a sigh of relief when we saw the destructive and divisive policies of the last few years come to an end,” said Sen. John Carley, R-Piedmont, who sponsored the bill.

Worried about potential lawsuits, senators adopted an amendment requiring the state to cover schools’ legal costs.

“When Louisiana adopted this, it was immediately challenged in court,” Sen. David Wheeler, R-Huron, warned. “I just don’t want our school districts to have to pay that cost.”

The amendment passed on a voice vote.

Sen. Greg Blanc, R-Rapid City, a pastor and lawmaker, argued that children deserve to understand the nation’s religious roots.

“Children have a right to know the truth about the founding of our great nation,” Blanc said. “They have a right to know why the founding fathers mentioned belief in God in the Declaration of Independence.”

But Sen. Jamie Smith, D-Sioux Falls, drawing on classroom experience as a former teacher, blasted the mandate.

“We’re sitting here talking about smaller government while forcing schools to put up these displays,” Smith said.

The debate took an emotional turn when Sen. Red Dawn Foster, D-Pine Ridge, sought to include Native American values, citing the painful history of forced Christian education in tribal communities.

“Many see this bill as perpetuating the legacy of the 1868 federal boarding school initiative,” Foster said. Foster’s amendment failed.

Attorney General Marty Jackley has pledged to defend the law if challenged. Several organizations have offered to donate the required 8-by-14-inch displays.

The bill now heads to the House.

 

BILL SEEKING EXPANDED POWER FOR STATE AUDITOR MOVES FORWARD IN PIERRE

PIERRE, S.D. (Austin Goss / SDBA) – Legislation introduced by the Attorney General’s Office intended to prevent future scandals involving government employees sailed through the Senate State Affairs Committee.

One of the key pieces of Jackley’s legislative package entering the 100th legislative session, Senate Bill 60 would empower the State Auditor’s Office to look into the financials of other state agencies, just like the two other financial oversight entities in Pierre — the Bureau of Finance and Management (BFM) and Legislative Audit — can do.

“There are three opportunities for protection of taxpayer dollars,” Jackley said of the state’s accounting system. “Within the executive branch we have the Bureau of Finance and Management, on the legislative side we have the Auditor General, and then the people’s Auditor. The State Auditor that is elected on the ballot.”

Last year, at least five different state employees were accused, and in many cases charged with, financial crimes involving the theft of taxpayer money. As the state’s top law enforcement officer, the responsibility of investigating the crimes fell to Jackley.

But as the Attorney General said when he held several different press conferences in Sioux Falls announcing new charges against accused fraudsters, he was tasked by law with crimes after they occurred, not preventing them.

Jackley believes the State Auditor, or “people’s Auditor” as he calls it, should be empowered to help prevent such fraud.

“As I began these investigations, I was surprised to learn that the State Auditor does not have access to the state’s books and records of accounting,” Jackley continued. “This simply says that the State Auditor is entitled to access all of this as necessary for purposes of conducting an audit or investigating improper conduct.”

Though Jackley’s proposal was endorsed by fellow statewide elected official Treasurer Josh Haeder and current Auditor Rich Sattgast, BFM head Jim Terwilliger opposed the bill on the grounds that it would upset the apple cart of accountability.

He argued, in part, that the Auditor’s place in state government was well-established, and that expanding the powers without growing the staff was unworkable. The longtime bureaucrat also suggested that the office already had access to the state accounting system.

“This bill greatly expands the State Auditor’s role in terms of conducting audits,” Terwilliger said. “(And) There aren’t minimum education requirements to work in the Auditor’s office. In order to build the capacity to do detailed, fraud detecting audits, that capacity doesn’t exist today.”

Further opposition came from some of the state’s most entrenched business interests groups, who raised concerns about the influence of a more powerful State Auditor’s office.

“Our problem with the bill is it goes to the business records that go to state government,” said South Dakota Retailers Association Bill Van Camp, raising a concern that proprietary or personal information could be revealed by the bill.

South Dakota Bankers Association President Karl Adam said that office, which is intended to be a non-partisan one, could become political.

“It may lead to unnecessary government overreach and additional conflicts of interest,” Adam testified.

The arguments didn’t appear to move Jackley or the committee, who passed SB 60 on a unanimous vote. The longtime West River law man, whose tenure in the Attorney General’s office stretches across three separate decades, rattled off several instances of government corruption he’s lived through as he rebutted opposition testimony.

“EB 5, GEAR Up, six criminal cases two convictions and two open investigations, what is it going to take?” Jackley posed to the committee. “This is preventative in nature, it’s not asking for more prosecution powers… You have an elected state auditor… state government doesn’t give the auditor access to the information. Why wouldn’t you let the state auditor see the state financial books unless you are trying to hide something?”

Sattgast echoed Jackley’s concerns.

“A number of times we will get requests from the general public on certain issues for information, and we don’t have access,” said Sattgast. “As far as the cooperation goes, we get a response back like ‘why do you need this information?’… Think about that as the elected auditor.”

 

BAN ON EMINENT DOMAIN FOR CO2 PIPELINES PASSES SOUTH DAKOTA HOUSE, NOW DEADS FOR SENATE

PIERRE, S.D. (Josh Haiar / South Dakota Searchlight) – The South Dakota House of Representatives advanced a bill 49–19 that would ban the use of eminent domain for carbon dioxide pipelines, sending the legislation to the state Senate.

Eminent domain refers to the power to take private property for public use, with just compensation to the owner determined by a court.

Supporters of the bill attended the House debate Monday at the Capitol and cheered when the vote was displayed. House Speaker Pro Tempore Karla Lems, R-Canton, proposed the legislation and said it does not stop carbon pipelines from being built in the state.

“They just don’t get the supreme power of eminent domain to force their projects down the throats of South Dakota people,” Lems said.

She owns land near the route of the proposed $9 billion Summit Carbon Solutions pipeline. That project aims to transport some of the CO2 emitted by 57 ethanol plants in five states, including eastern South Dakota, to an underground storage site in North Dakota. The project would be eligible for billions in climate-change-related federal tax credits, for preventing the release of heat-trapping carbon into the atmosphere.

Summit has voluntary easement agreements with some landowners to cross their land, but needs eminent domain to gain access from landowners who are unwilling to sign easements.

Supporters of the bill said carbon pipelines do not meet the public-use standard required for eminent domain, which has typically been used by projects such as water and oil pipelines and electrical transmission lines.

Opponents of the bill warned of economic repercussions for the ethanol industry.

“It sends a terrible message to the country,” said Rep. Greg Jamison, R-Sioux Falls.

Rep. Drew Peterson, R-Salem, said the bill could make South Dakota an impediment to President Donald Trump’s energy independence goals.

“Trump supports biofuels,” Peterson said. “We don’t get to affect federal policy, whether we want to or not.”

But House Majority Leader Scott Odenbach, R-Spearfish, said Trump is eliminating unwise environmental policies, and tax credits for carbon pipelines could be next. He said there were three reasons to vote in favor of the bill: voters sent a message in November with the defeat of a referred law perceived as helping carbon pipelines; carbon pipelines are hazardous when they leak; and the Legislature has a responsibility to clarify if carbon pipelines have eminent domain authority.

Gov. Larry Rhoden has not yet indicated whether he would sign the bill.

Attempts to ban eminent domain for carbon pipelines failed during prior legislative sessions, but supporters of the idea used grassroots efforts last year to get their candidates elected to the Legislature and installed in leadership positions, thereby improving the chances for this year’s legislation.