SOUTH DAKOTA HOUSE CONCURS WITH SENATE CHANGES TO NOT CRIMINALIZE LIBRARIANS OVER POTENTIALLY OBSCENE BOOKS

PIERRE, S.D. (SDBA) — The South Dakota House voted today (Tuesday) to accept Senate changes to a controversial bill regarding obscene materials in school and public libraries, creating a clearer appeal process for concerned citizens.

Representatives voted 36-34 to concur with Senate amendments to House Bill 1239, which establishes a formal process for challenging obscene materials in school and public libraries.

The Senate version completely rewrote the bill, removing provisions that would have eliminated library exemptions from obscenity laws.

“This bill does absolutely nothing. Schools and libraries still don’t have to answer parents because they are totally and completely exempted from our laws on obscenity and material harmful to minors,” said Rep. Bethany Soye, R-Sioux Falls, the bill’s prime sponsor who wanted the measure sent to a conference committee.

Rep. Drew Peterson, R-Salem, spoke in favor of the Senate changes.

“The policy must allow for an individual to appeal to the school board to determine whether any matter or material is obscene,” he said. “Any determination made by the school board as to whether any matter or material is obscene is subject to judicial review in a court of competent jurisdiction.”

Rep. Will Mortenson, R-Fort Pierre, urged support for the amended bill.

“A lot of the folks asking you to vote no have a lot of emotion tied into this and have resorted to a lot of ad hominem attacks,” he said. “If you believe in this framework, then you should vote yes on this bill. It creates a civil cause of action to get to the judge.”

The passed version requires school districts and public libraries to implement policies by January 1, 2026*, that allow individuals to appeal potentially obscene materials to either school boards or library governing bodies. Their decisions can then be challenged in court.

Rep. Liz May, R-Kyle, described finding inappropriate books in schools while helping a child with homework. “It was the darkest, ugliest book I have ever read,” May said.

May expressed further frustration during the debate.

“We have a responsibility. Good grief. What are we here for?” she said. “We can’t even agree that these books shouldn’t be in the schools. Somebody needs to say, okay, we’re going to look at these books, and we are going to get them out of the schools.”

But even some supporters of those who want more tools for parents to object to books supported the reworked bill.

“We don’t want these books in our schools. I am equally as mad as you are at the book companies,” said Rep. Amber Arlint, R-Sioux Falls, who supported concurring with the Senate’s changes. She said she did not want to criminalize librarians.

The bill requires schools and libraries to publish their policies on their websites or in designated newspapers.

The House’s approval means the bill now heads to Gov. Larry Rhoden for consideration. If signed, the law would take effect on July 1.

 

 JOINT COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS REJECTS CUTS ON SDPB, RESTORES FUNDING

PIERRE, S.D. (SDBA) — The South Dakota Legislature’s Joint Committee on Appropriations voted unanimously today (Tuesday) to fully restore South Dakota Public Broadcasting funding, rejecting former Gov. Kristi Noem’s proposed budget cuts.

The committee voted 15-0 to approve the Bureau of Information and Telecommunications budget, which includes SDPB’s funding for fiscal year 2026.

“This has been one of the hardest few months of my life and my staff’s life and the people who support us and believe in us,” said Julie Overgaard, South Dakota Public Broadcasting executive director. “I can’t thank you all enough for the time and attention you gave and took to hear us out.”

In her December 2024 Budget Address, Gov. Noem had recommended significant reductions to SDPB’s budget, recommending a $3.6 million cut that would have eliminated 50 positions and reduced the organization from 76 to just 26 employees.

Rep. Liz May, R-Kyle, told the committee her support was tied to SDPB’s sports coverage.

“I just want to say how much I appreciate the fact that I’ve been here all these years and I miss all the basketball tournaments,” May said. “So as long as I’m here, it’s safe because I’ve got to watch basketball.”

Committee members from both parties expressed satisfaction with the decision to maintain SDPB’s funding.

“I’m very pleased to work alongside this committee to restore the cuts to South Dakota Public Broadcasting,” said Rep. Erik Muckey, D-Sioux Falls. “This is a team effort across both sides of the aisle.”

Rep. Chris Kassin, R-Vermillion, echoed that sentiment, saying he was “really, really happy to see the funding restored to South Dakota Public Broadcasting at the full level.”

The committee also restored the state’s $60,000 grant to the South Dakota Civil Air Patrol, which Gov. Noem had recommended removing from the Department of Military budget.

The budget restoration votes came during a scheduled four-hour session where the committee set budgets for 18 state departments and agencies, including the Department of Military, Department of Education, and Bureau of Finance & Management.

Overgaard acknowledged that future discussions about SDPB’s operations would likely continue.

“I know there’s probably more conversation to come in the future about what public broadcasting needs to be and looks like and how we can better serve the people of South Dakota,” she said. “And I hope we can continue to do it in a thoughtful and collegial way.”

With the committee’s approval, the General Appropriations Bill will include the restored funding and go to the full House and Senate.

The legislature has only three days remaining in the regular session, which concludes Thursday. Veto Day is scheduled for March 31.

 

A VIEW FROM OUTSIDE THE STATE ON THE TOPIC OF NO EMINENT DOMAIN FOR CARBON PIPELINES

PIERRE, S.D. (SDBA) — South Dakota’s new law banning eminent domain for carbon dioxide pipelines has created uncertainty for Summit Carbon Solutions’ multi-state project, according to multiple news reports.

The law prevents Summit from forcing South Dakota landowners to allow the pipeline on their property, the Associated Press reported. Despite this challenge, the company said the project “moves forward” in other states.

Governor Larry Rhoden signed House Bill 1052 Thursday, which prohibits using eminent domain specifically for carbon dioxide pipelines. The measure impacts Summit’s $9 billion, 2,500-mile pipeline project that would transport captured CO2 from five Midwest states to underground storage, the Tampa Free Press reported.

“Freedom ends when impinging on the freedom of others,” Rhoden told reporters at a press conference.

Rhoden said that in his long legislative career, he has always been a champion of property rights.

“I was a prime sponsor to reform eminent domain at one time,” he said of his legislative history.

In a letter to the legislature and the people of South Dakota, Rhoden wrote, “South Dakota landowners feel strongly that the threat of involuntary easements for the proposed carbon dioxide pipeline infringes on their freedoms and their property rights.”

“I have said many times that Summit needs to earn back trust from South Dakota landowners. Unfortunately, once trust is lost, it is a difficult thing to rebuild,” the governor added in his letter.

However, some proponents are still optimistic about the project.

“I don’t think anyone has given up on the pipeline and no one has given up on South Dakota,” said Tom Buis, CEO of the American Carbon Alliance, in comments to Brownfield Ag News.

According to U.S. News & World Report, Summit has already secured more than 2,700 easements across the Midwest region and obtained key permits in several states.

Reuters reported that Iowa approved Summit’s construction permits in June, North Dakota in November, and Minnesota in December.

Environmental groups cheered the South Dakota law.

“We are proud of all the hard work that we’ve done over the last four years. It shows that when people unite around a common cause, we are unstoppable,” Jess Mazour, a leader of the Iowa chapter of the Sierra Club, which opposes the pipeline, said in a statement to Reuters.

Reuters reported that the pipeline would span 495 miles across South Dakota as part of the larger network.

“As for legal action, all options are on the table,” Summit spokesperson Sabrina Zenor told Reuters.

Reuters reports that South Dakota denied the company a permit in September 2023, and the company reapplied last fall. In September 2023, Summit had secured voluntary easements for 73 percent of its right-of-way in South Dakota.

Yahoo News and ABC News reported that large pipeline projects typically need eminent domain powers. According to these sources, even a few landowner refusals can threaten an entire project’s viability.

Brownfield Ag News reported that Minnesota Governor Tim Walz believes the carbon pipeline remains possible. He stressed its importance for producing sustainable aviation fuel.

According to Summit Carbon Solutions’ website, the pipeline aims to capture and store 18 million tons of carbon dioxide annually. Supporters view the project as vital for the future of agriculture and ethanol production in the Midwest.

Summit hoped to connect ethanol plants in the region to collect carbon they produce, transporting it to deep underground storage in North Dakota. Ethanol producers in South Dakota argued that markets demanding carbon-neutral fuel would exclude them.

In a statement to The Dakota Scout, the company said South Dakota “changed the rules in the middle of the game,” noting it had already received approvals in Iowa, North Dakota and Minnesota.

“This kind of regulatory uncertainty creates real challenges — not just for our project, but for the ethanol plants in South Dakota that now face a competitive disadvantage compared to their counterparts in neighboring states,” the statement said.

While backers of the Summit project referred to House Bill 1052 as a “kill shot” to the project, Rhoden disagreed, saying the company’s project could still move forward, but easements would have to be voluntary agreements.

“The ethanol industry will remain a crucial part of our state’s economy,” Rhoden added.

Multiple news outlets reported that Summit Carbon Solutions plans to announce the next steps soon as they consider all available options following the South Dakota law.

In August, the South Dakota Supreme Court ruled that Summit failed to prove it was a common carrier transporting a commodity.