OPEN MEETINGS COMMISSION FINDS MULTIPLE VIOLATIONS BY LOCAL GOVERNMENTS AT MOST RECENT MEETING
PIERRE, S.D. (Joshua Haiar / South Dakota Searchlight) – South Dakota’s Open Meetings Commission decided Monday in Pierre that five local governments violated open meetings laws.
The commission found no violation in another case, and postponed a decision on another. Written reprimands will be issued for the violations.
The commission is a five-member body of state’s attorneys appointed by the state attorney general.
Last week, the commission met for the first time in nearly four years following a period of inactivity under a previous attorney general and problems maintaining a full roster of commission members. At last week’s meeting, the commission found violations in five of six cases considered.
Executive session violations
Some of the cases heard Monday involved closed-door meetings known as “executive sessions.”
State law allows executive sessions only for certain topics, such as personnel matters, consulting with lawyers about litigation and discussing contract negotiations. Government bodies must have the item on the agenda, state the reason for entering the executive session, pass a motion to conduct the executive session, stick to the intended topic while in the executive session, and conduct any final actions on the matter in open session.
In Pennington County, two county commissioners filed complaints about executive sessions against the rest of the county’s five-member commission.
The Open Meetings Commission found that the county commission violated open meetings laws on Nov. 7, 2023, when it conducted an executive session discussion about compensation comparisons between counties. The board had strayed from the stated purpose of the executive session, which was a discussion of a particular employee’s performance.
At the same meeting, the board violated open meetings laws when it came back into open session and voted to deny the employee’s request for a salary increase. The request was not on the commission’s agenda.
The Open Meetings Commission did not find a violation in a third accusation against the Pennington County Commission for a June 6, 2023, meeting. During that meeting, the county commission was in an executive session while it allegedly directed an employee to conduct a wage study and market analysis for department heads. The complaint alleged that the action was improper for an executive session and should have been taken in an open session.
The Sturgis City Council was found to have violated executive session laws on two occasions. On May 6 of this year, the council entered a closed session without stating a purpose. On Feb. 16, 2023, the council improperly deliberated in private on whether a city manager or city administrator was better for the community. The discussion was deemed improper for a closed session because it was about the positions in general, rather than a review of a specific employee.
Public notice violations
The Carlyle Township Board of Supervisors in Beadle County was found to have violated state law by failing to post an agenda in advance of a meeting in October 2023.
The Charles Mix County Commission was found to have violated state law by failing to post an agenda for its May 23, 2024, meeting.
The Tripp City Council committed a similar infraction when it failed to post an agenda before a special meeting where a police officer’s resignation was accepted. The city attorney acknowledged the error and noted that the vote was retaken at a subsequent meeting where it was listed on the agenda.
No violation found
The Open Meetings Commission did not find a violation in a case against the City of Lead Commission. The local government body voted in January of this year to support legislation for a community center and authorized an employee to travel to Pierre to lobby for it. The complaint centered on whether the agenda item, labeled “Community Center Update,” adequately informed the public of a pending vote.
Decision postponed
The Open Meetings Commission deferred its decision on a complaint against the Green Valley Sanitary District in Pennington County. A complaint alleged that three trustees secured a $200,000 loan for the district without a public vote. The district’s attorney argued that open-meetings laws may not apply to sanitary districts. The commission postponed a ruling pending further research.
EXPERTS SAY IT IS UNLIKELY PRESIDENT-ELECT TRUMP CAN ACTUALLY ELIMINATE EDUCATION DEPARTMENT
WASHINGTON, D.C. (Shauneen Miranda / States Newsroom) – President-elect Donald Trump’s pledge to get rid of the U.S. Department of Education will be far easier said than done.
As Trump seeks to redefine U.S. education policy, the complex logistics, bipartisan congressional approval and redirection of federal programs required make dismantling the department a challenging — not impossible — feat.
It’s an effort that experts say is unlikely to gain traction in Congress and, if enacted, would create roadblocks for how Trump seeks to implement the rest of his wide-ranging education agenda.
“I struggle to wrap my mind around how you get such a bill through Congress that sort of defunds the agency or eliminates the agency,” Derek Black, an education law and policy expert and law professor at the University of South Carolina Joseph F. Rice School of Law, told States Newsroom.
“What you can see more easily is that maybe you give the agency less money, maybe you shrink its footprint, maybe we’ve got an (Office for Civil Rights) that still enforces all these laws, but instead of however many employees they have now, they have fewer employees,” Black, who directs the school’s Constitutional Law Center, added.
What does the department do?
Education is decentralized in the United States, and the federal Education Department has no say in the curriculum of public schools. Much of the funding and oversight of schools occurs at the state and local levels.
Still, the department has leverage through funding a variety of programs, such as for low-income school districts and special education, as well as administering federal student aid.
Axing the department would require those programs be unwound or assigned to other federal agencies to administer, according to Rachel Perera, a fellow in Governance Studies in the Brown Center on Education Policy at the Brookings Institution.
Perera, who studies inequality in K-12 education, expressed concern over whether other departments would get additional resources and staffing to take on significantly more portfolios of work if current Education Department programs were transferred to them.
Sen. Mike Rounds introduced a bill last week that seeks to abolish the department and transfer existing programs to other federal agencies.
In a statement, the South Dakota Republican said “the federal Department of Education has never educated a single student, and it’s long past time to end this bureaucratic Department that causes more harm than good.”
The Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025 proposed a detailed plan on how the department could be dismantled through the reorganization of existing programs to other agencies and the elimination of the programs the project deems “ineffective or duplicative.”
Though Trump has repeatedly disavowed the conservative blueprint, some former members of his administration helped write it.
The agenda also calls for restoring state and local control over education funding, and notes that “as Washington begins to downsize its intervention in education, existing funding should be sent to states as grants over which they have full control, enabling states to put federal funding toward any lawful education purpose under state law.”
Title I, one of the major funding programs the department administers, provides billions of dollars to school districts with high percentages of students who come from low-income families.
Black pointed to an entire “regulatory regime” that’s built around these funds.
“That regime can’t just disappear unless Title I money also disappears, which could happen, but if you think about Title I money — our rural states, our red states — depend on that money just as much, if not more, than the other states,” he said. “The idea that we would take that money away from those schools — I don’t think there’s any actual political appetite for that.”
‘Inherent logical inconsistencies’
Trump recently tapped Linda McMahon — a co-chair of his transition team, Small Business Administration head during his first term and former World Wrestling Entertainment CEO — as his nominee for Education secretary.
If confirmed, she will play a crucial role in carrying out his education plans, which include promoting universal school choice and parental rights, moving education “back to the states” and ending “wokeness” in education.
Trump is threatening to cut federal funding for schools that teach “critical race theory,” “gender ideology” or “other inappropriate racial, sexual, or political content on our children,” according to his plan.
On the flip side, he wants to boost funding for states and school districts that adhere to certain policy directives.
That list includes districts that: adopt a “Parental Bill of Rights that includes complete curriculum transparency, and a form of universal school choice;” get rid of “teacher tenure” for grades K-12 and adopt “merit pay;” have parents hold the direct elections of school principals; and drastically reduce the number of school administrators.
But basing funding decisions on district-level policy choices would require the kind of federal involvement in education that Trump is pushing against.
Perera described seeing “inherent logical inconsistencies” in Trump’s education plan.
While he is talking about dismantling the department and sending education “back to the states,” he’s “also talking about leveraging the powers of the department to punish school districts for ‘political indoctrination,’” she said.
“He can’t do that if you are unwinding the federal role in K-12 schools,” she said.
CHEYENNE RIVER SIOUX TRIBE RECEIVES BISON FROM GRAND CANYON, REVIVING AN ANCIENT CONNECTION
UNDATED – When Grand Canyon National Park had surplus bison, the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe seized the opportunity to bring 100 animals to their reservation, aided by the InterTribal Buffalo Council.
The bison are being used to support the tribe’s farm-to-school program, providing nutritious meat to schools on the reservation and beyond.
While the bison have some genetic markers from cattle, they are not being bred with the tribe’s existing herd.
This collaboration represents a deep cultural reconnection, as the tribe has historically relied on bison for food, shelter, and spiritual significance.
The return of these bison is seen as a step toward healing past wounds and restoring traditional practices, with the tribe looking for more opportunities to bring bison back to the Great Plains.
IOWA GOVERNOR KIM REYNOLDS SAYS A DECISION ON LIEUTENANT IS COMING SOON
DES MOINES, Iowa (Gray Media Iowa State Capitol Bureau) – It has been 12 weeks since Adam Gregg announced that he was resigning as Iowa’s lieutenant governor. Tuesday, Governor Kim Reynolds said that her announcement about Gregg’s replacement will be “soon…very soon.”
Reynolds announced Gregg’s resignation on September 3rd. He became the president and CEO of the Iowa Bankers Association.
Reynolds confirmed to Gray Media Iowa that she has completed interviews of the lieutenant governor candidates. She declined to say how many finalists there are.
What is her timeline to announce her choice? “…in the next couple of weeks we’ll have a decision for you, probably,” she said.
Former Iowa governor Chet Culver, a Democrat, had his lieutenant governor, Patty Judge, also serve as the state’s homeland security adviser to help lead the state through the recovery process from the massive 2008 floods.
Reynolds could make a similar move as a way to further demonstrate conservative budgeting by having the next lieutenant governor hold an additional role for the state.
However, she would not say yet whether she, too, would pick someone who could serve two roles because giving that answer could show which finalist (s) she has in mind for the job.
“I’m not going to do that because that would narrow the selection process,” the governor responded.
BUILD DAKOTA SCHOLARSHIP: A DECADE OF IMPACT ON WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT
SOUTH DAKOTA – The Build Dakota scholarship program, which has seen significant growth since its launch, has prepared nearly 4,000 graduates for immediate entry into the workforce.
This unique initiative addresses the growing demand for skilled workers in fields like nursing, engineering, automotive, and agricultural technology.
Dana Dykhouse, CEO of First Premier Bank, emphasizes that admissions and academic counselors are crucial in identifying students with the right aptitude for these programs.
With many older workers nearing retirement, the need for younger, skilled professionals is increasingly urgent, as highlighted by Build Dakota scholar Adam Joachim.
Celebrating its tenth anniversary, the program is helping fill critical workforce gaps, offering lucrative career opportunities for specialists in their fields.
WATERTOWN CITY MANAGER RESIGNATION WILL BE EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY
WATERTOWN, S.D. (Dakota News Now Staff) – The Watertown City Council has accepted City Manager Amanda Mack’s resignation to be effective immediately after a special executive session.
According to KXLG Radio, the executive session lasted three hours on Monday night. It was listed under the agenda as a “personnel matter.”
Afterward, it was announced that the Council voted to make City Manager Amanda Mack’s already submitted resignation effective immediately.
As we reported earlier this month, Mack submitted her resignation to take a similar position in Harrisburg.
Mack was originally intended to depart her position on January 6, 2025.
Watertown Mayor Ried Holien announced a City Manager Succession Committee to help in the recruitment process to replace Mack.
The interim City Manager will be current Chief Financial Officer Kristen Bobzien.