South Dakotans

South Dakotans State Funding State Legislature

Legislative Update

l3wis February 28, 2025 0Comments

Advocates,

The legislature is almost over, but a lot is still unsettled. This is a 3-day weekend. Please write some probing questions for your crackerbarrels and hang around afterward to speak with them personally.

And please send emails and/or make calls. During the session, you can call messages to 605-773-3821(senators) and 605-773-3851(rep’s).

Committee members are listed at the bottom of this email.

— Medicaid, HJR5001 Medicaid on the Senate floor, Monday 2pm(1pm Mt). Oppose. Are they really willing to leave some SD’ans with no health coverage? Our lowest-income workers? Caretakers? People between jobs? Those whose health issues keep them from working? People with disabilities who are in the process of applying for disability?

— Childcare, HB1132 offers childcare workers assistance with paying for their own childcare. It could help address childcare worker shortage. in Senate Health & Human Services (maybe Tue) Support.

— Bathroom bill, HB1259 It would prohibit transgender people from using the communal facilities that match their gender identity, like restrooms and changing facilities, at South Dakota public schools. in Senate State Affairs, Monday 3pm(2pmMt). Oppose.

— SB172 rebuttable presumption of joint physical custody. It passed the Senate(22-13). Rather, we should stick with best interest of the child. in House Judiciary maybe Wednesday. Oppose.

— Guns on campus SB100, passed the senate. Next to House State Affairs (maybe Wednesday) Oppose.

— SB83, the penalty for ingestion. Rather than a felony, first offense would be misdemeanor with addiction treatment. 2nd offense: jail + treatment. 3rd offense: felony. It came out of committee without recommendation. Next on the House floor, maybe Tuesday. Support.

These are about our initiatives and referenda. OPPOSE them all. Could they please stop messing with our citizen rights to initiate measures for the ballot? These have passed their first house so they are awfully close to passing!

— HJR 5003 requires 60% for amendment to pass (takes away majority vote). in Senate State Affairs

— HB 1169 signatures from every district! in Senate State Affairs

— HJR 5006 requires a two-year gap before citizens can try again on a defeated ballot measure. in Senate State Affairs

— HB 1184(moves a deadline taking away 3 months of prime signature time). in Senate State Affairs

— SB 91 requires 14-pt font for petitions, in House State Affairs, Mon 7:45

— SB 92 subjects petition to prior review, in House State Affairs, Mon 7:45

These three are for Appropriations committee:

— Save Libraries!

— Save SDPB!

— TANF: The state’s poorest children need a payment increase. To meet their very basic needs, payments at a third of poverty level are not enough. These children have a TANF reserve fund legislators could use for an increase. It’s the children’s money.

Now here are the committee members:

Here are the committees mentioned above for contacts:

House State Affairs has these rep’s: Jessica.Bahmuller@sdlegislature.gov, Eric.Emery@sdlegislature.gov, Spencer.Gosch@sdlegislature.gov, Jon.Hansen@sdlegislature.gov, Erin.Healy@sdlegislature.gov, Les.Heinemann@sdlegislature.gov, Greg.Jamison@sdlegislature.gov, Karla.Lems@sdlegislature.gov, Scott.Odenbach@sdlegislature.gov, Marty.Overweg@sdlegislature.gov, Tim.Reisch@sdlegislature.gov, Brandei.Schaefbauer@sdlegislature.gov, Bethany.Soye@sdlegislature.gov,

Senate State Affairs has these senators: Arch.Beal@sdlegislature.gov, Randy.Deibert@sdlegislature.gov, Kevin.Jensen@sdlegislature.gov, Chris.Karr@sdlegislature.gov, Liz.Larson@sdlegislature.gov, Jim.Mehlhaff@sdlegislature.gov, Carl.Perry@sdlegislature.gov, Sue.Peterson@sdlegislature.gov, Tom.Pischke@sdlegislature.gov,

Senate Health & Human Services has these senators: Sydney.Davis@sdlegislature.gov, Tamara.Grove,@sdlegislature.gov, Kevin.Jensen@sdlegislature.gov, Carl.Perry@sdlegislature.gov, Tim.Reed@sdlegislature.gov, Jamie.Smith@sdlegislature.gov, Curt.Voight@sdlegislature.gov,

House Judiciary has these rep’s: Mary.Fitzgerald@sdlegislature.gov, John.Hughes@sdlegislature.gov, Jana.Hunt@sdlegislature.gov, David.Kull@sdlegislature.gov, Curt.Massie@sdlegislature.gov, Will.Mortenson@sdlegislature.gov, Peri.Pourier@sdlegislature.gov, Rebecca.Reimer@sdlegislature.gov, Tim.Reisch@sdlegislature.gov, Matt.Roby@sdlegislature.gov, Bethany.Soye@sdlegislature.gov, Mike.Stevens@sdlegislature.gov, Tim.Walburg@sdlegislature.gov,

Appropriations has these reps: Mike.Derby@sdlegislature.gov, Terri.Jorgenson@sdlegislature.gov, Chris.Kassin@sdlegislature.gov, Liz.May@sdlegislature.gov, Scott.Moore@sdlegislature.gov, Erik.Muckey@sdlegislature.gov, Al.Novstrup@sdlegislature.gov, John.Sjaarda@sdlegislature.gov, Jack.Kolbeck@sdlegislature.gov,

and these senators: John.Carley@sdlegislature.gov, RedDawn.Foster@sdlegislature.gov, Taffy.Howard@sdlegislature.gov, Mark.Lapka@sdlegislature.gov, Paul.Miskimins@sdlegislature.gov, Ernie Otten <Ernie.Otten@sdlegislature.gov>, Glen Vilhauer <Glen.Vilhauer@sdlegislature.gov>, Mykala.Voita@sdlegislature.gov, Larry Zikmund <Larry.Zikmund@sdlegislature.gov>,

Thanks for all your help. We sure don’t always win, but we need to be voices for what’s right and good.

The legislature will be over soon.

Thanks.

Bike Trail South Dakotans State Legislature

E-Bikes banned on the Mickelson Trail?

l3wis February 27, 2025 4Comments

So why the question mark? Because, the legislature really did not ban them because they don’t understand the technology. We will get to that shortly.

First off, I was planning a trip with four other E-bikers to the Mickelson in May. We were going to rent a monster VRBO, eat out and entertain ourselves, spend lots of tourist money and ride the trail. Trip cancelled. We instead are probably going to Duluth and ride the trails around Lake Superior while spending our tourist dollars in another state. It will be epic.

The AARP was against this because seniors are the biggest users of Class II E-bikes, tons of studies have shown this. It has also improved the health of many seniors.

This bill was written by a whack-a-doodle who is anti-green energy and of course anything electric, go figure.

The irony is that they will still allow 200 HP, LOUD, 40 MPH, GASOLINE powered snowmobiles. Hmm? The other irony is that electric powered snowmobiles and ATV’s are becoming extremely popular with hunters and naturalists because the animals are not alerted by the exhaust smell and noise. E-powered vehicles are virtually silent not interrupting the quaint sounds of nature.

But what puzzled me the most is the lack of knowledge the legislature has on micro-mobility (E-Bikes, etc.) This isn’t rocket science and you can literally watch a 10 minute YT video explaining the different technologies that change everyday. They are allowing Class I which is no different then Class II or III except for speed and a throttle. But the best part is they haven’t banned E-Bikes entirely, they actually opened the trail up for E-Motorcycles which can go anywhere between 40-80 MPH;

Electric bicycle defined–Classes.

For purposes of this chapter, the term, electric bicycle, means a bicycle or a tricycle that is equipped with a seat or saddle, with operable pedals for propulsion, and with an electric motor of seven hundred fifty watts or less.

An electric bicycle is a Class I electric bicycle if the motor provides assistance only when the person is pedaling and ceases to provide assistance when a speed of twenty miles per hour is achieved.

An electric bicycle is a Class II electric bicycle if the motor is capable of propelling the bicycle without the person pedaling and ceases to provide assistance when a speed of twenty miles per hour is achieved.

An electric bicycle is a Class III electric bicycle if the motor provides assistance only when the person is pedaling and ceases to provide assistance when a speed of twenty-eight miles per hour is achieved.

In other words if your E-bike can achieve over 29 MPH it is considered an ‘out of class’ e-bike and is NOT defined in state law. Once again the dopes in Pierre passed a law that has zero teeth, but I won’t bother testing it, because I will be in Minnesota and Wisconsin.

Drugs South Dakotans State Legislature

Drug ingestion law changes misguided

l3wis February 27, 2025 1Comments

So the local media has been flapping their traps about how incredible it is that the legislature is changing the ingestion laws making the ‘supposed’ crime a misdemeanor instead of a felony. Shouldn’t we celebrate?! Ah, NO. Ingestion laws should be taken off the books entirely. They are just a way for prosecutors to ‘pile on’ charges which only costs taxpayers in further proceedings that are of no consequence.

Why should ingestion NOT be a crime? Because if you are charged with it, you likely committed some other crime, like DUI (most likely). Once you are arrested after a field test and breathalyzer you are hauled back to the station for a blood test which will tell law enforcement every substance you are on. If they find Alcohol and let’s say Meth in your system they could charge you with DUI and INGESTION but the ingestion charge would likely be dropped for the more serious charge of DUI. In other words, ingestion doesn’t matter. It is obvious you took too much of some kind of drug and were driving, so you will be charged with felony DUI, why charge you with something else?

This would have been a great victory if they just erased the law from the books all together, but that would have been to easy.

I suggested once the legislature needs to drug test every member the first day of session and those who fail would not be allowed to vote on legislation. I told someone once that I can guarantee almost 30% of the legislature would fail the test, and I can almost guarantee over 60% would have a trace or more of alcohol in their system.

Kettle meet black.

1st Amendment Downtown Sioux Falls Mayor TenHaken Property Taxes Riverline District Sioux Falls South Dakotans State Funding State Legislature Taxes

What’s next for the Riverline District?

l3wis February 6, 2025 6Comments

I can’t imagine the meetings at City Hall today after the SD Legislative Taxation Committee killed the 3rd penny tax in a squeaker, 7-6. It is no secret their ignorant plan was to convince some rubes from rural districts to support this so they can build a street. But most people knew the jig was up. This was about building a Convention Center that nobody wants or cares about. The Ice Ribbon is a great example of a project NO ONE, ABSOLUTELY NO ONE asked for. But now $16 million later here we are.

So some are asking, without this special 3rd penny tax authority can we move forward with the Riverline District? Yes and NO.

While I think the mayor is about as bright as a bar of soap in a truck stop restroom, I think he knew this may not pass, so they may have a backup plan.

I hate to break it to you Poops, but the legislature is dug in on this one, it ain’t going anywhere. Even if passed out of committee it would have been DEAD in the full legislature.

So how can they still salvage the Convention Center deal? It will be financial gymnastics, but they can still do it within their means, but on a smaller scale. My guess is they will push all bond expectations toward the project and see how much they can borrow. They have also been banking reserve funds which I think they want to use for a down payment (It is between $70-80 million) Why does the city have a savings account from our taxes that is 3x what ordinance asks for? With this surplus and borrowing authority the city could build this without a special tax, but the private donations would have to be significant.

My suggestion all along is to implement an INCOME tax on corporations in SF that have more then 500 employees, Hotels and Hospitality to pay for this. They are the benefactors of conventions, visitors and tourism, the average citizen buying a Twin Bing at the GC won’t benefit BUT these industries would. MAKE THEM PAY FOR IT!

To tell you the truth, the more I think about it, I am not opposed to the city buying the land, it has potential, but with this crappy tax revenue source killed, the city will have to get creative. My suggestion? Demo and plant grass, form a committee that will tell us the best use for the land for the least expensive capital improvement. One idea I had years ago is turning Fawick park into a sculpture garden and put all the SculptureWalk sculptures in the park as a destination, essentially an outdoor museum. We could do this here for minimal costs.

It is no secret that Poops would benefit financially thru this deal (still digging on this one, and will crack that case).

Make no mistake, TenHaken’s lack of leadership, transparency and vision put the last nail in this coffin, and I got to admit after I watched the vote live, I howled in enthusiasm. I think I even did a jig. I am a good jigger.

But don’t get lazy, they will try to cut a deal and we must ride their asses until they are dragging on a gravel road. This ain’t over.

The irony of all this is Poop’s record on getting things done. It is awful. And if I was him I would be embarrassed and resign. Bunker Ramp, 6th street bridge, Delbridge dead monkeys, and the constant lying and belittling of public inputers. YOU ARE NOT A LEADER. YOU ARE NOT A VISIONARY.

1st Amendment Citizens for Reponsible Sales Tax food tax Gas Tax Media Property Taxes SF City Council Sioux Falls South Dakotans State Legislature Taxes

The 1st Amendment and the Sioux Falls City Council

l3wis February 6, 2025 1Comments

It seems I am spending a lot of time these days talking about the role of the council and the 1st Amendment. The thing that always puzzles me is that the 1st Amendment is NOT complicated, but folks struggle with it.

So today HB Bill 1050 got killed, by a ONE VOTE in taxation committee. Several folks were instrumental in killing this bill. It would have pretty much put a $450M tax debt on the citizens of Sioux Falls if passed. I posted Greg Neitzert’s written testimony after the hearing. I truly believe that testimony changed minds, and Cathy B’s telephone testimony cinched the deal. I also emailed the committee suggesting amendments and solutions (I think it would be good for small towns, but NOT SF.)

After this I assumed city hall was reeling, trying to figure out their next steps (I will post later about the future of the Riverline District).

But things got really interesting.

I’m going to leave the constituent’s name out of this for privacy reasons, and the city councilor, because I think it applies to the ENTIRE council.

Their is a constituent that emails the mayor and the council quite a bit, he is very involved in local politics, and I don’t always agree, but he always CC’s me in the emails so I am a media witness (I think I told him to do this). I have several concerned citizens that CC me when sending emails to the city council and I encourage you to CC me, witnesses are important.

fb.art@sio.midco.net

I sometimes do a reply all to their emails if I feel something needs to be clarified or piled onto.

After I posted Former Sioux Falls City Councilor Greg Neitzert’s* submitted written testimony to the taxation committee on the blog this constituent emailed the council with Greg’s testimony and a brief statement about his work. This person called the council ‘CORRUPT’ three times, but in fair context and NOT harassment. Then he said that Greg has ‘LARGE BALLS’. Trust me, I spit out my coffee when I read that, but it’s NOT a threat or harassment. In fact, Neitzert saw the email and thot it was funny. So a newly elected city councilor wasn’t having it and reported the email to Human Resources as harassment. HOGWASH! Not only is this constituent completely harmless they wouldn’t hurt a soul, but that doesn’t matter. This NEW councilor seems to think that he is a city employee and has the same protections, he does not, YOU ARE ELECTED and must follow the constraints of the 1st Amendment and the US Constitution. Now if such an email was sent to an unelected city employee, that would be an issue. So the city’s HR department warned this constituent if they send anymore ‘Harassing Emails’ they will be blocked. First off, they don’t have that authority because this person is NOT a city employee, secondly, sending an email about concerns is NOT threatening. It often puzzles me that they put their hand on a bible and swear an oath to the Constitution but have no idea what is in the document. If you can’t handle the heat in the Carnegie Kitchen may I suggest resignation. Nobody will miss yah. The irony of all this is this councilor was in a similar situation at a former employer. Kettle meet Black.

*Full disclosure, I worked on Greg’s first term campaign coordinating his messaging, graphic design, marketing and direct mail, it was one of the most successful campaigns I was involved with, we kicked ass and took names!

Legislative Update

E-Bikes banned on the Mickelson Trail?

Drug ingestion law changes misguided

What’s next for the Riverline District?

The 1st Amendment and the Sioux Falls City Council

You Missed

Is Mayor TenHaken becoming a lame duck on purpose?

Did Tre Ministries LIE to the City Council?

Are SFPD watching us on the DTSF camera system?

Now is the time to speak up