Ballot Measure Committee sponsoring new initiated measure for 2018 – Committee to Ensure Student Privacy

In case you’re as curious as I was, here’s more information on the new ballot measure. It’s being sponsored by the Committee to Ensure Student Privacy, chaired by Jack Heyd of Box Elder, SD.

Ballot Measure 2018 – Same Sex Bathroom Initiated Meaasure by Pat Powers on Scribd

Heyd had recently sent a letter to the editor in the primary election:


And had some other issues he was in the paper for last year, declaring Chapter 7 Bankruptcy in 2015 but otherwise, he’s not well known statewide in political circles.  Although, you’ve got to start somewhere, and this may be his entrance into statewide politics.

Stay tuned for more on this ballot measure which is sure to stir controversy.

20 thoughts on “Ballot Measure Committee sponsoring new initiated measure for 2018 – Committee to Ensure Student Privacy”

  1. Would this be in addition to a bill introduced in the coming legislative session or will that be on hold to see if this ballot measure gains traction?

  2. Already?! We are just coming off the 2016 elections and they are starting with new initiated measures? We some how need to make a harder to get some of this stuff on the ballot.

    1. from the date of the letter (October 7) they started BEFORE the election….

      but i agree January or later would be better…let us enjoy the holidays

  3. Read the first paragraph of Mr. Hancock’s letter…did they really do this in 22? extremely poorly written IM (22)

  4. Well if you can’t make it in the private sector, Chapter 7 bankruptcy, might as well try politics.

      1. Are you saying this individual’s bankruptcy is Obama’s fault? Just want you to come out and say it rather than vague hand-waving.

  5. It would be interesting to read his petition for bk and see what kind of “stuff” happened. Doubt it had much to do with Obama.

  6. Jack Heyd from the Constitution Party? Lori Stacey (Robot Bees) & Lora Hubbel ? ok so Fema camps and now Transgender kids?

    I can only imagine the misrepresenting advertising that comes out to support this. All the misinformation put forth and the fear will be misdirected. Generalizations, Demonization and then to be expected it will take a life of it’s own and people will be hurt from this emotionally, financially and possibly physically.

    The parents of kids who have gender issues and the kids have enough on their plate without a hostile environment. I would highly advise them to move to Minnesota where they can get the professional help they need and be in a safer environment. Their educational and economic opportunities would most likely be better there anyways.

  7. My question is whether the proposed initiative will be rendered moot by the incoming Trump administration reversing, withdrawing, or modifying the 2014 U.S. Dept. of Ed. “guidance” letter that interpreted Title IX protections as extending to transgender students. It was that guidance letter that started the kerfuffle.

    1. Agreed. If Milbank doesn’t want gay wrestlers, it should be up to the school district to make sure they don’t get to shower or roll around on the mat with the straight boys. They should also refuse to participate against any school who may allow such reprehensible grappling sodomites from coming into contact with their boys as well.

      1. How would you know if they are gay? Is there a test that you know of? Lesbian girls playing basketball. Is there a test you would do for that?

        Gay, Straight or Transgender could it be that these kids just want to fit in and participate in a sport or activity with nothing else going on? Looks like someone is imagining things going on that are not there or has their own issues they need to work out.

  8. Michael,

    I agree. Take out the federal government’s meddling and this becomes a local school board issue to handle as they see fit. I know liberals want one-size fits all and (if I read this proposal right) so do some conservatives but most South Dakotans resist that concept and are willing to have it dealt with on a case-by-case basis.

    1. I’m a blue dog Democrat and believe it should be handled on a cases by case basis. I don’t know of SD having any issues with this topic, so why make such a law when it isn’t an issue. Could anyone give me a link of evidence that this is needed in our great state?

Comments are closed.