(I am having a sense of deja vu… – pp)
ATTORNEY GENERAL RELEASES DRAFT EXPLANATION FOR PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE SOUTH DAKOTA CONSTITUTION
PIERRE, S.D. — South Dakota Attorney General Mark Vargo has released an Attorney General’s ballot draft explanation for a draft Constitutional Amendment entitled: An Initiated Constitutional Amendment Prohibiting Taxes on Anything Sold for Eating or Drinking.
Review the draft explanation here on the Draft Ballot Explanations page on the Attorney General’s website.
State law requires the Attorney General to draft a title and explanation for each initiated measure, initiated constitutional amendment, constitutional amendment proposed by the Legislature, or referred measure that may appear on an election ballot. See SDCL 12-13-9 & 12-13-25.1.
The Attorney General’s explanation is meant to be an “objective, clear, and simple summary” intended to “educate the voters of the purpose and effect of the proposed” measure, as well as identify the “legal consequences” of each measure. SDCL 12-13-9 & 12-13-25.1. Each explanation is limited to 200 words.
The public can comment on draft Attorney General explanations. Once the Attorney General has filed and posted the draft explanation, the public has 10 days to provide written comment. The Attorney General must review all accepted comments and may revise the draft explanation as deemed necessary. The final explanation from the Attorney General must be filed with the Secretary of State no later than 20 days after filing the draft explanation.
For more information regarding ballot measures, please visit the Secretary of State’s website.
State law may be reviewed by visiting the Legislative Research Council webpage.
To file written comments on a draft Attorney General’s explanation please use one of the following methods below. Copies of all received comments will be posted on this website. The deadline for comments on this amendment explanation is November 3, 2022, at the close of business in Pierre, South Dakota. The final explanation is due to the Secretary of State on November 14, 2022.
Comments may be submitted via mail, or through hand delivery, to the Attorney General’s Office at the following address:
Office of the Attorney General Ballot Comment
1302 E. Hwy. 14, Suite 1
Pierre, SD 57501
Comments that are hand delivered must be received by the close of business in Pierre, South Dakota, on the day the time to accept comments expires. Comments that are mailed must be received by the Attorney General’s Office before the deadline expires to accept comments. Comments may also be emailed to [email protected]. Emailed comments must be received by the Attorney General’s Office before the deadline expires to accept comments. Comments should be clearly expressed in the body of the email. The Attorney General’s Office will not open attachments in an effort to prevent malware or other digital threats. Please include your name and contact information when submitting your comment. The title of the comment must be included in the subject line of the email.
-30-
The question on everyone’s mind, I’m sure, is “will this apply to cannabis edibles?”
This moment of levity brought to you by Spearfish City Limits.
🙂
I am sure this was asked facetiously, but in reality it would apply here. There goes the argument that making recreational marijuana legal would bring in a lot of money in taxes! Also, I am against adding just about anything to the constitution that can’t be addressed in the legislative process.
will restaurant bills need to be itemized with the costs of the food, the preparation and service listed separately?
Prepared food is excluded.
According to Barnett’s letter, “The measure prohibits the collection of sales or use tax on alcoholic beverages or prepared food. Prepared food is defined by law to include that is sold heated or with utensils”. So restaurant meals are tax-free as should be those great foods sold at county fairs, hot dog stands and the like. If I am interpreting this correctly, frozen dinners, pizzas and the like would not be tax-exempt because they’re not served as described. I will be sending a query to the ATG website asking for clarification on behalf of all bachelors who don’t cook and just grab armloads of frozen dinners the way Steve McQueen did in “Bullit”.
The legislature doesn’t respect IMs so CAs are needed.
One only needs to travel across the border into North Dakota finding groceries exempted from sales tax higher in cost than in South Dakota to understand how this reduction in tax will ultimately not save anyone on the consumer side any money long term. On top of that magic, which will slowly occur right before your eyes if this buffoonery is passed the loss of tax revenue for all our small communities will be budget busting. The top 10 population centers may not feel it as badly but before the Republicans join hands with the touchy feely Democrats ideology please go speak with all our small rural mayors.
This one will put a tie around my neck once again and get me testifying against it in Pierre this coming session.