After House Bill 1083 (establish the crime of felony stalking of a public official, and provide a penalty therefor) was eviscerated in committee a week or so back, I’m guessing State Representative Brandei Schaefbauer was unhappy.
Because she dusted it off, stripped it down to only keep the bad parts, made those even worse, and has now resurrected it as House Bill 1305 to not just cover state officials and legislators – but now has the felony threat about disseminating information about public officials going from the top, down to anyone who might be or has ever been touched by the term “public officer:”

(Of course, Carl Perry also signed on to it. Because Carl signs on to anything)
What is “public officer” perceived as being under Brandei’s Law? In Chapter 22, buried in definitions, SDCL 22-1-2, it’s right there:
(39) “Public officer,” any person who holds a position in the state government or in any of its political subdivisions, by election or appointment, for a definite period, whose duties are fixed by law, and who is invested with some portion of the sovereign functions of government;
Now, go back to the definition that the bill provides “No person may publicly disseminate the employment, home, or school address or location of a current or former public officer, or the officer’s family or household member:” So, if you disseminate the location of – even just a family member of – a former public officer, someone might be guilty of a felony. Boy, the phone book and city directory publishers are going to be screwed. This is kind of nutty.
Of course, Brandei and Carl will probably go on about intent, and claim that the draconian potential isn’t what we think, but think about how deep and far reaching this is. The local weekly paper might be fighting out intent in court by publishing a photo noting who attended a ball game. Or, a news story about a public official. And considering how expansive this list it – current or former public officer or the officers family or household member – that might take up about everybody. It’s a small state.
Would a legislator be a public officer? Well, yes. Would the lay-person member of the State Board of Funeral Service be a public officer covered under Brandei’s Law? Hell yeah. And not just them, but according to the language, so would every member of the State Fair Commission, their kids and their spouses (I’m looking at you Justin). If someone said State Fair Commission member Bell is up at the Capitol being a lobbyist, and they didn’t do it with a smile *BOOM* They could be facing a felony arrest – and let them prove otherwise.
Former Senate President Pro Temp Lee Schoenbeck has taken off his cardigan for the day and he’s out hunting – and you tell people the location of where he is? And he feels you might be trying to be intimidate this former public officer out of his favorite pheasant spot? Brandei’s Law invoked – GO TO JAIL and do not collect $200! And Lee’s a really good trial lawyer. Expect that if Brandei’s law passes, he’ll see you in court in a civil action too.
Here’s a scenario – a scoundrel who wants to avoid the harsh glare of the public’s eye takes up with a public officer. Under Brandei’s law, now the press might be facing criminal or civil action for making note of it, since they’re now a household member. In fact, now that I think of it, could KELOland face a lawsuit if they disclose the town where a sex offender is living now under Brandei’s law? I know of at least one who is a member of a former pubic officer’s family.
That’s how bad and outright nutty this legislation is.
Heck, as ridiculous as it sounds, I would even be covered by Brandei’s law. My wife was elected to the Pierre School Board before we moved to Brookings. Because I am a family member of a former pubic officer, if I don’t think someone said “that @$$^&* lives in Brookings” with good intentions – by disclosing my location, they could be facing a Class 6 felony and a civil action in our new police state under Brandei’s Law.
Based on the testimony that was provided in House Bill 1083, the legislation that was rejected earlier, I know I’m failing to come close to describing all the problems with it. But, if you feel we need Brandei’s law to protect Lee’s and my location like we’re in witness protection.. well, you should take a harder look at the kind of state you want to live in.

I am so thankful that there will be a full slate of candidates to take on Al, Brandei, and Carl.
Spencer Sommers and a yet to be announced candidate(coming soon) in the house
Katie Washnok in the Senate. This could bring a breath of fresh air and D3 could Move Forward from this debacle.
Is there really 300 plus worth of laws that need to be added, changed or deleted from the House bodies perspective. Cripes this fruit cake bars like to talk about nonsense and waste time.
Ok. Let’s say I attend Mass at Sacred Heart Church in Aberdeen and Brandei and I happen to make eye contact once while in the church. Does this mean I could be charged and convicted under “Brandei’s Law” and end up being a convicted felon?
If for some reason Brandei did not like the look on my face during Mass or I did not demonstrate devotion or worship to her idea of being a Catholic or Christian could I end up being charged as being a protestor in the church charged and convicted of another felony?
Background: Sacred Heart is my home church where I was Baptized, Confirmed, would go over to the rectory to wake up the priest for early morning Mass.where I would serve. We also attended daily Mass there while going to Sacred Heart Elementary and Roncalli Junior High.
AMENDMENT IDEA: move the SD House and Senate to the Minuteman Missile Historic Site, and bring everyone in on a bus while blindfolded every day.
Is Brandei even running for re-election? Wouldn’t she actually have to come back to Aberdeen to collect signatures, and she hasn’t set foot in the city limits in months?
I’ve heard she’s been at a couple of public events. But I don’t dare discuss the location.
Wait, should I be supporting this?
Did Chris Reder resign because a house he owned in Minnesota with a status as being homesteaded so he could get a tax break from the county requiring that the house be owner occupied and that he was a legal resident of that county and Minnesota? That house is not supposed to be rented out either.
Legally Reder never should of been a South Dakota candidate nor elected to be a legislator.
Don’t remove valuable tools to maintain trust and integrity in our electoral/political system.