A letter just went out this afternoon from several concerned members of the House & Senate with regards to the impact and implications of House Bill 1281, which refers a number of day to day decisions on federal spending which have been done within expenditure guidelines set by the budget, and puts it on a far tighter rein, and might require Appropriators to spend a lot more time in Pierre:

Dear Caucus Leaders:

It is no secret that we believe HB 1281, which was reincarnated as the “budget deal Federal spending framework”, was the wrong direction for South Dakota. We ask the Leadership of both Chambers to consider the issues we raise below and acknowledge the need for a Legislative fix to the problems we created.  The House majority spoke when House Bills 1333, 1334, 1335, 1336, and 1339 were defeated and the Senate spoke with one unanimous voice on SR701, yet somehow, we’re living with the reality of HB 1281 and we have many questions that we cannot find answers for.  We’ve developed a short list of the most obvious questions/concerns we’ve arrived at thus far.

1. 1. As appropriators or former appropriators, we are aware that there are agencies not explicitly referenced in HB 1281 which may receive funding from the federal legislation referenced in the bill. We believe that there is confusion regarding what process those agencies should follow under this new legislation. Should they follow the new budget unit process, or should they simply continue conducting business as usual?
   2. What constitutes a “change in policy” as referenced in section 10 of HB 1281? If a department must alter a program to match shifting federal guidance, would that constitute a “change in policy?” For instance, theSouth Dakota Department of Transportation frequently has to adjust to revised rules and criteria for various federal funds, yet all funds would still be used for roads and bridges.  Who is the arbiter of the “change in policy”?  Does the Transportation Commission have authority to accept grants with changing parameters or have we destroyed that Commission and must now legislate which highways are repaired or not?  Is the STIP now worthless or at best subject to legislative approval? 
   3. Do discretionary, competitive grants – like local law enforcement grants – constitute new programs? This same situation repeats time and time again across state government.
   4. Section 10 also states that an agency may not expend federal funds for these new programs (again, unclear on what constitutes a new program) “until the special committee… releases the appropriated money.” What process and timeline does the committee intend to follow for releasing that money? Does the Joint Appropriations Committee have authority over these grants during session, or is it only the “Special Committee”?
   5. For the remaining federal fund authority in the base budgets of various agencies impacted by HB 1281, would they need to transfer that money to the new budget units as identified in section 1, and then transfer the money back to the previous budget unit?
   6. Many sections of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021, Pub. L. 116-260, as is shown in HB 1281, appear to be replaced by Public Law 117-43. What impact does that have on the provisions of HB 1281?
   7. For projects that span multiple fiscal years (whether state or federal), would agencies need to request a separate release of expenditures only for work to be performed in state FY 2023? This seems like it could overcomplicate planning for the type of major construction projects that our legislature has approved in the past two years.
   8. What kind of time commitment is anticipated from current appropriators until the next legislative session? How much additional work do you expect HB 1281 will create? If our Legislative Branch wants to be in “control” of the budget shouldn’t it be the responsibility of the Legislative Research Council fiscal staff to do the research to identify the agency budgets impacted and subject to HB 1281? How many additional staff will we need and what will be the cost to our citizens to do all this analysis, when in the end we can only do what was already authorized by the U.S. Congress?

There are many additional questions that we could ask as to how agencies accounting processes should work. As legislators, we should clarify our intent so that the administration can move forward with a workable process – if that is even possible given the vagueness of this legislation.

This is a legislative problem created by our haste to “get out of town” on the last day of session.  We have analyzed HB 1340, the G-Bill.  There are no ill effects if HB 1281 is disposed of.   We need to stand up and acknowledge our error and find a Legislative solution or ask the Governor to veto this bill and then work to sustain her veto.

Respectfully,

The undersigned members:

Senators:
John Wiik  
David Johnson                                                                     

Representatives:
David Anderson
Larry Tidemann
Hugh Bartels
Lance Koth
Mike Derby

What are your thoughts?

From my mailbox:

New Survey: Sioux Falls Residents Raise Alarm on Mega-Slaughterhouse

SIOUX FALLS, South Dakota – Citizens for a Sustainable Sioux Falls (CSSF), a community network dedicated to preserving the spirit of Sioux Falls and the beauty of its natural resources, today released the results of a new poll capturing local views on plans for a major new hog processing plant just off Interstate 229. The survey, conducted by Public Opinion Strategies in February, found that three-quarters of registered voters in Sioux Falls want to hit the brakes on a proposal by Nebraska-based Wholestone Farms to open a 170-acre complex to process six million hogs annually within city limits.

“Sioux Falls continues to grow as the economic and cultural hub for our region, but residents don’t want to jeopardize that bright future with short-range thinking,” said CSSF executive director and Sioux Falls native Robert Peterson. “The vast majority of local voters shared serious concerns about the impact of a massive new slaughterhouse inside our city on odor, traffic, water quality, housing, and other issues. They want city leaders to protect our quality of life and our future ability to attract high-skilled, high-wage jobs.”

Before being presented with any arguments, the survey of 300 registered voters found that 81% of residents felt the proposed slaughterhouse would negatively impact odors in Sioux Falls, while 67% of residents felt it would negatively impact the availability of housing. Majorities also agreed it would negatively impact water quality, traffic and congestion, and property values. A full 75% agreed with the statement that, “City leaders should halt the project until more study is done on the impact to property values, traffic, and living conditions.” Even more, 78%, would support requiring any new slaughterhouse to be located outside of city limits.

“Given the city’s long-time efforts to combat contamination in the Big Sioux River and foul odors in our neighborhoods, it’s clear why residents want to keep up to six million hog carcasses away from our homes, businesses, and schools,” added Peterson. “Sioux Falls is our home and an increasingly attractive location for many new families and professionals. We can keep it that way by placing a moratorium on this project while more study is done, citizens’ concerns are heard, and better locations are considered.”

Additional results are available in a memo from Public Opinion Strategies linked here.

###

ABOUT US: Citizens for a Sustainable Sioux Falls highlights the voices of community leaders, employers, and local residents who share a passion for ensuring that Sioux Falls remains the best little city in America to live, work, open a business, or raise a family. Our work aims to ensure Sioux Falls continues to grow as a thriving center of commerce, culture, and technology by preserving the spirit of our community and the beauty of its natural resources. Learn more at CitizensForASustainableSiouxFalls.com.

Sunday, March 20 marks the first day of Spring — at 10:33 a.m. CT/9:33 a.m. MT precisely, according to the Farmer’s Almanac. Spring is a crucial season for both of our state’s two largest industries: agriculture and tourism.

Spring is always a great time of year. Easter is right around the corner. Every day we see signs of renewal that give us hope: the warm sun melting away the chill of winter; Buffalo calves on the prairie; and Spring blooms returning to the fields and trees.  

After two years of COVID looming over the lives of people across the country, Americans are looking for wide-open spaces like what we have in South Dakota. Even as inflation climbs to record highs, recent data from experts like Expedia suggests Americans are gearing up for another big year of travel. After our record-breaking tourism year in 2021, we are optimistic about another big tourism season for South Dakota. 

As gas prices blow past historic peaks, fueled by a 40-year high for inflation, Americans are planning to put a higher premium on travel and vacation this year. With airlines potentially ending mask mandates in mid-April, we could also see a rise in air travel in Sioux Falls, Rapid City, and other regional airports. 

While it is impossible to know for sure how many visitors will make their way to South Dakota in the coming months, a look back at 2021 shows that folks want to visit our great places and see our great faces. Record numbers of people visited our parks, and our airports in Rapid City and Sioux Falls saw a 74% increase over the previous year. 

All told, our state saw about 13.5 million visitors in 2021. That’s because we have so much to offer: national monuments, the most beautiful parks, plenty of places to hunt & fish, rodeos, livestock shows, some of the best county fairs in America, and rich cultural experiences such as Pow Wows and the Crazy Horse Memorial.  

All of these attractions led to visitors spending a record $4.4 billion last year in South Dakota. That’s an amazing figure for our state’s No. 2 industry.  

As we look forward to warmer days and the chance to enjoy the outdoors, my thoughts are also turning to our farmers and ranchers. A milder winter has given way to earlier spring weather. Unfortunately, the lack of snow hasn’t helped ease drought conditions. As Spring comes, let’s all pray for some April showers (and some March showers, too) to help our farmers as they put crops in the ground. 

Last year, Agriculture accounted for more than $32 billion in our state economy, making it our largest industry by far. With the drought hanging around, it’s likely our Ag economy could take a hit this year. 

Without additional moisture, our farmers and ranchers will face challenges. They are already feeling the pinch on their margins thanks to inflation, including rising diesel prices. Without adequate spring showers, ranchers will be spending more to keep their stock fed, and farmers will have a harder time growing their crops. 

In times like these, I turn to my faith. The Bible tells us not to fear, “For I will pour water on the thirsty land, and streams on the dry ground.” It also says “Ask the Lord for rain in the springtime; it is the Lord who sends the thunderstorms. He gives showers of rain to all people, and plants of the field to everyone.” Let’s remember those promises and pray for rain. 

Hope springs eternal as we approach the celebration of Jesus’ resurrection. May we remain thankful for our blessings in South Dakota and work together to lift our neighbors who are waiting for their blessings to come in the form of rain clouds. 

###

Secretary of State Steve Barnett is joining us at SDWC on advertiser’s row for a while, so make a point to click on his ad, and if you’re inclined, lend him your support for another 4 years as South Dakota’s Secretary of State.

And don’t forget to check out our other advertisers including Marty Jackley, Americans for Prosperity – South Dakota, Governor Kristi Noem, US Senator John Thune, Dusty Johnson for US Congress, Rapid Digital Solutions, Brent Hoffman for District 9 Senate, Cyber Climb, and the South Dakota Republican Party!

Of course, at Dakota Campaign Store, you’ll find me hawking yard signs, postcards, and all the things a professional campaign needs to make an impression.

We’re down to only a few limited advertising opportunities left for reaching South Dakota’s opinion leaders as 2022 campaign continues to press forward. Advertising on the Dakotwarcollege.com website is based on a first come, first serve basis for available positions.

Information on ad prices, ad positions, and ad commitments may be directed to the webmaster by clicking here.

Gov. Noem Signs Bills to Take Care of People

PIERRE, S.D. – Today, Governor Kristi Noem signed bills to take care of the South Dakota people, including SB 58, which funds both the construction of a new state public health lab and the renovation of the existing lab.

“Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, our State Health Lab helped us to take care of South Dakotans who needed it, and the new lab will bolster our capabilities to support our healthcare systems,” said Governor Noem. “Since I took office, we have placed a priority on taking care of people by cutting red tape and making it easier for South Dakotans to get the care they need in the way that they need it.”

The Governor also signed the following 12 bills to take care of people:

• SB 86 revises certain definitions in laws regarding physical therapists.
• SB 147 authorizes the construction and operation of a nursing facility in Lyman County.
• SB 169 establishes a means for certain Department of Corrections inmates to earn credit against fines or costs ordered by the sentencing court.
• HB 1038 establishes an opioid abatement and remediation fund.
• HB 1129 prohibits forms of discrimination in access to organ transplantation.
• HB 1133 provides that the cost of a home study required for adoption is the responsibility of the Department of Social Services.
• HB 1229 authorizes the formation of corporations and limited liability companies by physical therapists, occupational therapists, and speech-language pathologists.
• HB 1272 revises provisions related to counseling for domestic abuse defendants.
• HB 1278 revises the child support obligation schedule.
• HB 1279 revises certain provisions relating to child support.
• HB 1293 limits liability for certain child welfare agency licensees.
• HB 1302 modifies tuition responsibilities for children in residential treatment centers.

Governor Noem has signed 174 bills into law and vetoed one this legislative session.

###

 

Hot off my e-mail box….

The White House has apparently announced a couple of their patronage jobs in the federal government for South Dakota, and it looks like Dem’s Vice-Chair and chief attack dog Nikki Gronli has landed the spot for USDA State Director for Rural Development as a reward for her faithful service to the Democrat Party.

So what are her qualifications for state director of rural development? According to the Democrat party:

Nikki grew up in Aurora, SD. She received her B.S. in Design Communications from the University of Minnesota and began her career in advertising in Minneapolis. She returned to South Dakota in 2001 and continued to work on some of the best-known brands in the region.

Currently as Marketing Specialist at SDN Communications she oversees the brand, traditional marketing, and educational events.

Apparently rural development is all about branding now.

If you check out her twitter account where she spends most of time hating on Republicans, she does claim to have hunted..

While “Three-shell” Gronli and other Democrats get their plum positions, what’s more interesting is that the Biden administration has yet to fill two of the most significant federal positions; the judgeship being vacated by retiring Judge Viken, and the US Attorney spot, with those spots being supposedly vetted by SDDP Chair Randy Seiler. As I remarked back in January:

No replacement for Judge Viken has been made public yet. The US Attorney is still vacant after the resignation of Ron Parsons, with an “acting” in front of US Attorney Dennis Holmes title.  The United States Marshal is still Donald J. Trump appointee Daniel C. Mosteller.… and so on.

Read it here.

With Democrats vetting candidates for these positions, it looks like the only thing the SDDP crew has managed to do so far is to help ..themselves.

Duvall Announces District 24 Re-Election Bid

State Senator Mary Duvall of Pierre has announced her re-election bid as a Republican for District 24, which includes Haakon, Hughes, Hyde, Stanley, and Sully counties.  Senator Duvall is finishing her first term in the Senate, after serving the citizens in central South Dakota for four terms in the House.

“It has been an honor to represent central South Dakota,” said Sen. Duvall.  “For the past ten years, I have been an advocate for state employees, agriculture, transportation, and education. I am asking voters for the opportunity to continue working for them.”

She added, “I am proud of the fact that the 2022 Legislature approved a six percent wage increase for state employees, teachers, and health care providers.  We made significant investments in infrastructure for water, housing, and higher education.  We have worked hard to make South Dakota a great place to live, to raise a family, and to run a business.”

Sen. Duvall chairs the Senate Transportation Committee.  She also serves on the State Affairs, Ag & Natural Resources, and Retirement Laws committees.  This past summer Duvall chaired the Senate Legislative Redistricting Committee which added Haakon county to District 24.  In addition, she serves on the Water Development Oversight Committee which will be monitoring the $600 million investment in water, wastewater, storm water, and nonpoint source pollution propjets in South Dakota.

Duvall noted, “I believe an effective legislator needs to work hard to understand the issues, listen to those who know how a bill will affect our State, and find ways to develop consensus with others.”

Sen. Duvall is a South Dakota native and a graduate of South Dakota State University.  She worked for 30 years on agricultural policy and communication issues with the state Department of Agriculture, the South Dakota Farm Bureau, and other agricultural organizations.  Her husband, Ron, works for the SD Department of Agriculture and Natural Resources.  They have two married daughters, and are active in their church.

Johnson to USDA: Provide Certainty to Producers

Washington, D.C. – Today, U.S. Representative Dusty Johnson (R-S.D.) along with his colleagues urged U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Secretary Tom Vilsack to mirror the Cattle Contract Library Pilot Program included in the fiscal year 2022 Omnibus off of Johnson’s House-passed bill—the Cattle Contract Library Act. This bill overwhelmingly passed the U.S. House in December 2021.

“As you implement the recently passed appropriations bill, we write to urge you to prioritize the implementation of the cattle contract library pilot program based off the provisions included in our legislation, the Cattle Contract Library Act of 2021,” said the members. “By quickly implementing the provisions in our legislation, you can help provide certainty to producers across the country who put food on American’s tables.”

H.R. 5609 creates a library for cattle contracts within the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA’s) Agriculture Marketing Service Department. Currently, beef packers are not required to report the details of contract terms to USDA, which leaves cattlemen in the dark, inhibiting a transparent, fair, and competitive market.

Read the full letter here or below:

The Honorable Tom Vilsack
U.S. Department of Agriculture
1400 Independence Avenue SW
Washington, DC 20250

Dear Secretary Vilsack,

Our nation’s cattle ranchers are a vital part of the agriculture industry, helping supply Americans and consumers around the world with safe, healthy beef. They have done so all while facing Mother Nature, a pandemic, supply chain issues, and volatile markets. To make sure our farmers and ranchers have the tools they need to operate their businesses, they need a transparent and competitive market. One area of improvement is greater price discovery and reporting of alternative marketing arrangements. Right now, beef packers are not required to report the details of these arrangements to USDA, leaving cattlemen in the dark as to the contract terms being offered by packers through these extensively used agreements.

This Congress, the House overwhelmingly passed legislation to address this challenge by directing USDA’s Agriculture Marketing Service to establish a contract library for cattle contracts that would be reported and published along with other ongoing livestock reporting. We also successfully worked to secure funding for this purpose in the FY2022 omnibus appropriations package. As you implement the recently passed appropriations bill, we write to urge you to prioritize the implementation of the cattle contract library pilot program based off the provisions included in our legislation, the Cattle Contract Library Act of 2021.

Our legislation would establish a publicly available, user-friendly cattle contract library that would publish information pertaining to the type of contract; the duration of the contract; provisions in the contract that may affect the base price of the cattle; schedules of premiums or discounts; and transportation arrangements. Further, it would publish information regarding the total number of cattle solely committed to the packer each week within the 6-month and 12-month periods following the date of the contract, or an indication that that the contract is an open commitment. These provisions would equip cattle producers with the market data they need to make more informed business decisions and exert greater leverage in negotiations with major meatpackers.

We look forward to working with you to support cattle ranchers. By quickly implementing the provisions in our legislation, you can help provide certainty to producers across the country who put food on American’s tables. Thank you for your consideration of this request.

Sincerely,

###

Gov. Noem Signs “Zuck Bucks” Ban and Good Government Bills into Law

PIERRE, S.D. – Today, Governor Kristi Noem signed SB 122, which prohibits private funding of election costs.

“In 2020, we saw Mark Zuckerberg pour ‘Zuck Bucks’ into local election operations across the country. Elections should be funded by government, and we will not risk creating avenues for big-tech billionaires to unfairly influence our free and open elections,” said Governor Noem. “We take election integrity very seriously in South Dakota. We already have some of the strongest election laws on the books, and this legislation will make them even stronger.”

The Governor also signed 13 additional Good Government bills into law:

• SB 56 revises certain provisions relating to the South Dakota Retirement System.
• SB 57 adds gaming enforcement agents to Class B membership of the South Dakota Retirement System.
• SB 90 revises certain provisions regarding local building codes.
• SB 108 repeals certain reporting requirements to the Executive Board of the Legislative Research Council.
• SB 131 requires the Board of Regents to provide an annual presentation to the special committee.
• SB 156 revises certain provisions regarding census estimates for the purposes of off-sale and on-sale liquor licenses.
• SB 187 requires state agencies to provide certain information for initiated measure or constitutional amendment fiscal notes.
• SB 203 revises certain provisions regarding utility facilities and revenue bonds.
• HB 1041 facilitates legislative oversight of settlement agreements involving a state entity or official.
• HB 1084 provides for the regulation of motorized foot scooters.
• HB 1127 modifies provisions related to county redistricting.
• HB 1214 prohibit forms of caller identification manipulation and imposes a penalty therefor.
• HB 1268 revises provisions related to name changes when obtaining a marriage license.

You can find photos of the “Zuck Bucks” ban bill signing here and a video of the signing here.

Governor Noem has signed 161 bills into law and vetoed one this legislative session.

###

So, there’s a guy who has a website who is so extreme that he apparently thinks Madison Cawthorne and Marjorie Taylor Greene are liberal sellouts.  He also claims “great leaders take action” and in South Dakota it wasn’t Kristi Noem who kept the state open, but ….the State Legislature?

…”It turns out that for Kristi Noem, her policy on Covid wasn’t about preserving freedom. It’s just that she doesn’t like doing things. That, and her state legislature. South Dakota’s state legislature is overwhelmingly Republican, and they were the ones who blocked her from doing more restrictions than she did, and after it worked out Noem sucked up all the praise on TV.”

Um.. WTF? Do you recall the weekly briefings from the legislature during COVID? Pretty sure it was all hands on deck from the Executive Branch, and it was Governor Noem and the Secretary of Health up there.

But in the bizarro world of the Internet, of course this person is Taffy Howard’s latest interview. You can catch this bag of crazy interview here (via rumble, of course) while anti-vaxxer “statistics” scroll across the screen claiming miscarriages and disabilities from covid vaccinations: