Good gosh.  The Brookings School Board voted last night to increase property taxes on the school’s property tax levy from 34 cents per $1,000 in valuation to $2.295 per $1,000. An increase of literally $1.955 per thousand or a 675% increase:

Brookings voters will get to decide on April 10 the fate of a $5.1 million annual opt out that would last for 10 years.

The opt out was approved by the Brookings School Board Monday night on a 4-1 vote after considering several different options that would have put the opt out amount at different totals and fund different levels of district priorities.

As Brookings Superintendent Klint Willert put it in describing the district’s situation, the challenge is closing the gap between limited resources and the needs and wants of students, staff and the district.

and..

Option 3.1 is a variation of No. 3 that puts a heavier emphasis on reducing class sizes and providing staff development enhancements. That opt out would come to $5,060,118.

The main difference between this and the third option, as pointed out by Willert, is “the 20 students per core classroom, which would add a total of 32 staff members to the district, 32 FTEs. Again, this is an anticipated number, a projected number based on current enrollments.”

This would increase the tax levy from 34 cents per $1,000 in valuation to $2.295 per $1,000.

and..

The vote to put the $5.1 million annual opt out on the April 10 ballot was approved by the board 4-1, with Fishback voting against.

Read it here.

I’m betting that’s not going to go well.

District 1 State House seat sought by Tamara St. John

SISSETON, South Dakota – Tamara St. John, a life-long resident of South Dakota, today announced her intention to seek a legislative seat for District of the South Dakota House of Representatives.

“I am looking forward to running for this opportunity to be a conservative and inclusive voice for District 1.” St. John said. “Being a woman, a tribal member and a believer in fiscal responsibility, I truly feel like I can add a unique voice to the SD legislature. One size doesn’t always fit all. I am looking forward to going out this year and earning the vote of the hard working and diverse people of District 1.”

St. John, born and raised in northeastern South Dakota, is also a member of the Sisseton Wahpeton Sioux Tribe.  St. John works as a historian, genealogist and has spent many years in the area of historic preservation, along with currently serving as the archivist for the Sisseton Wahpeton Tribal Archives and Collections. In this role, she has specialized in community outreach and education. St. John also has experience working with local, state and federal governments on historic preservation and cultural projects.

St. John serves on the South Dakota Humanities Council as a member of the Board of Directors and recently received a certificate in cultural heritage tourism from George Washington University. St. John is the mother of 4 children and currently resides in Sisseton, South Dakota.

About District 1: District 1 of the SD State Legislature includes the entire counties of Day, Marshall, Roberts and northern part of Brown County in South Dakota.

Rounds, Colleagues Urge VA to Honor Veterans’ Emergency Care Claims

Senators Urge VA to Reimburse Veterans for Their Emergency Treatment Claims Before Recent Court Decision

WASHINGTON – U.S. Sens. Mike Rounds (R-S.D.), a member of the Senate Veterans’ Affairs Committee, along with 11 of his Senate colleagues, today sent a letter to Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Secretary David Shulkin to request that the VA reimburse veterans who were billed for emergency treatment at private hospitals.

In January, the VA announced that it would not retroactively reimburse veterans for their emergency treatment despite a court decision that ruled the VA is responsible for emergency medical costs at private, non-VA hospitals. In response, the Senators wrote to VA Secretary David Shulkin urging him to reimburse veterans who filed a claim for emergency medical costs before the court ruling.

“Between 2010 and April 16, 2016, the VA erroneously denied thousands of veterans’ claims for emergency treatment,” the senators wrote. “With the VA’s recent interpretation of this ruling, veterans who filed claims before April 16, 2016, would see no relief from the VA’s wrongful application of the law and would be stuck paying medical bills that Congress intended that the VA pay. We ask that the VA include those veterans whose claims were decided before April 16, 2016, so that all veterans can fully take advantage of a benefit Congress intended they receive.”

The Expansion of Veteran Eligibility for Reimbursement Act, enacted in 2010, directed the VA to pay for veterans’ emergency treatment at non-VA facilities unless the veteran has another form of insurance that entirely covers their medical costs. Since 2010, the VA has denied thousands of claims because a veteran’s other insurance partially paid for their treatment, leaving veterans to cover the difference for costly emergency care.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims ruled on April 16, 2016, that the VA’s interpretation of its responsibility for non-VA emergency treatment was wrong and ordered the VA to begin paying these claims. Despite that, the VA has chosen not to pay veterans who filed before the 2016 court ruling.

The VA released its new policy regarding payment or reimbursement for emergency treatment at private hospitals on January 9, 2018. The VA will only pay for new claims or those not decided prior to April 16, 2016.

Sens. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.), Steve Daines (R-Mont.), Jon Tester (D-Mont.), Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), Patty Murray (D-Wash.), Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) and Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) also signed the letter to Secretary Shulkin.

The senators’ letter to Secretary Shulkin can be read online HERE.

###

Tapio: Non-Meandered Waters Bill a ‘Lose-Lose’ for Sportsmen and Land Owners

South Dakota Congressional Candidate and Watertown State Senator, Neal Tapio Monday expressed disappointment regarding SB 199, a bill meant to end a long simmering state feud over the balance between private land owners and sportsmen who believe in public access to bodies of water for angling and recreational use on private land.  Tapio and 18 other senators voted to kill the bill in floor consideration Monday by a vote of 19-16.

Tapio blames authors of the bill for including several fatal flaws and unreasonable provisions in the bill’s language that he says made it impossible to reach a compromise, including one major sticking point which could have made it illegal for private landowners to hunt and fish on their own property.

“After more than a year of conversation, a special session and a 15-person committee to address this issue, it is an understatement to say this final attempt at legislation was a disappointment and a failure,” Tapio said.

“I think it’s unfair to South Dakota sportsmen who were misled into believing this was a reasonable attempt to open as many waters to fishing as possible,” Tapio said.

Senator Tapio believes fatal flaws doomed the legislation by attempting to expand the discussion to all non-meandered bodies of water and by demanding a process to close access to both the sporting public and private owners known as the “closed to one, closed to all provision.”

“This bill literally could have made it possible for one landowner to close down access to an entire non-meandered lake, making it impossible for adjoining landowners to use that lake for fishing or hunting, even on their own land”  Tapio said.

“Think about that.  You have water on your property and you want to take your grandchild hunting.  For some reason another landowner requests the lake to be closed and so it is closed to all recreation, both public and private, thereby preventing you from hunting ducks with your grandson on your own land,” Tapio said.

“A group of seasoned Republican legislators met secretly for months, but failed to respect the very basic rights of private property ownership while leading the sportsmen to believe this was a fair and equitable solution to a very complex problem.” Tapio said.  “Unfortunately, this bill expanded the scope of the problems by including all recreation on all non-meandered lakes, while failing to account for the simple core principles of private property rights,” Tapio said.

“Along with many other problems, it simply wasn’t fair to drag this process on any longer,” Tapio said.

Dakota Posts is at it again tonight… from Facebook

Here’s how it all went down today on Rep Dennert’s House Bill 1305 to allow non-Republican party members to vote in the GOP Primary that was blasted by the South Dakota Republican Party today. 29 yea, 37 nay, and 4 excused.

House Bill 1305, Drew Dennert’s open primary vote measure, went down on a 29- 37 vote.  I’m working on getting who voted and how, so hold on for more details…

House Bill 1305, sponsored by State Representative Drew Dennert just earned a sharp rebuke from the South Dakota Republican Party Executive Board this morning, who voted unanimously to oppose the legislation on Sunday.

Why? Partly because according to an e-mail calling for action by the South Dakota Republican Party Central Committee, the GOP noted that the “..measure was introduced without talking with stakeholders,” indicating that the sponsor of the measure took it upon themselves to introduce it without consulting the people it would affect.

SDGOP Chairman Dan Lederman also noted that Constitutional Amendment V, which would have done similar things to the primary process was rejected by South Dakota voters 55-45, and lost in all but three counties in the state.

The party also noted This measure represents an attempt to appease those who want to allow Democrats and others to pick the Republican candidates.   Winston Churchill said it best when he said “An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last.” 

The e-mail encourages members of the Republican Central Committee to call the House lobby at 773-3851 to encourage their State Representatives to vote NO on the bill when it’s up for a vote today on the House Floor.

The e-mail closes by also noting that the Republican State Party Executive Board will also be weighing in on House Bill 1259.

I’m catching info this AM on a bill that’s affecting a group that wasn’t asked about a measure ahead of time. And now they’re not happy.

Stay tuned as I get details.