Davison County Sheriff reverses course, opposes state prison proposal for Mitchell
Davison County Sheriff Steve Harr issued a statement Monday saying he has decided not to support a possible $600 million prison plan that is being considered by the state's Project Prison Reset task force, becoming one of the most prominent Davison County leaders to oppose the plan.
Harr said the change of heart came after the feedback he's gotten from residents in Davison County who are against the prison plan.
"Since Davison County made the cut at the last meeting, it has become quite clear that there are a very large number of residents that are opposed to the prison coming to our county," Harr wrote in a statement. "I have heard very little from anyone that is in favor of it. That is why it was important to get a conversation going. It is unfortunate that it didn't happen earlier, but better now than after a decision has been made.
In an interview with the Mitchell Republic on Monday afternoon, Harr said he made the decision by listening to the constituents of Davison County.
"The majority of the public just doesn't seem to be in favor," Harr said. "They're pretty adamant that they don't want this."
In his letter, Harr said he initially signed a letter of support for the prison because he hoped Mitchell's plan would advance and there would be conversations about the idea.
"It was not done as a statement of "we need a prison in Mitchell." Well, as you know, this was successful, as the conversation all over town is on this topic," he wrote.
Harr, who initially began working for Davison County as a corrections officer in 2000 and was a longtime deputy, has been sheriff since 2021.
"I did not make this decision lightly, as there are people in this county that are supportive of bringing it here. However, the clear majority do not. My job as sheriff is to look out for the citizens of Davison County and I feel that is what is being done by coming to this decision," Harr wrote. "I would like to thank everyone that has reached out or made your concerns known in other ways. Without an open conversation, nothing gets accomplished. To the people that are in favor, I hope you understand how I came to this decision."
Harr was one of 10 individuals or entities in a June 4 press release from the Mitchell Area Development Corporation and Chamber of Commerce listed as formally expressing support for Mitchell's inclusion as a prison site. In addition to MADC and the Chamber itself, the others included the Mitchell City Council, Davison County Commission, Mitchell Mayor Jordan Hanson, State Rep. Jeff Bathke, Mitchell Area Housing, Inc., Randall Community Water District, Central Electric Cooperative and Mitchell Technical College.
"I can see the plusses and minuses that come with the prison. But when it comes to something of this magnitude, we need to listen to the public that lives here," Harr said in an interview.
Asked about the third-party consultant report that described the Mitchell location as a sub-optimal location because of its site near a major interstate, a rail line and the James River, Harr downplayed the concern and said he's skeptical about how often true prison escapes occur.
"I would like to know about the last escape from the South Dakota State Penitentiary. Movies kind of glamorize that. Inmates sometimes don't return when they're out on work release, but I can't remember the last escape from the prison."
Following the June 3 meeting of the Project Prison Reset task force, Mitchell was named as one of the finalists for the prison location along with a site near Worthing and state land on the grounds of the Mike Durfee Prison in Springfield and at the penitentiary in Sioux Falls. The proposed Mitchell site is 160 acres located south of Interstate 90 near the city's sewer lagoons and landfill. The MADC said last week that the project would generate more than 440 full-time jobs with an annual payroll of more than $36 million.
The task force is working on a short timeline. The state engineer and contractors are expected to present new prison designs that meet the new parameters before the state task force's July 8 meeting. Legislators will convene for a special session at the state Capitol on July 22 to consider approving a plan.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
09-08-2025
- Yahoo
Councilman nearing enough signatures to put term limits plan on Mitchell ballot
Aug. 8—MITCHELL — A proposed term limits initiative petition being circulated by a Mitchell City Council member could effectively turn over six of eight City Council positions, if it's successful. Councilman Mike Bathke is carrying a petition to put term limits on Mitchell's elected officials and expects to finish the petition within the month. If successful, the petition would bring term limits to a vote of the people at the ballot booth, and would impact the seats of the Mitchell City Council members and Mitchell's mayor. Bathke told the Mitchell Republic he is within 20 to 30 signatures of the required signature count. The petition requires 502 signatures, which is 5% of the about 10,000 registered voters in the city of Mitchell. Bathke is hoping the term-limit ordinance can go to a public vote in June 2026. He told the Mitchell Republic that he doesn't want taxpayers to pay for a special election in November 2025, which costs about $10,000, and that he wants a good voter turnout, which happens when there's more questions on the ballot. If approved by voters, the ballot item would introduce a new ordinance to limit city-elected officials to three consecutive terms, including past or present terms of sitting officials. "It could take possibly four years to term out six people," Bathke said. "If it passes, six of the eight on the council would term out after the 2027 election." That would mean, if passed, council president Kevin McCardle and council members Jeff Smith, Marty Barington, and Dan Sabers would be ineligible to run in the 2027 council election. However, under the proposed referendum, council members would be eligible to run for mayor. Furthermore, if the ordinance were to go to a special election in November and is passed, council members Susan Tjarks and John Doescher would be ineligible to run in the 2026 council election. Bathke is seeking term limits for those sitting on the council, including himself, which is something that was lacking from the ordinance the council unanimously voted down in June. At that meeting, Bathke vowed to bring a petition to the vote of the people. The proposed term-limits ordinance allows a person to serve in the role in which they are term-limited if no other candidate has submitted a valid petition for the position. Additionally, any term-limited council member could run for mayor and vice versa. After a break of 18 months, a term-limited official could run again. An initial City Council proposal in June would not have counted past or current terms toward the three consecutive term limit. "There's some people in our community — good, smart men and women — that would be more than willing to step up and do this," said Bathke, who noted that being on the council is a commitment but is rewarding. The council members who would potentially be term limited out have a collective 73 years of combined experience on Mitchell's legislative body. Term limits will reshape the city, according to Bathke, who hopes that more people get involved in the election process of Mitchell and pay attention to what's going on. Bathke noted that an easy step for people to stay informed is to watch the council meetings. The petition cost $800 in attorney fees, which Bathke personally paid for. He said many of the signatures were gathered at Arts in the Park, the Palace City Pre-Sturgis Party and people reaching out personally. "It's been really nice and cool to see people I've never met reach out to me and say, 'Hey, I want to sign the petition,'" Bathke said. However, not everyone agrees with Bathke. "I don't necessarily buy the 'new idea' argument, because I listen to people all the time and get new ideas," said council vice president Tim Goldammer. Bathke and Goldammer were sworn in on the same day for their first terms in 2023. Goldammer and Doescher separately told the Mitchell Republic that term limits make sense on the national level, but not on the local level. Goldammer told the Mitchell Republic he is 60% through his first term and is just now feeling like he is connecting with his constituents. "I think I've started to fully grasp some of the real concerns from my area of town," Goldammer said. Goldammer noted that some city projects take years to progress because of the scope and price tag, and that leaders should have those ideas in the back of their minds. A project of note for Goldammer is flooding and water flow issues in the Miller Street area and the Dry Run Creek area near Burr Street. "And I'm not saying that somebody new to the council can't do that," Goldammer said. "It's important to have somebody in the room who can vocalize those concerns that might be unique to a specific area of town, make sure they stay in focus." For those council members who would be term limited out, the average time in office is 12 years. Council members Smith and Barington have served since 2006, Tjarks since 2013, McCardle and Doescher since 2017, Sabers since 2018, and Bathke and Goldammer since 2023. Doescher compared the term limit petition with the Lake Mitchell vote, when the council voted 5-3 for a resolution to hold a special election over a $25 million lake dredging loan. "I wasn't in favor of borrowing all that money for the lake, but voters passed it by 30 votes," Doescher said. Mitchell Mayor Jordan Hanson told the Mitchell Republic he plans to sign the petition. The proposed ordinance would affect the mayor's office, as well. Council members Barington, McCardle, Sabers, Smith, and Tjarks did not respond to requests for comment prior to the publication of this story. "I think the majority of the council members have the same attitude as (I do) and that is let the voters decide," Doescher told the Mitchell Republic. "If you don't like my job, then vote me out, or run against me or get somebody to run against me." Solve the daily Crossword
Yahoo
19-07-2025
- Yahoo
Prison task force picks Sioux Falls, caps price at $650 million for 1,500 beds
South Dakota State Engineer Stacy Watters, left, and Vance McMillan of JE Dunn testify to the Project Prison Reset task force on July 8, 2025, in Sioux Falls. (John Hult/South Dakota Searchlight) SIOUX FALLS — South Dakota can't build the prison it needs at the price it wants without sacrificing quality and longevity. That was the message delivered Tuesday to the Project Prison Reset task force by the state's construction manager, the state engineer and the consultant hired earlier this year to evaluate the options for addressing prison overcrowding. The message didn't take. Citing the political realities of a skeptical Legislature, the task force voted unanimously to recommend that lawmakers support a men's prison at a price point of $650 million during a special session whose date has yet to be set. Prison task force rejects original Lincoln County site, tightens budget for new facility That's $50 million higher than the limit the group set last month. It's also $75 million less than the experts said the group's preferred project would cost hours before the vote. Lt. Gov. Tony Venhuizen, who leads the task force, said the figure is a compromise that moves the state toward a replacement for the 144-year-old penitentiary in Sioux Falls. 'There is no appetite, none, for going above $650 million,' Venhuizen said. House Speaker Jon Hansen, R-Dell Rapids, said securing a two-thirds majority in both chambers — required for spending bills — will mean convincing lawmakers that the job can be done without cost overruns and supplemental budget requests. 'We're going to need to know that we can actually do it for $650 million,' Hansen said. The group also endorsed two vacant plots of industrial land in northeastern Sioux Falls just off Interstate 229, near Gage Brothers, a precast concrete company. The choice of which was left to legislators. The task force voted to shoot down options in Mitchell or Worthing early on during its final meeting Tuesday, which took place at the Military Heritage Alliance in Sioux Falls. Other site options were ruled out during earlier meetings, and some communities, including Box Elder, removed themselves from consideration after submitting proposals. Unlike the residents of Mitchell and Worthing, Joe Bunker of Gage Brothers told the group his company had no qualms with having a prison as a neighbor. 'I just want you to know that we're not opposed to it,' Bunkers said. The buildings on the recommended prison campus should be designed to last 100 years, the task force decided, with 1,200 beds for higher security inmates and another 300 for lower-security inmates. That configuration was one of 14 options presented Tuesday morning from Arrington Watkins, the consulting firm hired to assess the prison system's space needs. The price estimate for the northeastern Sioux Falls prison complex is $725 million. That's $100 million less than a 1,500-bed men's prison proposed for Lincoln County, whose failure to earn the support of the Legislature back in February spurred the creation of the task force. The two sites in northeast Sioux Falls selected as potential prison locations. Mike Quinn of Arrington Watkins ran the task force through the options Tuesday morning. None came in below $600 million, the price cap the task force adopted previously. In addition to brushing off Mitchell and Worthing as site options, the group's final recommendations eliminated options that would have placed buildings in multiple locations. Those included a small prison just north of the penitentiary across a Big Sioux River diversion channel and an additional dormitory-style building in Springfield, current site of Mike Durfee State Prison. Those options were an outgrowth of questions from task force members about the need for a single high-security facility. Minnehaha County Sheriff Mike Milstead, a task force member, asked Quinn if any of the multi-building setups would be 'the best option for the taxpayer.' The answer was no. Each prison site, regardless of size, Quinn said, would need to have recreation areas, kitchens and mess halls and other support areas. 'When you build three facilities, you're building those buildings three times,' Quinn said, adding 'it's never more economical to split it up into smaller units.' Hansen was one of several task force members to ask about a 1,512-bed Nebraska prison priced at $313 million for inmates at a variety of security levels. South Dakota State Engineer Stacy Watters said the state of Nebraska has refused to release specifications for that facility, and denied a records request from South Dakota for more details, citing nondisclosure agreements with its contractors. What the state did learn, Watters said, was that the $313 million price only includes construction, not site preparation or design, and that it doesn't include the intake area or medical facilities that South Dakota's proposal does. Nebraska has already spent $130 million on buildings with those services over the past seven years, she said, and plans to use cheaper piping for its plumbing in the new prison project. The design and materials being used in Nebraska are unclear, but 'we had to assume that at that price, there was a reduced level of construction,' said Vance McMillan of JE Dunn, the state's construction manager at-risk. Hansen questioned why Nebraska would hold back on sharing its design features for a public project. Venhuizen suggested that Nebraska is building a 'sub-par' facility, and 'that's not something they're really looking to admit.' McMillan told the group it had done all the due diligence necessary to keep its estimates low, bidding out every piece of the project. A cheaper price would mean building a prison that would need replacing sooner. Comparisons to Nebraska or other states weren't 'apples to apples,' he said. Report: Tough-on-crime policies could push prison construction costs as high as $2.1 billion But House Majority Leader Scott Odenbach, R-Spearfish, said lower reported price points in other states have created enough doubt to put a new South Dakota prison in political jeopardy at the prices offered Tuesday. 'I'm sitting here as majority leader trying to figure out how I can sell this to a two-thirds majority of the Legislature not knowing all the answers,' Odenbach said. The state has $566 million set aside in an incarceration construction fund, a balance built by infusions of COVID-19 relief money and earning interest. About $50 million of that is earmarked for a women's prison in Rapid City, which is currently under construction. The fund will grow by $23 million of interest in August, Corrections Department spokesman Michael Winder said Tuesday. That the state has the money set aside makes the project more palatable, but Rep. Greg Jamison, R-Sioux Falls, said worries about ongoing operational costs and concerns that the state might not be getting the best deal have left some lawmakers unwilling to trust the experts. 'Other states are doing it for less. There's a shadow of doubt, and we need to rebuild that trust,' Jamison said, to get legislative approval. Jamison suggested that the group vote for 1,500 beds, cap the price at $600 million, and recommend looking for a new construction manager at-risk, as JE Dunn and Henry Carlson's single proposal was the only one the state fielded back in 2023. McMillan, as well as some task force members, bristled at the idea of dispensing with JE Dunn and starting from scratch. McMillan told the task force that every month wasted carries the potential for greater costs. He urged them to make a decision, and insisted that the team that's worked on prisons for the state for the past two years could meet whatever design specifications that lawmakers want. 'We would be happy to build you a steel structure that would last you 50 years. That's a decision that you guys have to make,' McMillan said. McMillan said it would be 'a tall order' to build a 100-year facility for $650 million. Judge Jane Wipf Pfeifle, a task force member, said switching gears on a construction manager would ultimately cost taxpayers. She also questioned the wisdom of setting an 'arbitrary' cap on costs that could hamstring a new prison's ability to meet the state's needs. Two consultants' reports since 2022 have pointed to inmate population growth that will outpace the state's ability to house prisoners without major policy shifts or new construction. The experts, she said, have shown their work to explain their prices and how their designs can address the problem. Prison task force is offered sites east of Box Elder, near unbuilt hog operation in Sioux Falls 'They're not saying 'Gosh, I read in the newspaper that it's cheaper in Arkansas or Nebraska,'' Wipf Pfeifle said. Sen. Jamie Smith, D-Sioux Falls, was among the task force members to worry aloud about what the state would lose — including space for things like rehabilitation programming — by placing a cap of $650 million on the project. Smith said he had little choice but to support the lower-cost compromise figure, but that 'there are going to be corners that will have to be cut in order to get to that number, based on everything that you've seen today.' Sen. Jim Mehlhaff, R-Pierre, expressed similar concerns. Based on a question from Mehlhaff, Corrections Secretary Kellie Wasko told the group that after closing up the penitentiary, she could likely fill 1,500 beds with the state's current prison population. 'We might build a facility that is overcrowded the day we move in,' Mehlhaff said, adding that spending $600 million of saved-up money without solving the problem would be 'a poor stewardship of taxpayer money.' Even so, Mehlhaff said, he recognizes that his fellow lawmakers need to be willing to move forward. Mehlhaff moved that the task force recommend the Legislature to direct the Department of Corrections to 'come up with a plan' to build 1,500 beds 'in the most efficient way possible,' with 300 beds for lower-security inmates. Attorney General and task force member Marty Jackley suggested a $650 million price cap as an amendment. Prison work group peppered with public testimony in first Sioux Falls meeting That addition was 'not necessarily friendly,' the Mehlhaff said, 'but if we could move the ball forward, I could accept that.' Before the final vote, both Venhuizen and Hansen, a 2026 gubernatorial candidate, lauded the result as a win. Venhuizen said the task force had produced a workable compromise. Hansen said the group was able to find a location that, unlike the original Lincoln County proposal, is palatable to neighbors. When asked if the lower price might force the Legislature to build a facility meant to last less than 100 years, Venhuizen said 'I would rather build it smaller' than cheaper. Compromises will need to be made, he said, but those decisions will need to come from the Legislature. Hansen said he also wants to see a durable facility. He couldn't speculate on what kinds of compromises might be necessary, but said there's no question that a higher price tag is off the table. 'We'll have to see what these guys bring to the Legislature,' Hansen said of the design team. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Yahoo
19-07-2025
- Yahoo
Special legislative session scheduled for South Dakota prison vote
Cells at the South Dakota State Penitentiary. (Courtesy of South Dakota Department of Corrections) South Dakota lawmakers will gather in September to decide whether to replace the state penitentiary. On Friday, Gov. Larry Rhoden issued an executive proclamation calling a special session of the Legislature for Sept. 23. The news comes a little over a week after the governor's Project Prison Reset task force voted to endorse a 1,500-bed complex on undeveloped land in northeastern Sioux Falls. Prison task force picks Sioux Falls, caps price at $650 million for 1,500 beds The group recommended a price cap of $650 million, which is roughly the amount that has been set aside for prison construction over the past three years, potentially allowing the state to pay cash for the project rather than taking on debt. The cap is around $75 million less than consultants and work managers said would be necessary for a project of that size during the task force's final meeting on July 8, but the group decided that a higher price wouldn't earn legislative support. Spending bills require the support of two-thirds of lawmakers. The final spending push for an $825 million prison on a controversial Lincoln County site failed to clear that hurdle in February. In a letter to Rhoden requesting the special session, Lt. Gov. Tony Venhuizen, who leads the prison task force, said compromises were necessary to find an answer that would appeal to the Legislature and ease overcrowding in the state's Department of Corrections facilities. 'The task force's unanimous vote for its recommendation demonstrates that we have found a good site for a new penitentiary and a strong path forward,' Venhuizen wrote. The new prison, if approved by lawmakers, would replace the oldest parts of the state penitentiary in Sioux Falls. That building was initially constructed in 1881, prior to statehood. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
