Lawmakers target government supervisors who stay silent on misconduct, but not with a felony

Yahoo

04-03-2025

South Dakota Attorney General Marty Jackley talks about charges filed against 11 prison inmates on April 23, 2024, at the Law Enforcement Center in Sioux Falls. (John Hult/South Dakota Searchlight)
The South Dakota House of Representatives handed one loss and one victory to Attorney General Marty Jackley in his quest for an ethics reform package on Monday at the state Capitol in Pierre.
The House voted 38-31 to strip the possibility of felony penalties from a bill that would punish state employee supervisors who fail to report misbehavior.
Gov. Larry Rhoden's team has argued against felony penalties originally embedded in Senate Bill 62, even while working with Jackley and State Auditor Rich Sattgast to craft the attorney general's legislative response to a host of investigations into state employee misconduct over the past year.
The defendant at the center of one of those cases, Lonna Carroll, was in court Monday for a motions hearing. The former Department of Social Services employee faces felony theft charges for allegedly engaging in a yearslong pattern of writing and approving fake financial assistance requests. She'd pocketed the $1.8 million over the years to support an overactive retail shopping habit, court documents allege. Her lawyer tried unsuccessfully to convince a judge to dismiss the case Monday. Her trial is set to begin April 1.
Some of the conduct a supervisor would be tasked with reporting to the attorney general under the bill, including engaging in low-dollar conflicts of interest, amount to misdemeanor crimes.
Former state employee accused of stealing $1.8 million from Child Protection Services
A supervisor should not have a felony charge levied for not turning in misdemeanor behavior, the Rhoden administration has said.
On the House floor, Rep. Tim Reisch, R-Howard, moved to amend the bill so that a failure to turn in misbehaving employees would be a Class 1 misdemeanor. Crimes in that category are punishable by up to a year in jail and a $2,000 fine.
'A Class 1 misdemeanor is not a slap on the wrist,' Reisch said.
Fort Pierre Republican Rep. Will Mortenson said he likely wouldn't support the bill without the amendment. He pointed out that as written, the bill threatened penalties for failure to turn in unethical behavior.
'We could be talking about something that's not even a crime, and a supervisor doesn't report it to the attorney general. Now that supervisor is a felon,' Mortenson said. 'I think this amendment really saves this bill.'
Opponents to Reisch's idea characterized it as unfriendly to the attorney general's vision of deterrence through the threat of stiff penalties. Majority Leader Scott Odenbach, R-Spearfish, said there are already some crimes on the books that could net misdemeanors for supervisors who stay silent about the criminal behavior in their agency.
'I'm not a guy that wants to add a bunch of felonies, but I think in this case it's necessary,' Odenbach said.
As amended, the bill passed 66-3. Because it passed the Senate in a different form, a conference committee with members from both chambers will be formed to reconcile the differences if the Senate doesn't approve the amended version. That committee's compromise would then need sign-off from the full House and Senate.
'We look forward to continuing the conversation and need for government accountability in the Senate/House conference committee,' Jackley said in a statement about SB 62.
Senate Bill 61 is meant to strengthen the role of the state's Internal Control Board, so it can better monitor the activities of state agencies, accept and review annual performance measures and write rules on codes of professional conduct for state employees.
Felonies for silent supervisors a sticking point as anti-corruption bills clear SD Senate
The House State Affairs Committee changed SB 61 from the version approved by the Senate. The committee voted to put the state treasurer on the board, moving the state auditor from a group member to its chair, and nest the entire operation under the Auditor's Office. It's currently a part of the Bureau of Finance and Management.
Rep. Les Heinemann, R-Flandreau, offered a successful amendment to the bill on the House floor to undo the committee changes. He told House members the committee's version of the bill put too much authority in the hands of an elected official, the auditor. He also opposed having the treasurer, who approves payments from the state coffers, on the board, and of putting the board under the auditor, a move he said would require the hiring of additional staff at the auditor's office.
The Internal Control Board, he argued, should have balance between elected officials and career public servants. Under the amendment passed by the House, the head of the Bureau of Finance and Management would serve as chair.
Jackley had wanted the changes in the Heinemann amendment and issued a statement praising its 60-9 passage with them added. Jackley's office had backed the Senate version.
Two other Jackley anti-corruption bills have already passed the House and Senate. Senate Bill 60 would give the state auditor greater authority to access state agency financial records, and Senate Bill 63 would implement new protections for government whistleblowers.
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX