logo
House shoots down prison money, but new vote looms

House shoots down prison money, but new vote looms

Yahoo22-02-2025

Sen. Jack Kolbeck, R-Sioux Falls, on the Senate floor during the 2024 legislative session. Kolbeck, now a state representative, amended a bill Friday in an attempt to keep talks alive on a proposed $125 million men's prison construction project. (Makenzie Huber/South Dakota Searchlight)
PIERRE — A legislative maneuver meant to secure funding and continue discussion on an $825 million men's prison failed by two votes Friday in the South Dakota House of Representatives.
The vote on House Bill 1025 was 34-35, with one member absent and a majority of 36 votes required for passage. The House could vote on whether to reopen debate when lawmakers return to Pierre next week.
The vote throws the future of the massive prison project into question, and could chart a path to easing some of the state's financial strain in a year where lawmakers are pondering cuts and swatting back funding requests.
Showdown over $825 million prison looms for state House of Representatives
House Speaker Pro Tempore Karla Lems, R-Canton, said after the vote that some of the money could go to a trust fund lawmakers want to establish for revenue from unclaimed property. That money comes from abandoned assets that revert to the state.
'We don't want to just blow that money,' Lems said. 'We'd like to see it possibly go into an unclaimed property trust fund, or at least part of it. Maybe there would still be some dollars this year to do some other things.'
Lems voted against HB 1025 on Friday.
In its original form, the bill would've sent $182 million toward the proposed 1,500-bed prison in Lincoln County. It also would have cleared the Department of Corrections to tap into a prison fund worth more than $600 million, set aside by legislators in prior years, to begin building it.
To build the prison that's been designed, mapped out and bid for, its funding package would need support from two-thirds of lawmakers in both the House and Senate, a chamber where it has yet to appear.
On Friday in the House, Sioux Falls Republican Rep. Jack Kolbeck moved an amendment designed to keep the bill alive with a simple majority. It stripped the bill of everything but a provision moving $148.1 million into the prison construction fund. The original proposal also sought to spend $33.9 million from the state's budget reserves.
Since the amendment bill would've moved money, rather than spend it, it could've side-stepped the state's constitutional requirement that spending bills need two-thirds support.
'I've heard a lot of people say we need to build a new prison,' Kolbeck said. 'This amendment allows that discussion to continue.'
The amendment passed 37-32.
Lems was the first to speak against the amended version of the bill. She rattled off questions about the prison's rural location and a pending lawsuit over that location, unknown costs for roads and ongoing operations, and on a price tag she sees as too high.
SD House panel lukewarm on bill to finalize new men's prison funding
She called the prison 'Plan A' for dealing with overcrowded conditions in the state's correctional system. There could be other, cheaper options or alternative locations, Lems said, and there's a bill circulating that would force correctional officials to consider them.
'Before I vote to put any more money into a savings account, I want to know what the plan is,' Lems said.
Rep. Taylor Rehfeldt, R-Sioux Falls, supports the prison project as envisioned by the state's executive branch. She pointed out that the Legislature balked at a $38 million funding bill for a women's prison in 2022. The following year, it passed a bill to spend $60 million on the same project. Now under construction, the maximum price for that Rapid City facility came in at $87 million.
With a guaranteed maximum price for the men's prison set to expire if work doesn't commence by March 31, Rehfeldt questioned what could happen to the price tag after that.
'What will that be in the future? Probably more. Almost certainly more,' Rehfeldt said.
Rep. Will Mortenson, R-Fort Pierre, said even if the unanswered questions lead the state down a path toward a different kind of prison, that shouldn't prevent the state from adding money to the construction fund in preparation. Paying cash instead of interest – this year or in the future – will save hundreds of millions of dollars.
The state needs space, Mortenson said, and 'it is fiscally conservative to set it aside in a fund.'
He also said most of the objections relate to location, but those objections are likely to dog the project wherever it lands.
'I'd love to build the prison in Montana or Mars or somewhere else,' Mortenson said. 'Unfortunately, that's not how these things work.'
But Rep. Logan Manhart, R-Aberdeen, said it's not about location. It's about size and design, which he said is more than the state needs.
'When we're going to spend this kind of money on a Ritz-Carlton prison, I have some questions,' Manhart said.
Rapid City Democratic Rep. Peri Pourier pleaded with her fellow lawmakers to think about the root causes of crime, like poverty, drug abuse, family violence and a lack of state-supported services to address them.
Resistance to final budget request for new prison 'a real possibility' in Pierre
'Yes, we need a new prison, but do we need that big of a prison? And if we do, we need to ask ourselves why we need that big of a prison,' Pourier said.
She nearly wept as she recounted her recent struggle to gain traction for state dollars to support Court Appointed Special Advocates (CASA) in Rapid City. Children involved in abuse and neglect proceedings can be assigned CASA representatives to look out for their interests in court.
'West River has the highest child abuse and neglect rates in the state, and these kids are going to court with no one looking out for them,' Pourier said. 'Do you know how hard it was to fight for a minuscule $5 million to help them?'
Pourier challenged representatives to imagine what their grandchildren would think years from now about their investment in such a large prison.
'This is what we're going to bet on. We're going to bet that they're going to get locked up,' Pourier said.
Rehfeldt moved immediately following the vote to reconsider the bill. The House will decide next week whether to take up the bill a second time.
Howard Republican Rep. Tim Reisch, a former Department of Corrections secretary, was absent for Friday's vote. Reisch has voted for prison funding each time it's come up during his tenure in Pierre.
It will take some work to find support and flip votes, Mortenson said, but flipping votes 'is what we do around here.'
'I think a lot of people came here ginned up to vote no on building the prison in Lincoln County in that spot,' Mortenson said. 'I don't think it really sank in to most of the members that that isn't what this does. This just sets aside money for 'a' prison. It doesn't have to be 'the' prison.'
Republican Gov. Larry Rhoden has called the new prison – in the Lincoln County location – his top priority. The prison would largely replace the Sioux Falls penitentiary.
After Friday's vote, a spokeswoman for Rhoden told South Dakota Searchlight that 'we look forward to continuing the conversation.'
If House Bill 1025 ultimately fails, lawmakers would have $182 million more to work with in a tight budget year. If it passes in its amended form and moves $148.1 million into the prison fund, they'd have $33.9 million.
Lawmakers aim to stabilize 'volatile' unclaimed property revenue with trust fund
Lems was one of several lawmakers to suggest that some of the money could go into an unclaimed property trust fund. A proposal to set up such a fund, meant to earn interest on unclaimed money handed over to the state after three years of dormancy, is moving through the Legislature this session. A sister proposal aims to ask voters in 2026 to let the South Dakota Investment Council manage the fund.
House Speaker Jon Hansen, R-Dell Rapids, said some of the unspent prison money could ultimately be placed into the prison fund, where it earns interest. If voters let the investment council manage an unclaimed property fund, though, starting that off with a chunk of the $182 million earmarked for the Lincoln County site would mean bigger returns in the long run.
The interest from the unclaimed property trust fund could, at some point, be used to offset high property taxes, Hansen said.
'I've always been open to that idea,' he said.
House Assistant Majority Leader Marty Overweg, R-New Holland, also mentioned a trust fund, but said nothing is final with the prison funding proposal. As a Republican caucus, he said, 'we've had discussions on what we'll do if it gets killed, not where it goes.'
'It's pretty hard to do much with one-time money, except put it into a savings account,' Overweg said.
Senate Pro Tempore Chris Karr, R-Sioux Falls, also trumpeted talks of an unclaimed property fund.
The budget reserve funds could wind up funding immediate needs if they aren't used for prison funding.
'The budget reserve typically just gets used for one-time dollars,' Karr said. 'So those would be open to go to some of the other projects that are in the one-time bills out there.'
Pourier saw other avenues worth exploring with the extra dollars, either immediately or paid for with interest: mental health services and substance abuse services and aftercare programming, particularly in rural areas, and expanding access to trauma-informed care.
She pointed to testimony from Corrections Secretary Kellie Wasko, who's repeatedly said that the majority of offenders struggle with mental health and substance abuse, and to Attorney General Marty Jackley, who's spent years talking about how drug abuse can become the fuel for violent crime.
'These guys, girls, everybody, the people who struggle with substance abuse disorders, they have a chemical imbalance in their brain and they're self-medicating,' Pourier said.
The location of a proposed men's prison in southeast South Dakota.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Blue state governors to testify on "sanctuary policies" amid L.A. protests over immigration raids
Blue state governors to testify on "sanctuary policies" amid L.A. protests over immigration raids

CBS News

time14 minutes ago

  • CBS News

Blue state governors to testify on "sanctuary policies" amid L.A. protests over immigration raids

Washington — Three Democratic governors are defending their responses to the migrant crisis and dispute claims of failing to cooperate with federal authorities, according to prepared remarks that will be delivered Thursday before a House oversight panel. New York Gov. Kathy Hochul, Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker and Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz are among the witnesses scheduled to testify before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee on so-called "sanctuary policies". "Let me be clear: Sanctuary policies don't protect Americans. They protect criminal illegal aliens," Oversight Chair James Comer, a Kentucky Republican will say in his opening statement. The governors' appearances come as President Trump and California Governor Gavin Newsom remain embroiled in a legal and political standoff over the deployment of the National Guard troops and Marines to quell immigration protests in Los Angeles. Demonstrations have spread to other U.S. cities, including New York and Chicago following a series of deportation raids. "Minnesota is not a sanctuary state," Walz will tell lawmakers. "It is ridiculous to suggest that Minnesota — a state that is over 1,500 miles away from the Southern border and a thousand miles from lawmakers in Washington, D.C. who decide and implement border policy is somehow responsible for a failure of immigration enforcement." The former vice presidential candidate has drawn intense scrutiny not only over immigration policy but also for his handling of social justice protests that broke out in Minneapolis following the death of George Floyd in 2020. Trump administration officials have cited Walz' actions to justify the president's decision to federalize troops in California. While Walz does not appear to directly address the controversy in his testimony, he says he is "disappointed" in the federal government's overall approach. "As governor of Minnesota, it is incumbent on me to use the state's resources to help Minnesota families—not turn those resources over to the administration so they can stage another photo-op in tactical gear or accidentally deport more children without observing due process," Walz is set to say. Ahead of the hearing, the GOP-led panel released a video compilation of various news clips accusing the governors of "shielding" undocumented immigrants and "causing chaos" in their states. A memo from Hochul's office suggested the hearing could be "derailed by wild accusations" and "twisted characterizations" but noted the governor's position is "clear" when it comes to supporting strong borders and comprehensive immigration reform. "New York state cooperates with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) in criminal cases," Hochul says. "And our values as New Yorkers demand that we treat those who arrive here in search of a better life with dignity and reject policies that tear law-abiding families apart." Hochul also addresses the influx of more than 220,000 migrants to New York City since early 2022, many of whom were bussed from border states, calling it "an unprecedented humanitarian crisis." "We have responded to this crisis with both compassion and pragmatism," Hochul states."And as a result, we largely prevented what could have become an additional crisis — one of street homelessness and tent cities." Pritzker says Illinois also stepped up to the challenge, and blamed the lack of federal intervention and cooperation from border states for exacerbating the problem. "As governor, my responsibility is to ensure that all Illinoisans feel safe in their homes, their businesses, and their communities," Pritzker is prepared to say. "That is why my administration continued to make significant investments in public safety, even as our resources were strained because of the lack of federal support during the crisis — expanding our state police force and investing in efforts to reduce gun violence." Thursday's session follows a March hearing on sanctuary cities with four Democratic mayors: Eric Adams, of New York, Mike Johnston of Denver, Brandon Johnson of Chicago and Michelle Wu of Boston. Comer launched an investigation in January into "sanctuary jurisdictions", including states, counties or cities, to examine their impact on public safety and federal immigration enforcement. President Trump has vowed to crack down on localities that don't back his immigration agenda. Earlier this month, the Department of Homeland Security removed its list of sanctuary jurisdictions after several cities challenged the findings.

Newsom v. Trump heads to court as protests against ICE raids spread: Updates
Newsom v. Trump heads to court as protests against ICE raids spread: Updates

USA Today

time21 minutes ago

  • USA Today

Newsom v. Trump heads to court as protests against ICE raids spread: Updates

Newsom v. Trump heads to court as protests against ICE raids spread: Updates Show Caption Hide Caption See how Los Angeles protests intensified over one weekend What started as a small protest over immigration raids on Friday ballooned into large demonstrations throughout the weekend. Here's what happened. Nearly a week after protests over federal immigration enforcement raids first broke out in Los Angeles, a showdown between federal and state officials is expected to land in court on Thursday over whether President Donald Trump can use the military to assist the raids against California leaders' wishes. In the hearing, scheduled for Thursday afternoon, U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer in San Francisco will hear Gov. Gavin Newsom's motion for a temporary restraining order limiting the activities of the 4,000 National Guard members and 700 Marines Trump deployed in Los Angeles. Newsom has decried the military intervention as an illegal waste of resources and is asking the court to block the troops' participation in law enforcement activities. He ultimately wants the National Guard returned to state control and Trump's actions declared illegal. Downtown Los Angeles remained under a curfew after days of demonstrations against the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement led to hundreds of arrests. The protests broke out on June 6 in response to ongoing ICE raids that have sparked fear among immigrant communities. While many protests have been relatively peaceful, some have turned into scenes of chaos as police fired with less lethal munitions, tear gas and flash-bangs to disperse crowds. "If I didn't act quickly on that, Los Angeles would be burning to the ground right now," Trump said at an event at the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts on Wednesday. State and local leaders have disputed Trump's claims, saying the decision has only provoked the unrest, likening the president's actions to "authoritarian regimes." U.S. Northern Command announced on Wednesday that the 700 active-duty Marines had completed their training for the Los Angeles mission, which included de-escalation and crowd control. The Marines were expected to be deployed within 48 hours to protect federal officers and property. National Guard commander Maj. Gen. Scott Sherman said on Wednesday that the troops wouldn't conduct arrests or searches and seizures, but would be authorized to detain protesters temporarily. Protests are planned for 1,800 communities across the country on June 14, the same day Trump holds a military parade in Washington, D.C. For decades, the GOP has claimed most of the symbols of patriotism, including the American flag, but the people protesting Trump, a Republican, say they are the true patriots now. The rallies, named "No Kings Day" to oppose what they see as Trump's power grab, are expected to be the largest and most numerous protests since Trump's second term began, dwarfing the Hands Off protests in early April that drew as many as 1 million Americans to the streets at more than 1,000 rallies. No Kings Day was organized by grassroots groups in cities and towns of all sizes to coincide with the U.S. Army's 250th anniversary celebration, which is also Trump's 79th birthday and Flag Day. Administration officials insist it is a coincidence that the parade falls on Trump's birthday. Read more here. Contributing: Reuters

House will vote on Trump's request to cut funding for NPR, PBS and foreign aid
House will vote on Trump's request to cut funding for NPR, PBS and foreign aid

Washington Post

time25 minutes ago

  • Washington Post

House will vote on Trump's request to cut funding for NPR, PBS and foreign aid

WASHINGTON — House Republicans are moving to cut about $9.4 billion in spending already approved by Congress as President Donald Trump's administration looks to follow through on work by the Department of Government Efficiency when it was overseen by Elon Musk . The package to be voted on Thursday targets foreign aid programs and the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which provides money for National Public Radio and the Public Broadcasting Service, as well as thousands of public radio and television stations around the country. Republicans are characterizing the spending as wasteful and unnecessary, but Democrats say the rescissions are hurting the United States' standing in the world. 'Cruelty is the point,' Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries of New York said of the proposed spending cuts. The Trump administration is employing a tool rarely used in recent years that allows the president to transmit a request to Congress to cancel previously appropriated funds. That triggers a 45-day clock in which the funds are frozen pending congressional action. If Congress fails to act within that period, then the spending stands. The benefit for the administration of a formal rescissions request is that passage requires only a simple majority in the 100-member Senate instead of the 60 votes usually required to get spending bills through that chamber. So, if they stay united, Republicans will be able to pass the measure without any Democratic votes. The administration is likening the first rescissions package to a test case and says more could be on the way if Congress goes along. Republicans, sensitive to concerns that Trump's sweeping tax and immigration bill would increase future federal deficits , are anxious to demonstrate spending discipline, though the cuts in the package amount to just a sliver of the spending approved by Congress each year. They are betting the cuts prove popular with constituents who align with Trump's 'America first' ideology as well as those who view NPR and PBS as having a liberal bias. In all, the package contains 21 proposed rescissions. Approval would claw back about $900 million from $10 billion that Congress has approved for global health programs. That includes canceling $500 million for activities related to infectious diseases and child and maternal health and another $400 million to address the global HIV epidemic. The Trump administration is also looking to cancel $800 million, or a quarter of the amount Congress approved, for a program that provides emergency shelter, water and sanitation, and family reunification for those forced to flee their own country. About 45% of the savings sought by the White House would come from two programs designed to boost the economies, democratic institutions and civil societies in developing countries. The Republican president has also asked lawmakers to rescind nearly $1.1 billion from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which represents the full amount it's slated to receive during the next two budget years. About two-thirds of the money gets distributed to more than 1,500 locally owned public radio and television stations. Nearly half of those stations serve rural areas of the country. The association representing local public television stations warns that many of them would be forced to close if the Republican measure passes. Those stations provide emergency alerts, free educational programming and high school sports coverage and highlight hometown heroes. Advocacy groups that serve the world's poorest people are also sounding the alarm and urging lawmakers to vote no. 'We are already seeing women, children and families left without food, clean water and critical services after earlier aid cuts, and aid organizations can barely keep up with rising needs,' said Abby Maxman, president and CEO of Oxfam America, a poverty-fighting organization. Rep. Jim McGovern, D-Mass., said the foreign aid is a tool that prevents conflict and promotes stability but the measure before the House takes that tool away. 'These cuts will lead to the deaths of hundreds of thousands, devastating the most vulnerable in the world,' McGovern said. 'And at a time when China and Russia and Iran are working overtime to challenge American influence.' Republicans disparaged the foreign aid spending and sought to link it to programs they said DOGE had uncovered. Rep. Chip Roy, R-Texas, said taxpayer dollars had gone to such things as targeting climate change, promoting pottery classes and strengthening diversity, equity and inclusion programs. Other Republicans cited similar examples they said DOGE had revealed. 'Yet, my friends on the other side of the aisle would like you to believe, seriously, that if you don't use your taxpayer dollars to fund this absurd list of projects and thousands of others I didn't even list, that somehow people will die and our global standing in the world will crumble,' Roy said. 'Well, let's just reject this now.'

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store