Latest news with #R-Pierre
Yahoo
01-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Work group aims to ditch baggage, find solutions in prison talks
A rendering of a new men's prison proposed for an area of Lincoln County about 15 miles south of Sioux Falls, presented to state lawmakers on Nov. 14, 2024. The complex would house about 1,500 inmates. (Courtesy of SD DOC) Members of a prison work group say they'll need to leave the past in the past if they expect to find consensus on new facilities for the state's correctional system. There's plenty to leave behind, they acknowledge. Gov. Larry Rhoden wanted lawmakers to greenlight a 1,500-bed, $825 million men's prison in Lincoln County during this year's legislative session. He needed support from two-thirds of them. He didn't get it. Governor relents, appoints task force to reset prison talks after legislative loss That proposal's critics — some of whom now serve on the work group — complained about a lack of transparency, as well as the price tag, facility size and the plan's focus on a single site. Backers, meanwhile, argued that waiting will only cost taxpayers money. The $825 million price tag was guaranteed through Monday. Money questions will loom large. Lawmakers have set aside nearly $600 million for prison construction since 2023, and the state's already spent $55 million on the Lincoln County prison plan. The work group has four planned meetings between now and July. The first, a two-day affair in Sioux Falls, begins Wednesday morning. State Senate Majority Leader Jim Mehlhaff, R-Pierre, a work group member, backed the Lincoln County site during the legislative session. He said it'll be hard to 'unlearn things,' start fresh, and accept that the road may — or may not — lead back to Lincoln County. The conversation might end, he said, with 'boy, we really screwed up when we wasted all that money on that Lincoln County site.' 'If everybody's going in there with the preconceived notion of where we're going to wind up, it's going to be pretty difficult to reach consensus,' Mehlhaff said. The Rhoden executive order that created the 'Project Prison Reset' work group lists three goals: decide if the state needs a new facility, work with a consultant to figure out its size and location, and report findings to a special legislative session on July 22. Wednesday's meeting starts with a morning tour of the state penitentiary in Sioux Falls, the 1881 structure the proposed Lincoln County prison was meant to largely replace. A tour of the Lincoln County site, located 14 miles south of Sioux Falls, will start at 2 p.m. CONTACT US The penitentiary tour is not open to the media or the public 'for security and logistical' reasons, the meeting agenda says. Lt. Gov. Tony Venhuizen, who will chair the work group, said there are too many people already to add media to the mix. The media will be able to tour the penitentiary in the weeks between now and July 22, Venhuizen told Searchlight. 'We're very open to the idea of, at some point, coordinating another tour for media members,' Venhuizen said, adding that he'd need to check in with Corrections Secretary Kellie Wasko to find a suitable time. The group's first session will continue Thursday at 8 a.m. at the Military Heritage Alliance in Sioux Falls with a series of informational sessions on inmate job training, behavioral health, prison industries and re-entry programs. A public comment period will start at 12:30 p.m. that day. Neighbors to the site of the now-paused prison project sued the state because it didn't ask for the county's permission to build there. They lost at the local level, and the state Supreme Court heard arguments on their appeal last week. The plaintiffs are constituents of House Speaker Pro Tempore Karla Lems, R-Canton, who voted against funding the project this year. She's also appeared at the group's public events. She's now one of 11 lawmakers on the 22-member work group. The $55 million spent on that site gives Lems heartburn. Lawmakers approved $62 million for prison planning in 2024, but Lems said the executive branch spent more than it should've, given that the Lincoln County site lacked a final legislative blessing. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE Lems is encouraged that Rhoden's office has committed to a 'palms up' process for the meetings, and that the group's been advised to 'start from scratch.' But 'the Lincoln County site is out there' and will need to be addressed. 'I don't want to be the NIMBY person,' Lems said, using an acronym for 'not in my backyard.' 'But I do want to have a site that actually makes sense.' Lems argues that some of the money spent for the site, such as the funds used to buy a stake in electrical and rural water infrastructure, won't be completely wasted if the state can find a better plan. The rural customers will still benefit, she said. The site 'makes no sense to me at all,' she said. Rhoden called the site near Sioux Falls 'a gift from God' because the state already owned the land, and because of its relative proximity to the interstate. More than once during the 2025 session, Mehlhaff called on lawmakers to avoid 'analysis paralysis' on the prison issue. The state hired a consultant, the DLR Group, to review its prison needs in 2021. A small group of lawmakers digested the findings and recommended a 1,500-bed prison the following summer, adopting the guidance of the Department of Corrections on the best path forward. There's broad agreement that the state needs to do something, he said — and fast — to ease the overcrowding issues dissected throughout that report, he said. 'I'm going to be focused on finding a solution rather than focusing on finding a problem that prevents us from finding a solution,' Mehlhaff said. 'You can go down that rabbit hole, and that's what was done before.' Some opponents to the Lincoln County plan have zeroed in on the DLR report's recommendations for multiple, smaller facilities across the state. Lawmakers funded a medium-security women's prison in Rapid City nearly three years ago based on that report, and construction on that $87 million facility is ongoing. Mehlhaff's not convinced that smaller facilities for male inmates would make more sense than a centralized location. 'If you spread them out among four different places, you'll have to duplicate programming, you'll have to duplicate food service, you'll have to duplicate prison industries,' he said, but added that he and every other member needs to be ready to hold preconceived notions in abeyance. 'We're supposed to be taking a fresh look at it, right?' Assistant Senate Minority Leader Jamie Smith, D-Sioux Falls, led an effort to rename the Department of Corrections the 'Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation' during the legislative session. The pitch sailed through the Senate but failed in the House of Representatives. Smith, now a work group member, had hoped a name change would set a tone for the department. There is programming now, but Smith said the ideal is a department that focuses as much on preparing inmates to succeed on the outside as it does on housing them. Name change for Department of Corrections falls flat on SD House floor Smith said he intends to honor the group's three stated goals, but hopes issues surrounding rehabilitation and finding ways to reduce the state's long-term need for prison beds are in the mix. 'I do believe that we need to make sure that is the focus, and ultimately what we're trying to do,' Smith said. House Minority Leader Erin Healy, of Sioux Falls, is the work group's other Democrat. She's concerned about crowding and security in the 1881 facility. She got a letter recently from a Sioux Falls inmate concerned about safety in the current building, as well as a lack of access to rehabilitation and their ability to 'live a dignified life.' During her last tour of the penitentiary, locked-down inmates let loose similar concerns as lawmakers walked by. 'They know that if you are with Secretary Wasko, you're probably somebody who's making decisions for them or our state,' Healy said. 'That's kind of what I witnessed last time.' The current penitentiary's condition is top of mind for Minnehaha County Sheriff Mike Milstead as he prepares for the first work group meeting. He works closely with the DOC as the elected overseer of a county jail that serves as a pretrial waystation for future penitentiary inmates or parolees nabbed and detained for violations. Milstead has questions about the price tag and the DLR report's alternative options, but said 'the aging facility up on top of the hill is in need of replacing.' In 1998, the sheriff had a similar problem on his hands, though 'on a much smaller scale.' His jail was old, inefficient and dangerous, he said, so he went to the public to ask for support. The Argus Leader newspaper's photographers and cameras from local TV stations were invited to visit. That gave Milstead a chance to make the case that a new jail, built with room to expand in the future, would be preferable to upgrades at the old one. Parole officers create specialty unit to target parolees in hiding 'I am so glad we did not try to cobble together the old jail above the public safety building,' Milstead said. Yankton Police Chief Jason Foote heads the South Dakota Police Chiefs' Association. He'll represent local law enforcement on the work group. He's hoping to learn more about how the DOC's crowded facilities and operations might play into the system's handling of the parolees his officers deal with regularly. He wants parolees held accountable for their actions, he said, which 'can be pretty severe.' Law enforcement 'has a lot of interactions with those that have been in and are now out.' 'So I think it's important to look at the recidivism, and what the prison system can do to maybe change some of the behaviors of people,' Foote said. Like Milstead, though, he's coming to the group without having gone through the legislative battles on what kind of facility the DOC might need. He hopes to offer a different perspective as a result. 'I'm coming in with an open mind,' Foote said. 'I'm not biased either way.' SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Yahoo
16-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Legislature seeks tighter limits on voter qualifications with host of ‘election integrity' bills
A Sioux Falls resident votes in the general election on Nov. 5, 2024, at Gloria Dei Lutheran Church. (Makenzie Huber/South Dakota Searchlight) Lawmakers introduced more than 50 bills during the 2025 legislation session proposing to alter South Dakota's election laws. Almost half are 'election integrity' bills, aimed at election security, technology and voter qualifications. Seven of those bills are on the governor's desk. Instead of regulating the process, with bills such as those that would have shortened the voter registration deadline and prohibited automatic tabulators, lawmakers this session favored tighter controls on who can participate in South Dakota elections. That includes bills redefining residency for voter registration and creating a federal-only ballot for people such as full-time RVers, whose vehicle registration and use of a mail-forwarding service might be their only connections to the state. Attempts to remove technology from SD elections lose in court after losing at the polls Sen. John Carley, R-Rapid City, introduced a handful of election bills. 'The legislators feel closest to the people, so they see the people-oriented bills as ones they can support more strongly,' Carley said. 'Some of the election process-related items are more related to auditors and the secretary of state, which have people arguing against these bills more.' Senate Majority Leader Jim Mehlhaff, R-Pierre, said during a press conference that the recounts and post-election audits in recent elections show that elections 'are running pretty much as they should.' 'We have paper ballots, we have voter ID laws and we have post-election audits in place,' Mehlhaff said. 'I think our process is pretty good and I think it's proven to be pretty effective.' The changes may seem small with each bill, said Samantha Chapman, advocacy manager with the American Civil Liberties Union of South Dakota, but could lead to voter disenfranchisement. 'Taken as a whole, I think voters should see this as a serious threat to our democracy.' People who register under the Uniformed And Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act, or list a post office box or mail forwarding service as their address because they don't live permanently in the state, will only be able to vote on federal races — not local or state elections — if the governor signs House Bill 1208. The legislation mandates the creation of a separate, federal-only ballot for U.S. presidential and congressional races. House Bill 1066 changes the definition of a South Dakota resident eligible to vote in state and local elections to someone who lives and 'usually' sleeps in the same place for 30 consecutive days. The legislation would also require voters who register using a mail-forwarding service or other post office box as their address to additionally list 'a description of the location of the individual's habitation' to be able to vote in state and local elections. Individuals who leave the state must 'intend to return' to qualify as a resident, HB 1208 says. Hughes County Finance Officer Thomas Oliva said the bills lack the tools and structure for auditors to verify applicants meet residency requirements, so he plans to continue evaluating residency requirements with the 'honor system.' He added that HB 1208 would allow an applicant to put in whatever description they want for their living situation to get a state and local ballot without requiring the auditor to verify it. 'If there's a description of where they're living, I take it as I'm to accept that. I'm not to investigate and go to the Walmart parking lot and ask for 30 consecutive days of security footage of that RV sitting there,' Oliva said. Or, an auditor could determine the voter doesn't qualify as a resident, and refuse to give the voter a state or local ballot. Lawmakers who voted against the bills said the changes disenfranchise South Dakotans who choose to travel after living most of their lives in South Dakota, as well as other professionals who don't stay in the state at least 30 consecutive days, such as truckers. House Minority Leader Erin Healy, D-Sioux Falls, attempted to amend HB 1208 to include statewide elections and ballot questions that affect fees or taxes on the separate ballot. Without including those amendments, it would subject South Dakotans living out-of-state to 'taxation and governance without representation,' she said. Her effort failed. 'These voters will still continue to pay state sales tax, they're going to continue to pay motor vehicle registration fees, they're going to continue to pay driver's license fees, they'll continue to pay county wheel taxes, and there's still the chance they could be summoned and report for jury duty,' Healy said. The ACLU sent Gov. Rhoden a letter asking him to veto HB 1208. Oliva said he hopes the state can 'come up with something better.' He added that the bills would add more work for his office to inform voters of the changes as they register to vote or apply for absentee ballots. Members of the South Dakota Canvassing Group supported most of the 'election integrity' bills introduced this session. The group has reviewed the state's voter rolls in recent years and unsuccessfully challenged the residency of some absentee voters in the June 2024 primary election. House Bill 1062 designates a county's master registration files as public records. The files include voter registration information and absentee ballot information, such as the address an absentee ballot was mailed to and the dates it was requested and returned. The bill also requires the Secretary of State's Office to update its statewide voter registration file weekly and reduces the cost to access a copy of the state's voter registration list. It currently costs $2,500 to purchase a list of South Dakota registered voters, according to the Secretary of State's Office. HB 1062 would create an electronic spreadsheet option for $225. In making voter information more public, Chapman said she worries the change will threaten domestic assault survivor safety and will 'embolden' targeted misinformation campaigns in South Dakota, inaccurately leading registered voters to believe they can't vote if they no longer reside at their voter registration address. The South Dakota Supreme Court denied a request by members of South Dakota Canvassing Group last year to order Secretary of State Monae Johnson and county-level election officials to disqualify 132 primary election ballots cast in Minnehaha County on the grounds that those voters did not meet residency requirements. The boundaries of the two precincts targeted include mail forwarding companies in Sioux Falls. Senate Bill 185, introduced by Sen. Amber Hulse, R-Hot Springs, would change the challenge process. The bill allows a person to challenge someone's residency status on grounds other than 'identity,' which is what the group used to challenge the 132 ballots last year, or that a person is a felon or mentally incompetent. Challenges could also be based on residency, voting or being registered in another state, or being deceased. Challenges could only be made in the months ahead of the election, not on Election Day. Oliva and Chapman said they worked with Hulse to reach a sufficient end result. If a county auditor determines a challenge is credible, the challenged person would have to fill out a 'verification request' within 30 days to document their qualifications as a registered voter. The state Board of Elections will establish the process by which an auditor researches voters, establishes validity of a challenge and determines what documentation is needed to prove residency qualifications, Hulse told South Dakota Searchlight. The auditor must remove the person from the voter list if they don't respond with sufficient evidence and don't vote between the verification request and immediately after the next general election. An auditor can't cancel voter registration for a residency challenge within 90 days before an election. Other bills passed by both chambers are largely a reaction to 273 non-U.S. citizens being removed from South Dakota's voter roll last year. The noncitizens marked 'no' to the citizenship question on their driver's license application, but were added to the voter roll due to human error, the Secretary of State's Elections Director Rachel Soulek said at the time. Noncitizens can obtain a driver's license or state ID if they are lawful permanent residents or have temporary legal status. There's a part of the driver's license form that allows an applicant to register to vote. That part says voters must be citizens. Soulek said one of the 273 noncitizens cast a ballot. That was during the 2016 general election. Rep. Kadyn Wittman, D-Sioux Falls, criticized and voted against the bills that arose in response to that situation. 'If we are bringing legislation to try and address something that happened nearly a decade ago by a single individual with this piece of legislation,' Wittman told lawmakers, 'I cannot think of a larger form of virtue signaling than this.' South Dakota's voter registration form already requires a voter to certify they're a citizen of the United States. Senate Bill 73 would require people be South Dakota residents when they register to vote while applying for a South Dakota driver's license. Senate Bill 75 would require U.S. citizenship status be placed on a driver's license or nondriver identification card, allowing poll workers to more easily identify if a voter is eligible. Democratic lawmakers argued the bill would lead to discrimination against noncitizens outside of elections. Senate Bill 68 increases the penalty for voting illegally in the state. Rep. Logan Manhart, R-Aberdeen, carried the bill in the House, calling it an 'election integrity' bill and saying it would deter fraudulent voting and keep noncitizens from voting in elections. Chapman said it intimidates already-registered voters who might not meet new residency requirements approved by the Legislature. 'The goal here is not to protect voters or 'election integrity.' The goal is to intimidate,' Chapman said. 'The state Legislature should not be using its position to intimidate voters out of participating in our elections.' Senate Joint Resolution 503 sends a constitutional amendment to South Dakota voters clarifying a person must be a U.S. citizen to vote in the state. The resolution doesn't require the governor's approval. All of the other bills await Gov. Larry Rhoden's consideration.
