Monthly Archives: August 2018

By Dana Hess
For the S.D. Newspaper Association

BROOKINGS — Task forces delving into open government issues have been appointed by various elected leaders the past 20 years, but that practice would stop if U.S. Rep. Kristi Noem is elected governor.

“My goal is not going to be to create new task forces,” said Noem, the Republican candidate for governor, who noted that there are 130 state boards and commissions. “I think we can utilize their resources and get the people that we need participating in those to where we don’t need to create another layer of bureaucracy to get the decisions that we need to serve the people of South Dakota.”

Her Democratic opponent, State Sen. Billie Sutton, embraced the use of a task force which in the past has brought together representatives of the media, law enforcement, local government, the judiciary and others to find common ground on proposed legislation.

“When the law needs to be changed, I think we need a task force approach to move the ball so everybody’s on the same page and we’re all communicating what makes sense,” Sutton said.

The two candidates made their remarks to members of the South Dakota Newspaper Association First Amendment Committee and the SDNA Board of Directors. The gubernatorial candidates were questioned in separate interviews about their views concerning open meetings and open records laws in South Dakota.

Noem assured newspaper editors and publishers that the lack of a new open government task force would not result in a lack of input from their industry. She explained that talking to stakeholders was the way her congressional office operates before proposing legislation.

“I would not begin to start pushing a lot of these other transparency initiatives until we had you guys in the loop,” Noem said. “That’s just been our normal, standard operating procedure for the last eight years.”

The candidates also differed on their approach to the open records exception that keeps government correspondence, including emails, from public disclosure.

“I think a presumption of openness as it pertains to emails is a good step,” Sutton said. “That is definitely something I want to do.”

Noem said she was concerned about the protection of personal information that may be included in the emails as well as the prospect of implementing strict rules that would drive officials away from email and toward using the telephone, where there would be no record of their interaction.

“If you asked me today if I’m open to opening all emails, I would say, ‘No, I’m not,’” Noem said. “But I would love to sit down and figure out a way it could work because those two concerns are big concerns.”

Both candidates were in favor of looking at ways to limit confidential settlements in state government lawsuits.

“I think it makes sense for the public to know anytime taxpayer dollars are involved,” Sutton said. “I feel strongly that the public should have access to information.”

Noem said information about victims should be protected, but that state government lawsuit settlements should be an open record.

“If the taxpayers are picking up the tab,” Noem said, “they should get a receipt for what they paid for.”

In South Dakota, law enforcement investigative records for closed cases and inactive cases are closed to the public as are police reports generated by calls for service. Both candidates showed a degree of reluctance when asked if they would work toward opening those records.

“I think definitely when cases are closed and investigations are complete,” Sutton said of opening the investigative records. “I’d be more hesitant on ongoing investigations. I also have a strong belief that somebody’s innocent until proven guilty.

Noem said she would need to hear from law enforcement about why the records are closed. She said her congressional office has fielded requests from families seeking old police records to get information.

“So I do know there is a general frustration for families that are caught up in those cases,” Noem said. “They’re sitting out there for years with no answers and no way to get them.”

Both candidates were open to a possible tightening of the rules that allow public elected bodies to go into executive session. They also expressed support for a law that would require executive sessions be recorded so that the recording could be reviewed by a judge if a complaint about the legality of the session were filed.

Both candidates also said they supported the continued publication of public notices in newspapers as well as favoring a continuation of the sales and use tax exemption for advertising services.

Noem got the attention of editors and publishers when she said that her administration would seek a reporter shield law Shield laws protect reporters from revealing sources, turning over notes or being compelled to testify in court.

“There should be that protection for investigative reporters to do their jobs without fear of consequences and legal action,” Noem said.

The candidates differed when asked to grade South Dakota’s efforts in the areas of open government and transparency.

Noem gave the state a B.

“I think we have made strides,” Noem said. “We’ve got some room for improvement that can happen.”

To help the state improve, Noem has proposed what she calls the Sunshine Initiative. It includes steps to further open government in the areas of live streaming more government meetings, expanding open.SD.gov, implementing the reporter shield law, limiting confidentiality in state government lawsuit settlements and reviewing open meetings laws.

Sutton wasn’t as generous with his grade: “If I had to grade us on transparency and accountability it would not be higher than a C and in some instances I think it’s an F.”

Sutton’s plan for government transparency includes opening more government records to the public, adding more and more easily accessible information to open.SD.gov, standardizing records retention rules and ensuring access to state government officials by the press and the public.

When it comes to open records, Sutton said, “We’ve gotten a little complacent as a state government.”

By Dana Hess

For the S.D. Newspaper Association

A year ago the South Dakota High School Activities Association was struggling to keep its corporate sponsors from defecting to the SDHSAA Foundation. At Thursday’s meeting, the SDHSAA Board of Directors approved a full slate of corporate sponsors for the new school year.

Corporate sponsors and their yearly donations include: • Lead partner, Sanford Health, $125,000 • Financial services partner, Dakotah Bank, $75,000 • Community partner, Farmer’s Union Insurance, $62,500 • Military partner, S.D. Army National Guard, $50,000

Billion Automotive makes an in-kind donation of vehicles for use by SDHSAA staff.

Dakotah Bank replaces First Premier Bank and Premier Bankcard as the financial services partner. First Premiere expressed an interest in making its contribution to the SDHSAA Foundation.

Funds from corporate sponsors are used to buy catastrophic insurance for school districts.

“That covers every high school student in the state,” said SDHSAA Executive Director Daniel Swartos.

Thursday the board also received an update from Pierre Superintendent Kelly Glodt representing the SDHSAA Foundation. Glodt reported that the foundation has $388,504 on hand and $10,331 available for disbursement. The foundation’s plan is to make significant contributions to South Dakota school districts.

“Our goal is to build those dollars,” Glodt said, “to where we have some substantial dollars for the future.”

SDHSAA Board Chairman Brian Maher of Sioux Falls suggested that it might be best to re-invest the money available for disbursement in order to help the principal grow.

Maher said that $10,000 “spread across our state isn’t really that much money.”

Youth! Entrepreneurship! Cash! Scholarships!

These are the key ingredients in the BIG Idea Competition which is launching its 11th Annual competition this fall. High school students across South Dakota are invited to compete in this business idea competition where winners will receive over $5,500 in cash awards and scholarships.

Students may work individually or as a team and will be able to submit their business idea applications online from September 1 until October 31, 2018. The online application as well as various resources and examples can be accessed at the BIG Idea website: www.BIGIdeaSD.com. For the optional marketing design competition, students will create an ad to support their business idea. A Wellness Category sponsored by Sanford Health, offers an additional $500 cash prize to the best business idea in this category. New this year is a Food Animal Agriculture Category sponsored by Midwest Ag Supply, which offers an additional $500 cash prize for the best business idea in this category.

Coordinator Kelly Weaver of the Small Business Development Center said, “Understanding the basics of business is important to students, regardless of their career path. The BIG Idea Competition is a great way for students to in learn about those business basics. For those students interested in pursuing a business, we can connect them with resources and mentors to help further their entrepreneurial growth and business success. We are also excited to be offering even more prizes this year.”

All applications submitted by the October 31, 2018 deadline will be reviewed and ranked by judges across the state. The eight (8) top scoring entries will be invited to the final competition and will make a presentation for the final judging component. The top three applications will receive cash awards of $1,000, $500 and $250, respectively. College scholarships to both Northern State University and Presentation College will be awarded as well. One winner will be chosen from among all the marketing design entries and be awarded $500. One winner will be chosen for each the Wellness Category and the Food Animal Agriculture Category and recognized at the final competition.

The final competition and awards event will be held on Wednesday, Dec. 5 at Northern State University in Aberdeen. Students will participate in various activities surrounding entrepreneurship. Prior to the awards presentation, all finalists will give an elevator pitch of their business idea.

Since inception in 2007, the BIG Idea Competition has received over 2,100 entries involving over 3,000 students from 88 schools. The competition is open to any high school student in the state. The winning entry in 2017 was Dakota Cubs, by Christian Westhoff of McCook Central High School. A complete listing of the 2017 finalists can be found on the BIG Idea website along with a video of their elevator pitches.
The competition is organized by a broad based committee of economic development organizations, educational institutions, and private businesses and coordinated by the Small Business Development Center. Sponsors include Sanford Health, East River Electric, REED Fund, Dacotah Bank, First Premier Bank, Midwest Ag Supply, Northwestern Energy, Northern State University, Presentation College, McQuillen Creative Group, Aberdeen Development Corporation, and the Tom and Danielle Aman Foundation. Questions regarding the competition can be directed to Kelly Weaver of the Small Business Development Center at (605) 626-2565 or kelly@growsd.org

By Dana Hess
For the S.D. Newspaper Association

SIOUX FALLS — A group of newspaper journalists recently quizzed the attorney general candidates about government transparency issues and found both men open to considering changes to the laws that journalists find problematic.

Meeting with the two candidates – Republican Jason Ravnsborg and Democrat Randy Seiler – were members of the South Dakota Newspaper Association First Amendment Committee.

Both candidates were asked to use an A through F scale to grade South Dakota on its openness and transparency laws. The higher grade came from Ravnsborg, a Yankton attorney, who gave the state a B minus.

“We’ve got room for improvement,” Ravnsborg said, “but I don’t believe we’re as bad as a number of the surveys that have been pushed around the country showed.”

The grade from Seiler, a former U.S. Attorney, came in at a C minus.

During his campaign, Seiler said he has heard complaints about methamphetamine and opioid use, “but I also hear a lot about public corruption aspects, the obvious Mid-Central Cooperative and EB-5.”

Getting South Dakota’s grade up to an A, according to Ravnsborg, would take better transparency by the state’s Bar Association so that a list of lawyers who have been dis-ciplined is more readily accessible to the public.

“It is a public record, but there is no good list,” Ravnsborg said. “Why not make a list that’s all in one place?”

For Seiler, the road to an A grade goes through a review of public corruption statutes like those found in Initiated Measure 22 and a more transparent standard for involving South Dakota in other state’s lawsuits.

Seiler cited South Dakota’s role in lawsuits to overturn the pre-existing conditions provi-sion of the Affordable Care Act and an effort to find the Clean Water Act unconstitution-al.

“I don’t know what factors were made or taken into consideration in making that deci-sion,” Seiler said. “It obviously should not be political. There should be standards based on what’s in the best interest of the people of the state of South Dakota.”

The candidates were told about journalists’ frustration with abuse of the open meetings law, particularly the provisions that allow executive sessions for consulting with an attor-ney about litigation or discussing personnel matters.

Ravnsborg said he has heard the same complaints about local elected boards discuss-ing regular business during closed session.

“I don’t know that it’s always intentional,” Ravnsborg said. “I do think it’s probably small towns predominantly that don’t necessarily know the rules or aren’t getting the greatest legal advice.”

Seiler said he was familiar with local boards as a former Mobridge School Board mem-ber and as a former member of the Fort Pierre City Council. He has also filled in as Hughes County State’s Attorney.

“Just because they’re a lay board, they don’t get an exception for following the rule of law,” Seiler said. “Certainly that’s their obligation—to ensure they are familiar with and in compliance with the statute.”

Both candidates were open to considering the idea of having executive sessions rec-orded. In the event the legality of the meeting was challenged, the recording could be reviewed in a judge’s chambers.

A 2009 state law declaring a presumption of openness for government records came with more than 20 exceptions. One of the exceptions is government correspondence, including emails.

Ravnsborg said official documents should be open to the public. “Emails are problemat-ic,” Ravnsborg said. “They’re so quick.”

Seiler, too, was open to reviewing the exceptions.

“The presumption is that they are open, but then we’ve crafted all of these exceptions,” Seiler said. “We need to narrow those. We need to look at those.”

Both candidates favored treating as public records the confidentiality agreements in state lawsuits.

“I believe that agreements should be more open and transparent, especially when you’re involving tax dollars,” Ravnsborg said.

According to Seiler, confidentiality agreements aren’t allowed under any circumstances in lawsuits handled by the U.S. Attorney’s office.

“I can’t think of anything, right now, that should be an exception to that blanket rule,” Seiler said. “If you’re involved in litigation and you’re paying a settlement and you’re us-ing government money to pay the settlement or settle litigation, the public should have access to that.”

In South Dakota, law enforcement investigative records for closed and inactive cases as well as police reports generated by calls for service are not open records. Both candi-dates said they were open to reviewing that policy as well as reviewing the proper times to release 911 calls and body cam and dash cam videos. Both were open to expanding the release of booking photos to include high level misdemeanors.

If elected, both candidates said that creating more transparency in state government would start with the attorney general’s office.

In addition to setting standards for South Dakota’s involvement in litigation, Seiler said he would improve the online form citizens use to report consumer affairs abuses.

“Citizens should be able to have a very open access to the attorney general’s office on these issues,” Seiler said.

Ravnsborg said he would add transparency to the AG’s use of the Drug Control Fund. The fund comes from forfeitures in the state’s drug cases that are used to pay for grants to law enforcement agencies in the state.

“We’ll have more transparency on how the money comes in and how it’s granted out,” Ravnsborg said. “I would like to shine some light on the process.”

—