#david lust

More Legislative and Executive appointments, a look at the Uniform Law Commission

There have been a few more South Dakota legislative and executive appointments. The June 20 State Register lists three legislative appointments and the June 27 State Register lists two executive appointments. Two of these appointments are to the Uniform Law Commission (ULC). This post will look briefly at the ULC and then list the new appointments. Uniform Law Commission Here is part of the…

Senate Transportation has 2 bills and 2 executive appointment considerations on Weds Feb 24,

On Wednesday, February 24, at 8:00 am the SD Senate Transportation committee will take on 2 bills. This is compiled using the agenda at the time of composing this post. Agendas can and do change! One way to listen to these meetings live is via the audio links on the Schedule page of the LRC website. While there you can also view the status board for the meetings as they are going on. *** Also on…

This morning, legislative leaders adopted new rules for next year that will limit the number of resolutions lawmakers can offer.

The restriction comes after a record number of resolutions were introduced in the House of Representatives, including 11 from Rep. Stace Nelson.

No one will be able to do that next year. Under the rules passed Tuesday by the Legislative Procedure Committee, lawmakers will be limited to introducing four concurrent (nonbinding) resolutions. And three of those have to be introduced before the start of the Legislature's third week — the ninth day out of 35. This year lawmakers could introduce resolutions up to the 26th day. That will remain the deadline for lawmakers' fourth and final concurrent resolution.

Now, rules like this wouldn't necessarily have stopped Nelson from bringing all those resolutions. He'd have just had to get three allies to sponsor bills for him. That already happens with bills, where lawmakers are limited to just three bills in the days before the deadline. If one legislator has already hit his or her limit, they will commonly ask a friend to introduce a bill for them.

But next year's lawmakers will also have more restrictions on the type of resolutions they can offer. In another rule change, resolutions will no longer be allowed to "memorialize" something or someone.

That would rule out some of Nelson's resolutions this year, like one "commemorating the 200th anniversary of the War of 1812," and the controversial one honoring former presidential candidate Ron Paul. Other non-Nelson resolutions would also no longer qualify, such as one "recognizing Hot Springs as 'The Veterans Town'" and another honoring former President Calvin Coolidge.

But as Rep. David Lust noted, this restriction can be bypassed by clever legislators. Resolutions are still allowed if they're instructing a department of state government or petitioning federal agencies, and a lawmaker could always phrase their resolution as a petition to Congress to honor the 200th anniversary of the War of 1812.

The leaders on the Legislative Procedure Committee, though, seemed to agree with Rep. Brian Gosch, who said the changes, "combined with some turnover in the Legislature," probably address "the issue we had this year."

South Dakota lawmakers defended an economic development program they created last year from perceived encroachment by Gov. Dennis Daugaard on Wednesday.

The Building South Dakota program, created by a bipartisan group of legislative leaders in 2013 with only reluctant support form Gov. Dennis Daugaard, spends millions of dollars each year on economic development incentives, career education, affordable housing and other areas.

But as part of complicated budget maneuvers, this year Gov. Dennis Daugaard proposed replacing the ongoing funding stream for Building South Dakota with a one-time infusion of $30 million. In addition to giving Daugaard more funds for his priorities, this also removed his primary objection: Building South Dakota's continual appropriation of large amounts of money from the state's unclaimed property fund.

In a hearing Wednesday morning, the House State Affairs Committee approved Daugaard's funding swap. They also agreed to a three-year cap on Building South Dakota's spending at $10 million per year, part of an accounting mechanism so Daugaard's $30 million infusion wouldn't get automatically spent at once. But they drew the line at the governor's proposal for a permanent $10 million yearly cap.

"To limit in perpetuity distributions from the Building South Dakota fund at $10 million is not appropriate," said House Republican leader David Lust, R-Rapid City.

Under the program's structure, 30 percent of its funding is automatically spent every year on career education and other programs in local school districts. That's true whether lawmakers give it $10 million or $100 million.

Daugaard's budget director Jason Dilges said a cap would preserve money in the fund for the non-educational aspects of the fund: local development corporations, infrastructure, housing and other areas, which he called "the true economic development aspects" of Building South Dakota.

That drew criticism from Democrats, who said the educational aspects of the fund are among the most effective forms of long-term economic development.

"This is a sly way to take money away from education," said House Democratic leader Bernie Hunhoff, D-Yankton.

Under pressure from lawmakers, Dilges said proposed removing the $10 million cap.

"It would be very short-sighted of us to decide that we're going to derail this proposal because of what's going to happen three years down the road," he said.

The House State Affairs Committee then adopted a Lust amendment to remove the cap, before passing the bill.

Democrats on the committee voted no, saying the long-term provisions to fund Building South Dakota with budget surpluses are sufficiently complicated they could be manipulated with "sleight of hand budgeting." But Hunhoff said Democrats support the concept.

In this morning's House State Affairs Committee vote on early school year starts, House Speaker Brian Gosch, R-Rapid City, and House Majority Leader David Lust, R-Rapid City, spoke out on opposite sides of the issue.

Gosch and Lust are the top two ranked Republican lawmakers in the House, represent neighboring districts, and have served together for years. So it's always interesting, if not surprising, when they end up differing.

Fortunately, I've got the stats on the subject, part of my legislative vote analysis from last month.

In 2013, Lust and Gosch were both participants in 379 votes. Of those, they agreed on 336 occasions, and differed on 43. That's an 88.7 percent agreement.

In the South Dakota Legislature, 88.7 percent is a pretty high agreement. Gosch only voted with two lawmakers more often than he voted with Lust (Reps. Jon Hansen and Dean Wink). Lust only voted with four lawmakers more often than Gosch (Reps. Scott Munsterman, David Novstrup, Kristin Conzet, and — surprisingly — Democratic leader Bernie Hunhoff).

South Dakota schools should be blocked from starting their school years before late August, a legislative committee said Wednesday.

Several schools and a range of business figures urged a later start date, saying student workers should have more time to work in agriculture and tourism jobs that are often very busy in late summer.

"A lot of places in South Dakota, that middle to last part of August is the absolute best time to visit," said Michele Brich of the South Dakota Hotel and Lodging Association."

Groups also appealed to ag-related activities, such as the state fair and 4-H events, that happen in late August.

Of South Dakota's 151 public school districts, 126 started this year before the last Monday in August. Under House Bill 1093, that would be the earliest students could start.

School groups opposed the law, saying each district should set the start time that works best for its needs.

School boards "look at where exactly they want to complete their program so it fits with their testing and school breaks," said Dick Tieszen, a lobbyist for the Associated School Boards of South Dakota. "It's not the same in every district... This is not a situation that requires the Legislature to impose its will."

Rep. Christine Erickson, R-Sioux Falls, said it was too hard for citizens to impose their will on a school board that wants an earlier start date. In Sioux Falls, referring a decision of the school board to set a calendar requires thousands of signatures -- 5 percent of the registered voters in the district.

"The people in my district... have been fighting this issue for many, many years," Erickson said.

But it was the appeals from business groups about the tourism and agriculture industries that seemed to persuade many of the committee. Representatives of the South Dakota Visitor Industry Alliance, South Dakota Retailers Association and South Dakota Chamber of Commerce and Industry joined the Hotel and Lodging Association in supporting the bill.

"We have to look at the needs of all the state. We're still a rural state," said Rep. Brian Gosch, R-Rapid City. "That shouldn't be ignored because a smaller group of people in South Dakota decide that's not important to them."

A majority of the committee agreed with Gosch, voting 8-5 to send the bill to the full House.

Dissidents, including majority leader David Lust, said the state shouldn't limit school start dates.

"The best interests of the children should be preeminent, not the best interests of tourism or retailers," Lust said.

South Dakota lawmakers should be able to spend a few more years in the Legislature before being kicked out by term limits, a top legislative panel said Friday.

The proposed constitutional amendment would change South Dakota's legislative term limits from eight consecutive years in each chamber to 12. If both houses of the Legislature pass the amendment, it would need to be approved by voters before it could become law.

"The short amount of (term limits) definitely hurts the legislative process," said Rep. Charlie Hoffman, R-Eureka. "It takes out institutional knowledge."

There was no opposition testimony Friday, and good feelings on the House State Affairs committee considering the amendment.

Democratic leader Bernie Hunhoff praised both the amendment and his opposite number, Republican leader and committee chair David Lust.

"Our committee chair, he's far from perfect... but clearly he's a fine legislator, and what sense does it make to shove a David Lust out the door (after eight years)?" Hunhoff said. "It's not doing the public any service."

Lust also backed the bill.

"I am a proponent of term limits, but eight years is really too short," Lust said. "Twelve years, I think, is a nice balance."

Lawmakers would still be able to switch from one chamber to the other after reaching their term limits.

South Dakota voters adopted legislative term limits in 1992 with 63.5 percent of the vote, on a measure that also included term limits for constitutional officers and members of Congress. In 2008, 75 percent of voters rejected a repeal of legislative term limits.

Voters have never been asked to weigh in about keeping but extending legislative term limits.

Also on Friday, the House State Affairs committee:

Unanimously approved adding the state's budget commissioner to the South Dakota Investment Council.

Legislative leaders from both parties are calling for an investigation into the Governor's Office of Economic Development.

In a resolution filed minutes ago, Democratic leaders Bernie Hunhoff and Jason Frerichs were joined with Republican leaders David Lust and Tim Rave in a call to activate the Joint Committee on Government Operations and Audit to hold hearings on GOED.

The investigation is to commence following the completion of the Department of Legislative Audit's report, expected in a few weeks. The committee is asked to finish its report by Dec. 1, 2014, and within 30 days of its final hearings.

GOAC would be empowered to review all available audits and any additional information, order additional audits, summon witnesses and issue subpoenas and generally interview "persons involved in related economic development projects."

The Government Operations and Audit committee consists of Reps. Dan Dryden, Melissa Magstadt, Justin Cronin, Mark Mickelson and Susan Wismer, and Sens. Larry Tidemann, Phyllis Heineman, Blake Curd, Jean Hunhoff and Angie Buhl. Dryden and Tidemann are the chairs.

The resolution still needs to be adopted by both houses. It does not require Gov. Dennis Daugaard's signature. And while ordinarily resolutions have no force of law, last week Lust noted a resolution has more power when it concerns the Legislature's own operations.