>> THIS IS A PRODUCTION OF SOUTH DAKOTA PUBLIC BROADCASTING.

♪♪ >> GOOD EVENING AND WELCOME TO SOUTH DAKOTA FOCUS.

I'M JACKIE HENDRY, LIVE FROM THE LEO P FLYNN GALLERY IN SDPB'S SIOUX FALLS STUDIO.

WE'RE ROUGHLY HALF-WAY THROUGH THE 2022 STATE LEGISLATIVE SESSION, AND A TOTAL OF 551 BILLS HAVE BEEN INTRODUCED.

IN A FEW MINUTES, WE'LL HEAR ABOUT A PROPOSAL TO BUILD ADDITIONAL CAMPSITES IN CUSTER STATE PARK THAT INSPIRED PASSIONATE OPPOSITION.

AND LATER, WE'LL LEARN ABOUT A BILL THAT WAS NOT INTRODUCED, THE GOVERNOR'S BAN ON ABORTIONS AFTER SIX WEEKS.

WE'LL HEAR HER RESPONSE TO HOUSE LAWMAKERS, AND LEARN HOW THAT PROPOSAL FITS INTO A NATIONAL MOVEMENT TO LIMIT ABORTION ACCESS.

BUT FIRST, SDPB'S POLITICS AND PUBLIC POLICY REPORTER LEE STRUBINGER JOINED ME EARLIER FROM PIERRE, WHERE HE'S FOLLOWING A LONG LIST OF MEDICAL MARIJUANA-RELATED BILLS.

>> LEE STRUBINGER, YOU'VE BEEN FOLLOWING THE QUESTION OF CANNABIS IN SOUTH DAKOTA FOR QUITE A WHILE NOW.

WE HAVE SEVERAL BILLS IN PLAY THIS LEGISLATIVE SESSION FROM THE SUMMER STUDY ON MEDICAL CANNABIS.

WHAT ARE THE KEY POINTS THAT YOU'RE FOLLOWING?

>> THERE ARE OVER 40 BILLS THAT ARE AIMED AT THIS NEW INDUSTRY OF MEDICAL MARIJUANA.

THE BULK OF THOSE 40 PLUS BILLS HAVE COME FROM THAT MARIJUANA SUMMER STUDY THAT MET LAST YEAR.

AND THE SENATE HAS ALREADY GONE THROUGH AND REALLY WORKED THROUGH A MAJORITY OF THOSE BILLS THAT HAVE COME THROUGH THE SUMMER STUDY SO FAR AND HAVE SENT THEM OVER TO THE HOUSE.

THE HOUSE HAS THOSE BILLS.

SOME OF THEM ARE SCHEDULED.

OTHERS HAVE JUST BEEN INTRODUCED, SO IT'S KIND OF A BIT OF A WAITING GAME TO SEE HOW THOSE BILLS WILL FARE IN THE HOUSE AT THIS POINT.

THERE ARE OTHER BILLS THAT ARE AIMED AT THE MEDICAL MARIJUANA INDUSTRY THAT HAVE BEEN INTRODUCED.

THE BULK -- A LOT OF THEM, I SHOULD SAY, HAVE BEEN INTRODUCED BY FOLKS WHO WERE ON THAT SUMMER STUDY, BUT THEIR PROPOSAL OR THEIR IDEA DIDN'T NECESSARILY GET THE STAMP OF APPROVAL FROM THAT COMMITTEE.

AND, SO, SOME OF THOSE BILLS HAVE BEEN GIVEN THE GREEN LIGHT.

SEVERAL IN THE HOUSE HAVE MADE IT OVER TO THE SENATE, AND THE SENATE HAS CONSIDERED THEM.

ONE OF THEM, IN PARTICULAR, WHICH I THINK WE'LL TALK ABOUT IN A LITTLE BIT, IS A BILL TO BAN HOME CULTIVATION.

THAT PASSED OUT OF THE HOUSE AND IS NOW OVER IN -- OR IT WAS REJECTED IN THE SENATE.

BUT THE SENATE HAS SENT THEIR OWN VERSION OVER TO THE HOUSE, AND THEY'LL KIND OF WORK THAT OUT.

AND, SO, YEAH, IT'S JUST KIND OF -- THERE'S SEVERAL BILLS, ALL KIND OF AT PLAY RIGHT NOW THAT ARE REALLY IN THE WORKS.

>> THAT'S A GOOD OPPORTUNITY FOR US TO TALK ABOUT THE APPARENT DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE HOUSE SIDE AND THE SENATE SIDE AS FAR AS IDEAS ABOUT HOME CULTIVATION POLICY FOR MEDICAL CANNABIS.

WHAT SEEM TO BE THE STICKING POINTS THERE?

>> YEAH.

SO THE HOUSE -- THE MAIN TALKING POINT COMING FROM SEVERAL WHO ARE OPPOSED TO THIS RIGHT NOW IS -- OPPOSED TO HOME CULTIVATION IS BASICALLY, WE DON'T ALLOW PEOPLE TO GROW THEIR OWN MEDICINE, SO WHY SHOULD THIS BE ANY DIFFERENT?

THEY ALSO THINK THAT WHEN IT COMES TO, YOU KNOW, GROWING MARIJUANA FOR MEDICINE, YOU NEED -- YOU KNOW, LEAVING IT TO THE PROFESSIONALS WHO CAN GET THAT THC CONTENT, WHICH IS THE INTOXICANT IN MARIJUANA, OR, YOU KNOW, BALANCE OUT ANY OTHER COMPOUNDS THAT FOLKS MIGHT BE LOOKING FOR WHEN IT COMES TO MEDICAL MARIJUANA.

ON THE SENATE SIDE, THEY ARE MORE -- THEY'RE MORE CONCERNED WITH UPHOLDING IN-26 AS IT WAS PASSED.

LIKE I SAID, THERE ARE SOME TWEAKS THAT THEY HAVE MADE TO HOME CULTIVATION.

SO THE BILL THAT PASSED BY VOTERS SAID THAT IF YOU WANTED TO HOME GROW OR IF YOU WERE PRESCRIBED HOME GROW HAD TO BE A MINIMUM OF SIX PLANTS.

AND, SO, THE SENATE JUST WENT THROUGH AND SAID THAT THERE CAN BE A MAXIMUM OF SIX PLANTS.

THREE OF THEM BEING PLANTS THAT ARE CAPABLE OF PRODUCING THC AND THEN THREE THAT ARE, I GUESS, IMMATURE PLANTS, IF YOU WANT TO CALL THEM THAT, THAT ARE SORT OF ON STANDBY.

AND, SO, THE IDEA BEING THERE IS THAT A MEDICAL PATIENT COULD HAVE A STEADY FLOW OF MEDICAL CANNABIS THAT THEY NEED IF THEY START TO RUN OUT.

>> INTERESTING.

SO IT SOUNDS LIKE PART OF THE ISSUE IS ALSO AN ACCESS ISSUE.

WHEN IT COMES TO HOME CULTIVATION.

AM I TRACKING WITH YOU THERE?

>> YEAH, I WOULD SAY THAT'S FAIR TO SAY.

SOUTH DAKOTA'S A VERY LARGE STATE AND THERE ARE A LOT OF VERY HYPER RURAL AREAS.

AND, SO, IF SOMEBODY IS ABLE TO, SAY, LIVE IN BISON IS EXAMINE IS ABLE TO CULTIVATE THEIR -- AND IS ABLE TO CULTIVATE THEIR OWN MEDICAL MARIJUANA, THERE MIGHT BE A DISPENSARY THAT IS, YOU KNOW, HUNDREDS OF MILES AWAY, THAT THEY WOULD STILL HAVE ACCESS TO THAT IF THEY NEEDED IT.

>> SURE.

OF COURSE, ANOTHER PIECE OF THE LEGISLATIVE SESSION WE'LL TALK ABOUT A LITTLE BIT LATER IN THE PROGRAM, I COULD FEEL IT HERE IN SIOUX FALLS, IT SEEMS LIKE THERE'S SOME TENSION BETWEEN THE LEGISLATIVE AND EXECUTIVE BRANCHES OF OUR STATE GOVERNMENT IN RECENT DAYS.

GIVE US YOUR TAKE FROM THE CAPITOL.

>> YEAH.

SO, WHAT WE SAW LAST WEEK WAS -- AND THE WEEK PRIOR IS SEVERAL OF THE GOVERNOR'S KIND OF KEY POLICY ANNOUNCEMENTS THAT CAME OUT IN HER STATE OF THE STATE ADDRESS.

THEY WERE REJECTED BY THE HOUSE, WHETHER WE'RE TALKING ABOUT GOVERNOR NOEM'S PRAYER IN SCHOOL, MOMENT OF SILENCE BILL, OR THE CAMPGROUNDS IN CUSTER STATE PARK OR THE SHOOTING RANGE, AND THEN IT REALLY CAME TO A HEAD WHEN IT WAS THE LAST DAY FOR BILLS TO GET INTRODUCED IN A COMMITTEE, AND TYPICALLY THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH, GOVERNOR NOEM, CAN COME TO A LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE AND SAY, HEY, I HAVE THIS BILL LANGUAGE, WOULD YOU PLEASE INTRODUCE IT?

THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH DOES NOT HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO INTRODUCE THEIR OWN LEGISLATION.

THAT'S RESERVED TO THE LEGISLATURE.

AND WHEN THAT ASK WAS MADE, THAT COMMITTEE THAT MORNING TOOK UP ONE OF HER ABORTION LEGISLATIONS, WHICH WAS TO BAN MEDICATION ABORTIONS OUTSIDE OF LICENSED ABORTION FACILITIES.

THE OTHER WAS TO BAN ABORTION AFTER SIX WEEKS.

IT KIND OF MIRRORS THE TEXAS ABORTION LAW THAT WENT INTO EFFECT LAST YEAR THAT, YOU KNOW, ALL EYES ARE ON THE SUPREME COURT AS TO WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN THERE.

AND, SO, THAT COMMITTEE DECIDED NOT TO INTRODUCE IS THAT BILL.

THE GOVERNOR PUT OUT A STATEMENT SAYING IT WAS UNPRECEDENTED.

HOUSE LEADERSHIP IS SAYING, YOU KNOW, I GUESS -- THE GOVERNOR IS SAYING IT WAS UNPRECEDENTED BECAUSE SHE WAS SAYING THAT EVERY BILL GETS A HEARING.

HOUSE LEADERSHIP IS SAYING IT WASN'T A BILL SO IT DIDN'T TECHNICALLY -- BECAUSE IT DIDN'T GET INTRODUCED, IT DOESN'T MEAN IT WAS UNPRECEDENTED, IT JUST DIDN'T GET INTRODUCED AT THAT POINT.

>> INTERESTING.

WELL, -- WE'LL HEAR A BIT MORE ABOUT THAT LATER THIS HOUR.

BUT UNTIL NEXT TIME, SDPB'S POLITICS AND PUBLIC POLICY REPORTER, LEE STRUBINGER JOINING US FROM PIERRE.

LEE, AS ALWAYS, THANK YOU.

>> YEAH, THANKS FOR HAVING ME, JACKIE.

>> YOU CAN FOLLOW LEE'S REPORTING AND ALL OF OUR LEGISLATIVE COVERAGE ONLINE AT SDPB.ORG/STATEHOUSE.

LET'S TURN NOW TO OUR MAIN FOCUS TONIGHT.

LAWMAKERS ACROSS THE STATE WERE FLOODED WITH PHONE CALLS AND EMAILS ABOUT A PROPOSED EXPANSION TO CAMPSITES IN CUSTER STATE PARK.

THE VAST MAJORITY OF THOSE MESSAGES TOLD LAWMAKERS TO REJECT THE BILL.

TO BE CLEAR, DEMAND FOR CAMPSITES IN THE PARK IS ON THE RISE, AND VISITATION RATES IN RECENT YEARS HAVE BROKEN RECORDS, THANKS IN PART TO THE PANDEMIC PUSHING PEOPLE TO ENJOY THE GREAT OUTDOORS.

BUT MANY FEAR THEIR TREASURED STATE PARK IS BEING LOVED TO DEATH.

THE GAME FISH & PARKS DEPARTMENT DEFENDED THE PROPOSED EXPANSION IN THE HOUSE AG AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMITTEE LAST WEEK.

>> THERE ARE 389 CAMPSITES IN CUSTER STATE PARK.

AN EARLIER PROPOSAL CALLED FOR ANOTHER 175 SITES, INCLUDING NEW ELECTRIC UTILITIES, A SHOWER HOUSE, AND PAVED ROADS.

AFTER PUSHBACK FROM CONSERVATIONISTS AND PRIVATE CAMP OWNERS, THE GAME, FISH AND PARKS DEPARTMENT OFFERED A NEW PROPOSAL, 66 NEW SITES IN ANOTHER PART OF THE PARK.

IT WAS A LESS INTRUSIVE OPTION THAN THE PREVIOUS PLAN, AND ABOUT $5 MILLION CHEAPER.

>> THE NEW LOCATION AT STOCKADE LAKE AND THE REVISED BUDGET ARE A PRODUCT OF LISTENING TO THE PUBLIC, WHO SENT AN EMAIL OR MADE A PHONE CALL TO THE DEPARTMENT, TO THE GOVERNOR'S OFFICE, AND TO THIS BODY.

>> SECRETARY OF GAME, FISH AND PARKS, KEVIN ROBLING TESTIFIED IN FAVOR OF THE EXPANSION BEFORE THE HOUSE AG AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMITTEE.

>> THE LAND WHERE THE PROPOSED SITE WAS LOCATED WAS PURCHASED IN 1974.

IT LIES OUTSIDE THE FENCE BOUNDARY OF CUSTER STATE PARK.

THE STOCKADE LOCATION IS ADJACENT TO CURRENT CAMPGROUNDS, IT ENCOMPASSES 60 ACRES WITH -- 50 ACRES WITH 66 CAMPSITES.

THIS REPRESENTS LESS THAN 1/10 OF 1% OF THE PARK'S 71,000 ACRES.

>> SECRETARY ROBLING SAYS THE SITE IS CURRENTLY USED AS A HAYING GROUND FOR THE PARK'S BISON HERD BUT IT'S NOT A UNIQUE HABITAT FOR ANY WILDLIFE.

THESE POINTS WEREN'T ENOUGH TO SATISFY OPPONENTS.

>> A LONG TIME AGO WHEN I WAS A LITTLE KID, GROWING UP IN PENNINGTON COUNTY, AN OLD RANCHER TOLD ME, NO MATTER HOW THIN THE TOILET PAPER, THERE'S ALWAYS TWO SIDES.

AND THERE'S ANOTHER SIDE TO THIS.

>> CRAIG WILLAN OF CUSTER WAS THE FIRST OF MORE THAN A DOZEN OPPONENT TO TESTIFIED BEFORE THE COMMITTEE.

HE READ THE LETTER HE'D SENT TO HIS REPRESENTATIVE.

>> LET FREE ENTERPRISE FILL THE NEEDS OF CAMPING AND LODGING OUTSIDE THE PARK, FOR BOTH OUR OWN CITIZENS AND OUT-OF-STATE GUESTS.

WHAT'S NEXT?

OUR STATE GOVERNMENT EXPANDING TO GET INTO RENTING ATVs, RENTING HORSE STABLES, CHUCK WAGON SUPPERS, GUIDED BUS TOURS?

AND I'M NOT BEING FACETIOUS HERE.

>> PRIVATE CAMPGROUND OWNERS ECHOED THE DESIRE TO LIMIT COMPETITION FROM STATE GOVERNMENT.

STEVE SAINT OF CUSTER WAS ONE OF THEM.

>> FURTHER, THIS COMPETITION WOULD HAVE A PERPETUAL FUNDING SOURCE, PAY NO TAXES OR FEES, AND THUS WOULD BE ABLE TO OFFER A PRODUCT FOR A PRICE THAT WOULD BE UTTERLY UNSUSTAINABLE FOR THE PRIVATE SECTOR.

>> SAINT SAYS THERE ARE 44 PRIVATE CAMPGROUNDS WITHIN 15 MILES OF CUSTER STATE PARK THAT OFFER HUNDREDS OF ADDITIONAL CAMPSITES.

BUT BEYOND BUSINESS COMPETITION, SOME WORRY THAT CUSTER STATE PARK IS FOLLOWING IN THE FOOTSTEPS OF CROWDED NATIONAL PARKS.

REPRESENTATIVE TAFFY HOWARD DESCRIBED A RECENT FAMILY TRIP TO I DON'T YOSEMITE IN NATIONALK IN CALIFORNIA.

>> IF YOU'RE HIKING ON ANY TRAILS OUTSIDE OF THE VALLEY, THERE ARE HOARDS OF PEOPLE.

YOU ARE WALL TO WALL.

THERE IS NO PEACE AND QUIET IN THAT CAMP OR IN THAT VALLEY OR ON ANY OF THE TRAILS.

>> CUSTER STATE PARK FOR MANY PEOPLE, WHAT YOU NEED TO UNDERSTAND, IS STILL OUR LOCAL STATE PARK.

IT IS NOT A NATIONAL PARK.

IT SHOULD NOT BE TREATED AS A NATIONAL PARK.

IT'S OUR LOCAL STATE PARK.

AND SOUTH DAKOTANS NEED TO BE PUT FIRST AND FOREMOST.

WE NEED TO BE ALLOWED TO ENJOY OUR OWN NATURAL RESOURCES.

JUST AS YOSEMITE AND YELLOWSTONE AND GLACIER ARE BEING LOVED TO DEATH, CUSTER STATE PARK IS HEADED IN THE SAME DIRECTION.

>> THE SIGNIFICANT PUBLIC OUTCRY CAUGHT LAWMAKERS' ATTENTION.

SENATOR JULIE FRYE-MUELLER REPRESENTS DISTRICT 30, WHICH INCLUDES CUSTER.

SHE SAYS THE PUBLIC RESPONSE FROM ALL CORNER OF THE STATE HAS BEEN OVERWHELMING.

>> WE ARE THE VOICE OF THE PEOPLE.

THAT'S WHY WE'RE ELECTED BY THE PEOPLE.

AND WE'VE HEARD LOUD AND CLEAR FROM THE PEOPLE, PLEASE DON'T CHANGE THIS.

>> BOTH OF DISTRICT 30'S REPRESENTATIVES SIT ON THE HOUSE AG AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMITTEE.

REPRESENTATIVE TIM GOODWIN OFFERED AN AMENDMENT TO LIMIT THE PROPOSAL TO TENT CAMPING ONLY, SAYING THAT WOULDN'T INTERFERE WITH MOST PRIVATE CAMPGROUND BUSINESSES.

>> IT'S ONLY 66 SITES, IT WOULD BE $15 A NIGHT, IF YOU WANTED TO GO CAMPING IN CUSTER, IF YOU REALLY WANTED TO GO CAMPING, MAYBE I'M AN ARMY GUY AND I KNOW WHAT REAL CAMPING IS, YOU PITCH A TENT, AND CAMP AND HECK, IF YOU'VE GOT A SHOWER AND A FLUSH TOILET, YOU THOUGHT YOU WERE IN HEAVEN.

SO WITH THAT, I APPRECIATE YOUR SUPPORT OF THIS AMENDMENT PGH >> BUT FOR REPRESENTATIVE TRISH LADNER, THE DECISION WAS CLEAR.

>> SOMETIMES DOING WHAT YOU'RE CHARGED TO DO CAN BE MESSY.

AND THIS HAS BEEN DIFFICULT, BUT THE PEOPLE HAVE SPOKEN FROM DISTRICT 30.

I HAVE OVER 1500 EMAILS, AND NONE OF THEM IN FAVOR.

SO I WILL BE OPPOSING THIS AMENDMENT.

>> THE BILL TO EXPAND CAMPSITES IN CUSTER STATE PARK ULTIMATELY FAILED ON A 9-3 VOTE, INSPIRING BRIEF APPLAUSE FROM THE AUDIENCE.

BUT THE QUESTION OF MAINTAINING CUST STATE PARK'S CAPACITY FOR CAMPERS AND VISITORS REMAINS.

>> HERE TO CONTINUE THE CONVERSATION ABOUT SOUTH DAKOTA'S PUBLIC LANDS IS JOHN COOPER.

HE SPENT MORE THAN 40 YEARS IN WILDLIFE WORK AT BOTH THE FEDERAL AND STATE LEVEL, INCLUDING SERVICE AS SECRETARY OF GAME FISH AND PARKS UNDER GOVERNORS JANKLOW AND ROUNDS.

HE RETIRED AS COMMISSIONER OF STATE GAME, FISH & PARKS IN 2016.

JOHN COOPER JOINS ME NOW FROM THE CAPITOL BUILDING IN PIERRE.

MR. COOPER, WELCOME TO SOUTH DAKOTA FOCUS, THANK YOU FOR JOINING US TONIGHT.

>> THANK YOU, JACKIE.

THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME HERE.

>> SO, Mr. COOPER, YOU TESTIFIED AGAINST THIS BILL AS WELL.

AND DURING YOUR TESTIMONY YOU TOLD COMMITTEE MEMBERS ABOUT A SOMEWHAT SIMILAR EXPERIENCE RELATED TO A PROPOSAL ABOUT CAMPSITES IN CUSTER STATE PARK DURING YOUR EARLIEST YEARS WITH THE JANKLOW ADMINISTRATION.

TELL US ABOUT THAT STORY AND HOW THAT SHAPED YOUR OPINION NOW.

>> WELL, I PROBABLY UNDERWENT SOME OF THE SAME PRESSURES THAT SECRETARY ROBE LIPPING UNDER-- ROBLING UNDERWENT IN TERMS MUCH TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO WORK THROUGH SOME OF THE GOVERNOR'S GOALS AND OBJECTIVES.

IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, GOVERNOR JANKLOW HAD RECEIVED A LOT OF REQUESTS AND SOME CONCERN THAT WHEN SOME FOLKS CAME OUT TO GO TO THE BUFFALO ROUNDUP AND OTHER THINGS THAT WERE GOING ON IN THE BLACK HILLS, THAT WHEN THEY CAME INTO CUSTER STATE PARK, THEY HAD THESE LARGE MOTOR HOMES AND THEY HAD LARGER CAMPERS AND MUCH MORE NEED FOR ELECTRICAL LOAD THAN WHAT WE HAD SERVICE FOR.

MOST OF OUR CAMPING SPOTS BACK IN '95, '96 WERE 25 OR 35 MAX AMPS AND, OF COURSE, WITH ALL THE ELECTRICAL REQUIREMENTS THAT THEY HAD FOR THESE BIGGER MOTOR HOMES, THEY WERE WANTING 50 AMP SERVICE.

SO RALEIGH NOEM WHO WAS THE DIRECTOR OF CUSTER STATE PARK AT THAT TIME, MYSELF, DOUG HOFFER, WHO WAS WITH THE -- WORKED FOR ME AT THE STATE PARKS, WE ALL THOUGHT, WELL, THIS WOULDN'T BE TOO BAD AN IDEA.

IT SEEMS REASONABLE.

LET'S GO AHEAD AND WHILE WE'RE AT IT, LET'S PUT IN A COUPLE OF MORE CAMPING PADS THAT WOULD BE LARGER AND WOULD ACCOMPANY THOSE FOLKS THAT HAD THOSE LARGER RIGS.

WELL, WE THOUGHT WE WERE DOING THE LORD'S GOOD AND WE CAME TO THE LEGISLATURE WITH THE SAME KIND OF BILL THAT SECRETARY ROBLING AND HIS STAFF JUST HAD.

AND WE GOT THE SAME RECEPTION FROM A LOT OF PEOPLE OUT THERE LOCALLY WHO FELT AS THOUGH THAT WHAT WE WERE DOING WAS INFRINGING UPON THE PRIVATE CAMPGROUND OWNERS AND OPERATORS TO RUN THEIR BUSINESS.

AND IT WAS UNFAIR COMPETITION.

I THINK STEVE MENTIONED THAT IN ONE OF YOUR OPENING STATEMENTS.

SO, IT WAS SIGNIFICANT OPPOSITION.

AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE DIDN'T DO, WHICH WAS KIND OF A LEAD-IN FOR SOME OF THE WAY THAT WE DID BUSINESS AFTER THIS, WAS THAT WE FELT LIKE WE DIDN'T GO OUT AND TALK TO THE LOCAL PEOPLE ENOUGH, GET SOME KIND OF AN IDEA OF HOW THEY WERE FEELING.

BECAUSE CUSTER STATE PARK, AS SENATOR HOWARD TALKED ABOUT, THAT'S A PLACE, PEOPLE LOVE IT, I LOVE IT, MY FAMILY LOVES IT.

AND THE BOTTOM LINE OF THIS WHOLE THING IS THAT WE'RE THERE PRIMARILY FOR THE SAME GOALS AND OBJECTIVES THAT PETER KNORRBECK ORIGINALLY SET THAT PARK UP TO BE AND THAT WAS TO VIEW WILDLIFE AND THE BLACK HILLS AND NATURE AND THE VISTAS AND THE WATER ALL IN AN AREA WHERE WE DID NOT HAVE TO PUT UP WITH THE HUBBUB AND THE SMOKE AND ALL OF THE NOISE AND ALL OF THE THINGS THAT US HUMAN BEINGS BRING WHEN WE GO TO A CAMPING EXPERIENCE.

NORBECK.

SO, FROM THAT POINT ON, WHAT WE ENDED UP DOING WAS PUTTING TOGETHER A RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN.

AND THAT RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN TALKS ABOUT CUSTER STATE PARK'S HISTORY AND ITS WILDLIFE AND ITS WATER AND ET CETERA.

SO IF I CAN, I DON'T LIKE TO READ FROM SOMETHING, BUT I HAVE A QUOTE HERE FROM THE MISSION STATEMENT THAT WAS PUT TOGETHER RIGHT AFTER WE STUBBED OUR TOE WITH THE SAME KIND OF SITUATION THAT SECRETARY ROBLING WAS UP AGAINST HERE.

AND THIS IS UNDER THE MISSION STATEMENT.

CUSTER STATE PARK WILL BE A PLACE FOR BOTH PEOPLE AND NATURE.

A PLACE WHERE VISITORS CAN SEE AND EXPERIENCE MUCH OF THE NATURAL AND CULTURAL HERITAGE OF WESTERN SOUTH DAKOTA.

IT'S A PLACE WHERE THE CHARACTER AND THE NATURAL SYSTEMS PREDOMINATE AND WHERE ACTIVITIES OF OUR VISITORS ARE IN HARMONY WITH THAT DOMINANT CHARACTER.

SO THAT COMES FROM NORBECK AND HAS STEPPED DOWN THROUGH ALL OF THE PARK MANAGERS AND THE DIFFERENT TYPES OF COMMISSIONS THAT THAT PARK HAS GONE THROUGH HISTORICALLY.

AND THERE IS AN UPDATED RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN THAT GOES THROUGH A LOT OF THIS MANAGEMENT BASED UPON THIS VERY SAME PHILOSOPHY.

SO DOES THAT HELP YOU UNDERSTAND A LITTLE BIT OF WHERE WE'RE AT -- OR WHERE WE WERE AT CERTAINLY?

>> YEAH, ABSOLUTELY.

AND I SHARE YOUR LOVE AND MOST PEOPLE'S LOVE FOR CUSTER STATE PARK.

AND I THINK WE'RE SEEING A WHOLE LOT MORE PEOPLE DISCOVERING A LOVE OF CUSTER STATE PARK AS WE SEE THESE VISITATION NUMBERS REALLY CLIMB QUITE SIGNIFICANTLY.

IN THE LAST COUPLE YEARS.

IN 2021, I SEE 2.4 MILLION VISITORS TO CUSTER STATE PARK.

I'M CURIOUS HOW WE MANAGE THAT BALANCE OF PRESERVING THE NATURAL BEAUTY THAT PEOPLE ARE COMING TO SEE BUT ALSO MANAGING THE TRUE ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY THAT THAT NUMBER OF VISITORS PROVIDES TO THE AREA?

>> AND IT'S PROBABLY THE BURNING QUESTION HERE IS, WHERE DO WE -- WHAT DIRECTION DO WE GO?

IT'S THE SAME KIND OF ISSUE AND ARGUMENT AND DEBATE THAT'S TAKEN PLACE IN PLACES LIKE YELLOWSTONE AND YOSEMITE AND TEDDY ROOSEVELT NATIONAL PARK IN NORTH DAKOTA.

THE ISSUE, I THINK, FOR US IN SOUTH DAKOTA IS THAT THE PRIVATE CAMPGROUND OWNERS HAVE THE ABILITY AND UNDER KIND OF THE TRUE CAPITALISTIC ISSUES THAT WE KIND OF OPERATE UNDER IN THE U.S., THE IDEA WOULD BE, LET THEM PROVIDE THE LODGING.

LET THEM PROVIDE THE ISSUES WITH THE PARKING OF THE LARGE CAMPERS, ET CETERA, OR THE MOTEL, HOTELS OR THE CABINS.

AND LET US, AT CUSTER AND AT GF&P FOCUS MORE ON HOW WE WOULD ACCOMMODATE THEM TEMPORARILY WHILE THEY'RE MAKING THEIR ROUNDS IN THE PARK.

AND THEN OUR WILDLIFE ISSUES, OUR WILDLIFE RESOURCES WOULD TAKE PRECEDENCE.

THEY WOULD HAVE THIS DOMINANT ISSUE THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT WOULD BE OUR ABILITY TO MAINTAIN NATURAL SETTINGS, AND THAT WOULD BE UP TO THE PARK MANAGERS TO ACCOMMODATE THOSE OCCASIONAL VISITORS, THOSE TEMPORARY VISITORS.

I THINK IT'S THE ONLY WAY.

I KNOW PEOPLE THAT WORK IN YELLOWSTONE AND THEY FEEL THAT THE ISSUE'S KIND OF GOT AWAY FROM THEM AS A RESULT OF PEOPLE WHO DON'T HAVE -- AREN'T WELL SCHOOLED IN PUBLIC TRUST RESOURCE DECISIONS.

THEY'RE SCHOOLED IN PRIVATE PROPERTY AND BUSINESS, BUT THEY'RE NOT SCHOOLED IN THE PUBLIC TRUST RESOURCES.

AND THAT PARK, CUSTER STATE PARK, IS A SIGNIFICANT PUBLIC TRUST RESOURCE, SO THE DECISION-MAKING BODIES, WHETHER IT BE LEGISLATURES OR COMMISSIONS OR EVEN US SECRETARY, SECRETARY ROBLING AND I HAD A MEETING YESTERDAY, A GOOD MEETING, TO TRY TO FIGURE OUT HOW WE COULD, YOU KNOW, WORK CLOSER TOGETHER.

FRANKLY, I WOULD HAVE TO TAKE PROBABLY SOME RESPONSIBILITY.

I SHOULD HAVE CALLED HIM FIRST AND SAID, YOU KNOW WHAT?

YOU GUYS ARE GOING DOWN A LINE HERE WHERE GOVERNMENT MADE A MISTAKE TO BEGIN WITH, AND WE SHOULD BE DOING A BETTER JOB OF COORDINATING ALL OF THE RESOURCE FOLKS THAT -- AND THE RESOURCE ISSUES THAT PROBABLY WOULD TRIP YOU UP.

AND I'LL TAKE SOME RESPONSIBILITY FOR NOT MAKING THAT OVERTURE.

GOVERNMENT MAKES MISTAKES.

FRANKLY, ONE OF THE REASONS IS BECAUSE THERE'S NO CONTINUITY.

A NEW GOVERNOR COMES IN, OLD SECRETARIES GO OUT, NEW SECRETARIES COME IN.

AND, SO, YOU KNOW, THE CONTINUITY DOESN'T GET DONE.

BUT I THINK IT WOULD HAVE DEFINITELY BEEN A MISTAKE AT THIS POINT IN TIME, GIVEN THE ISSUES THAT WERE RAISED BY THE PRIVATE INDUSTRY FOLKS, THE CAMPGROUND PEOPLE, TO GO AHEAD WITH THAT PROPOSAL AND THAT'S THE REASON THAT I TESTIFIED AGAINST IT.

>> INTERESTING.

IN KIND OF OUR LAST COUPLE MINUTES TOGETHER, I'M CURIOUS IF THE CHALLENGES WE SEE WITH PRESERVING OUR PUBLIC LANDS IN SOUTH DAKOTA, HAVE THOSE CHALLENGES CHANGED IN A SIGNIFICANT WAY SINCE YOUR TIME WITH GAME, FISH & PARKS, OR IS IT REALLY THE SAME THING THAT WE RUN INTO ON A CYCLE?

>> THEY'VE CHANGED, I THINK, SIGNIFICANTLY.

WHEN I ARRIVED IN SOUTH DAKOTA, I WAS WORKING FOR THE U.S.

FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, AND AT THAT TIME WE HAD ABOUT 600,000 PEOPLE, 585,000, I THINK IT WAS, WE'RE RIGHT AT THAT MILLION FIGURE NOW, MORE PEOPLE MOVING IN, ESPECIALLY TO RAPID, SIOUX FALLS, WATERTOWN, AND WHAT'S HAPPENING IS THAT WE'RE BECOMING MORE URBAN IN THOSE LOCATIONS.

AND WE HAVE THIS KIND OF A DISCONNECT BETWEEN THE RURAL LOCATIONS.

YET, THAT'S WHERE OUR WILDLIFE IS.

AND, SO, ONE OF THE CHALLENGES FOR ANY RESOURCE MANAGER IS, HOW DO YOU KEEP LAKES STOCKED UP WITH FISH NOW WHERE PEOPLE WANT TO FISH?

WELL, WE ONLY HAD, YOU KNOW, TEN PEOPLE OUT HERE FOR 25, 30 YEARS AND NOW WE GOT 100.

ONCE YOU GET INTO THAT KIND OF SITUATION -- AND THE 100 WANT TO HAVE TOURNAMENTS AND THE 100 WANT TO HAVE AN EXTRA CAMPGROUND OVER HERE.

THE BOTTOM LINE OF THIS THING IS THERE'S ONLY SO MUCH.

AND WHERE IT COMES TO CUSTER STATE PARK, THE PEOPLE GO THERE -- WE DID SOME SURVEYS WHEN I WAS SECRETARY, AND THE MOST RESOUNDING ISSUE, THE THING THAT THEY LOVED WAS WILDLIFE.

THEY WANT TO VIEW WILDLIFE.

IT'S THE SAME THING, EVEN WITH THE RALLY GOERS, WITH -- EVEN WITH MOTORCYCLES, RIGHT, THEY WANT TO SEE THE BISON, THEY WANT TO SEE THE ELK.

AND, SO, IF YOU DISTURB THAT, THOSE GENERAL LOCATIONS WHERE THOSE ANIMALS FEEL SAFE, AND YOU START ENCROACHING ON IT, WHAT WILL HAPPEN IS, YOU'LL DRIVE THOSE BACK IN THE FOREST.

AND THEY'LL BE SAFE BACK THERE, BUT THEY WON'T TOLERATE A WHOLE LOT OF PUSHING AND SHOVING, YOU KNOW, IN A WILD SETTING LIKE WE HAVE IN CUSTER STATE PARK.

SO YOU WOULD DIMINISH WHAT A LOT OF PEOPLE GO THERE TO SEE AND TO DO.

>> WELL, OUR GUEST HAS BEEN JOHN COOPER, FORMER SOUTH DAKOTA SECRETARY OF GAME, FISH AND PARKS, AS WELL AS FORMER FG -- GF&P COMMISSIONER.

I'VE ENJOYED OUR CONVERSATION.

WE'RE OUT OF TIME NOW BUT WOULD LOVE TO HAVE YOU BACK AGAIN.

THANKS AGAIN FOR YOUR TIME TONIGHT.

>> GREAT.

THANK YOU, JACKIE, I APPRECIATE IT.

>> WE'LL MOVE ON NOW TO A CONFLICT IN THE CAPITOL THAT HIGHLIGHTS A NATIONAL MOVEMENT.

IN HER STATE OF THE STATE ADDRESS, GOVERNOR KRISTI NOEM ANNOUNCED PLANS TO INTRODUCE A BILL TO BAN ABORTIONS AFTER FETAL CARDIAC ACTIVITY CAN BE DETECTED.

THAT'S USUALLY AROUND SIX WEEKS INTO A PREGNANCY.

HER PROPOSAL INSPIRED ONE OF THE STANDING OVATIONS SHE RECEIVED FROM LAWMAKERS.

THE DRAFTED LANGUAGE WAS SIMILAR TO A TEXAS LAW, KNOWN AS THE TEXAS HEARTBEAT ACT.

BUT, AS LEE STRUBINGER MENTIONED EARLIER, ONLY LEGISLATORS AND THEIR COMMITTEES HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO INTRODUCE A BILL.

AND IN THE FINAL HOURS BEFORE SUBMISSION DEADLINE, A MOTION TO INTRODUCE THE GOVERNOR'S DRAFT FAILED IN COMMITTEE FOR LACK OF A SECOND.

GOVERNOR NOEM EXPRESSED HER FRUSTRATION DURING A WEEKLY PRESS CONFERENCE LAST WEEK.

HERE'S HER EXCHANGE WITH DAKOTA NEWS NOW REPORTER AUSTIN GOSS.

>> OBVIOUSLY WE'RE VERY CYNICAL, CRITICAL OF THE HOUSE STATE AFFAIR COMMITTEE YESTERDAY FOR THEIR DECISION NOT TO HEAR YOUR PROPOSAL ON THE HEARTBEAT BILL.

SPEAKER GOSCH WITHIN THE LAST 30 MINUTES PUT OUT A STATEMENT EFFECTIVELY SAYING THAT SOUTH DAKOTA RIGHT TO LIFE OPPOSE YOUR PROPOSAL, BOTH SENATE LEADERSHIP AND HOUSE LEADERSHIP OPPOSE YOUR PROPOSAL.

SAYS HE WANTS TO AVOID PERSONAL ATTACKS, D.C.

POLITICS IS NOT WELCOME HERE AND SOUTH DAKOTA DESERVES BETTER FROM THEIR ELECTED OFFICIALS.

I WANT TO SEE WHAT YOU MAKE OF THAT AND WHAT IT SAYS ABOUT YOUR RELATIONSHIP WITH HOUSE AND SENATE LEADERSHIP?

>> I THINK MY RELATIONSHIP WITH HOUSE AND SENATE LEADERSHIP IS GOOD, IT'S STRAINED WITH THE SPEAKER, DEFINITELY.

WHAT I WOULD SAY IS THIS IS THE FIRST TIME IN YEARS THAT THE LEGISLATURE HAS REFUSED TO GIVE A HEARING TO A BILL.

IT WAS INTRODUCED UNDER THE SAME PROTOCOLS, SAME MECHANISMS AS EVERY OTHER BILL GOVERNORS HAVE BROUGHT.

THIS BILL AND MYSELF WERE TREATED VERY DIFFERENTLY THAN IN THE PAST.

I KNOW SPEAKER GOSCH HAS AN ISSUE WITH ME AND I HONESTLY DON'T KNOW WHAT IT IS.

I DO NOT -- CANNOT THINK OF A REASON WHY HE IS SO OFFENDED BY ME AND WHAT I DO.

BUT I AM FOLLOWING THE EXACT SAME PROTOCOLS AS OTHER GOVERNORS ON THIS AND BILL AND -- ON THIS BILL AND OTHER PIECES OF LEGISLATION.

AND I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT EVERY BILL GET A HEARING.

NOW, WHAT IS INTERESTING TO ME ON THIS HEARTBEAT BILL IS THAT THERE ARE NATIONAL PROLIFE LEADERS THAT SAY THIS IS AN IMPORTANT BILL AT THIS TIME IN THE STATE OF SOUTH DAKOTA.

JAY SECULO WHO HAS AGREED TO DEFEND THIS BILL FREE OF CHARGE, HAS GIVEN HIS ENDORSEMENT TO THIS PIECE OF LEGISLATION.

SUSAN B. ANTHONY GROUP HAS GIVEN THEIR SUPPORT TO THIS PIECE OF LEGISLATION.

IN FACT, IN SEPTEMBER, YOU VISITED AND INTERVIEWED DALE BARTSCHER WITH SOUTH DAKOTA RIGHT TO LIFE, WHO SAID IT WAS WONDERFUL THAT TEXAS BROUGHT THE BILL THAT THEY BROUGHT AND PASSED IT AND SAID HE THOUGHT IT WAS GREAT AND SOMETHING SOUTH DAKOTA SHOULD BE CONSIDERING.

AND THAT'S WHEN WE WENT THROUGH THE ANALYSIS AND LOOKED AT THE LANGUAGE AND BROUGHT IT FORWARD.

SO I KNOW THERE'S DISAGREEMENT.

THEY HAVE AN ATTORNEY.

AN OUT-OF-STATE ATTORNEY THAT'S TELLING THEM THAT THIS BILL ISN'T APPROPRIATE.

WE HAVE MANY OTHER PEOPLE THAT SAY IT IS.

I'M INTERESTED IN DEFENDING LIFE.

THIS WOULD HAVE BEEN A FANTASTIC DEBATE JUST TO HAVE IN COMMITTEE.

AND WE CAN ALL DISAGREE.

I STILL DEFEND LIFE.

WE CAN DISAGREE ON STRATEGY.

BUT LET'S HAVE THAT IN AN OPEN FORUMMENT.

AND -- FORUM.

AND I AS GOVERNOR WANT TO HAVE A TRANSPARENT PROCESS.

WHAT HAPPENED IN SPEAKER GOSCH'S COMMITTEE YESTERDAY WAS NOT TRANSPARENT.

IT WAS BASICALLY A POCKET VETO THAT HE MADE A DECISION ON AND, FRANKLY, MEMBERS OF HIS CAUCUS DIDN'T KNOW IT WAS GOING TO HAPPEN.

>> THERE'S QUITE A BIT MORE TO THE STORY THAN WHAT HAPPENED IN HOUSE STATE AFFAIRS.

SOUTH DAKOTA RIGHT TO LIFE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR DALE BARTSCHER SAID THIS TO SDPB'S LEE STRUBINGER.

>> WE BELIEVE THAT THE PASSAGE OF A TEXAS-STYLE HEARTBEAT BILL WILL MOOT THE LITIGATION WE CURRENTLY HAVE IN THE 8th CIRCUIT COURT.

THAT REASON, WE CANNOT SUPPORT A TEXAS-STYLE HEARTBEAT BILL VERBIAGE.

THE LITIGATION HE'S RESEARCHING IS NOW KNOWN AS PLANNED PARENTHOOD V. NOEM BUT THE LITIGATION BEGAN IN 2011 WHEN DENNIS DAUGAARD WAS GOVERNOR.

THE CASE DEALS WITH THE REQUIREMENT THAT A PERSON SEEKING AN ABORTION MUST FIRST VISIT A PREGNANCY CRISIS CENTER.

THAT REQUIREMENT HAS BEEN TIED UP IN THE COURT SYSTEM FOR A DECADE AND NOT BEEN ENFORCED.

NOW, WE'VE HEARD ABOUT WHAT THE HOUSE STATE AFFAIRS COMMITTEE DIDN'T INTRODUCE.

BUT THE COMMITTEE DID INTRODUCE ANOTHER DRAFT FROM THE GOVERNOR, AN ACT TO PROHIBIT MEDICAL ABORTION BY TELEMEDICINE.

THIS BILL COULD CODIFY AN EXECUTIVE ORDER NOEM ISSUED LAST YEAR AND THIS WEEK A FEDERAL JUDGE HALTED THAT RULE UNTIL THE LAWSUIT IS DECIDED.

THAT LAWSUIT, BY THE WAY, IS ALSO CALLED PLANNED PARENTHOOD V. NOEM.

THE BILL RELATED TO MEDICAL ABORTIONS HAS YET TO BE HEARD IN COMMITTEE AND IT'S NOT CLEAR HOW THE FEDERAL INJUNCTION WILL IMPACT ITS PROGRESS.

WHAT IS CLEAR IS THE DECADES-LONG STRATEGY OF CITIZENS AND POLICY MAKERS ACROSS THE NATION TO LIMIT ABORTION ACCESS.

THE SUPREME COURT IS POISED TO MAKE A DECISION IN JUNE THAT SOME SAY COULD OVERTURN THE RULING MOST OFTEN CONNECTED WITH ABORTION ACCESS ROE VS. WADE.

ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE AT USF MIKE THOMPSON JOINED ME EARLIER.

WE START WITH THE CASE TO BE DECIDED IN JUNE.

DOBBS VS. JACKSON WOMEN'S HEALTH.

KIND OF PUT US INTO THE CONTEXT OF THIS DOBBS V. WOMEN'S HEALTHCARE CASE IS DEALING WITH.

>> SO THE SUPREME COURT AGREED TO HEAR THIS CASE BACK IN, I THINK, OCTOBER OF '21, THEY HEARD ARGUMENTS ON IT.

WHEN THE SUPREME COURT ISSUES -- OR WHEN THE SUPREME COURT WANTS TO HEAR A CASE, IT ISSUES A WRIT OF ESSENTIAL ORRERY.

SO, IN THE WRIT, OR THE GRANT OF THE WRIT, THE SUPREME COURT WILL SAY, HERE'S THE ISSUE WE WANT YOU TO DISCUSS.

HERE'S THE ISSUE WE WANT YOU TO ARGUE.

AND THE SUPREME COURT, I HAVE IT HERE, THE SUPREME COURT'S ISSUE THAT THEY WANTED THE PARTIES TO ARGUE IS WHETHER ALL PREVIABILITY BANS ON ELECTIVE ABORTIONS ARE UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

THAT'S THE ISSUE THE COURT WANTS ARGUED.

THERE'S NOTHING IN THERE ABOUT OVERTURNING ROE VS. WADE OR DETERMINING WHETHER THE RIGHT TO PRIVACY RECOGNIZED IN THAT CASE AND IN PRIOR CASES SHOULD BE OVERTURNED, OVERLOOKED, HOWEVER YOU WANT TO TERM THAT.

SO, IF THE COURT STICKS TO THE ISSUE THAT THEY ASKED TO BE BRIEFED, YOU MOST LIKELY WOULDN'T GET TO ROE AND THE CASES THAT CAME AFTER IT.

AND IT IS INTERESTING THAT THE COURT -- IT IS INTERESTING THAT THE COURT DECIDED TO HEAR IT BECAUSE OFTENTIMES THE SUPREME COURT WILL -- THEY'LL TAKE CASES WHERE THE CIRCUIT COURTS ARE IN DISAGREEMENT, THE FEDERAL COURTS ARE IN DISAGREEMENT ON THE SAME ISSUE, AND THE COURT THEN TAKES THE CASE TO UNIFY THE LAW ON THAT ISSUE.

IN THIS SITUATION, THE CIRCUIT COURTS ARE UNANIMOUS IN FINDING AS UNCONSTITUTIONAL THESE SET WEAK BANS -- SET WEEK BANS PREVIABILITY ON ABORTIONS.

SO WE JUST HAVE TO WAIT AND SEE.

>> MOST PEOPLE HEAR ROW V. WADE, THEY KNOW IT HAS SOMETHING TO DO WITH ABORTION AND THE SUPREME COURT.

>> RIGHT.

>> CAN YOU TELL US MORE ABOUT THAT CASE AND THE CONTEXT OF THAT DECISION?

>> YEAH, MAYBE SOME BORING HISTORY.

THERE WAS A CASE IN THE 1960s CALLED GRISWALD VS. COUNTY CONNECTICUT.

CONNECTICUT HAD A, CONNECTICUT.

CONNECTICUT HAD A CRIMINAL STATUTE THAT PRESENTED A PHYSICIAN FROM PRESCRIBING CONTRACEPTION TO A MARRIED COUPLE.

AND A DOCTOR DID THAT AND WAS FINED $100, SO HE WAS CONVICTED OF A CRIME.

HE SUES.

THE SUPREME COURT IN THAT CASE FOUND -- AND THE WORD THAT'S ALWAYS TALKED ABOUT IS PENUMBRA, THE COURT FOUND IN THE PENUMBRAS OF THE 14TH AMENDMENT, A RIGHT TO PRIVACY BETWEEN PHYSICIAN AND PATIENT.

AND, SO, THE COURT SAID, THAT'S TOO HEAVY HANDED OF A REGULATION OF THAT PRIVACY INTEREST.

THEREFORE, YOUR LAW IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

THEN WE GET TO ROE VS. WADE, AND IN THAT CASE, THE COURT SET UP THE TRIMESTER SYSTEM.

THE COURT LOOKED AT THE PRIVACY AND THE DOCTOR/PATIENT RELATIONSHIP.

AND SOME PEOPLE SAY THE COURT REALLY FOCUSED ON THAT PRIVACY INTEREST IN ROE VS. WADE.

AND THEN ROE VS. WADE CAME UP WITH THE TRIMESTER.

THE TRIMESTER APPROACH WAS TO SAY WHEN THE GOVERNMENT HAD A LEGITIMATE INTEREST IN REGULATING THE CHOICE TO HAVE AN ABORTION.

SO THAT COURT DIVIDED IT INTO TRIMESTERS.

THEN YOU GET KASEY VS.

PLANNED PARENTHOOD.

KASEY GOT RID OF THE TRIMESTER APPROACH.

AND ADOPTED THIS UNDUE BURDEN TEST, WHETHER THE STATE REGULATION PLACES AN UNDUE BURDEN ON THE WOMAN'S RIGHT TO SEEK AN ABORTION.

CASEY.

SO THAT -- AND THERE HAVE BEEN A COUPLE OF CASES SINCE THEN, BUT FROM A LEGAL PRINCIPLE STANDPOINT, CASEY HAS THE -- THAT'S THE PRINCIPLE TODAY.

>> THE UNDUE BURDEN TEST IS ALSO PLAYING INTO THE MOST RECENT PLANNED PARENTHOOD V. NOEM CASE.

THE EXECUTIVE ORDER NOEM ISSUED LAST YEAR REQUIRES TWO ADDITIONAL VISITS TO A LICENSED ABORTION PROVIDER FOR A MEDICATION ABORTION.

BECAUSE THE PLANNED PARENTHOOD CLINIC IN SIOUX FALLS IS THE ONLY SUCH PROVIDER IN THE STATE, THE FEDERAL JUDGE FOUND THE RULE "LIKELY IMPOSES AN UNDUE BURDEN" ON THE CLINIC AND ITS PATIENTS.

THE STATE CANNOT ENFORCE THE RULE UNTIL THE LAWSUIT IS RESOLVED.

IN A PRESS CONFERENCE TODAY, GOVERNOR NOEM SAID SHE SEES THIS AS A MEDICAL SAFETY ISSUE RATHER THAN AN ABORTION ISSUE AND HER TEAM PLANS TO APPEAL.

IN THE MEANTIME, THE BILL TO CODIFY THAT RULE LIES IN WAIT IN THE STATEHOUSE.

WE'LL CONTINUE OUR COVERAGE OF ABORTION LEGISLATION AS THE SESSION CONTINUES.

WE NOW TURN TO SDPB'S BUSINESS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT REPORTER FOR A LOOK AT THE FUTURE OF SPORTS BETTING IN SOUTH DAKOTA.

ARIELLE ZIONTS JOINS US NOW FROM THE SOUTH DAKOTA COMMUNITY FOUNDATION GALLERY IN SDPB'S BLACK HILLS STUDIO IN RAPID CITY.

ARIELLE, WELCOME BACK TO SOUTH DAKOTA FOCUS!

THANKS FOR BEING HERE.

>> OF COURSE.

>> SO, I UNDERSTAND LEGAL SPORTS BETTING IS STILL FAIRLY RECENT IN SOUTH DAKOTA.

TELL US ABOUT THIS YEAR'S PROPOSED EXPANSION OF THAT LEGAL SPORTS BETTING.

>> SURE.

SO IT IS VERY NEW, AND WHAT HAPPENED WAS LAST ELECTION, THE VOTERS DECIDED TO APPROVE LEGAL SPORTS BETTING, BUT ONLY IN THE CITY OF DEADWOOD.

YOU HAVE TO BE IN CITY LIMITS.

OF COURSE, DEADWOOD IS A GAMBLING AND CASINO MECCA.

WHAT THIS -- WHAT'S HAPPENING RIGHT NOW IS THERE IS A RESOLUTION WITHIN THE LEGISLATURE THAT SAYS, OKAY, IF WE GET A MAJORITY, YOU KNOW, IF IT PASSES, IT WILL PUT IT ON THE NEXT BALLOT, THIS NOVEMBER BALLOT.

SO IT WOULD COME TO THE CITIZENS AGAIN.

AND IT WOULD EXPAND IT STATEWIDE THROUGH MOBILE OR ONLINE GAMING.

SO YOU COULD DO IT FROM ANYWHERE.

I COULD DO IT FROM RIGHT HERE.

[ Laughter ] FROM HOME.

BUT IT WOULD HAVE TO BE ROOTED THROUGH SERVERS AT DEADWOOD CASINO.

SO THERE WOULD STILL BE A BENEFIT THERE.

>> INTERESTING.

SO, ARE WE HEARING -- I'M THINKING OF THE DEADWOOD GAMING ASSOCIATION, I WOULD IMAGINE THIS IS A THUMBS UP FROM THEM.

WHAT KIND OF RESPONSE ARE WE HEARING?

>> SO, WHAT'S REALLY INTERESTING IS THE DEADWOOD GAMING ASSOCIATION IS TOTALLY DEADLOCKED.

SO THEY HAVE NOT SPOKEN IN FAVOR OR AGAINST THIS.

>> REALLY?

>> YEAH.

SO SOME PEOPLE SAY THEY'RE AGAINST IT BECAUSE THEY SAY WHAT'S SO GREAT ABOUT DEADWOOD AND THE NEW SPORTS BETTING IS YOU MAY COME HERE FOR SPORTS BETTING BUT YOU'LL DO ALL THE OTHER KINDS OF GAMING.

YOU WILL STAY AT A HOTEL, YOU'LL COME EAT.

OTHERS SAY, WE NEED TO BE COMPETITIVE BECAUSE LEGAL SPORTS -- LIKE I COULD DRIVE JUST ACROSS THE BORDER AND DO THAT IN ANOTHER STATE.

SO THEY SAY WE NEED TO BE COMPETITIVE AND THAT REVENUE THAT MIGHT BE LOST FROM PEOPLE VISITING WILL BE MADE UP BY MORE PEOPLE PARTICIPATING IN IT.

>> INTERESTING.

AND IT'S TRUE WHAT YOU SAY, I KNOW SOMEONE VERY CLOSE TO ME WHO WOULD RATHER DO THAT BETTING IN SOUTH DAKOTA, BUT, INSTEAD, HE DRIVES ACROSS THE BORDER FOR THAT.

WHAT OTHER ARGUMENTS, I SUPPOSE, ARE WE HEARING FOR AND AGAINST THIS EXPANSION?

>> SURE.

SO IT HAS BEEN A REALLY TIGHT DEBATE.

IT'S SO FAR PASSED A SENATE COMMITTEE AND THE FULL SENATE.

BUT BY EACH TIME IT WAS JUST BY ONE VOTE.

THE SUPPORTERS, I MEAN, THEY TALK ABOUT THAT COMPETITION ISSUE, BUT THEY ALSO TALK ABOUT JUST VALUEWISE.

LIKE WE'RE SOUTH DAKOTA, WE BELIEVE IN ECONOMIC FREEDOM, SO THE RIGHT FOR BUSINESSES TO OFFER THIS SERVICE AND THEN THE RIGHT OF INDIVIDUALS TO ENGAGE IN IT AND THE PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY TO KNOW THE RISKS.

THE OPPONENTS ARE FOCUSING ON THAT RISK.

SO SAYING IT'S GOING TO INCREASE GAMBLING ADDICTION, WHICH CAN LEAD TO, YOU KNOW, FAMILY PROBLEMS, MENTAL HEALTH ISSUES, AND, OF COURSE, FINANCIAL PROBLEMS.

>> RIGHT.

I'M CURIOUS, AND I THINK YOU TOUCHED ON THIS JUST A LITTLE BIT, BUT AS FAR AS THAT -- THE ECONOMIC, ALMOST RIPPLES OF, IF YOU'RE FORCED TO PHYSICALLY GO TO DEADWOOD FOR SPORTS BETTING, AS YOU SAY, YOU'RE PROBABLY ALSO GOING TO ENJOY OTHER KINDS OF GAMBLING IN DEADWOOD AND ALSO GO TO A FEW RESTAURANTS, STAY IN A FEW HOTELS, WHEREAS, IF WE EXPAND TO THAT SMARTPHONE ACCESS FROM WHEREVER YOU ARE, THAT'S NOT THE CASE.

ARE YOU HEARING THOSE KINDS OF ARGUMENTS AND FROM WHAT SOURCES?

>> SOME LAWMAKERS WHO LIVE NEAR THAT -- YOU KNOW, LIVE NEAR DEADWOOD WHO ARE REPRESENTING THAT AREA, I MEAN, THE OTHER OPPONENTS ARE THE -- I MEAN, THERE'S SOME SOCIAL CONSERVATIVES WHO ARE AGAINST IT.

>> SURE.

>> THE DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, THE DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES WHICH PROVIDES GAMBLING SERVICES.

>> RIGHT.

THAT MAKES A LOT OF SENSE.

>> SO BECAUSE IT'S A RESOLUTION, IT DOES NOT NEED TO BE APPROVED BY GOVERNOR NOEM.

SINCE IT'S NOT A BILL.

BUT JUST IN CASE PEOPLE ARE WONDERING, SHE DOES NOT SUPPORT IT.

AND SHE SAYS THAT'S BECAUSE HER BIG EMPHASIS IS ON FAMILIES AND SHE DOESN'T THINK THIS WOULD BE POSITIVE FOR FAMILIES.

>> AND I'M REALLY GLAD YOU POINT THAT OUT.

I FORGOT TO MENTION THAT, THAT THIS IS NOT A BILL, IT IS A RESOLUTION.

WHERE DOES THIS RESOLUTION KIND OF SIT, THOUGH, IN THE PROCESS THAT IT WOULD MOVE THROUGH THE STATEHOUSE?

>> SURE.

SO, IT WENT THROUGH THE SENATE, SO NOW IT'S GOING TO GO TO A HOUSE COMMITTEE.

AND THEN THE HOUSE.

AND THEN IF THAT'S ALL PASSED, THEN WE'LL SEE IT ON THE BALLOT AND THEN IT WILL BE UP TO US.

>> IN JUST A MINUTE OR SO LEFT, I KNOW THERE'S ONE MORE STORY YOU'VE BEEN FOLLOWING RELATED TO WORKFORCE HOUSING.

WHAT'S JUST A PRIMER FOR FOLKS TO STAY TUNED FOR THAT COVERAGE, WHAT ARE YOU HEARING?

>> SURE.

I'LL KEEP IT BRIEF.

SO THERE WAS A SUMMER STUDY THIS YEAR THAT STUDIED -- I MEAN, THERE'S A HUGE STATEWIDE HOUSING SHORTAGE.

I MEAN, OVERALL HOUSING AND AFFORDABLE HOUSING.

IT WAS A BIG PART OF GOVERNOR NOEM'S BUDGET ADDRESS.

SHE WANTS TO SPEND $200 MILLION IN STATE AND FEDERAL FUNDING.

AND SO FAR A BILL HAS MOVED FORWARD WITH SOME AMENDMENTS THAT WOULD GIVE HALF THAT MONEY TO THE GOVERNOR'S OFFICE OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND THEN HALF TO THE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY SO ONE WOULD BE GRANTS, ONE WOULD BE LOANS.

MUNICIPALITIES AND DEVELOPERS, NONPROFIT OR FOR PROFIT WILL PITCH THESE PROJECTS -- WILL PITCH PROJECTS.

AND WHAT THE MONEY IS, IT'S ONLY FOR HOUSING INFRASTRUCTURE.

SO GETTING THE LAND READY, YOU KNOW, PAVING THE ROADS, PUTTING PLUMBING IN.

SO THEY WOULD PITCH PROJECTS.

BUT THEY WOULD NEED TO INCLUDE A LOCAL WORKFORCE STUDY TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S MEETING THEIR NEEDS.

SO THE WHOLE POINT IS THAT THIS IS REALLY CUSTOMIZABLE AND FLEXIBLE TO THE LOCAL NEEDS.

ONE OF THE ONLY RESTRICTIONS IS THAT IT CAN'T GO TO GOVERNMENT-SUBSIDIZED-LEVEL HOUSING.

AND THE ARGUMENT THERE IS THAT THERE'S ALREADY PROGRAMS FOR THAT.

>> I SEE.

BRIEFLY, HAVE YOU BEEN HEARING ANY KIND OF INITIAL REACTION TO THAT PROPOSAL?

>> SO IT RECENTLY WENT THROUGH A COMMITTEE AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.

AND EVERY SINGLE PERSON WHO TESTIFIED, I THINK IT WAS MORE THAN A DOZEN, TESTIFIED IN FAVOR OF IT.

THE ONLY, LIKE, CRITICISM OR CONCERN THAT I'M HEARING, I SPOKE WITH SOME PEOPLE WHO WORK IN AFFORDABLE HOUSING, THEY WANT TO MAKE SURE -- OR AT LEAST ONE OF THE PEOPLE I SPOKE WITH IN RAPID CITY OR THE BLACK HILLS HABITAT FOR HUMANITY, HE SAYS HE WANTS TO MAKE SURE THIS GOES TO PROJECTS -- TO INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS THAT EVENTUALLY TURNS INTO HOUSING THAT IS BELOW MARKET RENT OR PRICE, THAT THIS SHOULDN'T BE GOING TO -- SHOULDN'T TURN INTO HOUSING THAT IS EASIER FOR DEVELOPERS TO BUILD BECAUSE IT CAN SELL AT MARKET RENT.

HOUSING PRICES.

>> RIGHT.

JUST A TEASER FOR COVERAGE TO COME.

SDPB'S BUSINESS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT REPORTER ARIELLE ZIONTS.

YOU CAN FOLLOW ALL OF HER SDPB.ORG/NEWS.

ARIELLE, THANKS AGAIN FOR JOINING US!

THE SOUTH DAKOTA EDUCATION ASSOCIATION IS A PROFESSIONAL ORGANIZATION DEDICATED TO THE STATE'S PUBLIC EDUCATION WORKFORCE.

IN THIS INSTALLMENT OF "PIERRE TO PEER," SDPB'S LEE STRUBINGER TALKS WITH THE ORGANIZATION'S DIRECTOR OF GOVERNMENT RELATIONS.

THEY DISCUSS THE HALF-PENNY SALES TAX INTENDED FOR TEACHER SALARIES, THE GOVERNOR'S PROPOSED 6% INCREASE IN STATE AID TO EDUCATION, AND THE ONGOING IMPACT OF THE PANDEMIC ON OUR STATE'S TEACHERS.

♪ UP BEAT MUSIC >> SANDRA, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR JOINING ME ON "PEER TO PIERRE," I REALLY APPRECIATE IT.

>> THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME.

>> THIS YEAR IS THE ACCOUNTABILITY PROVISION FOR THE HALF-PENNY SALES TAX EXPIRES.

I WAS WONDERING IF YOU COULD GIVE US SOME HISTORICAL CONTEXT INTO THAT PROVISION.

>> YES.

IN 2016, WHEN THE BLUE RIBBON TASK FORCE IN THE LEGISLATURE LEGISLATURE -- AND THE LEGISLATURE WROTE THE NEW FUNDING FORMULA AND PASSED THE HALF-PENNY SALES TAX WHICH WAS TARGETED TOWARD TEACHER SALARY, THERE WAS SOME CONCERN, WELL, WHAT IF THE MONEY DOESN'T MAKE ITS WAY TO TEACHER'S SALARY?

SO THEY PUT IN TWO PIECES OF ACCOUNTABILITY THAT ENSURED THAT THE FIRST DOLLARS DID GO INTO SALARIES AND BENEFITS, AND THAT THOSE DOLLARS STAYED AND WHAT THE ACCOUNTABILITY REQUIRED THE DISTRICTS TO DO WAS KEEP THEIR AVERAGE TEACHER COMPENSATION AT OR EQUAL TO F.Y.

2017, WHICH WAS THE FIRST YEAR THE SCHOOLS WERE RECEIVING MONEY FROM THE HALF-PENNY SALES TAX.

THAT ACCOUNTABILITY PROVISION EXPIRED THIS YEAR AND WE'RE ASKING THE LEGISLATURE TO CONTINUE THAT FOR ANOTHER THREE YEARS UNTIL F.Y.

2024.

NOW, SOME MIGHT ASK, WHY ARE YOU -- WHY DO YOU WANT TO KEEP THIS PROVISION IN PLACE?

MOST OF THE SCHOOL DISTRICTS HAVE DONE A GREAT JOB OF INCREASING TEACHER COMPENSATION.

HOWEVER, THERE ARE ABOUT 30 SCHOOL DISTRICTS THAT ARE JUST HOVERING ABOVE WHERE THEY WERE FOR 2017.

AND, SO, WE WANT TO GIVE THEM A LITTLE BIT MORE TIME TO GET THOSE AVERAGE COMPENSATIONS UP AND A LITTLE BIT FARTHER AWAY FROM 2017.

OUR FEAR IS IF THAT STANDARD OR THAT BENCHMARK GOES AWAY THAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE SCHOOL DISTRICTS START TO SLIDE BACK AND THAT IS GOING TO HURT OUR AVERAGE TEACHER COMPENSATION AND MAKE THE STATE LESS ATTRACTIVE TO TEACHING.

>> HOW HAS -- HOW HAS TEACHER PAY REALLY KIND OF KEPT UP WITH INFLATION SINCE THAT WENT INTO EFFECT?

>> IF YOU LOOK AT EVERY YEAR, EXCEPT FOR THIS YEAR, IT HAS REALLY KEPT THE -- THE INCREASE TO STATE AID HAS KEPT WITH INFLATION, IF NOT A LITTLE BIT MORE THAN INFLATION, IN ALL BUT ONE YEAR, ONE YEAR THE INFLATION WAS 1.7 AND WE ONLY RECEIVED 1.

I DO BELIEVE STATE AID TWO YEARS AGO MADE UP THAT DIFFERENCE.

SO GENERALLY SPEAKING, IT'S KEEPING UP WITH INFLATION.

SO THE SALARIES THEMSELVES HAVE BEEN MOVING FORWARD, BUT WITH THIS LAST YEAR, WITH HIGH INFLATION, IT'S BEEN -- WE'RE GOING TO NEED TO PUT MORE MONEY INTO EDUCATION IN ORDER TO KEEP SALARIES ON PACE.

>> GOVERNOR KRISTY NOEM -- KRISTI NOEM ANNOUNCED AN INCREASE FOR THE BIG THREE, EXAMINE THAT INCLUDES EDUCATION.

HOW ARE YOU ALL RESPONDING TO THAT AND WHAT DOES THAT MEAN FOR TEACHERS IN THE STATE?

>> WELL, THAT 6% IS AN UNPRECEDENTED INCREASE TO STATE AID FOR EDUCATION.

AND OF WE'RE VERY APPRECIATIVE OF THE GOVERNOR OFFERING 6%.

HOWEVER, IN HER STATE OF THE STATE, SHE DID SAY THAT REVENUE PROJECTIONS WERE EVEN BETTER.

SO WE ARE HOPING THAT, AND WE'RE WORKING FOR AT LEAST 6%.

AND IF THE LEGISLATURE SEEMS TO FIND A LITTLE BIT MORE MONEY TO GET TO MAYBE 7 OR 8%, WE WOULD WELCOME THAT AS WELL.

BUT WE ARE GRATEFUL FOR THE 6%.

AND WE'RE ASKING LEGISLATORS TO PRIORITIZE ANY EXTRA DOLLARS TO K-12 PUBLIC EDUCATION.

>> I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO BE REMINDED NOT ONLY FOR MYSELF BUT ALSO VIEWERS AND LISTENERS THAT THAT 6% MAY NOT NECESSARILY GO DIRECTLY TO TEACHER SALARIES.

SO THAT'S KIND OF WHY YOU'RE ASKING FOR THE ACCOUNTABILITY PROVISION FOR THAT HALF-PENNY SALES TAX AND FOR TEACHER SALARIES?

>> WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE INCREASE TO K-12 EDUCATION, THAT DOESN'T NECESSARILY MEAN THAT TEACHERS ARE GOING TO RECEIVE A 6% INCREASE.

THAT HAPPENS IN NEGOTIATIONS FROM SCHOOL DISTRICT TO SCHOOL DISTRICT.

THAT 6% ALSO HAS TO COVER THE OVERHEAD, SUPPORT STAFF, INCREASED COSTS THAT SCHOOLS HAVE WITH BUSING, HEATING, COOLING, ALL OF THE OTHER THINGS IT TAKES TO RUN A SCHOOL.

AND, SO, WHILE 6% IS VERY MUCH APPRECIATED, THE SCHOOL DISTRICTS ARE FEELING A LOT OF PRESSURES AND A LOT -- IN A LOT OF DIFFERENT AREAS OF COSTS GOING UP.

OUR SUPPORT STAFF, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE A LOT OF OPEN POSITIONS AND A LOT OF IT IS BECAUSE THE SCHOOL DISTRICTS ARE STRUGGLING TO COMPETE WITH THE MARKET.

WHEN YOU HAVE PLACES LIKE McDONALD'S AND WAL-MART AND OTHER BUSINESSES THAT ARE NOW PAYING $15 PLUS, THE DISTRICTS HAVE TO MAKE THAT 6% GO EVEN FARTHER, WHICH IS ANOTHER REASON WE'RE REALLY ENCOURAGING LEGISLATORS TO TAKE A LOOK AT ANY EXTRA DOLLARS THAT THEY CAN TARGET TOWARDS STATE AID.

>> THERE WAS ALSO A BILL INTRODUCED THAT WOULD HAVE BANNED COLLECTIVE BARGAINING FOR K-12 TEACHERS.

A FEW SESSIONING AGO, LEGISLATORS DID THAT FOR BOARD OF REGENTS EMPLOYEES.

SESSIONS AGO.

HOW WOULD THAT HAVE AFFECTED YOUR ORGANIZATION AND THE STATE'S TEACHERS?

>> YOU KNOW, WE'RE VERY APPRECIATIVE THAT THE BILL WAS WITHDRAWN.

THAT IS GOOD NEWS FOR EDUCATORS.

WHAT IT WOULD MEAN FOR EDUCATORS ACROSS THIS STATE IS THAT THEY WOULD NO LONGER HAVE A VOICE IN THEIR WORKING CONDITIONS.

AND THEIR WORKING CONDITIONS ARE YOUR STUDENTS OR OUR STUDENTS' LEARNING CONDITIONS.

AND I THINK THAT WOULD -- TO NOT HAVE A SAY IN WHAT YOUR SCHOOL LOOKS LIKE, HOW PERSONNEL ARE TREATED WOULD HAVE A VERY DEMORALIZING EFFECT ON EDUCATORS ACROSS THE STATE.

SCHOOLS AND COMMUNITIES MUST WORK TOGETHER TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY'RE DELIVERING A GREAT EDUCATION TO STUDENTS.

AND BY REMOVING COLLECTIVE BARGAINING, YOU REALLY ARE REMOVING THE VOICE OF EDUCATORS IN THAT DISCUSSION.

SO I THINK IN A TIME WHEN EDUCATORS ARE ALREADY PUSHED TO THE MAX, THIS BILL WAS SENDING A VERY BAD MESSAGE THAT YOUR VOICE DIDN'T MATTER AND, SO, WITH THE WITHDRAWAL OF IT TODAY, I THINK EDUCATORS ARE -- HAVE A SIGH OF RELIEF, BUT THEY WANT SOUTH DAKOTA TO KNOW THAT THEY DO WANT TO HAVE A VOICE, A VOICE IN THEIR SCHOOLS AND THEY DO WANT TO HAVE A VOICE IN THE LEARNING ENVIRONMENT OF THEIR STUDENTS.

>> YEAH.

I MEAN, HOW HAVE THE LAST TWO FULL YEARS OF PANDEMIC BEEN FOR TEACHERS ACROSS THE STATE?

WHAT ARE YOU HEARING FROM THEM?

>> ONE OF THE ISSUES IS THE PANDEMIC HAS EXACERBATED MANY THINGS THAT WERE ALREADY HAPPENING IN SCHOOLS.

I THINK PRIOR TO THE PANDEMIC, THERE WERE ALREADY OPEN STAFF POSITIONS, BUT THE PANDEMIC SEEMS TO HAVE MADE EVEN MORE OPEN STAFF POSITIONS.

AND, SO, WHY I THINK THE -- WHILE I THINK THE EDUCATORS OF SOUTH DAKOTA ARE STEPPING UP, THEY'RE COMING TO SCHOOL, THEY'RE EDUCATING THEIR KIDS WITH CONSTANT CHANGES EVERY DAY, THEY REALLY ARE, I THINK, WORKING HARDER THAN THEY EVER HAVE AND HAVE A WORK LOAD THAT IS UNSUSTAINABLE.

AND IT'S NOT JUST THE TEACHERS IN THE CLASSROOM.

YOUR ADMINISTRATORS ARE ALSO TRYING TO MANAGE THIS PANDEMIC.

AND, SO, THE PANDEMIC HAS REALLY SHED A LIGHT ON SOME OF THE TOOLS AND RESOURCES OR SOME OF THE STRUGGLES OUR SCHOOLS ARE ALREADY HAVING.

WHICH IS, AGAIN, WHY WE REALLY WANT TO FOCUS ON THE FUNDING THAT OUR SCHOOLS NEED BECAUSE WE CAN ALL AGREE THAT WE WANT TO CREATE A SCHOOL ENVIRONMENT WHERE KIDS HAVE THE FREEDOM TO LEARN AND EXPLORE AND THEY NEED WELL-RESOURCED SCHOOLS TO DO THAT AND THE ONE THING THE PANDEMIC HAS DONE IS REALLY HIGHLIGHTED WHERE WE HAVE SOME DEFICIENCIES AND WHERE WE NEED TO DO WORK.

>> LOOKING FORWARD, WHAT SHOULD SOUTH DAKOTANS KNOW ABOUT EDUCATION OR HOW CAN THEY GET INVOLVED?

>> I THINK WHAT'S IMPORTANT FOR SOUTH DAKOTANS IS TO GET TO KNOW A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT THEIR SCHOOLS.

VISIT THEIR SCHOOLS.

ATTEND A SCHOOL BOARD MEETING.

ASK QUESTIONS OF YOUR TEACHERS.

TEACHERS, ADMINISTRATORS, THE PEOPLE WHO WORK IN OUR PUBLIC SCHOOLS, THEY ARE CITIZENS LIKE HE HAVE BEEN ELSE.

THEY JUST WANT TO -- LIKE EVERYBODY ELSE.

THEY JUST WANT TO PROVIDE A STRONG ENVIRONMENT WHERE KIDS HAVE THE FREEDOM TO LEARN.

SO WE JUST, YOU KNOW, VISIT A LOCAL SCHOOL, VOLUNTEER IN YOUR LOCAL SCHOOL.

IT REALLY IS A COMMUNITY EFFORT AND WE WANT MORE PEOPLE INVOLVED IN EDUCATION.

I THINK WE CAN ALL WORK TOGETHER TO MAKE SURE THAT THOSE SCHOOLS HAVE THE RESOURCES THEY NEED TO DO WHAT WE ALL WANT, WHICH IS GIVE KIDS A GREAT EDUCATION.

>> SANDRA, THANKS FOR JOINING ME ON "PEER TO PIERRE."

>> THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME.

>> YOU MAY HAVE HEARD SOUTH DAKOTA LAWMAKERS NEVER CONDUCTED AN IMPEACHMENT PROCESS PRIOR TO THIS WINTER.

IT TURNS OUT, THEY HAVE.

SDPB'S SETH TUPPER FINDS SOME FORGOTTEN HISTORY IN THIS WEEK'S INSTALLMENT OF OUR LEGISLATIVE SERIES: "WHY IS THAT?"

♪♪ >> THE NEWS IS FULL OF REFERENCES THIS WINTER TO THE POTENTIAL IMPEACHMENT OF SOUTH DAKOTA ATTORNEY GENERAL JASON RAVNSBORG.

MANY REPORTS CALL IT AN UNPRECEDENTED SITUATION.

THE FIRST TIME THE LEGISLATURE HAS FORMALLY CONSIDERED IMPEACHING A PUBLIC OFFICIAL.

AS IT TURNS OUT, THIS IS AT LEAST THE SECOND TIME THE SOUTH DAKOTA MEDIA HAS PROCLAIMED A FIRST-EVER IMPEACHMENT PROCESS.

THE HISTORICAL RECORD INDICATES THE FIRST IMPEACHMENT PROCEEDINGS WERE 105 YEARS AGO IN 1917.

AT THE TIME, AN ARGUS LEADER NEWSPAPER HEADLINE DESCRIBED IT AS THE "FIRST PROCEDURE OF THE KIND EVER BROUGHT IN SOUTH DAKOTA."

THAT IMPEACHMENT PROCESS INVOLVED A BLACK HILLS ENTREPRENEUR, A JUDGE, AND ALLEGATIONS OF CORRUPTION.

THE ENTREPRENEUR WAS FRANK LOCKHART.

HE CONTROLLED A PRIME PIECE OF BLACK HILLS LAND WHERE HE WANTED TO BUILD A POWER PLANT, HARNESSING THE WATERS OF RAPID CREEK.

HE FILED A LEGAL DOCUMENT CALLED A PLAT AT THE LOCAL COURTHOUSE, ASSERTING WATER RIGHTS WITH THE PROPERTY.

BUT LOCKHART HAD COMPETITION.

ANOTHER COMPANY WANTED TO BUILD A POWER PLANT ALONG THE SAME STRETCH OF RAPID CREEK.

AND THAT RIVAL COMPANY HAD AN IMPORTANT INVESTOR -- CIRCUIT COURT JUDGE LEVI McGEE.

ACCORDING TO LOCKHART, JUDGE McGEE USED HIS INFLUENCE TO DOCTOR LOCKHART'S PLAT.

THE DOCTORED PLAT MADE IT APPEAR McGEE'S COMPANY HAD WATER RIGHTS BEFORE LOCKHART.

LOCKHART SAID THE JUDGE'S COMPANY USED THE FORGED DOCUMENTS TO RAISE A HALF MILLION DOLLARS FROM INVESTORS ON THE STRENGTH OF THE WATER RIGHTS, WHILE LOCKHART WAS SHUT OUT.

THAT WAS ACCORDING TO LOCKHART AND THE NEWSPAPER THAT PUBLISHED HIS STORY.

A DIFFERENT NEWSPAPER FRIENDLY TO JUDGE McGEE DISMISSED THE ALLEGATIONS, SAYING McGEE HAD AN INSULLY -- UNSULLIED REPUTATION FOR INTEGRITY AND SQUARE DEALING.

LOCKHART WROTE HIS ALLEGATIONS IN A SWORN STATEMENT AND DELIVERED IT TO THE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE OF THE STATEHOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

HE ASKED LAWMAKERS TO IMPEACH THE JUDGE.

COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRODUCED A MAJORITY REPORT ADVISING AGAINST IMPEACHMENT AND A MINORITY REPORT ADVOCATING FOR IMPEACHMENT.

THE FULL HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES SIDED WITH THE JUDGE, VOTING 74-23 AGAINST IMPEACHMENT.

THE LOCKHART-McGEE CONTROVERSY ILLUSTRATES A LITTLE-KNOWN FACT ABOUT IMPEACHMENT IN SOUTH DAKOTA.

IT'S NOT JUST FOR POLITICIANS ELECTED TO STATEWIDE OFFICE.

THE STATE CONSTITUTION SAYS OFFICERS SUBJECT TO IMPEACHMENT BY THE LEGISLATURE INCLUDE THE GOVERNOR, OTHER STATE AND JUDICIAL OFFICERS, JUSTICES OF THE PEACE, AND POLICE MAGISTRATES.

THAT LATTER TERM IS AN ANTIQUATED REFERENCE TO A TYPE OF LOW-LEVEL JUDGE.

THE CURRENT IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY FOCUSES ON ATTORNEY GENERAL JASON RAVNSBORG'S CONDUCT FOLLOWING A FATAL CRASH IN 2020.

RAVNSBORG WAS DRIVING A CAR THAT STRUCK AND KILLED PEDESTRIAN JOE BOEVER.

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL PLEADED NO CONTEST TO A PAIR OF MISDEMEANORS IN A CRIMINAL CASE STEMMING FROM THE INCIDENT.

A COMMITTEE OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES IS INVESTIGATING THE MATTER.

THE COMMITTEE'S NEXT MEETING IS SCHEDULED FOR LATER THIS MONTH.

THE COMMITTEE MAY EVENTUALLY SEND A REPORT TO THE FULL HOUSE.

IF THE HOUSE VOTES TO IMPEACH RAVNSBORG, THAT WOULD APPARENTLY BE A FIRST IN STATE HISTORY.

THE SENATE WOULD THEN CONDUCT A TRIAL AND DECIDE WHETHER TO REMOVE RAVNSBORG FROM OFFICE.

I'M SDPB'S SETH TUPPER.

>> THAT'S ALL WE HAVE TIME FOR TONIGHT, BUT THE "STATEHOUSE" COVERAGE IS FAR FROM OVER!

AND YOU CAN FOLLOW OUR GAVEL-TO-GAVEL COVERAGE ON SD.NET.

WE LIVESTREAM VIDEO FROM THE HOUSE AND SENATE CHAMBERS AND AUDIO STREAM EACH COMMITTEE HEARING.

BUT FOR A SUMMARY, YOU CAN SUBSCRIBE TO OUR DAILY SDPB NEWS PODCAST OR OUR TWICE-WEEKLY SDPB MORNING REPORT EMAIL NEWSLETTER.

SPEAKING OF EMAIL, IF THERE'S A STORY YOU WANT TO SEE ON "SOUTH DAKOTA FOCUS," YOU CAN REACH OUR TEAM AT [email protected].

AND YOU CAN FIND ME ON TWITTER @JACKIEHENDRYSD.

WE'RE LIVE FOR OUR NEXT "SOUTH DAKOTA FOCUS" ON THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 24TH, WHEN WE'LL TURN OUR ATTENTION TO THE WIDE VARIETY OF EDUCATION-RELATED BILLS IN PLAY THIS SESSION.

UNTIL THEN, I'M JACKIE HENDRY, THANK YOU FOR WATCHING.

♪♪