South Dakota House Sustains Governor’s Vetoes and Approves Crucial Dam Funding
RAPID CITY, S.D. (KOTA) – As the South Dakota legislature concluded its 101st session, two pressing issues remained unresolved due to vetoes sustained by the House. On the other hand, a vital infrastructure project received the green light, ensuring public safety near Aberdeen.
Governor Larry Rhoden took decisive action, sustaining the vetoes of House Bill 1077, which sought to categorize cultivated-protein products as adulterated food, and House Bill 1138, concerning non-medical home care agency regulations. Meanwhile, Senate Bill 121 secured $8.2 million for replacing the Richmond Lake dam and spillway, emphasizing the state’s commitment to public safety.
Larry Rhoden [/caption]
The Richmond Lake Dam Initiative
The Richmond Lake dam, deemed a ‘high-hazard’ facility due to the potential risk of significant property and life loss, saw swift approval from lawmakers. The urgent need for replacement led the House to approve funding with a resounding 61-3 vote, swiftly echoed by the Senate. Funds for the project derive from the trust fund for unclaimed property, entrusted to the Office of the Commissioner of School and Public Lands.
Representative Al Novstrup, R-Aberdeen, acknowledged the critical nature of the plan, stating, “We’ve got a high-hazard dam, which the definition of high hazard means significant loss of property and life could result if this dam breaks. And so we have a need and we have the money available to do it.”
The bill’s approval showcases the state’s commitment to its residents’ welfare, highlighting South Dakota’s proactive approach to infrastructure safety and development.
Debate on Cultivated-Protein: Economic and Agricultural Impacts
The contentious House Bill 1077, which drew significant attention from agriculture advocates and lawmakers, was designed to classify manufactured cell-based products as adulterated under state law. The House vote concluded in a deadlock at 32-32, insufficient for the required two-thirds majority to override the governor’s veto.
Representative Julie Auch, R-Yankton, voiced concerns about the potential long-term impacts on South Dakota’s rural economies and traditional farming. “This is not about coexistence. This is about replacement. Replacement of ranchers, replacement of farmers’ family operations, replacement of rural economies, and the replacement of a food system rooted in the land with one controlled by patents, corporations, and laboratories,” she argued.
Governor Rhoden’s approach balanced the interests of maintaining traditional farmer livelihoods while allowing time to evaluate the safety and implications of these new food technologies. Although the veto stands, Senate Bill 124 further fortifies this stance by instituting a five-year moratorium on cultivated-protein sales within the state, allowing stakeholders to assess potential impacts thoroughly.
Home Care Agency Licensing: Protecting South Dakota’s Vulnerable Populations
The second rejected bill, House Bill 1138, intended to enforce licensing and regulatory measures for home care agencies. Governor Rhoden’s veto prevailed with a 36-27 vote, again falling short of the supermajority needed for an override.
Proponents, such as Rep. Mellissa Heermann, R-Brookings, underscored the need for such measures to protect vulnerable adults receiving at-home care, illustrating the bill’s potential to enhance accountability and service standards. “Keeping our heads in the sand while people are getting taken advantage of, it just hurts the soul,” she said, appealing for the bill’s reconsideration in the future.
However, opponents like Rep. Heather Baxter, R-Rapid City, highlighted concerns that strict regulations could adversely affect rural accessibility to care. “I feel it creates a false sense of consumer protection because there’s not even background checks that the Department of Health can actually verify. Also concerned about reduced access to services potentially having unintended consequences on our rural communities,” Baxter remarked.
The adjournment of the session concludes with both sides acknowledging the need for ongoing dialogue to address these crucial topics impacting South Dakota’s demographic and economic landscapes.
For more information on legislative actions and other updates, subscribe to our newsletter.