SB 201 referendum signature deadline June 24
The deadline looms for the petition drive to refer SB 201 to South Dakota voters.
Concerned citizens across the state are gathering signatures of those who believe the issue should be placed on the ballot this fall.
The deadline to turn in all signatures is June 24, 2024. The group hopes to gather about 25,000 signatures, which will give them a few thousand extra in case of errors.
Senate Bill 201, which sparked significant debate during the 2024 legislative session, takes away the rights of townships and counties to establish pipeline and electrical line “setback” limits that are more restrictive than the South Dakota Public Utilities Commission’s setbacks. For example, Brown County approved a 1,500 foot setback for carbon pipelines going past residences and places of business. If the SD PUC grants Summit Carbon Solutions a permit, and establishes a smaller setback than 1,500 feet, the state setback will override the county setback.
Tina Mulally, a Rapid City small business owner and District 35 Representative serves as the treasurer for South Dakota Property Rights and Local Control Alliance, a group overseeing the petition effort.
She said she believes property rights are the “number one foundational difference between Americans and anyone else in the world.”
She said, “It was very concerning that the legislators didn’t listen to the people during the session, so the only thing that’s left, according to our US constitution and the state constitution is a referendum so that the people can vote. The legislature got it wrong,” she said.
Jared Bossley, a Brown County farmer and rancher went public two years ago when Summit Carbon Solutions surveyed his land against his wishes and told him at one point the carbon sequestration pipeline would go right near his home quarters, affecting plans for a new cattle pen and passing through some new tree plantings.
Bossley has told TSLN that private property rights are of great importance to him, and he is working to gather signatures, although it is a busy time for farmers and ranchers.
“I’m not around people very often. May is a busy month with cattle work, first cutting of alfalfa and so much more,” he said.
It’s not hard to convince people to sign, nearly everyone wants to sign, but it’s hard for me to get to activities with a large crowd. I bring the petition along if I make a parts run or something,” he said.
Bossley believes the South Dakota primary showed that South Dakota citizens are concerned about the issue – several legislators who supported SB 201 were not re-elected.
Jason Glodt, a Pierre-based attorney, who established “South Dakota Ag Alliance,” together with Rob Skjonsberg, SD Senator Rounds’ former chief of staff, published a news release recently claiming that “The large majority of landowners across South Dakota support the carbon capture pipeline project.”
When TSLN asked how he arrived at such a conclusion, he said it was because of organizations who supported the bill during the legislature such as the South Dakota Farm Bureau and South Dakota Cattlemen’s Association, and a poll of some (not all) Republican voters (not landowners).
TSLN contacted the state to find out how many landowners are in the state, in order to verify Glodt’s claim and after more than a week of research, the state Department of Revenue said it is not able to determine how many landowners or how many rural landowners exist in the state of South Dakota.
Glodt also told TSLN, “Proponent landowners heavily outnumbered opponent landowners at the Capital during key votes this Session.” But several legislators who served on the committees that handled this issue reported to TSLN that their committee rooms were unable to hold all of the landowners who attended to speak against the bill – in more than one case, it was reported that well over 100 landowners were present in opposition to the bill, while only a handful of paid lobbyists attended to speak in favor of the bill. Many opponents didn’t get onto the official record due to time constraints.
Said Glodt: “I have been working with landowners for over two years on carbon pipelines. Like on many issues, opponents are more vocal than supporters, but I would definitely say opponent landowners are in the minority when it comes to where landowners across the state stand. In all fairness, most landowner are not directly impacted by the project…and very few west of the James River are. This is not a landowner v. Summit Carbon fight. There are clearly landowners in support and opposition, but it is not accurate to claim or imply that all, or even a majority, of landowners oppose carbon pipelines.”
Bossley pointed out his frustration with the legislators who called SB 201 a “landowner bill of rights.”
“You can call a manure spreader a honey wagon, but it’s still a manure spreader,” he said.
Those who wish to help with the petition effort should go to https://www.sdpropertyrightslocalcontrol.com/volunteer/