South Dakota Representative Liz May: Legislative Review

March 29, 2025

Legislative Review

On Monday I will offer LOI (Letter of Intent) to JCA (Joint Committee on Appropriations) that aims to strengthen oversight of South Dakota’s budget process by increasing transparency and ensuring that taxpayer dollars are spent as intended by the legislature.

“In the 1970’s, the state budget was presented in a clear, concise manner, with each program explained so legislators and the public could see how funds were being used. Today, the committee receives broad, high-level reports from the Bureau of Finance and Management (BFM).

While the Appropriations Committee holds budget hearings and listens to agencies promote their work, legislators often face roadblocks when trying to track how funds are being used within specific programs.

The proposal would give the legislature the tools it needs to provide real oversight:

• Program-Level Reporting – Require BFM to report spending at the program level, not just the budget unit level.
• Justification of Variances – BFM must explain any deviation from legislative intent and provide corrective plans.
• Performance Accountability – Tie spending to measurable outcomes to evaluate program success.
• Independent Oversight – Strengthen the authority of the Legislative Fiscal Analyst Team to review and report on program-level spending.

Government at any level doesn’t create, build, or produce anything without taking it from the citizens first. We owe it to taxpayers to make sure their money is being used the way the legislature intended — not shuffled around.

If passed, by the majority of JCA the proposal would give the legislature more authority over the budget process and ensure that taxpayer dollars are spent with greater accountability and transparency.

I want to switch gears now and address an issue facing one of my constituents. As State Representatives, our primary responsibility is to advocate for and protect the interests of our constituents. While we may not have direct authority over federal agencies such as the USDA, it is imperative that we bring attention to matters that significantly impact our state’s largest industry—cattle production.

We’ve all heard the old saying: “I’m from the government, and I’m here to help.” The key question is — help who?

The troubling case of the Maude family, facing undue regulatory challenges that threaten their livelihood and, by extension, the economic well-being of our state’s agricultural sector. While the specifics of their case are still unfolding, the broader implications for regulatory overreach, property rights, and fair treatment of cattle producers demand our immediate attention.

The cattle industry is the backbone of our state’s economy, supporting thousands of jobs and communities. However, excessive and inconsistent federal regulations pose a growing threat to its sustainability. If the challenges faced by the Maude family are not addressed, they could set a precedent that places undue burdens on all producers, ultimately disrupting the agricultural strength for generations.

Charles and Heather Maude, a married couple near Caputa, South Dakota, have farmed and raised cattle and on land that has been in their family since the early 1900s. The Maude family has maintained a grazing agreement with the U.S. Forest Service (USFS) since the land was placed under the agency’s management. Their private land surrounds the two contested lots on three sides, with the Cheyenne River forming the fourth boundary.

The heart of the dispute seems to be over a fence line — one that’s been in place since sometime between 1910 and 1950 and has long been recognized by the USDA as the property boundary. After more than a century of peaceful use and cooperation, the Maudes now face felony charges of theft of federal property. They’ve been indicted separately, forcing them to hire separate attorneys — a financial burden that would strain any working family.

The official grand jury indictment states that the Maudes:

“…did knowingly steal, purloin and convert to their own use, National Grasslands managed by the United States Department of Agriculture…approximately 25 acres of National Grasslands for cultivation and approximately 25 acres of National Grasslands for grazing cattle, having a value in excess of $1,000, and did aid and abet each other, all in violation of U.S.C. §§ 641 and 2.”

This raises serious questions about how such a long-standing agreement could suddenly be treated as a criminal matter. It’s concerning that one federal agency’s shift in interpretation could have such a devastating impact on a family that has contributed to South Dakota’s agricultural strength for generations.

Situations like this are not new to South Dakota producers. In 2013–2014, there was a similar challenge when Badlands National Park attempted to claim land on the Pine Ridge Reservation for expanding the park and taking more land out of production. The effort was successfully opposed at the time, but it raises broader concerns about how land use and property boundaries are interpreted and enforced by federal agencies.

I’m calling on every State Legislator to reach out to our federal delegation, urging them to step in and review this case. South Dakota’s agricultural families deserve clear and consistent policies — not sudden shifts that put their livelihoods at risk.

Recently, Governor Rhoden and Lt. Governor Venhuizen have been on their “Open for Opportunity Tour” — highlighting business and economic growth across the state. If South Dakota is truly open for opportunity, then supporting the Maude family is essential. Ranching is the backbone of our state’s economy — the largest industry in South Dakota. The Maudes’ situation is exactly the kind of government action that can undermine confidence and threaten rural families. If the Governor and Lt. Governor are serious about protecting South Dakota’s economy, they need to visit the Maude family and stand with them.

It’s also time to take a broader look at how federal agencies like the USDA are managing these issues. South Dakota’s producers need a balanced approach — one that respects long-standing agreements and supports the families who have built their livelihoods on this land.

I encourage everyone to support the Maudes in their effort to prevail—whether through financial assistance, words of encouragement, or simply letting them know they are not alone in this fight. Even if you don’t know them personally, a note of support can go a long way.

The ranching community has always been built on resilience and standing together in times of need. This is one of those times. The Maude family has contributed to South Dakota agriculture for generations, and now they need our help. By standing with them, we are standing up for fairness, property rights, and the future of ranching families across our state.

Let’s make sure they know they have the support of their fellow producers, their neighbors, and all who believe in the values that make South Dakota strong.

Donations can be made via GoFundMe “Help the Maude Family Preserve Their Legacy” or checks can be addressed to “The Maude Legal Fund” and mailed to First Interstate Bank at 404 S. Ave A, New Underwood, SD 57761

Liz May, SD State Representative District 27