Grassroots conservatives are asking voters if they want to ban eminent domain for economic development or increased tax revenue purposes.
If one measure passed by the Legislature, voters could amend the Constitution to do just that during the general election in November.
However, the resolution gets at something deeper within South Dakota politics.
Life, Liberty, the Pursuit of Happiness and Property. That’s how Amanda Radke, a landowners’ rights activist, described House Joint Resolution 5001 to a House committee. She spoke with SDPB after the resolution’s hearing in the House State Affairs Committee Friday.
“House Joint Resolution 5001 is going to give the people of South Dakota the say on should we allow eminent domain for private gain or not in the state of South Dakota. We’re not really trying to change the Constitution," Radke said. "What we’re trying to do is fortify what’s already in the Constitution of what does property rights mean and what is the appropriate use of eminent domain. So, we heard some concerns today from things like utilities which never really have to use eminent domain in the first place. Those are part of the fabric of our community and part of the fabric of South Dakota.”
She spoke to concerns raised by some lobbyists representing gas, electricity, water and other utility companies that provide services, but are non-government entities. Such concerns raised questions on if the proposed amendment’s language would inhibit their abilities to use eminent domain for the public services they provide.
HJR 5001 was introduced by Rep. Spencer Gosch who said it would allow the voters to decide if eminent domain should go back "to the way it was supposed to be:" only for public and governmental use.
The legislation comes on the heels of a contentious debate over the Summit Carbon Solutions pipeline that swept across much of eastern South Dakota. That was prompted by voters overturning a “Landowner’s Bill of Rights” the Legislature passed that required state regulators to prove local restrictions on pipeline locations are reasonable.
Lawmakers further put a stamp on the issue, after multiple landowners’ rights Republicans won in the June 2024 primary election. They passed a law last year that banned eminent domain use for carbon pipelines, what many have said is a kill shot to Summit’s pipeline.
Radke explains her thoughts on the bill.
“Really a monumental victory and kind of a message that said, ‘Hey, we want to do good business in South Dakota,’ " Radke said. "Which means there should be a willing buyer and willing seller and we should be able to negotiate and we should be able to say, ‘No thank you.’ And I think that has only continued to grow, that sentiment.”
The grassroots movement has expanded into other areas across the country. Iowa sent a similar bill to HB 1052 to its Senate. The movement prompted Speaker of the SD House Jon Hansen, and Rep. Karla Lems to run for governor and lieutenant governor respectively.
Radke, who's announced her support of the two in the gubernatorial campaign, said she's expecting the momentum to continue.
"I think this is going to be a growing conversation leading into the primary election," Radke said. "I think property rights are going to be a deciding issue on how people vote on the candidates."
As evidence, she pointed to the property rights rally earlier this session.
"Honest to goodness, I thought, 'Nobody's going to show up.' Because the big threat was kind of gone," Radke said.
However, over 400 showed up, which Radke said is the second largest in the rally's four-year history.
But not all are on board with the way things are shaking out. That includes Rep. Tim Reisch, who voted against the House Resolution to ban eminent domain for economic development use.
“I really do believe that we’re gonna have a reputation if we keep on putting up fences for new industry of not being open for business. Industry, which is often privately funded the shareholders, they’re going to be reluctant to come to South Dakota if we put this in our Constitution," Reisch said. "And the Constitution to change it, if we figure out, ‘Well we screwed that up,’ now we have to wait for the next election to try to fix it. So, I’m very concerned this is a step in the wrong direction.”
Reisch said you can’t have your cake and eat it too when having these statewide conversations.
“You know, it seems to be the same people that are in a rush to do the quote ‘protect the property owners’ are the ones that are complaining the loudest about property taxes. It’s the same group. It is. So, they’re kind of talking out of both sides of their mouth," Reisch said. "We’re not going to lower property taxes by building fences around our state that keeps new industry out. You know, I love cows and pastures and all that. I’ve got a farm, but we’ve gotta move forward. We’re not farming the same way we were back then.”
One way some Republicans want to lower property taxes is through a new potential economic development: data centers. However, that battle looms in the future.
He put it plainly.
“South Dakota needs to be more welcome to business,” Reisch said. “I’m really concerned with the direction we’re going.”
This comes after a failed Tax Increment Financing vote in Rapid City for an amusement park called LibertyLand.
Majority Leader Rep. Scott Odenbach explained his thinking at a Legislative Press Conference Thursday. He said he's taking a thousand-foot-view of the economic development debate.
“I mean, I think that vote on the Libertyland TIF on the 20th in Rapid City is pretty instructive. You had the proponent people spend like $650,000 and the opponents of it spend about $15,000 and that TIF went down 70-30%," Odenbach said. "And that’s really something I think the folks ought to pay attention to as far as the public and what are they saying as they wake up to this issue.”
The economic development debate will continue to rage on in the Legislature, especially with bills surrounding data centers and an economic development tool called the Future Fund.
