Property tax relief could come in the form of online sports betting. A Senate committee is advancing a resolution that asks voters if they support the prospect in November.
Senate Joint Resolution 504 asks voters if they support expanding online sports betting statewide with casinos that partner with Deadwood. Revenue would be split 90% heading to property tax relief and 10% towards Deadwood.
If passed, the Legislature would have authority to create rules around sports wagering. The actual amount of revenue generated is not known at this time, because it would be contingent on the rules established on the gaming.
John Pappas is the senior advisor for GeoComply, a company he says works with regulated gaming operators to ensure strict compliance with federal and state law. He said their data shows South Dakotans are interested in online sports wagering.
“What we’ve seen in South Dakota is that people by the thousands are leaving and crossing the border into Iowa, somewhat into Wyoming but more into Iowa,” Pappas said. “93% of all border crossings go into Iowa. And they’re literally just coming across the border, placing wagers and coming back."
Pappas said that activity has a monetary impact.
“Iowa is benefitting from the current status quo in South Dakota, and South Dakota is not receiving any of the benefit of a regulated market," Pappas said.
Proponents also say South Dakota is missing out on cash due to other recent developments. Event prediction markets that offer contracts similar to sports wagers are becoming more popular. Proponents argue companies like Kalshi and Polymarket are an unregulated form of sports betting in South Dakota. They allow users to place money on prediction outcomes, such as the winner of a game. Proponents said a state-regulated alternative would keep consumers safer.
The Deadwood Gaming Association and the Tourism Coalition of South Dakota spoke in favor of the bill as well.
"It gives our state the chance to modernize gaming in a way that keeps locals and visitors and their spending here at home," Carmen Schramm, Executive Director of the Tourism Coalition said. "Many South Dakotans and visitors simply cross state lines and they're making those mobile sports wagers in neighboring states because it's already legal there."
However, opponents say the state could be enabling highly addictive gaming to youth. That includes Norman Woods, the Director of South Dakota Family Voice.
“The biggest segment of people with problems with sports betting addiction is 18-34,” Woods said. “I know that currently they’re estimating that 29% of sports bettors have a problem.”
He posed the question at hand to the committee.
“This activity’s happening. I know you saw all the pins of where people are trying to place bets on one app that rejected them and then other apps that maybe are taking their bets," Woods said. "Do you want in? Do you want their to be a state interest in that activity? Do you want to be bringing in state revenue from it? We would suggest it’s a poor way to fund state government and a poor way to reduce property taxes.”
The other opponent was the South Dakota Catholics Conference. Michael Pauley is the Executive Director of the group, and he shared that Catholicism "doesn't teach that games of chance are inherently wrong." He warned against addiction.
"The availability of instant access to wagering on one's phone or mobile device, an impulse that can be instantly fulfilled at any time and any place, has shown itself to be conducive to addiction that increases the harm to individuals, families and communities," Pauley said.
He also pushed back on the idea that this is an issue to "just let the voters decide."
"We all know that that decision is not gonna be made in a vacuum. It's going to be made in an environment where an industry with deep pockets can spend millions of dollars to pass a measure precisely for the reason that if it passes, it will generate huge profits for them," Pauley said, adding the only groups who would oppose the resolution would be churches and nonprofits. He argued it's not "even remotely a fair fight."
SJR 504 narrowly advanced to the Senate floor following a 4-to-3 Senate Taxation Committee vote Friday.
