Bluestem Prairie

Former South Dakota attorney general Jason Ravnsborg fights suspension of Iowa law license

Over the years since former South Dakota Jason Ravnsborg hit and killed Joe Boever as the Highmore man was walking on the shoulder of the road, carrying a flashlight, Bluestem Prairie has posted about this tragic event in South Dakota.

The Iowa Capital Dispatch article republished below appears to illustrate that Ravnsborg has learned little since being impeached and stripped from his office and ability to practice law in South Dakota for awhile.

Certainly not remorse for wantonly killing another human being and fellow citizen.

Former South Dakota attorney general fights suspension of Iowa law license
by Clark Kauffman

The former attorney general of South Dakota is objecting to a proposed six-month suspension of his Iowa law license due to his involvement in a 2020 traffic fatality.

In September, the South Dakota Supreme Court suspended for six months the South Dakota law license of Jason Ravnsborg, who served as that state’s attorney general from 2019 until his impeachment and removal from office in 2022.

Because Ravnsborg is licensed to practice law in Iowa, he was recently notified that his Iowa license may also be subject to a six-month suspension based on South Dakota’s actions.

Ravnsborg recently filed a written response to that notice, arguing that an identical suspension in Iowa “would be too severe.” In his response, he cites the fact that he was born on an Iowa farm in Cherokee County and later served three military deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan.

In his response, Ravnsborg also says he believes that South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem, whom he had been investigating at the time of the fatality, “did everything she could to intimidate, interfere and influence” what he calls “the automobile investigation.” He adds that he still believes “she had to get me, otherwise she would be exposed for her actions.”

Both Noem and Ravnsborg are Republicans.

Ravnsborg also says resigning would have been the easier path for him to take but he opted to remain in office to serve “my client, the state of South Dakota, who repeatedly shows up on lists as one of the most corrupt states.”

Ravnsborg has also informed the Iowa Supreme Court that he is willing to sit before the Iowa Attorney Disciplinary Board and answer questions or appear at a hearing before the Iowa Supreme Court. He adds that he believes he should “be given no more than a private reprimand” so he can move forward after four years of dealing with the matter.

The Iowa Supreme Court has yet to issue a decision in the case, but a hearing on the matter is scheduled for Jan. 22, 2025.

The death of Joe Boever

Court records indicate Ravnsborg graduated from the University of South Dakota School of Law in 2001 and was later admitted to the bar in both South Dakota and Iowa. In 2018, he was elected to serve as South Dakota’s attorney general, and he took office in early 2019.

About 10:30 p.m. on Sept. 12, 2020, according to court records, Ravnsborg was driving from a political event in Redfield, South Dakota, to his home in Pierre, South Dakota, when he struck and killed a man, 55-year-old Joe Boever, who was walking on the shoulder of the road near the town of Highmore.

According to court records, Ravnsborg slowly brought his vehicle to a stop and called 911, telling the operator, “I’m the attorney general. And I am – I don’t know – I hit something.” The operator asked whether he had hit “a deer or something,” and he allegedly replied, “I have no idea, yeah, it could be, I mean it was right in the roadway.”

Hyde County Sheriff Mike Volek was dispatched to the scene but couldn’t locate anything Ravnsborg struck. Because Ravnsborg’s car was so damaged it could not be driven, Volek then offered Ravnsborg the use of his personal vehicle to complete the drive home to Pierre.

Court records indicate that the next day, Ravnsborg returned to Highmore with his chief of staff to return the sheriff’s vehicle. On the way, they stopped at the site of the crash and found Boever’s body lying just off the side of the road. They then informed Volek of their discovery, and Volek advised Ravnsborg to go back home to Pierre. The sheriff then contacted the South Dakota Highway Patrol and Division of Criminal Investigation.

State officials later revealed that within two days of the accident, Ravnsborg received a text message about Boever from an unnamed consultant saying, “Well, at least the guy was a Democrat.”

When he was interviewed by investigators, Ravnsborg denied having consumed any drugs or alcohol on the night of the accident – which, according to court records, was confirmed by a blood test. Investigators also concluded that excessive speed was not a factor in the accident and while Ravnsborg had been on his phone for some of his commute between Redfield and Highmore, both of his phones were locked at the time of the accident.

Ultimately, investigators concluded Ravnsborg had been driving outside the lane of travel, just off the roadway, when the accident occurred. Ravnsborg pleaded guilty to two misdemeanor offenses — operating a vehicle while using a cell phone and improper lane driving — and a charge of careless driving was dismissed.

Ravnsborg then entered into a confidential civil settlement with Boever’s estate. In June 2022, he was impeached by the South Dakota Senate, removed from office and barred from ever holding public office again in South Dakota.

Board cites lack of apology and condolences

The Disciplinary Board of the State Bar of South Dakota subsequently investigated the matter and recommended a 26-month suspension of Ravnsborg’s law license.

The board noted that in the immediate aftermath of the accident, the South Dakota governor publicly asked Ravnsborg to resign or take a leave of absence, which Ravnsborg refused to do. The board also alleged that when responding to questions by investigators, Ravnsborg “did not appear to be forthright, and (was) only willing to acknowledge certain conduct after being confronted with evidence by the investigators.”

The board also alleged that Ravnsborg frequently identified himself as “the attorney general” when encountering law enforcement for minor traffic violations, such as speeding, running a stop sign, and “when making a 911 call from the highway shortly after killing Joe Boever.”

In its written findings, the board also stated that “Ravnsborg was not sincere in his remarks concerning how badly he felt for Boever’s family and bluntly stated, ‘And I’m going down the road and my life changed,’ and that, ‘I had no idea, to be clear, until the next morning when I found the body and it changed my life forever.’”

The board also noted that from the night of the accident and continuing throughout his service as attorney general, Ravnsborg made no public or private apology, never expressed his condolences to the Boever family, and he never acknowledged any culpability.

Ravnsborg, the board concluded, was more concerned with the “impact of the incident on his political and military careers than the victim, the victim’s family and the public he served.”

Ravnsborg challenged those findings and the matter went before a retired circuit judge to act as “referee” in resolving the dispute.

The referee concluded Ravnsborg had not been dishonest or misleading and that he had conducted himself in a manner befitting of an attorney. He did, however, recommend that Ravnsborg be censored for identifying himself as the attorney general when dealing with the police in order to win “favorable treatment” from officers.

Court settles on six-month suspension

In opting for a six-month law license suspension, the South Dakota Supreme Court stated that “several of Ravnsborg’s statements after the accident raise questions about his honesty and truthfulness.”

The court noted that Ravnsborg had repeatedly denied using his phones during his drive from Redfield to Highmore.

According to the court, the metadata on one of Ravnsborg’s phones showed that “minutes before” he called 911, he had unlocked his phone, checked his Yahoo email account, accessed the Dakota Free Press website, and clicked on a political news article.

It was only after investigators informed him of that evidence, the court said, that “Ravnsborg’s story took another turn” and he admitted “looking at stuff” on his phone before the accident.

“Ravnsborg’s responses demonstrated a concerted effort to avoid criminal liability through dishonesty and misrepresentations,” the court concluded.

The court also made note of Ravnsborg’s decision to “conceal himself from the public eye” in the aftermath of the accident, even while refusing to take a leave of absence. “Each decision he made was influenced by personal aspirations and political survival rather than his responsibility to serve the public and uphold the integrity of his office,” the court stated.

The court also noted two instances of Ravnsborg being stopped for minor traffic offenses – once in Nebraska and once in Iowa — and informing the officers that he was the South Dakota attorney general. In both cases, he was released without a citation being issued, the court stated.

Photo: Jason Ravnsborg, former attorney general of South Dakota, speaks during a hearing about the future of his law license on Feb. 14, 2024, at the Capitol in Pierre while his legal team looks on. (David Bordewyk/SD NewsMedia Association/via South Dakota Searchlight).

This Iowa Capital Dispatch article is republished online under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. 

Related posts

• SD State Supreme Court suspends law license of former AG Ravnsborg for six months
• Strange days for Jason Ravnsborg: from meddling telemarketing to Trump praise
• Slow grind: SD Attorney General Ravnsborg impeached, removed & barred from public office
• Proof we're not in MN anymore, Toto: Ravnsborg reviewing Noem’s meeting with daughter
• South Dakota legislators call for special session to ponder impeaching state attorney general
• Associated Press: Top lawmakers release Ravnsborg impeachment petition for special session 
• Justice for Joe Boever: news about Ravnsborg impeachment; Jackley's campaign for office
• Bipartisan group of South Dakota House leaders call for Ravnsborg impeachment inquiry
• A Friday of headlines in the life of South Dakota Attorney General Jason Ravnsborg
• Top South Dakota lawman: Joe Boever's killer Ravnsborg gets 7th speeding ticket since 2014
• Is anyone pleased with SD AG Jason Ravnsborg plea deal other than Team Ravnsborg?
• Remember Joe Boever: AP reports South Dakota AG Ravnsborg objects to cameras at his trial 
• Sioux Falls Argus Leader: Army Reserve blocks Ravnsborg promotion due to Boever death 
• Boever death: Ravnsborg didn't see face coming through glass, flashlight like beacon in grass
• Ravnsborg's lawyer enters not guilty plea; South Dakota Attorney General not present in court
• Joe Boever was killed, but Ravnsborg's attorney claims client suffering is the worst thing ever
• Justice for Joe Boever: Governor Noem calls for AG Ravnsborg's resignation; articles of impeachment filed in South Dakota House
•  Attorney General Ravnsborg charged with 3 misdemeanors in crash that killed Joe Boever
• Twitter memorials: 5 months ago, South Dakota Attorney General Ravnsborg killed Joe Boever
• Daily Beast: Ravnsborg killed a man. Family members fear Joe Boever has been forgotten
• Sioux Falls Argus Leader: Noem supports using grand jury to speed up Ravnsborg killing probe
• States attorneys looking into killing of Joseph Boever by AG Ravnsborg not talking to Noem
• Rapid City Journal: After 4 months, still no decision on whether AG Ravnsborg will be charged for killing Joseph Boever
• AP: Prosecutors waiting on debris testing in SD Attorney General killing of Joseph Boever 
• Governor Kristi Noem takes off her positive pants, given pace of Ravnsborg investigation
• Well, that's illuminating: South Dakota Highway Patrol’s accident report on Boever killing 
• South Dakota News Watch: Crash experts question Ravnsborg’s car-deer explanation
• SD News Watch: State's criminal & civil traffic laws favor drivers over pedestrians in collisions
• UPDATED: Joe Boever's tragic death on Hwy 14: news digest about Ravnsborg's fatal accident
• Heat wave Ravnsborg impeachment news digest
• SD Attorney general intrigue: Future roles uncertain for Jackley, Natvig — and Ravnsborg
• Joseph Boever's killer Ravnsborg confirms he's not seeking re-election as Attorney General
• Breaking Ravnsborg? Joseph Boever's killer won't seek re-election as SD Attorney General
• Associated Press: Top aide's entry to AG race suggests Ravnsborg won’t seek 2nd term
• South Dakota News Watch: Political intrigue swirls around upcoming AG election
• Post-impeachment digest: Jason Ravnsborg sees redemption in the South Dakota Senate
• SD Attorney General Ravnsborg impeached by South Dakota House. Next stop: the state senate

If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 600 Maple Street, Summit SD 57266) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post.

Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email [email protected] as recipient.

I'm on Venmo for those who prefer to use this service: @Sally-Sorensen-6

South Dakota Public Utilities Commissioner stays on new carbon pipeline case after prior recusal, with no explanation this time

Another installment in the ethanol carbon pipeline saga, as Summit Carbon Solutions tries again to secure a permit from the South Dakota Public Utilities Commission.

Republished from the South Dakota Searchlight.

Regulator stays on new carbon pipeline case after prior recusal, with no explanation this time
by Joshua Haiar

Public utilities commissioner’s relatives still have a trust that owns land on the project route

A trust controlled by a South Dakota regulator’s relatives still owns land along a proposed pipeline route, but the regulator has not recused herself from the project’s second permit application after recusing herself from the first one.

Two years ago, Public Utilities Commissioner Kristie Fiegen disqualified herself from Summit Carbon Solutions’ first carbon dioxide pipeline application. She cited state law prohibiting commissioners from participating in hearings or proceedings when they have a conflict of interest.

Fiegen wrote a recusal letter in February 2022 that said the pipeline “would cross land owned by my sister-in-law (my husband’s sister) and her husband.” Gov. Kristi Noem assigned State Treasurer Josh Haeder to fill in for Fiegen. 

In September 2023, Haeder and the other two commissioners rejected Summit’s initial application, citing the pipeline route’s conflicts with several county ordinances that mandate minimum distances between pipelines and existing features. 

Summit reapplied in November 2024 with an adjusted route. Fiegen has not filed a recusal letter in the new application docket, and she participated in a procedural hearing about the application on Dec. 17.

Fiegen did not respond to questions from South Dakota Searchlight about her participation in the new docket. 

Public Utilities Commission spokesperson Leah Mohr said “ex parte” rules bar Fiegen from discussing the matter. Those rules prohibit direct communication with commissioners about dockets they’re considering. Mohr also declined to discuss the matter, and declined to discuss how conflicts of interest are defined for commissioners. 

The Attorney General’s Office declined to say whether Fiegen’s participation complies with state law, or whether she sought the office’s legal advice. 

Defining a conflict of interest

The chapter of state law Fiegen cited in her 2022 recusal is specific to public utilities commissioners, and it leaves conflicts of interest undefined. It merely says “if a commissioner determines” that the commissioner has a conflict, the commissioner should file a recusal letter.

Meanwhile, a 2016 law required the state Board of Internal Control to create a conflict-of-interest policy for use by state agencies. 

The policy says officials involved in quasi-judicial actions such as reviewing a permit application must be “disinterested and free from actual bias or an unacceptable risk of actual bias” and must abstain if “a reasonably-minded person could conclude” they are not impartial.

Land owned by Fiegen’s relatives

The $9 billion Summit pipeline would span five states, transporting some of the CO2 captured from the production processes at 57 ethanol plants to underground injection sites in North Dakota. The project would capitalize on federal tax credits that incentivize the prevention of heat-trapping carbon emissions.

This map shows a portion of the proposed Summit Carbon Solutions pipeline route where it would cross McCook County land owned by the Jeffrey A. Ordal Living Trust, of which Jean Fiegen-Ordal and Jeffrey Ordal are trustees. The couple also formerly owned land in Minnehaha County, not shown here, that would be crossed by the pipeline. Jean Fiegen-Ordal is the sister-in-law of South Dakota Public Utilities Commissioner Kristie Fiegen. (Map by South Dakota Searchlight)

The originally proposed pipeline route would have crossed three parcels of land in Minnehaha County owned by Fiegen’s sister-in-law, Jean Fiegen-Ordal, and Fiegen-Ordal’s husband, Jeffrey Ordal, plus another three parcels of land in McCook County owned by the Jeffrey A. Ordal Living Trust, for which the couple serves as trustees.

Summit said it paid $175,000 in total compensation for easements and future crop damages on the land owned by the Ordals or their trust. An easement is an agreement granting access to land.

Summit said $88,000 of the money went to the Ordals. The company did not disclose further details, but public records show the Ordals completed a sale of their Minnehaha County land several months after signing the easement documents in 2022. 

The new pipeline route would cross the same parcels of land: the Minnehaha County land that Fiegen’s relatives no longer own, and the McCook County land that the Ordal trust still owns.

Photo: Public Utilities Commissioner Kristie Fiegen participates in an election forum on Sept. 19, 2024, at Dakota Wesleyan University in Mitchell. (Joshua Haiar/South Dakota Searchlight).

This South Dakota Searchlight article is republished online under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0.

Related posts

• Punt! Lincoln County commissioners push back decision on ethanol carbon pipeline rules
• Summit Carbon Solutions in the news: landowners & counties appeal North Dakota pipeline permit; Summit tells Iowans to cease & desist; Pipeline Fighters Hub & CURE statements
• North Dakota Industrial Commission approves CO2 storage for Summit ethanol carbon pipeline
• Minnesota PUC granted a permit for Summit Carbon Solutions Otter Tail to Wilkin County pipeline
• South Dakota Public Utilities Commission schedules public input meetings on Summit carbon pipeline application
• Summit ethanol CO2 injection wells up for approval but court appeal already in the works
• Oh the irony: ethanol carbon pipeline company has failed to address crossing concerns, DAPL oil pipeline company says
• Iowa Supreme Court upholds land survey abilities of pipeline companies in Summit case
• U.S. appeals court hears Summit pipeline case against Iowa's Shelby and Story counties
• Never mind the voters: ethanol carbon pipeline company reapplies for South Dakota permit
• Summit ethanol carbon pipeline news digest: Summit sues another Iowa county and more!
• North Dakota Public Service Commission approves Summit carbon pipeline route
• North Dakota couple plans to ‘dig in’ if Summit ethanol carbon pipeline is approved
• Summit ethanol carbon pipeline news digest: CO2 pipeline in MN moves forward; ND Public Service Commission decision coming Friday
• SD pipeline foes secure legislative leadership; MN Summit decision could come Dec. 12
• In unofficial results, ethanol carbon-pipeline law tossed out by South Dakota voters 
• CURE: MN Administrative Law Judge’s report on Summit’s CO 2 pipeline expected November 4
• Seven South Dakota ballot measures, $7 million and counting: Reports reveal total spending
• Jeepers: ethanol coop kicks in another $400,000 to support carbon pipeline ballot question 
• Ethanol carbon news digest: Summit Carbon pipeline in MN, Iowa & North Dakota media
• Summit Carbon Solutions CEO asks for prayer, while MN PUC wants public comment on FEIS of Otter Tail – Wilkin portion of CO2 Pipeline
• Public can comment on Otter Tail – Wilkin Co section of ethanol carbon pipeline until Sept. 11
• VIDEO: Carbon capture in Minnesota: public lands, fast money, and pipe dreams
• Summit pipeline segment enters final permitting stages in Minnesota; CURE raises objections
• Ethanol is fueling support of South Dakota carbon pipeline ballot measure
• Pipeline Fighters Hub: Summit Carbon Solutions numbers don’t add up in South Dakota 
• Referred Law 21 & carbon pipelines: A landowner bill of rights or an undermining of local control
• Summit Carbon Solution's ethanol carbon pipeline takes #2 spot on Heatmap's The Most At-Risk Projects of The Energy Transition 
• Ethanol carbon pipeline news: Attorneys differ on meaning of common carrier law in Summit case
• Summit Carbon Solutions pipelines won’t capture all carbon emitted by ethanol plants
• South Dakota Supreme Court ruling complicates Summit Carbon Solution’s push for land
• Referred pipeline law puts Summit Carbon Solution's permit quest in limbo
• Breaking crowded South Dakota ballot news: carbon pipeline law referendum validated
• Sustainable jet fuel company Gevo contributes $167K in defense of carbon pipeline law
• South Dakota Property Rights and Local Control Alliance turns in petitions to SD Secretary of State to force a vote on carbon pipeline policy
• South Dakota District 1 GOP House primary news round-up: carbon pipeline politics major issue
• New Midwest battles brew over CO2 pipelines

If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 600 Maple Street, Summit SD 57266) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post. 

Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email [email protected] as recipient.

I'm on Venmo for those who prefer to use this service: @Sally-Sorensen-6

Note to Bluestem Prairie readers: posting will be sparse until January 13

I'll be working on a creative project based in rural Minnesota history for the next two weeks, and posting will be sporadic during that time.

Thanks to readers and supporters of Bluestem Prairie for their patience during this time.

Image: Anti-Nonpartisan League cartoon from the Red Flame. From "Fighting for a Future: Farm Women of the Nonpartisan League," by Karen Starr. In Minnesota History, vol. 48, no. 6 (1983). Minnesota Historical Society.

If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 600 Maple Street, Summit SD 57266) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post. 

Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email [email protected] as recipient.

I'm on Venmo for those who prefer to use this service: @Sally-Sorensen-6

DFL Sen. Kari Dziedzic, former MN Senate Majority Leader, dies of cancer at 62

Sad news from Minneapolis that has temporarily changed the balance of partisan power in the Minnesota Senate.

Republished from the Minnesota Reformer.

DFL Sen. Kari Dziedzic, former Majority Leader, dies of cancer at 62
by Madison McVan

One of the architects of the Democratic-Farmer-Labor party’s historic 2023 legislative session, Sen. Kari Dziedzic of Minneapolis, died on Dec. 27 of ovarian cancer. She was 62.

As Majority Leader, Dziedzic shepherded through the Senate dozens of DFL priorities that had long been stymied by divided government — while working from home, battling cancer, with just a one-seat majority in the chamber.

For 12 years, she represented northeast Minneapolis — where she was born and raised — in the state Senate.

“Her talents as a consequential and thoughtful leader made us all better legislators, and her examples of kindness, humor and selflessness made us all better people,” Senate Majority Leader Erin Murphy, DFL-St. Paul, said in a statement. “She was an uncommon leader and touched us all in a great many ways.”

Dziedzic’s seat will be vacant at the start of the 2025 session in January, leaving the Senate tied 33-33. The governor will call a special election to fill the seat in the safe DFL seat, though a timeline has not yet been announced.

Dziedzic was the daughter of Walt Dziedzic, a longtime Minneapolis City Council and Park Board member. Kari Dziedzic, too, spent much of her career in local government, working for the Minneapolis Park Board and the Hennepin County Board before joining U.S. Sen. Paul Wellstone’s staff as his executive assistant.

In the 1990s, Dziedzic spent 11 months working for the North Stars professional hockey team and owner Norm Green; Green routinely harassed her, she alleged in a 1994 lawsuit, and Green’s allies in the media painted her lawsuit as the tipping point that pushed Green to move the team from Minnesota to Dallas.

In the Senate, she advocated for victims of sexual harassment and assault, updating the Senate’s policy on nondiscrimination and anti-harassment, and sponsoring legislation to make it easier for victims of workplace sexual harassment to file suit.

Dziedzic stepped down as Majority Leader in February after a recurrence of the cancer that kept her home during the 2023 legislative session.

Dziedzic earned a reputation as a pragmatic and passionate leader, garnering respect from political opponents within her party and across the aisle.

“Senator Kari Dziedzic was a passionate legislator, a respected leader and a trusted colleague and friend. She will be remembered for her integrity and her compassion for Minnesotans, something that we all saw as she continued to serve even as she battled cancer,” Senate Minority Leader Mark Johnson, R-East Grand Forks, said in a statement.

In a 2023 Reformer profile, Dziedzic largely deflected praise and maintained focus on the work still to be done.

She leaves behind her mother, Pat Dziedzic, her five siblings and their spouses, and nieces and nephews.

She also leaves in her wake a long list of policy achievements that will touch the lives of nearly every Minnesotan: the right to abortion in law; free school lunch for all; climate regulation; driver’s licenses for undocumented people; and billions of dollars in funding for infrastructure and housing.

Photo: Senate Majority Leader Kari Dziedzic, DFL-Minneapolis, in her office on Dec. 23, 2022. Photo by Max Nesterak/Minnesota Reformer.

This Minnesota Reformer article is republished online under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. 

Related posts

• After Johnson drops notion of appeal, MNHouse 40B special election scheduled for Jan. 28, 2025
• GOP wins MN House majority, for now, after judge rules District 40B DFL candidate ineligible
• Republicans seek Minnesota House majority through two legal challenges
• Dancing in the dark? MNHouse DFL and GOP, tied at 67, locked in a haters’ embrace

If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 600 Maple Street, Summit SD 57266) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post. 

Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email [email protected] as recipient.

I'm on Venmo for those who prefer to use this service: @Sally-Sorensen-6

‘School choice’ would force bad budget choices on state of South Dakota and school districts

Since she presented her budget address for next year, I've posted articles examining Governor Noem's proposed budgets for public education, libraries and dual-enrollment.

In the South Dakota Searchlight article republished below, the South Dakota Public Schools Coalition takes a critical look at Noem's plan to divert funding away from public schools. A genuine problem for rural schools, like those in and around Summit.

‘School choice’ would force bad budget choices on the state and school districts
South Dakota Public Schools Coalition

During her recent budget address, Gov. Kristi Noem outlined a plan to utilize $4 million of taxpayer money to pay for a new program she is calling “education savings accounts.” Let’s be clear. This is a school voucher program that diverts public dollars to private schools or alternative education programs with little transparency or accountability to taxpayers.

Some will say this is about “school choice,” but the reality is that these programs force future legislatures and local communities to make hard choices in the future. Numerous states have started these voucher schemes with devastating impacts on state budgets.

One example is Arizona. It started a similar program in 2022 with a price tag of $65 million. In just a few short years, that program is estimated to cost $429 million for the 2025 fiscal year alone and is responsible for two-thirds of the state’s $1.4 billion budget deficit for the combined 2024 and 2025 fiscal years.

Iowa, which hastily passed a voucher program in the opening weeks of its 2023 legislative session, is now facing a $200 million budget deficit. More private schools are opening, mostly in urban areas such as Des Moines, while small rural schools are closing. These are not isolated incidents but rather a pattern South Dakota should learn from.

This program is about choice, but not good choices for South Dakota rural communities and local school districts. Legislators can choose to fund this voucher program at the cost of cutting other programs such as the ones outlined in the governor’s proposed budget.

They can reduce state funding for the dual credit program for high school students, which provides a step up to students attending our universities. They can cut funding for the State Library, which provides vital resources to rural schools. They can even choose to cut South Dakota Public Broadcasting, which again offers valuable education and information to citizens of all ages. The Legislature can choose to start a voucher program, but only by cutting other services. Is that in South Dakota’s best interest?

What does making this choice mean in the long run for South Dakota’s schools and communities? We have already outlined what has happened in other states, and the same thing will happen here.

There will be less money for public schools, where over 80% of the state’s students attend — forcing local school boards to make the unpopular choice of cutting staff and having larger class sizes. There will be no room in local budgets for fine arts programs, which are essential for a district’s ability to offer an education that reaches all students, especially those at risk. Gone will be the career and technical education programs vital in training the workforce necessary to have a strong and vibrant rural economy. Schools in our rural communities will be hit the hardest, with no choice but to make devastating cuts or close their doors.

The South Dakota Public Schools Coalition emphasizes the importance of evaluating the long-term consequences of introducing a voucher program. Public schools are vital to our communities and require adequate resources to provide equitable, high-quality education to all students, as mandated by the South Dakota Constitution. Lawmakers have a duty to uphold this commitment. 

• School Administrators of South Dakota (SASD), Rob Monson, executive director
• Associated School Boards of South Dakota (ASBSD), Heath Larson, executive director
• South Dakota Education Association (SDEA), Ryan Rolfs, executive director
• South Dakota United School Association (SDUSA), Mitch Richter, executive director
• Large School Group, Dianna Miller, executive director

More about Noem’s ESA proposal from the South Dakota Searchlight:

• Noem proposes school choice program to ‘prioritize education.’ Critics say it’ll undermine it.
• Commentary: Noem proposal would fund Christian ‘segregation academies’

Illustration: The South Dakota State Capitol at Pierre in December 2024. (Makenzie Huber/South Dakota Searchlight)

This South Dakota Searchlight commentary is republished online under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. 

Related posts

• Noem’s budget cut would raise dual credit costs for ambitious high school students & families
• Noem's proposed SD State Library budget cut would hamstring local libraries, opponents say
• Proposed funding cut could sink network in as little as two years, SDPB director says 
• [VIDEO] Noem budget includes cuts; also new school-choice program & more prison money

If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 600 Maple Street, Summit SD 57266) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post. 

Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email [email protected] as recipient.

I'm on Venmo for those who prefer to use this service: @Sally-Sorensen-6

After Johnson drops notion of appeal, MNHouse 40B special election scheduled for Jan. 28, 2025

We'd last left party control of the Minnesota House with last Friday's republishing of a Minnesota Reformer article, GOP wins MN House majority, for now, after judge rules District 40B DFL candidate ineligible.

Now that majority is more firm, at least for a month.

At Minnesota Public Radio, Clay Masters reports in Republicans take majority in Minnesota House after DFLer drops out over residency case:

Republicans will start the 2025 legislative session with a Minnesota House majority now that a DFL candidate has opted against appealing a court defeat.

Last week, a Ramsey County judge disqualified Rep.-elect Curtis Johnson on residency grounds amid a challenge by his Republican opponent. Johnson said Friday in a Facebook post that he would let the ruling stand despite his belief it was wrong.

Johnson said it became clear “there is no viable pathway for me being allowed to retain my seat.”

In a letter to Gov. Tim Walz, Johnson said he would give up the seat “immediately and irrevocably.” That paved the way for the governor to call a special election just a couple of weeks into session.  ...

The Minnesota House's Information Services' Session Daily has the goods on the Special in District 40B special election scheduled for Jan. 28, 2025:

A writ of special election was issued Friday that sets Tuesday, Jan. 28, 2025 as the date for a special election to fill the District 40B House seat.

Curtis Johnson won the seat by more than 30% at the Nov. 5 election; however, a district judge ruled last Friday the DFL candidate did not meet the residency requirement to serve the district.

A special primary election for nomination of candidates, should one be necessary, would be held Jan. 14, 2025, ironically the first day of the upcoming legislative session.

Affidavits of candidacy and nominating petitions for the seat must be filed with the Office of the Secretary of State or the Ramsey County auditor by Dec. 31, 2024.

The district is reliably Democratic. We'll see what the House Republicans and their Minnesota Senate minority and Blue Dog Caucus allies can pass in that tiny window.

Photo: The Capitol grounds covered in snow on Dec. 19, 2024, following the first significant winter storm of the season. Photo by Michele Jokinen/House Public Information Services.

Related posts

• GOP wins MN House majority, for now, after judge rules District 40B DFL candidate ineligibl
• Republicans seek Minnesota House majority through two legal challenges
• Even Mary Franson got one: Minnesota House committee, division co-chairs announced for 2025-26 legislative biennium
• Dancing in the dark? MNHouse DFL and GOP, tied at 67, locked in a haters’ embrace
• Minnesota Democrats are drawing in the most outside spending, campaign finance data show
• DFL network dominates fundraising in September campaign finance reports

If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 600 Maple Street, Summit SD 57266) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post. 

Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email [email protected] as recipient.

I'm on Venmo for those who prefer to use this service: @Sally-Sorensen-6

Wounded Knee land bill, medals review fate uncertain as massacre commemoration nears

Bluestem last posted about the Wounded Knee Massacre site in September 2023's News about Wounded Knee Massacre site illustrate lows and highs for memorial.

An update in Thursday's South Dakota Searchlight.

Fate uncertain for Wounded Knee land bill and medals review as massacre commemoration approaches
by Makenzie Huber and Seth Tupper

As the 134th commemoration of the Wounded Knee Massacre nears, efforts to protect the massacre site and review medals awarded to participating soldiers are in limbo.

After years of activism by Lakota people, the U.S. Department of Defense announced in July that the “approximately 20” Medals of Honor awarded to soldiers who participated in the massacre would be subjected to a review. But there hasn’t been an announcement of the review panel’s recommendations yet, and President Joe Biden’s term ends Jan. 20 when President-elect Donald Trump takes the oath of office.

The massacre occurred on Dec. 29, 1890. Lakota people were camped near Wounded Knee Creek on the Pine Ridge Reservation in southwestern South Dakota, where they were surrounded by hundreds of Army soldiers. A shot rang out while the soldiers tried to disarm the camp, and chaotic shooting ensued.

Fewer than 40 soldiers were killed (some by friendly fire, according to historians), while estimates of Lakota deaths ran from 200 to 300 or more, depending on the source. After some of the bodies froze on the ground for several days, a military-led burial party dumped them into a mass grave.

The politics and racism of the day influenced the Army’s decision to support medals for some of the soldiers, even though Maj. Gen. Nelson Miles condemned the massacre. He led the Division of the Missouri, which included the soldiers who were responsible for the incident.

“I have never heard of a more brutal, cold-blooded massacre than at Wounded Knee,” Miles wrote in an 1891 letter that’s now held in an archive at Yale.

“Land Back” is spray painted on the bottom of a sign explaining the historical significance of the Wounded Knee Massacre on the Pine Ridge Reservation on July 30, 2024. (Makenzie Huber/South Dakota Searchlight)

Advocate hopeful that Biden will revoke medals

Historians have noted that the records associated with some of the medals are incomplete or unclear. Oliver “OJ” Semans, a Rosebud Sioux tribal member who advocates for the revocation of the medals, said he’s been told the review panel could not reach a consensus.  

He remains hopeful that President Joe Biden will revoke the medals, perhaps before or in conjunction with Sunday’s 134th commemoration of the massacre.

“That would be such a mental relief for all of those descendants of the massacre survivors,” Semans said.

While Biden was running for president in 2020, Semans’ Four Directions voter-rights advocacy group submitted written questions to the candidate, including one about the Wounded Knee medals. Biden said at the time that he supported revoking the medals.

“The Congressional Medal of Honor is our Nation’s highest award for gallantry in combat, in defense of our Nation’s highest ideals and principles,” Biden wrote in January 2020, according to a copy of the letter provided by Semans. “That this medal was awarded for the massacre of hundreds of unarmed Native Americans, including women and children, is abhorrent to those very ideals and lessens what the award represents in integrity and personal sacrifice for all others who have received it.”

The review panel included members from the Department of Interior. A spokesperson for that department declined to comment on the status of the review. A spokesperson for the Department of Defense said only that the review panel would provide its recommendations to the secretary of Defense, the secretary would provide recommendations to the president, and “the authority to award or rescind a Medal of Honor resides with the President of the United States.”

Land bill caught up in dispute over Lumbee recognition

Meanwhile, an effort to push the Wounded Knee Massacre Memorial and Sacred Site Act through Congress failed in November after one senator opposed the bill. The effort to protect 40 acres at the Wounded Knee Massacre site on behalf of the Oglala Sioux Tribe and Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe will have to start over after the 119th Congress begins on Jan. 3.

Two years ago, the two tribes purchased 40 acres at the massacre site from a private owner. The legislation would place the land in restricted-fee status, which means it could not be sold, taxed, gifted or leased without approval by the secretary of the Department of Interior.

The bill passed the House in September after Rep. Dusty Johnson, R-South Dakota, introduced it in May 2023. U.S. Sen. Mike Rounds, R-South Dakota, who introduced a Senate version of the bill in June 2023, tried to have the adopted House version considered by the Senate in November.

“I hope that we can come together to acknowledge this event and work to mend our history through reconciliation and mutual respect,” Rounds said on the Senate floor. “Although we can’t rewrite this past, this act is one way to show healing and progress.”'

An arch topped with a cross marks the entrance to the Wounded Knee Memorial and cemetery on the Pine Ridge Reservation on June 30, 2024. (Makenzie Huber/South Dakota Searchlight)

Sen. Thom Tillis, R-North Carolina, took advantage of Senate rules allowing a single senator to block consideration of a bill. 

Tillis has opposed several tribal-related bills in an attempt to get senators to support his own bill to federally recognize the Lumbee Tribe in North Carolina. He called out the leaders of the Oglala and Cheyenne River Sioux tribes for allegedly not supporting his efforts.

During a Senate floor speech, Tillis directed his comments to the people of the two tribes in South Dakota. 

“This is not about you. This is about your leaders and their underhanded, unfair treatment of a tribal nation that deserves recognition,” Tillis said. He added that the Wounded Knee bill “really does need to come into law. Just not yet.”

During November 2024 floor speeches, Republican Sens. Mike Rounds of South Dakota and Thom Tillis of North Carolina discuss legislation pertaining to Rounds’ Wounded Knee Massacre land bill and Tillis’ effort to obtain recognition for the Lumbee tribe.

Oglala and Cheyenne River Sioux tribal leaders did not respond to questions from South Dakota Searchlight on the issue.

Semans said Tillis and the Lumbee were wrong to subject the Wounded Knee land protection bill to a fight over the Lumbee’s status.

“It’s a terrible thing that they decided to pick one of the most horrific massacres in history to make a point about them wanting to become a federally recognized tribe,” Semans said.

Congress recognized the Lumbee in 1956, but denied financial benefits typically associated with federal recognition, such as funding for tribal law enforcement and access to the Indian Health Service.

The tribe has worked toward full recognition for decades, most recently with the North Carolina congressional delegation. Tribal nations typically receive federal recognition through an application with the Department of the Interior. President-elect Donald Trump pledged his support to the tribe in September.

Some other tribal leaders question the validity of the Lumbee’s historical claims, according to The Associated Press. Some opponents of Lumbee recognition are concerned it could siphon funding away from existing tribes, and also have concerns that recognition would allow the Lumbee to build a casino, which would compete with other tribal casino operations in the area.

The latest action on Tillis’ Lumbee recognition bill was its referral to the Committee on Indian Affairs after the legislation was introduced in February 2023.

South Dakota Searchlight’s Joshua Haiar contributed to this report.

Photo (top): Plastic flowers and American flags are placed atop graves at the Wounded Knee Memorial and cemetery on June 30, 2024. (Makenzie Huber/South Dakota Searchlight).

This South Dakota Searchlight article is republished online  under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0.

Related posts

• News about Wounded Knee Massacre site illustrate lows and highs for memorial
• Wounded Knee Memorial and Sacred Site Act heard in US Senate Committee on Indian Affairs

If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 600 Maple Street, Summit SD 57266) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post. 

Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email [email protected] as recipient.

I'm on Venmo for those who prefer to use this service: @Sally-Sorensen-6

Punt! Lincoln County commissioners push back decision on ethanol carbon pipeline rules

Just in time for Christmas Eve, the South Dakota Searchlight delivers another wrinkle in the Summit Carbon Solutions ethanol carbon pipeline project in South Dakota.

IS the punting part of South Dakota's peasant revolt against Summit? The reporter notes in the article below:

Two commissioners, Jim Jibben and Mike Poppens, lost their primary elections to anti-pipeline candidates, one of whom appeared in the commission chambers Tuesday to voice her concerns about the four ordinances up for possible passage.

From the South Dakota Searchlight.

Lincoln County commissioners push back decision on carbon pipeline rules
by John Hult

Opponents dislike all four options, ask officials to start from scratch

CANTON — Commissioners in South Dakota’s fastest-growing county punted on four carbon dioxide pipeline ordinances on Christmas Eve, opting to let their planning staff and two new commissioners start from scratch in the new year.

The Lincoln County Commission has wrestled with its approach to carbon pipelines for about two years. Several counties in South Dakota have passed ordinances restricting underground carbon pipelines so strictly that the company proposing a carbon capture pipeline through South Dakota, Summit Carbon Solutions, says it would be impossible to fully comply with all the local requirements and still build the project. The company has also applied for a state permit, which is under review.

The project is a $9 billion pipeline to carry pressurized carbon dioxide from ethanol plants in Iowa, South Dakota, North Dakota, Minnesota and Nebraska to an underground sequestration site in North Dakota. The company hopes to cash in on federal tax credits available for activities meant to mitigate the impact of climate change, in this case by keeping some of the heat-trapping gases produced in the ethanol production process from reaching the atmosphere.

Lincoln County is not one of the counties with stricter rules for carbon pipelines than Summit would prefer, though the controversial project has animated discussions about the issue and likely impacted the results of the most recent county commission elections.

Two commissioners, Jim Jibben and Mike Poppens, lost their primary elections to anti-pipeline candidates, one of whom appeared in the commission chambers Tuesday to voice her concerns about the four ordinances up for possible passage.

“I’m opposed to all of them,” said incoming commissioner Betty Otten, who also accused the current commission of being too cozy with Summit to be trusted to make decisions on the matter.

Back to the drawing board

Lincoln County commissioners opted last year to study the options for regulation. An ad-hoc study committee offered suggestions to the planning commission, which held public hearings on the options following the November election.

A state law dubbed the “landowner bill of rights” by its sponsors was on the November general election ballot thanks to a petition drive by pipeline opponents who felt it didn’t do enough for landowners to deserve that branding. The referred law failed to earn support from voters, with nearly 60% saying no. 

The four ordinances up for possible passage on Tuesday were the result of the planning work and public hearings, Planning Director Toby Brown told the commission. Commissioners were meant to pick one, as each would set a different set of guidelines and conflict with one another if passed together.

The first and second options would have put planners in charge of deciding if a carbon pipeline project would qualify as a permitted land use. The planning commission did not recommend commissioners pass those. 

The third would have required carbon pipeline companies to seek conditional use permits, which would open up a public hearing and the chance for opponents to challenge the county commission in court if its members voted to give Summit a permit.

The fourth would have barred pipelines in agricultural areas, but allowed them in areas zoned as industrial. With that option, the company could ask the commission to rezone the entire narrow strip of land under which the pipeline would run as industrial land. Voters would be able to refer the commission’s decision on the rezone to a public vote.

Vote faces pushback

Every Lincoln County resident to offer public comment on the ordinances Tuesday asked the commission to send the ordinances back to the planning commission, but not before telling them they’d rather not talk about them until next year. 

“This is too important, it’s been too long, and I just think it’s prudent that we have the new commission in there,” said Scott Montgomery of Fairview, echoing the words of half a dozen others in the commission chambers.

Lincoln County’s failure to pass an ordinance is at least partially the result of actions one commissioner took before debate started. Poppens took a deal with Summit for access to his own property, and he’s recused himself from every debate and vote on pipeline regulations. 

On Tuesday, though, Poppens did cast a vote, and it was to keep the pipeline discussion on the agenda. 

Commissioner Tiffani Landeen had asked for a vote to table the discussion until January, when Poppens and Jibben will be replaced by the candidates who ousted them in the June primary. Landeen said the timing of the discussion and the weight of the issue for citizens combined to convince her that debate should happen after the new commission is seated.

Poppens, in his last vote before leaving the body, said no.

“Residents of the county, my family personally, we are impacted. So I’m not going to discuss the ordinance, but I am against tabling it. It’s an important issue,” Poppens said.

Also opposed to tabling were Jibben and Joel Arends, who pushed his fellow commissioners to pass an ordinance, ideally one with a 500-foot setback required between the pipeline and homes, schools and businesses. Members of the public had taken time out of their holiday week to offer their opinions, he said, so they ought to be able to do that.

He also said that the county has already delayed making a decision, and that leaving it up to the next commission would be a dereliction of duty. 

“We’re in some kind of circular doom loop here,” Arends said. “We just have to put our feet down and say ‘we’re elected to office, we’re accountable, this is what it’s going to be.’” 

But Commissioner Jim Schmidt said voting on the ordinances during a day many might be unable to attend the meeting wouldn’t sit well with him.

“Is it an encumbrance for you to come back? Maybe. I’m sorry for that, but I think there’s a lot more that we would hear from when it’s not Christmas Eve,” Schmidt said.

After deciding to take testimony and hearing every citizen who spoke say they disliked all four ordinances, commissioners took their final vote of 2024.

Landeen made the motion to send the ordinances back to the planning commission, on which she serves as the commission’s representative.

No one in the room liked the ideas on offer, said Landeen, a Sioux Falls attorney and former Turner County state’s attorney, whose own take on the ordinances was that they were vague and unworkable. The last option might seem the most palatable to opponents, as it offers the chance to vote down the commission’s choice. But even there, she said, she doesn’t like the idea of having “this weird strip” of light industrial land running through the county for no reason but to make a pipeline possible.

“The language of these ordinances doesn’t do what anybody needs them to do,” Landeen said.

Photo: Linda Montgomery, of Fairview, speaks to Lincoln County Commissioners on Dec. 24, 2024, in Canton. (John Hult/South Dakota Searchlight)

This South Dakota Searchlight article is republished online under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4

Related posts

• Summit Carbon Solutions in the news: landowners & counties appeal North Dakota pipeline permit; Summit tells Iowans to cease & desist; Pipeline Fighters Hub & CURE statements
• North Dakota Industrial Commission approves CO2 storage for Summit ethanol carbon pipeline
• Minnesota PUC granted a permit for Summit Carbon Solutions Otter Tail to Wilkin County pipeline
• South Dakota Public Utilities Commission schedules public input meetings on Summit carbon pipeline application
• Summit ethanol CO2 injection wells up for approval but court appeal already in the works
• Oh the irony: ethanol carbon pipeline company has failed to address crossing concerns, DAPL oil pipeline company says
• Iowa Supreme Court upholds land survey abilities of pipeline companies in Summit case
• U.S. appeals court hears Summit pipeline case against Iowa's Shelby and Story counties
• Never mind the voters: ethanol carbon pipeline company reapplies for South Dakota permit
• Summit ethanol carbon pipeline news digest: Summit sues another Iowa county and more!
• North Dakota Public Service Commission approves Summit carbon pipeline route
• North Dakota couple plans to ‘dig in’ if Summit ethanol carbon pipeline is approved
• Summit ethanol carbon pipeline news digest: CO2 pipeline in MN moves forward; ND Public Service Commission decision coming Friday
• SD pipeline foes secure legislative leadership; MN Summit decision could come Dec. 12
• In unofficial results, ethanol carbon-pipeline law tossed out by South Dakota voters 
• CURE: MN Administrative Law Judge’s report on Summit’s CO 2 pipeline expected November 4
• Seven South Dakota ballot measures, $7 million and counting: Reports reveal total spending
• Jeepers: ethanol coop kicks in another $400,000 to support carbon pipeline ballot question 
• Ethanol carbon news digest: Summit Carbon pipeline in MN, Iowa & North Dakota media
• Summit Carbon Solutions CEO asks for prayer, while MN PUC wants public comment on FEIS of Otter Tail – Wilkin portion of CO2 Pipeline
• Public can comment on Otter Tail – Wilkin Co section of ethanol carbon pipeline until Sept. 11
• VIDEO: Carbon capture in Minnesota: public lands, fast money, and pipe dreams
• Summit pipeline segment enters final permitting stages in Minnesota; CURE raises objections
• Ethanol is fueling support of South Dakota carbon pipeline ballot measure
• Pipeline Fighters Hub: Summit Carbon Solutions numbers don’t add up in South Dakota 
• Referred Law 21 & carbon pipelines: A landowner bill of rights or an undermining of local control
• Summit Carbon Solution's ethanol carbon pipeline takes #2 spot on Heatmap's The Most At-Risk Projects of The Energy Transition 
• Ethanol carbon pipeline news: Attorneys differ on meaning of common carrier law in Summit case
• Summit Carbon Solutions pipelines won’t capture all carbon emitted by ethanol plants
• South Dakota Supreme Court ruling complicates Summit Carbon Solution’s push for land
• Referred pipeline law puts Summit Carbon Solution's permit quest in limbo
• Breaking crowded South Dakota ballot news: carbon pipeline law referendum validated
• Sustainable jet fuel company Gevo contributes $167K in defense of carbon pipeline law
• South Dakota Property Rights and Local Control Alliance turns in petitions to SD Secretary of State to force a vote on carbon pipeline policy
• South Dakota District 1 GOP House primary news round-up: carbon pipeline politics major issue
• New Midwest battles brew over CO2 pipelines

If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 600 Maple Street, Summit SD 57266) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post. 

Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email [email protected] as recipient.

I'm on Venmo for those who prefer to use this service: @Sally-Sorensen-6

Noem’s budget cut would raise dual credit costs for ambitious high school students & families

Reading the South Dakota Searchlight article republished below, I was surprised to learn that South Dakotans families have to pay a portion of "dual credit courses" that high school students can take in post-secondary institutions for credit for high school graduation and a later college or technical degree.

I was more familiar with Minnesota's Post Secondary Enrollment Option (PSEO), for which costs of enrollment and books are fully paid by the Minnesota Department of Education for qualified students, after pupils timely notify their enrolling public school district of their plans. The program gave a number of younger firends the chance to get ahead of college costs and grad requirements, as well as fueling their intellectual curiosity.

Not the case in South Dakota, however, and as Makenzie Huber reports in the article below, families would be required to pay a greater share for the Rushmore State's parallel program, up from one third of credit hour costs to one half.

From the South Dakota Searchlight.

Noem’s budget cut would raise dual credit costs for students
by Makenzie Huber

South Dakota high school students will pay 50% more to take dual credit courses if legislators adopt a budget proposal by Republican Gov. Kristi Noem.

Currently, students pay one-third of the cost per credit hour, $50.84, while the state pays the rest. Noem’s proposal would split the cost in half, with the student and state each paying about $76 per credit hour. The state would spend around $1 million less on the program annually.

Noem is proposing the policy change in her budget for the next fiscal year. It’s one of numerous budget cuts she’s requesting as sales tax revenues decline.

Yet, in the education portion of her budget, she’s also proposing $4 million in new spending to create education savings accounts that would provide public funds for families to pay for private school tuition or for the costs of alternative instruction such as homeschooling.

The state Department of Education responded with a statement to South Dakota Searchlight questions about the proposed dual credit rate increase.

“The governor’s proposed budget will continue to allow motivated students the privilege to earn college credits at a reduced rate,” the statement said.

Education professionals worry that the increase would burden families and hamper their ability to enroll students. The program benefits not only them but the state as well, introducing students to higher education options at public universities and technical colleges.

There were 4,213 students enrolled in the public university portion of the program during fiscal year 2024, according to the governor’s budget proposal. There were 1,849 students enrolled in the technical college program. Classes are offered through all six public universities and four technical colleges throughout the state. Students can attend on-campus or online.

The program not only allows students to get a head start on their degree, but increases their confidence to succeed in higher education, said Ashley Seeklander, government relations chair for the South Dakota School Counseling Association and a counselor in the Aberdeen school district, in an emailed statement. Dual credit students have higher GPAs and retention rates once they enter college, according to an annual report on the program.

“As school counselors, we see firsthand the positive impact that the dual credit program has on student success,” Seeklander said.

If students forgo the dual credit program because of cost but still go on to attend a South Dakota university, they’ll pay even more. The average credit hour cost is $300 for a typical college student.

The South Dakota Board of Regents oversees the state’s public universities. Executive Director Nathan Lukkes said connecting with high school students before they apply to out-of-state colleges is an advantage for those institutions. About 60% of dual credit students enroll at South Dakota public universities upon graduation.

He hopes Noem’s proposed fee increase for students doesn’t hinder their ability to take the classes. 

“The last thing we want is finances standing in the way of education,” Lukkes said.

He added that he expects enrollment in the program to level off in the coming years as high school enrollment decreases.

System director talks other proposed cuts

Noem also proposed another $2 million “operational” cut to the regents’ budget and a $9 million cut to the system’s building maintenance and repair fund.

The system has not decided how a $2 million cut would be implemented.

“Our goal is to minimize the impact to students — we want to continue to provide quality education at an affordable price,” Lukkes said. “We don’t want any cuts to hinder or alter that going forward.”

Regent Pam Roberts, a former South Dakota Republican Party chairwoman and former secretary of the South Dakota Department of Labor and Regulation, called the maintenance cut “shortsighted” at the board’s December meeting.

Lukkes added that it’s common to budget 2-4% of a building’s replacement value for maintenance and repair.

“We’re well positioned at the moment,” Lukkes said. “The challenge is if you take $9 million a year out of the funding stream and it’s not replaced very quickly, we’re good for a year or two. Five, 10, 15, 20 years down the road, you risk your infrastructure failing, falling into a state of disrepair and ultimately costing you more money than if you maintained it.”

Photo: Gov. Kristi Noem presents her annual budget address to lawmakers in the South Dakota State Capitol on Dec. 3, 2024. (Makenzie Huber/South Dakota Searchlight).

This South Dakota Searchlight article is republished online under  Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0.

Related posts

• Noem's proposed SD State Library budget cut would hamstring local libraries, opponents say
• Proposed funding cut could sink network in as little as two years, SDPB director says 
• [VIDEO] Noem budget includes cuts; also new school-choice program & more prison money

If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 600 Maple Street, Summit SD 57266) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post. 

Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email [email protected] as recipient.

I'm on Venmo for those who prefer to use this service: @Sally-Sorensen-6

GOP wins MN House majority, for now, after judge rules District 40B DFL candidate ineligible

Heckova development for the control of the Minnesota House.

As companion coverage for the Minnesota Reformer article republished below, I recommend Rochelle Olson's Judge rules DFL House candidate ineligible, throwing majority to GOP for now at the Minnesota Star Tribune, Dana Ferguson and Clay Masters' report, Minnesota House tie in peril after judge rules DFL lawmaker can’t be sworn in for Minnesota Public Radio, and Mary Murphy''s GOP gains momentary majority in Minnesota House after candidate residency ruling for the Forum Communications chain.

Ferguson and Masters add a note from Speaker Hortman:

Current House Speaker Melissa Hortman, of Brooklyn Park, issued a statement saying another appeal is coming.

“The court erred as a matter of law in not dismissing this case,” Hortman’s written statement read. “A residency issue must be resolved before an election and is not an appropriate basis for an election contest.”

Hortman added, that Johnson’s win was convincing — by 7,503 votes — “and no court should lightly overturn the will of the voters.”

From the Minnesota Reformer.

Republicans win MN House majority, for now, after judge rules candidate ineligible
by Michelle Griffith

District Court Judge Leonardo Castro on Friday ruled that Democrat Curtis Johnson did not meet the residency requirement to serve in the Minnesota House, enjoining him from receiving an election certificate and saying the seat should be filled through a special election.

Castro, in a blistering opinion, said Johnson did not meet the requirement that he live in the district he intended to serve for six months prior to the November election.

“The reasons for the (residency) mandate are obvious and axiomatic to our representative form of government,” Castro wrote in his opinion. “Obtaining a lease and changing your voter registration does not satisfy this requirement; meaningful physical presence is required to show genuine intent to reside in the district. The people of 40B deserve no less.”

Johnson, who did not immediately respond to the Reformer’s request for comment, could appeal the decision to the Minnesota Supreme Court.

For now, House Republicans will have a one seat majority, 67-66. House District 40B, which Johnson won by 30 points last month, is a safe DFL seat, and will likely wind up in DFL hands after a special election, but that won’t take place for some time.

Republicans will likely capitalize on their temporary majority before a special election in 40B to elect a House speaker and committee chairs.

Rep. Lisa Demuth, R-Cold Spring, who led Republicans to their new majority, is the likely speaker of the House, though a Supreme Court reversal of Castro’s ruling is still possible.

There’s very little precedent for a change of speakership in the middle of a legislative session, but because 68 votes would be required to vacate the speakership, Demuth would likely remain speaker even after a special election pulls the chamber into a tie, so long as she can keep Republicans in line.

Demuth praised the decision: “With the overwhelming evidence we heard during the trial that the Democrat candidate in Roseville never lived in the district, I applaud the court’s decision to grant the election contest and look forward to ensuring that a valid candidate represents District 40B during the upcoming legislative session,” she said in a statement. “This is a clear reminder that laws matter, and integrity in the election process is non-negotiable.”

Johnson’s GOP challenger, Paul Wikstrom, filed an election contest after his campaign conducted surveillance of Johnson and alleged  he didn’t live in the district.

Wikstrom alleged that Johnson has a Little Canada home he primarily lives in — not in the House district — and rents a Roseville studio apartment in the district to make it appear like he lives there.

Wikstrom in his election contest affidavit stated that his campaign created an “investigative team” to monitor Johnson’s whereabouts and alleged that Johnson would regularly come and go from his Little Canada home. He detailed the measures his campaign took to determine whether Johnson lived in the Roseville apartment.

Wikstrom said his team called Xcel Energy and Comcast to see if the Roseville apartment was hooked up to electricity and internet, and they were “given the impression” that the apartment didn’t have accounts set up for either.

One campaign staffer went to the Roseville apartment and saw that the door “was dusty and lacked evidence of any recent activity or markings indicating dust being wiped away from use,” the affidavit states.

Photo: The Capitol grounds covered in snow on Dec. 19, 2024, following the first significant winter storm of the season. Photo by Michele Jokinen/House Public Information Services.

This Minnesota Reformer article is republished online under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0.

Related posts

• Republicans seek Minnesota House majority through two legal challenges
• Even Mary Franson got one: Minnesota House committee, division co-chairs announced for 2025-26 legislative biennium
• Dancing in the dark? MNHouse DFL and GOP, tied at 67, locked in a haters’ embrace
• Minnesota Democrats are drawing in the most outside spending, campaign finance data show
• DFL network dominates fundraising in September campaign finance reports

If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 600 Maple Street, Summit SD 57266) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post. 

Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email [email protected] as recipient.

I'm on Venmo for those who prefer to use this service: @Sally-Sorensen-6

 

Phonics-based ‘science of reading’ on track for South Dakota implementation

Buried in this South Dakota Searchlight story about the introduction of the "science of reading" instruction into South Dakota schools:

. . . The board also held hearings for optional content standards for computer science and the Oceti Sakowin Essential Understandings, which educate students on culture and traditions of Indigenous South Dakotans. The computer science standards would be new standards to explore technology, such as artificial intelligence, in the classrooms and workforce. One person spoke against the revised OSEU standards, saying that the standards needed more tribal consultation and more representation of the Nakota and Dakota tribes.

Readers may recall the battle over teaching the Oceti Sakowin Essential Understandings--and can review related posts below.

All three are important and improving students' reading skills is an admirable goal.

From the South Dakota Standard.

Phonics-based ‘science of reading’ on track for South Dakota implementation
by Makenzie Huber

Phonics-based instruction could soon be a state standard in South Dakota. The Department of Education is working to align state standards for English and language arts with the phonics-based “science of reading” framework.

The proposed standards revision had its second hearing Thursday in Sioux Falls during a South Dakota Board of Education Standards meeting. It’ll be discussed at the board’s meetings in Pierre and Rapid City next year before approval.

The revision follows a global debate — often called the “reading wars” — about how best to teach children to read. One side advocates for an emphasis on phonics, which is understanding the relationship between sounds and letters. The other side prefers a “whole language” approach that puts a stronger emphasis on understanding meaning, with some phonics mixed in. The “balanced literacy” approach gained popularity in the 2000s, which is phonics-inclusive but favors whole language instruction.

Gov. Kristi Noem and the Legislature invested $6 million earlier this year to train teachers in the science of reading. 

The timing for the standards review “couldn’t be better,” said Shannon Malone, director of the Department of Education’s division of learning and instruction, during Thursday’s meeting.

Most of South Dakota’s teachers who were trained in phonics before “whole language” and “balanced literacy” was the standard have retired. Just under 50% of South Dakota students last school year didn’t meet standards for English and language arts, according to the state report card.

“We hope to see those numbers go up. I believe there’s good evidence they will,” state Education Department Secretary Joe Graves told the board.

The department is wrapping up its current voluntary training program on phonics-based teaching and transitioning to courses through the South Dakota Board of Regents, using part of the $6 million in funding from the Legislature. The department hopes to begin classes in fall 2025, open to all public, private and tribal school teachers in the state.

As part of the higher education system, state Department of Education officials hope the program will be used to train college students majoring in teaching before they graduate.

A $54 million Comprehensive Literacy State Development grant awarded to South Dakota from the federal government will also be used to help local school districts implement a phonics-based approach over the next five years. Those competitive grants, with applications opening in early 2025, can go toward improvements such as literacy coach salaries, teacher training or curriculum reviews.

The board also held hearings for optional content standards for computer science and the Oceti Sakowin Essential Understandings, which educate students on culture and traditions of Indigenous South Dakotans. The computer science standards would be new standards to explore technology, such as artificial intelligence, in the classrooms and workforce. One person spoke against the revised OSEU standards, saying that the standards needed more tribal consultation and more representation of the Nakota and Dakota tribes.

Photo: A proponent of new social studies standards offers a statement of support to the state Board of Education on Nov. 21, 2022, in Sioux Falls. (Joshua Haiar/South Dakota Searchlight)

This South Dakota Searchlight article is republished online  under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0.

Related posts

• Survey says nearly two-thirds of South Dakota educators use Indigenous standards 
• Native American leaders in South Dakota forge ahead with educational reforms
• Noem Nincompoopery: ad scolds Jamie Smith for vote shared by state representative appointed to 2nd social studies standard work group 
• Oceti Sakowin March for our Children: over 200 march, drum, and ride horses in pouring rain
• South Dakota News Watch: South Dakotans overwhelmingly support teaching of indigenous history and culture in public schools
• SD News Watch: SD teachers endure new stress as politics & culture war seep into classrooms

If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 600 Maple Street, Summit SD 57266) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post.

Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email [email protected] as recipient.

I'm on Venmo for those who prefer to use this service: @Sally-Sorensen-6

2nd filing fee for Summit Carbon Solutions project raises total potential fees to $1.47 million

Another wrinkle in the ongoing saga of the Summit Carbon Solutions ethanol carbon pipeline saga, in a news brief from South Dakota Searchlight.

Second filing fee for carbon pipeline project raises total potential fees to $1.47 million
by Joshua Haiar

South Dakota regulators will charge a carbon dioxide pipeline company up to $876,000 to help cover the cost of evaluating its new permit application.

It’s Summit Carbon Solutions’ second attempt for a South Dakota permit. The state Public Utilities Commission rejected Summit’s first application last year, due in part to the pipeline route’s conflicts with local siting laws. The company recently reapplied with an adjusted route.

The filing fee for the first application was $592,500, which the Iowa-based company paid in full. The new fee brings the company’s total potential filing costs to $1.47 million. New costs will be assessed up to the maximum $876,000 that commissioners approved Tuesday during a meeting in Pierre. 

The project would transport CO2 captured from 57 ethanol plants in five states —including 15 plants in eastern South Dakota — to underground storage wells in North Dakota. The company hopes to capitalize on federal tax credits incentivizing the prevention of heat-trapping carbon emissions.

The 2,500-mile route includes 698 miles in South Dakota. The South Dakota portion of the $9 billion project would cost about $1.35 billion.

The project has a storage permit in North Dakota and route permits in North Dakota, Iowa and Minnesota, although opponents continue to mount various legal and administrative challenges. Nebraska has no state permitting process for carbon pipelines.

Photo:  South Dakota’s three elected public utilities commissioners (from left), Gary Hanson, Chris Nelson and Kristie Fiegen, question a lawyer on Jan. 9, 2024, in Pierre. (Joshua Haiar/South Dakota Searchlight).

This South Dakota Searchlight article is republished online under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0.

Related posts

• Summit Carbon Solutions in the news: landowners & counties appeal North Dakota pipeline permit; Summit tells Iowans to cease & desist; Pipeline Fighters Hub & CURE statements
• North Dakota Industrial Commission approves CO2 storage for Summit ethanol carbon pipeline
• Minnesota PUC granted a permit for Summit Carbon Solutions Otter Tail to Wilkin County pipeline
• South Dakota Public Utilities Commission schedules public input meetings on Summit carbon pipeline application
• Summit ethanol CO2 injection wells up for approval but court appeal already in the works
• Oh the irony: ethanol carbon pipeline company has failed to address crossing concerns, DAPL oil pipeline company says
• Iowa Supreme Court upholds land survey abilities of pipeline companies in Summit case
• U.S. appeals court hears Summit pipeline case against Iowa's Shelby and Story counties
• Never mind the voters: ethanol carbon pipeline company reapplies for South Dakota permit
• Summit ethanol carbon pipeline news digest: Summit sues another Iowa county and more!
• North Dakota Public Service Commission approves Summit carbon pipeline route
• North Dakota couple plans to ‘dig in’ if Summit ethanol carbon pipeline is approved
• Summit ethanol carbon pipeline news digest: CO2 pipeline in MN moves forward; ND Public Service Commission decision coming Friday
• SD pipeline foes secure legislative leadership; MN Summit decision could come Dec. 12
• In unofficial results, ethanol carbon-pipeline law tossed out by South Dakota voters 
• CURE: MN Administrative Law Judge’s report on Summit’s CO 2 pipeline expected November 4
• Seven South Dakota ballot measures, $7 million and counting: Reports reveal total spending
• Jeepers: ethanol coop kicks in another $400,000 to support carbon pipeline ballot question 
• Ethanol carbon news digest: Summit Carbon pipeline in MN, Iowa & North Dakota media
• Summit Carbon Solutions CEO asks for prayer, while MN PUC wants public comment on FEIS of Otter Tail – Wilkin portion of CO2 Pipeline
• Public can comment on Otter Tail – Wilkin Co section of ethanol carbon pipeline until Sept. 11
• VIDEO: Carbon capture in Minnesota: public lands, fast money, and pipe dreams
• Summit pipeline segment enters final permitting stages in Minnesota; CURE raises objections
• Ethanol is fueling support of South Dakota carbon pipeline ballot measure
• Pipeline Fighters Hub: Summit Carbon Solutions numbers don’t add up in South Dakota 
• Referred Law 21 & carbon pipelines: A landowner bill of rights or an undermining of local control
• Summit Carbon Solution's ethanol carbon pipeline takes #2 spot on Heatmap's The Most At-Risk Projects of The Energy Transition 
• Ethanol carbon pipeline news: Attorneys differ on meaning of common carrier law in Summit case
• Summit Carbon Solutions pipelines won’t capture all carbon emitted by ethanol plants
• South Dakota Supreme Court ruling complicates Summit Carbon Solution’s push for land
• Referred pipeline law puts Summit Carbon Solution's permit quest in limbo
• Breaking crowded South Dakota ballot news: carbon pipeline law referendum validated
• Sustainable jet fuel company Gevo contributes $167K in defense of carbon pipeline law
• South Dakota Property Rights and Local Control Alliance turns in petitions to SD Secretary of State to force a vote on carbon pipeline policy
• South Dakota District 1 GOP House primary news round-up: carbon pipeline politics major issue

New Midwest battles brew over CO2 pipelines

If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 600 Maple Street, Summit SD 57266) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post. 

Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email [email protected] as recipient.

I'm on Venmo for those who prefer to use this service: @Sally-Sorensen-6

Topline: a pretty good deer hunt in Minnesota

As I noted Thursday in CWD confirmed in Traverse County wild deer harvested near Minnesota-South Dakota border, not all is well with Minnesota's deer herd.

But the mild 2023-2024 winter does seem to have been a blessing for the herd.

In the Minnesota Reformer's Topline article, UnitedHealth’s commitment to investors,  Christopher Ingraham reports:

A pretty good deer hunt

Hey, remember when Minnesota deer were in danger of going extinct because they were all getting eaten by wolves? You can scratch all that, because hunters had a pretty good year this year. Their total 2024 haul was 163,743 deer, according to preliminary Department of Natural Resources data, a bump of about 3% over the prior year and the first year-over-year increase since 2020.

That is basically what you’d expect given the mild winter of 2023-2024, which allowed deer populations to rebound slightly. That comports with what the DNR has been saying all along: The chief pressure on deer populations is harsh winters, not the state’s relatively modest wolf pack.

Update: I just got my December 13 copy of Outdoor News, which republished Marshall Helmberger's  November 14 commentary, North Dakota case study shows impact of winter without wolves, in the Timberjay. Highly recommended.

Photo: A Minnesota whitetail buck.

Related posts

•  US Congress Committee on Natural Resources subcommittee held wolf hearing in Sandstone 
• Fact check: what is the Leech Lake Band of Ojibwe's stand on wolf management?
• Minnesota Deer Hunters Association creates Wolf Report website; seeks public sightings
• Another card dealt in MN wolf management story: feds agree to draft new wolf recovery plan
• MN Reformer: Maps reveal where Minnesota deer hunters struck big, and struck out
• Don Peay shows up: will Hunters4Hunters be on receiving end of Utah's $500,000 war on wolves?

If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 600 Maple Street, Summit SD 57266) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post.

Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email [email protected] as recipient.

I'm on Venmo for those who prefer to use this service: @Sally-Sorensen-6

Noem's proposed SD State Library budget cut would hamstring local libraries, opponents say

Since working at The Library Company of Philadelphia-- a great Enlightenment library founded by Benjamin Franklin in 1731 and used by both Continental Congresses and the Constitutional Covention--I've had an affection for libraries.

Here's hoping Noem's plan to cut funding runs into a "no" at the state legislature.

From the South Dakota Searchlight.

State Library budget cut would hamstring local libraries, opponents say
by John Hult

A cut to the South Dakota State Library’s budget would be devastating to local libraries and the citizens who rely on them – including homeschool families – local librarians and library advocates say.

Republican Gov. Kristi Noem proposed a $1 million cut to the State Library during her budget address on Dec. 3, among other cuts in response to the depletion of federal pandemic relief funding and declining sales tax revenue.

Trimming the State Library’s budget would eliminate the vast majority of funding for the organization, which is an arm of the state Department of Education. The library currently has 21 employees; the budget cut would lay off a dozen of them, according to the governor’s proposal.

Nancy Van Der Weide, spokesperson for the department, said via email that the cuts will reduce database access and interlibrary loan support.

The office “will continue to support South Dakota Accessible Library Services (Braille and Talking Books) and professional development programming for public and school libraries” with the remaining nine employees, she wrote.

Seven State Library employees work in accessibility services. The budget cut would keep them but leave just two people to handle everything else. Opponents doubt the state will be able to afford to continue training or professional development if only two people remain on staff to service the entire state. 

One program, for example, allows librarians and staff to earn a certificate of public library management through a four-year course whose students meet once a month all year and meet in-person for a full week of training once a year. Van Der Weide did not respond to a message asking if that program specifically would remain if Noem’s proposal goes through.

Elizabeth Fox, president of the South Dakota Library Association and librarian for the H.M. Briggs Library at South Dakota State University, cannot envision the state offering anything that intensive with a dozen fewer people.

“With two people, they cannot do the training,” Fox said.

Fox and others in the library community say Noem’s proposal endangers public access to information and could leave local librarians floundering as they work to serve their communities without an adequately funded State Library to guide them.

“I’d say it would be like chopping them off at the knees, but it’s not even that,” said Jane Norling, vice president of the State Library Board and director of the Beresford Public Library. “It’s chopping off at the head, because three-fourths of the staff will be gone.”

Librarians: State Library benefits all South Dakotans

The state Library Association recently updated its homepage with a link to talking points on how to advocate for the State Library.

Librarians are concerned not just by the proposed $1 million state funding cut, but by the loss of another $1.3 million in grant funding through the federal Institute for Museum and Library Sciences. States are expected to match their grant funding at a 34% rate. Noem’s proposed budget wouldn’t leave enough money to do that, and notes that the budget cuts include a $1.3 million loss of federal funding.

The State Library uses grants to pay for a wide range of educational databases and resources like study guides and practice tests for the Law School Admission Test (LSAT) and Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT). 

Other databases accessible through the State Library include ancestry.com and Swank K-12 Streaming, which allows schools to stream films for educational purposes without paying licensing fees.

“Without this statewide subscription, schools would need to pursue individual licenses in order to legally stream movies,” Doris Ann Mertz, library coordinator at Custer School District, wrote in an email to Searchlight. “This is so cost-prohibitive.”

Norling noted that homeschooling families in the Beresford area rely heavily on local libraries, ordering books through interlibrary loans and using the databases funded by the State Library.

“We do borrow books for them, so that’s an impact to them,” Norling said.

The State Library offers a courier service for interlibrary loan materials.

The professionally curated databases and information sources like World Book Encyclopedia for general information or PubMed for scholarly publications are important for students and the public, Fox said.

There are other options like Wikipedia or Google Scholar, the library association president said, but those free resources can be manipulated and don’t have the reliability of an encyclopedia. Anyone can edit Wikipedia entries, she said, and Google Scholar ingests scientific research without filtering out questionably sourced materials.

It’s unclear what database resources might remain if the State Library were to be stripped to a bare bones budget. A single three-year state contract with a company called ProQuest that pays for citizen access to databases like the ProQuest Research Library, U.S. Newstream and Heritage Quest has a $512,000 price tag.

Van Der Weide did not reply to a question asking her to elaborate on what database resources would remain available if Noem’s cut takes effect. 

Training, coordination

Custer County Librarian Sarah Myers earned her public library certificate through the State Library’s Public Library Training Institute. Myers said the four-year training offered her the kind of education that would otherwise require a master’s degree. 

No school in South Dakota offers an accredited master’s in library science degree, according to the American Library Association’s database of accredited programs. 

Myers sees the opportunity for librarians like her to train without moving out of state, paying tuition and leaving their local libraries in the process as invaluable to a state where few counties or cities can afford to attract a degreed librarian.

“Librarians need training. They need to know how to do their jobs,” Myers said. “One way to get that is to get a master’s in library science, but that’s not always affordable to everyone.”

The national association’s president told Searchlight that state librarians – all 50 states have one – coordinate a host of services for local libraries, and do so with an eye to meeting local needs.

Beresford’s Norling and others pointed out that the State Library coordinates summer reading programs and trains librarians as each summer approaches. American Library Association President Cindy Hohl said that’s a common role for state libraries. 

Beyond state-level help with program set-up, there are nationwide summer reading resources available each year, and local librarians connect with them through their state libraries.

“Educators are always interested in how we can decrease the summer slide,” Hohl said, referring to the tendency of kids to lose ground in literacy in the summer months if they aren’t reading.

Hohl said state libraries are in the best position to make sure citizens have access to the most valuable information to local audiences, through database subscriptions or otherwise offering guidance to locals on content curation.

“Whether it’s helping a small business owner research the market or helping our homeschool parents find resources that are designed for children and their special learning needs, that’s what a state library does,” Hohl said. 

Cut could present difficulties for digital content 

The State Library acts as facilitator for a consortium of local libraries that offer e-books and other materials through an app called Libby. 

Local libraries pay a population-based fee to join the “South Dakota Titles To Go” consortium, with the state librarian facilitating the program and serving as the contact point for OverDrive, the company that owns Libby.

That’s a big concern for Ashia Gustafson, director of the Brookings Public Library. Libby has grown incredibly popular since 2020, she said. 

“It got a lot of people through the pandemic, because we couldn’t physically be open,” Gustafson said. 

Fox, who works across town at SDSU, suspects the Libby consortium will ultimately survive, but she also expects it’ll take a few messy years for the group to find its bearings without a state-level coordinator.

“The State Library has the expertise to negotiate contracts and to run the sort of behind-the-scenes, techie stuff that many of the librarians involved in this don’t have that expertise in,” Fox said. 

Tom Nelson, president of the State Library Board and a former legislator, told South Dakota Searchlight “there’s going to be a fight, or at least a very, very good discussion” on the State Library cut.

The personnel at the library now do more for the state than most citizens realize, he said.

“Each one of those employees has a face, name and a job to do,” Nelson said. “I just think that the people who made these recommendations to the governor either didn’t do the research, or they ignored it.” 

Examining Noem’s budget cuts

South Dakota Searchlight coverage of Gov. Kristi Noem’s proposed budget:

• Noem budget includes cuts, but also new school choice program and more prison money
• Noem proposes school choice program to ‘prioritize education.’ Critics say it’ll undermine it.
• Proposed funding cut could sink network in as little as two years, SDPB director says
• Commentary: Noem threatens government transparency with cuts to public broadcasting
• Noem’s plan to cut $17 million from maintenance and repairs is ‘shortsighted,’ regent says

Photo: Gov. Kristi Noem presents her annual budget address to lawmakers in the South Dakota State Capitol on Dec. 3, 2024. Behind her, from left, are House Speaker nominee Jon Hansen and Lt. Gov. Larry Rhoden. (Makenzie Huber/South Dakota Searchlight).

This South Dakota Searchlight article is republished online under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0.

If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 600 Maple Street, Summit SD 57266) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post. 

Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email [email protected] as recipient.

I'm on Venmo for those who prefer to use this service: @Sally-Sorensen-6

Summit Carbon Solutions in the news: landowners & counties appeal North Dakota pipeline permit; Summit tells Iowans to cease & desist; Pipeline Fighters Hub & CURE statements

A Saturday afternoon digest of news on the Summit Carbon Solutions activity and local reactions in three states.

From the North Dakota Monitor.

Landowners, 2 counties appealing Summit pipeline permit
by Jeff Beach

A group of landowners and two counties are appealing a North Dakota’s agency’s approval of a large carbon dioxide pipeline. 

The North Dakota Public Service Commission on Nov. 15 approved a route permit for 333 miles of the Summit Carbon Solutions pipeline in North Dakota. North Dakota is the planned endpoint of a 2,500 mile pipeline network to carry CO2 from ethanol plants in five states to an underground storage area west of Bismarck. 

Attorney Brian Jorde of Domina Law, which represents landowners across the pipeline area, said Friday in an email that there are several problems with the PSC’s findings.

He said the PSC received plume modeling and dispersion risk analysis as prepared by Summit that would show how CO2 might spread if there was a rupture of the hazardous liquid pipeline. 

The PSC did not allow the other parties to the case access to the plume information. 

“This ‘confidential’ information was also shared with other members of the public, yet potentially directly affected citizens engaged in the routing application process were kept in the dark,” Jorde wrote. He said that constituted a violation of due process rights.

If CO2 leaks from a pipeline, it can sicken or kill people in the immediate area.

“The public of North Dakota deserve transparency before hazardous pipelines are forced upon them,” Jorde said. 

Jorde said the landowner appeal will be filed in Burleigh County District Court. 

The two counties that are appealing are Burleigh and Emmons, both on the main trunk of the pipeline in central North Dakota. 

The counties are appealing the PSC’s February ruling that state rules supersede county ordinances on issues including how close a residence can be to a carbon pipeline. 

Emmons County filed an appeal on the ruling in March, but the matter was set aside until the commission voted on the permit application. 

Burleigh County filed its appeal this week. 

In South Dakota, the Public Utilities Commission ruled that county ordinances preempt state carbon pipeline rules, a main reason Summit was denied a permit there. Summit has since filed a new application. 

Summit has a permit in Iowa and for a short segment of its route in Minnesota. Nebraska has no state agency that issues carbon pipeline permits. 

The North Dakota Industrial Commission on Thursday approved Summit’s plan for underground storage of the carbon dioxide. 

At the Pipeline Fighters Hub, there's press release was shared on Thursday:

Press release: The Pipeline Fight Continues After North Dakota Industrial Commission Permits Summit’s CO2 Wells
by Mark Hefflinger

The Pipeline Fight Continues After North Dakota Industrial Commission Permits Summit’s CO2 Wells

Summit still needs a pipeline state permit in South Dakota; meanwhile, several court cases are also pending

Bismarck – Landowners and grassroots advocacy organizations vow to continue fighting after an unsurprising decision from the Industrial Commission. The North Dakota Industrial Commission, comprised of Gov. Doug Burgum, the Attorney General, and the Agricultural Commissioner, approved Summit Carbon Solutions’ permits for Class VI injection wells.

Summit proposes to use these wells to inject carbon dioxide (CO2), captured from 57 ethanol plants across Iowa, Nebraska, Minnesota, and the Dakotas, a mile underground in Oliver and Mercer counties, beneath the homes of residents and the larger communities.

The underground storage of CO2 has been associated with potential hazards due to the nature of the chemical, including its corrosiveness and the risks it may pose to public safety. Recently, an underground breach occurred at an ADM-operated sequestration facility in Decatur, Illinois, the first commercial geologic sequestration operation in the United States. CO2 corroded that equipment, allowing the gas to migrate beyond the defined storage zone, narrowly avoiding the acidification of an aquifer that serves as a source of drinking water. Summit proposes to use the same grade material in North Dakota that was corrupted by carbon dioxide at the Decatur facility.

“While not surprising, given Governor Burgum’s outspoken support for carbon capture and sequestration, this decision will only cause the opposition to Summit’s risky project to dig in their heels. This is a very technical issue, and the decision whether or not to permit this project should have been informed more by engineers, geologists, and other technical experts not by politicians whose loyalty is to a political agenda more so than the science behind these projects,” said Scott Skokos, Dakota Resource Council.

“We never expected any other outcome from this commission, particularly given Governor Burgum’s business and political relationship with Summit’s major investment partner, Continental Resources. At the end of the day, this predictable decision won’t make a difference to the widespread project resistance – we’ll continue doing everything we can to topple this stacked deck in order to protect the property rights and wellbeing of North Dakotans,” said Emma Schmit, Bold Alliance Pipeline Fighters Director.

Summit continues to face significant challenges as it encounters multiple permit appeals and local zoning regulations across the pipeline’s five-state footprint. Separate lawsuits over the Public Service Commission’s permitting decision have been launched by landowners and by Burleigh County. Additionally, the Northwest Landowners Association is suing the state over its amalgamation law (which allows the state to take away landowners’ mineral rights without the usual legal remedies granted by Eminent Domain).

# # #

About the North Dakota Easement Team:
The North Dakota Easement Team works to educate, organize, and support landowners who are opposed to eminent domain for private gain, and pool resources for landowners seeking legal representation in eminent domain battles and pipeline fights. Landowners with the NDET also sponsor a range of advertising and social media outreach and are networking with other state-based Easement Teams and landowners opposing carbon pipelines across the Midwest. The Easement Action Teams are a project of the Bold Education Fund. Read more about the NDET: https://NDeasement.org

About Bold Alliance:
The Bold Alliance is a network of “small and mighty” groups in rural states working to protect land and water. We fight fossil fuel projects, protect landowners against eminent domain abuse, and work for clean energy solutions while building an engaged base of citizens who care about the land, water, and climate change. (https://boldalliance.org)

About Dakota Resource Council:
Formed in 1978, Dakota Resource Council grew out of existing organizing efforts responding to impacts from coal development. DRC works with communities across the state to organize around the common goals of securing a thriving North Dakota and putting people first. Members take action to create public awareness and shape public policy to ensure safe and responsible development, protect North Dakota’s agricultural economy, and establish a foundation for a just transition to a diverse energy economy. (drcinfo.org)

And from the Monitor's sibling in the States Newsroom network, the Iowa Capital Dispatch. Bluestem is surprised that anyone would attempt to intimidate rural broadcaster and conservative voice Trent Loos, but we live in that sort of times.

Pipeline opponents receive cease and desist letters from Summit
by Cami Koons

Several opponents of the proposed Summit Carbon Solutions carbon sequestration pipeline have received letters on behalf of the company threatening lawsuits over perceived defamation, an environmental group representative said. 

Jess Mazour, a conservation program associate with the Sierra Club Iowa Chapter, said in a press release Thursday she received a letter from the company, “threatening to sue for compensatory or punitive damages if statements were not retracted.” 

The letter, dated Nov. 12, 2024, directed Mazour to cease and desist from “interfering” with and making any “further false and defamatory statements” about the pipeline project. 

The letter was sent from Jason Torchinsky with Holtzman Vogel law firm in Washington, D.C. and Todd Lantz with Weinhardt Law Firm in Des Moines. 

The letter points to a quote from Mazour in a nwestiowa.com article from August 2023, where she said Summit Carbon Solutions was in “in collusion” with the Iowa Utilities Board (now Iowa Utilities Commission) to “take away democracy and people’s rights.” 

The letter called the statement “false and defamatory” and said it, combined with Mazour’s “explicitly stated goal” to stop the pipelines, exposes her to “significant legal liability.” 

The letter then stated Summit Carbon Solutions and investors have $1 billion invested into the project to date and Mazour should “issue an immediate” public retraction of her statement to avoid legal action. 

Mazour said in a call with Iowa Capital Dispatch that she and Sierra Club counsel believe Summit has no “grounds to stand on” with the threatened lawsuit. 

“This is clearly an intimidation attempt just to keep us quiet and hamper our free speech rights,” Mazour said. 

Representatives from Summit Carbon Solutions did not respond to requests for comment or to verify the letters were sent on the company’s behalf. 

According to the press release from Mazour and the Sierra Club Iowa Chapter, at least six people have received similar letters. 

Trent Loos, who hosts several rural broadcasts, has also publicly stated he received a similar letter about comments he has made. During a Dec. 2 broadcast on X, Loos admitted he was wrong about one of the statements quoted in the letter, but he doubled down on two other statements the letter called false and defamatory. 

“In no way, shape, or form did I make a mistake,” Loos said of the two other alleged defamatory statements against him.

Mazour said the intention of the letters is “intimidation” and urged Iowans to “stand strong when companies take this kind of action.”

“It’s just really important that we don’t let this intimidation stop us from doing what’s right,” Mazour said. “It is our responsibility as citizens of the state to protect our land, and our water, and our rights, and our democracy, and no one should stand in the way of that.”

In Minnesota, pipeline opponent, rural grassroots group CURE posted on its blog:

PUC approves first CO2 pipeline permit in MN, with conditions

CURE and community members express anger and disappointment at the decision

On Thursday, December 12th, the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission (PUC) granted the route permit for Summit Carbon Solutions’ proposed carbon dioxide (CO₂) pipeline in Otter Tail and Wilkin Counties. However, the PUC placed a number of conditions on the permit, including prohibiting Summit from building in Minnesota before it has secured all permits and started construction in North Dakota on the pipeline and storage site. Summit’s lawyer stated at the meeting that construction at the storage site would not begin until “sometime” in 2026.

The segment permitted today was for 28-miles of pipeline that will run from the Green Plains Ethanol facility in Fergus Falls to the North Dakota border by Breckenridge. It is part of the much larger 2,500 mile Midwest Carbon Express CO2 pipeline network planned across parts of southern Minnesota, Iowa, South Dakota, and North Dakota. Along with CURE, the Minnesota Center for Environmental Advocacy and the Sierra Club argued against the approval at the PUC.

Today’s decision is a dereliction of the PUC’s duty to the public and sets a low bar for this first-of-its-kind project. The record shows clear risks from this project and a lot of unanswered questions by Summit. Minnesotans weighed in against Summit’s pipeline proposal by a 100-to-1 ratio, but instead of listening to community members, the commissioners paved the way for a project that risks our lands, waterways, and public health.
–Sarah Mooradain, Government Relations & Policy Director, CURE

Landowners and community members who live in the footprint of Summit’s project and attended the PUC meeting expressed dismay at the outcome.

With all due respect to the Commissioners, I was disappointed by the cavalier attitude they showed about the impact to our land and homes. The dismissal of the long-term impacts to crop yields, the lack of discussion about water use–these are the things that people in the area care about. But the PUC doesn’t seem to take them seriously.
–Tony Kramer, landowner and farmer from Redwood County

Indigenous allies who attended the meeting also pushed back against the arguments made that Summit’s project has climate benefits.

False Solutions are still a form of colonization. Summit’s pipeline directly impacts indigenous people. We need to end the fossil fuel industry with this false perception that carbon capture is a solution.
– Standing Rock Grassroots and Waste Wakpa Grassroots

A number of commissioners did note concerns that Summit’s project could be on shaky ground, relying on “tenuous” federal tax credits that could see substantial changes under a Trump administration and having not secured key permits in a number of states. They also reiterated, and Summit confirmed, that the permit does not give the company eminent domain powers in Minnesota and the company will have to secure voluntary agreements for the entire route before construction can begin.

Summit’s original timeline for building this project is already behind by a number of years and to date they haven’t applied for a permit for the hundreds of other miles of pipeline they say they want to build here in Minnesota. While today’s decision resolves some immediate questions for the company for this 28-mile route, they will not be putting pipeline in the ground in Minnesota anytime soon. A lot can happen in the meantime.
–Maggie Schuppert, Campaigns Director, CURE

After the PUC issues a written order in the next few weeks codifying today’s decision, parties will have 20 days to formally petition the Commission to reconsider its pipeline approval.

Meanwhile, here in South Dakota, the South Dakota Public Utilities Commission has scheduled six public input meetings in January on Summit carbon pipeline application. I'm hoping to attend the Watertown and Aberdeen meetings to document the peasant uprising here in South Dakota.

The North Dakota Monitor and Iowa Capital Dispatch articles are republished online  under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. 

Map:  The Summit Carbon Solutions proposed ethanol carbon pipeline network.

Related posts

• North Dakota Industrial Commission approves CO2 storage for Summit ethanol carbon pipeline
• Minnesota PUC granted a permit for Summit Carbon Solutions Otter Tail to Wilkin County pipeline
• South Dakota Public Utilities Commission schedules public input meetings on Summit carbon pipeline application
• Summit ethanol CO2 injection wells up for approval but court appeal already in the works
• Oh the irony: ethanol carbon pipeline company has failed to address crossing concerns, DAPL oil pipeline company says
• Iowa Supreme Court upholds land survey abilities of pipeline companies in Summit case
• U.S. appeals court hears Summit pipeline case against Iowa's Shelby and Story counties
• Never mind the voters: ethanol carbon pipeline company reapplies for South Dakota permit
• Summit ethanol carbon pipeline news digest: Summit sues another Iowa county and more!
• North Dakota Public Service Commission approves Summit carbon pipeline route
• North Dakota couple plans to ‘dig in’ if Summit ethanol carbon pipeline is approved
• Summit ethanol carbon pipeline news digest: CO2 pipeline in MN moves forward; ND Public Service Commission decision coming Friday
• SD pipeline foes secure legislative leadership; MN Summit decision could come Dec. 12
• In unofficial results, ethanol carbon-pipeline law tossed out by South Dakota voters 
• CURE: MN Administrative Law Judge’s report on Summit’s CO 2 pipeline expected November 4
• Seven South Dakota ballot measures, $7 million and counting: Reports reveal total spending
• Jeepers: ethanol coop kicks in another $400,000 to support carbon pipeline ballot question 
• Ethanol carbon news digest: Summit Carbon pipeline in MN, Iowa & North Dakota media
• Summit Carbon Solutions CEO asks for prayer, while MN PUC wants public comment on FEIS of Otter Tail – Wilkin portion of CO2 Pipeline
• Public can comment on Otter Tail – Wilkin Co section of ethanol carbon pipeline until Sept. 11
• VIDEO: Carbon capture in Minnesota: public lands, fast money, and pipe dreams
• Summit pipeline segment enters final permitting stages in Minnesota; CURE raises objections
• Ethanol is fueling support of South Dakota carbon pipeline ballot measure
• Pipeline Fighters Hub: Summit Carbon Solutions numbers don’t add up in South Dakota 
• Referred Law 21 & carbon pipelines: A landowner bill of rights or an undermining of local control
• Summit Carbon Solution's ethanol carbon pipeline takes #2 spot on Heatmap's The Most At-Risk Projects of The Energy Transition 
• Ethanol carbon pipeline news: Attorneys differ on meaning of common carrier law in Summit case
• Summit Carbon Solutions pipelines won’t capture all carbon emitted by ethanol plants
• South Dakota Supreme Court ruling complicates Summit Carbon Solution’s push for land
• Referred pipeline law puts Summit Carbon Solution's permit quest in limbo
• Breaking crowded South Dakota ballot news: carbon pipeline law referendum validated
• Sustainable jet fuel company Gevo contributes $167K in defense of carbon pipeline law
• South Dakota Property Rights and Local Control Alliance turns in petitions to SD Secretary of State to force a vote on carbon pipeline policy
• South Dakota District 1 GOP House primary news round-up: carbon pipeline politics major issue
• New Midwest battles brew over CO2 pipelines

If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 600 Maple Street, Summit SD 57266) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post. 

Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email [email protected] as recipient.

I'm on Venmo for those who prefer to use this service: @Sally-Sorensen-6

Speakers at South Dakota Farmers Union convention: uncertainty abounds for farm community as new administration takes shape

I've been wondering how Trump's policy promises and Cabinet nominees may affect the farming communities around me here in Northeast South Dakota.

The question was examined at the South Dakota Farmers Union convention in Huron this week.

From the South Dakota Searchlight.

Uncertainty abounds for farm community as new administration takes shape
by John Hult

Trump choice for ag secretary unknown in farm advocacy circles

HURON — The farm community faces uncertainty about tariffs and Cabinet picks but some opportunities to fight beef industry consolidation with the incoming presidential administration, according to the president of the National Farmers Union.

President Rob Larew spoke Thursday at the annual convention of the South Dakota Farmers Union in Huron. President-elect Donald Trump’s promise to levy tariffs on trade partners like China and some of his Cabinet picks have Larew concerned about what farmers might see in the coming years.

Tariffs from the first Trump administration that were continued by the Biden administration hit farmers hard, Larew said. A study from the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Economic Research Institute said the tariffs resulted in a $27 billion reduction in agricultural exports, with the largest export declines tied to trade with China.

Trump has threatened to issue additional tariffs against China, as well as against Mexico and Canada, upon taking office next month.

“We’re already getting the signals that we’re going to see these tariffs change and imposed on day one,” Larew said.

Matthew Roberts, an agricultural economist from Ohio, spoke to the group earlier in the day about tariffs. They have the potential to hurt farmers’ bottom lines, he said, and are all but certain to affect the price of groceries. 

“Sorry, but tariffs are ultimately paid for by consumers in about 80% of the cases,” Roberts said.

Concern about nominees

In their separate speeches, Roberts and Larew both mentioned Trump’s Cabinet picks and the promised efforts of other Trump-aligned insiders, like billionaire Elon Musk, as factors contributing to the unpredictability of farm policy in the coming years. 

The work Musk and former presidential candidate and venture capitalist Vivek Ramaswamy plan to do after promising to trim $2 trillion from the federal budget in the name of efficiency might create headaches for farmers, Larew said, though there isn’t a clear picture of what the pair intends to accomplish.

“We don’t really know what’s going to happen there,” Larew said.

Larew also mentioned Trump’s selection of Robert F. Kennedy Jr. as secretary for the Department of Health and Human Services. The one-time independent presidential candidate and scion of the Kennedy political dynasty has long contended that high fructose corn syrup poisons the American diet and contributes to an epidemic of obesity.

Trump said he would allow Kennedy to “go wild” on public health, which has sparked concerns in some quarters about policy shifts such as removing foods and beverages sweetened with the corn byproduct from schools. 

Roberts said the selection of RFK Jr. as HHS secretary was the one factor that made Trump less palatable for agriculture and free trade than his opponent.

There have now been three election cycles where the winner of the presidential contest has taken an anti-free trade stance, Roberts said, even as free trade policies have improved the economic lot of millions around the world and opened new markets for farmers.

Roberts said he suspects Kennedy could struggle to gain Senate support. If he gets it, he may struggle to remain in the 47th president’s good graces. 

“Kennedy will probably end up opening his mouth, making the president angry, and he’ll get jettisoned before he can do anything terribly permanent,” Roberts said.

Hope on antitrust

But Larew said he has hope in other areas, in spite of the concerns about people like Kennedy or Musk.

He believes that Gail Slater, who has been selected to serve as a top Trump adviser on antitrust issues, takes consolidation seriously. 

With antitrust enforcement – a top priority for Farmers Union, which is part of a five-year ongoing legal battle over beef industry consolidation – Larew expects his organization to appeal to Slater on areas affecting agriculture.

He described Brooke Rollins, the incoming president’s choice for agriculture secretary, as a blank slate. Rollins was an adviser to Trump in his first term, and is currently CEO of an organization called the America First Policy Institute.

“I meet at least every couple of weeks with the heads of a lot of other farm and ag organizations,” Larew said. “Even within that big space, nobody knew who she was.”

As far as the farm bill goes, Larew said there is growing fatigue about the topic. 

The bill, which includes crop insurance money and a host of other programs for farmers and food assistance for needy families, stalled this year after a series of fits and starts in both chambers of Congress. 

At this point, he said, he doesn’t see an immediate end to the logjam.

“I wish I had some hope to offer on that,” Larew said.

Photo: Rob Larew, president of the National Farmers Union, speaks at the South Dakota Farmers Union’s annual convention on Dec. 12, 2024, in Huron. (John Hult/South Dakota Searchlight).

Worth reading the Searchlight's companion article: Economist tells SD farmers that success means adapting to changing world, regulatory climate.

This South Dakota Searchlight article is republished online under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0.

Related posts

 

• SD Farmers Union President: Expansion of antitrust enforcement in agriculture is a hopeful sign for farmers and ranchers
• South Dakota's Big Sioux River buffer program takes off with higher landowner payments
• South Dakota News Watch: South Dakota beef industry sees potential in small, local meat plants
• Agri-Stats lawsuit: MN joins Biden administration push against concentration in agriculture
• MN Farmers Union president: A legislative agenda for Minnesota’s family farmer
• Where’s the meat? Solving a bottleneck in the meat supply chain vital to farmers’ profitability 
• Wabasso hog farmer & @LSPNow organizer Paul Sobocinski speaks truth to power on PBS
• Paul Sobocinski Star Tribune LTE: Cracks in industrial food system have been there all along
• Session Daily: Struggling farmers could see relief from loan fees with passage of Lippert's HF3739
• Guest post: Senate language defining feedlots as pasture could mean more manure in waters
• Paul Sobocinski: MN rural reality & factory farms

If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 600 Maple Street, Summit SD 57266) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post. 

Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email [email protected] as recipient.

I'm on Venmo for those who prefer to use this service: @Sally-Sorensen-6

North Dakota Industrial Commission approves CO2 storage for Summit ethanol carbon pipeline

It's been a breaking news day for ethanol carbon pipeline developments. First the Minnesota PUC granted a permit for Summit Carbon Solutions Otter Tail to Wilkin County pipeline.

Now the tale of the approval of a place to store the ethanol carbon.

From the North Dakota Monitor.

North Dakota approves CO2 storage for Summit pipeline
by Jeff Beach

North Dakota’s Industrial Commission on Thursday approved a plan to accept millions of tons of carbon dioxide to be permanently stored underground against the wishes of some landowners in the storage area. 

Iowa-based Summit Carbon Solutions plans to build a network of pipelines that gathers carbon emissions from ethanol plants across five states. If built, the pipeline will end west of Bismarck, where three injection wells will pump the carbon deep beneath private property into pore space — gaps and voids between the rocks. 

Summit compensates landowners for use of their pore space but an attorney for a group of landowners questions the accuracy of the model used by Summit to estimate where the gas will go when it is pumped underground. 

The Industrial Commission is composed of outgoing Gov. Doug Burgum, Attorney General Drew Wrigley and Agriculture Commissioner Doug Goehring, who approved the permits unanimously.

Thursday’s action by the Industrial Commission uses a North Dakota rule governing pore space called amalgamation. If at least 60% of the landowners in the pore space area approve, the other 40% are forced to comply. 

A lawsuit by the Northwest Landowners Association in North Dakota is already challenging the constitutionality of the amalgamation rule. 

About 92% of landowners in the sequestration area for Summit are participating voluntarily. The region includes parts of Oliver, Mercer and Morton counties. Department of Mineral Resources staff said landowners objecting to the project accounted for less than 2% of the acres. Carbon will be injected into the Broom Creek Formation about 5,500 feet below ground level. 

Summit estimates it will pump about 18 million tons of carbon dioxide into the storage area each year. The company will take advantage of federal tax credits — $85 per ton of carbon stored — as an incentive to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. 

“These sequestration permits are the result of years of rigorous scientific study, engineering design, and input from regulators, landowners, and local leaders,” Wade Boeshans, executive vice president of Summit Carbon Solutions, said in a news release. “With these permits, we’re one step closer to providing vital infrastructure that benefits farmers, ethanol producers, and communities across the Midwest.”

The carbon will come from 57 ethanol plants in five states — Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, North Dakota and South Dakota. 

Access to carbon capture and storage can significantly reduce an ethanol plant’s carbon score. Low-carbon ethanol may be able to fetch a premium price, which could also benefit corn growers. The carbon is captured during the fermentation process of turning corn into ethanol fuel. 

Tharaldson Ethanol at Casselton is the only North Dakota ethanol plant in the Summit pipeline project. 

Two other North Dakota ethanol plants are already capturing and sequestering carbon — Red Trail Energy at Richardton and Blue Flint Ethanol near Underwood. Those plants sit close to the areas with the suitable geology for carbon sequestration. 

Summit Carbon Solutions has obtained pipeline permits in Iowa and North Dakota. Minnesota approved a short segment of the route Thursday. 

Summit still still needs a permit in South Dakota. Nebraska has no state agency that permits carbon pipelines. 

In most states, it is the Environmental Protection Agency that permits CO2 storage wells, but North Dakota was the first state to be granted primacy in Class VI injection well permitting. 

This is a developing story and will be updated.

Photo: Gov. Doug Burgum takes part in a discussion of Summit Carbon Solutions injection wells, during a meeting of the North Dakota Industrial Commission on Thursday, Dec. 12, 2024, in Bismarck. (Mary Steurer/North Dakota Monitor).

This North Dakota Monitor article is republished online under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. 

Related posts

• Minnesota PUC granted a permit for Summit Carbon Solutions Otter Tail to Wilkin County pipeline
• South Dakota Public Utilities Commission schedules public input meetings on Summit carbon pipeline application
• Summit ethanol CO2 injection wells up for approval but court appeal already in the works
• Oh the irony: ethanol carbon pipeline company has failed to address crossing concerns, DAPL oil pipeline company says
• Iowa Supreme Court upholds land survey abilities of pipeline companies in Summit case
• U.S. appeals court hears Summit pipeline case against Iowa's Shelby and Story counties
• Never mind the voters: ethanol carbon pipeline company reapplies for South Dakota permit
• Summit ethanol carbon pipeline news digest: Summit sues another Iowa county and more!
• North Dakota Public Service Commission approves Summit carbon pipeline route
• North Dakota couple plans to ‘dig in’ if Summit ethanol carbon pipeline is approved
• Summit ethanol carbon pipeline news digest: CO2 pipeline in MN moves forward; ND Public Service Commission decision coming Friday
• SD pipeline foes secure legislative leadership; MN Summit decision could come Dec. 12
• In unofficial results, ethanol carbon-pipeline law tossed out by South Dakota voters 
• CURE: MN Administrative Law Judge’s report on Summit’s CO 2 pipeline expected November 4
• Seven South Dakota ballot measures, $7 million and counting: Reports reveal total spending
• Jeepers: ethanol coop kicks in another $400,000 to support carbon pipeline ballot question 
• Ethanol carbon news digest: Summit Carbon pipeline in MN, Iowa & North Dakota media
• Summit Carbon Solutions CEO asks for prayer, while MN PUC wants public comment on FEIS of Otter Tail – Wilkin portion of CO2 Pipeline
• Public can comment on Otter Tail – Wilkin Co section of ethanol carbon pipeline until Sept. 11
• VIDEO: Carbon capture in Minnesota: public lands, fast money, and pipe dreams
• Summit pipeline segment enters final permitting stages in Minnesota; CURE raises objections
• Ethanol is fueling support of South Dakota carbon pipeline ballot measure
• Pipeline Fighters Hub: Summit Carbon Solutions numbers don’t add up in South Dakota 
• Referred Law 21 & carbon pipelines: A landowner bill of rights or an undermining of local control
• Summit Carbon Solution's ethanol carbon pipeline takes #2 spot on Heatmap's The Most At-Risk Projects of The Energy Transition 
• Ethanol carbon pipeline news: Attorneys differ on meaning of common carrier law in Summit case
• Summit Carbon Solutions pipelines won’t capture all carbon emitted by ethanol plants
• South Dakota Supreme Court ruling complicates Summit Carbon Solution’s push for land
• Referred pipeline law puts Summit Carbon Solution's permit quest in limbo
• Breaking crowded South Dakota ballot news: carbon pipeline law referendum validated
• Sustainable jet fuel company Gevo contributes $167K in defense of carbon pipeline law
• South Dakota Property Rights and Local Control Alliance turns in petitions to SD Secretary of State to force a vote on carbon pipeline policy
• South Dakota District 1 GOP House primary news round-up: carbon pipeline politics major issue
• New Midwest battles brew over CO2 pipelines

If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 600 Maple Street, Summit SD 57266) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post. 

Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email [email protected] as recipient.

I'm on Venmo for those who prefer to use this service: @Sally-Sorensen-6

 

CWD confirmed in Traverse County wild deer harvested near Minnesota-South Dakota border

I read this press release from the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources with great sadness, since Traverse County abuts Roberts County, South Dakota, and the Lake Traverse Reservation. My neighbors hunt deer, some with great success.

Indeed, my Delorme Atlas and Gazetteer of South Dakota shows several Game Production Areas on this side of Lake Traverse and Mud Lake. This may dampen the hunts by both tribal and non-Indian hunters.

My topo map shows that the White Rock game production area is just across the border from where the deer was shot,

Hoping the agencies listed below will add the Sisseton Wahpeton Oyate's superlative Fish and Wildlife office.

From the MN DNR.

CWD confirmed in a wild deer near Wheaton in western Minnesota

A deer harvested near Wheaton in western Minnesota during the opening weekend of firearms season has tested positive for chronic wasting disease.

The adult male deer was harvested within deer permit area 271 along the Minnesota-South Dakota border. To date, no wild deer with CWD had been previously detected in DPA 271, nearby DPAs or near the Minnesota border in eastern South Dakota.

“This discovery in western Minnesota, while unwelcome news, highlights the importance and necessity of our disease surveillance efforts and allowing hunters to test deer harvested anywhere in the state if they would like to,” said Erik Hildebrand, wildlife health supervisor with the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources.

Following the detection near Wheaton, the Minnesota DNR will implement measures outlined in its CWD response plan, which calls for three consecutive years of testing to help determine the potential prevalence of the disease in DPA 271 and surrounding DPAs. The Minnesota DNR also will work with the South Dakota Game, Fish and Parks and the North Dakota Game and Fish Department to coordinate CWD surveillance and management activities in the vicinity.

Within DPAs where CWD has been detected and confirmed, the Minnesota DNR uses multiple management actions designed to help mitigate disease spread, including carcass movement restrictions, a deer feeding and attractants ban and, sometimes, increased hunting opportunities with increased bag limits. In 2024, DPA 271 will not be included in the CWD late-season management hunt that takes place Dec. 20-22. The adult male deer in DPA 271 that tested positive for CWD was harvested during the breeding season when deer are known to travel longer distances. Before deciding whether to remove additional deer in a CWD management hunt, the DNR will conduct surveillance in the fall of 2025 to better understand disease prevalence in the DPA.

Map: Screenshot of the location where the buck was shot in deer permit area 271 along the Minnesota-South Dakota border. Image obtained through the MN DNR's CWD test results: July 1, 2024 to present page. This is very close to South Dakota's White Rock wildlife production area, within the historic boundaries of the LAke Traverse Reservation, just across the South Dakota-Minnesota border

Related posts

• DNR and USDA to cull deer in Rochester area to slow CWD in southeastern Minnesota 
• Is it hunting? In South Dakota, ‘wild’ game increasingly raised in captivity for profit
• MinnPost: In effort to curb CWD, DFL lawmakers agree to ban new captive deer farms
• Session Daily: Bill targets deadly deer disease with tighter proposed restrictions on farms
• VIDEO: MN House environment committee passes most sweeping anti-CWD measure to date
• DNR: Chronic wasting disease suspected in a wild deer in Bemidji area for the first time
• MN Chronic Wasting Disease dilemma: should new deer farms be blocked? The old bought out?
• Chronic Wasting Disease: St. Louis County permanently bans new or expanded cervid farms 
• On Facebook, operator of CWD doomed Winona County deer farm wears Miller Scrap hat 
• MN Board of Animal Health: CWD confirmed in quarantined Winona County captive deer herd
• Update: More on Miller family deer farm interests
• Senate DFL Leader Franzen raises conflict-of-interest concerns in Republican leader's role overturning bipartisan vote to protect wild deer 

If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 600 Maple Street, Summit SD 57266) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post. 

Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email [email protected] as recipient.

I'm on Venmo for those who prefer to use this service: @Sally-Sorensen-6

Minnesota PUC grants permit for Summit Carbon Solutions Otter Tail to Wilkin County pipeline

Earlier today, I'd posted about January meetings in South Dakota Public Utilities Commission schedules public input meetings on Summit carbon pipeline application while watching the Minnesota PUC's decision hearing in St. Paul on IP7093/PPL-22-422 Summit Carbon Solutions, LLC In the Matter of the Application of Summit Carbon Solutions, LLC, for a Routing Permit for the Otter Tail to Wilkin Carbon Dioxide Pipeline Project in Otter Tail and Wilkin Counties, Minnesota. Online.

That hearing didn't go the way many of us in South Dakota and rural Minnesota wanted.

From the Minnesota Reformer (not a fan of the editorializing "long-awaited" phrasing in the Reformer headline).

PUC grants long-awaited permit for carbon capture pipeline
by Christopher Ingraham

The Minnesota Public Utilities Commission voted unanimously Thursday to grant a long-awaited permit to Summit Carbon Solutions, allowing the company to build a small portion of a planned 2,500 carbon capture pipeline network across the Midwest.

The Minnesota segment would run 28 miles from an ethanol plant in Fergus Falls to the North Dakota border. It would consist of 4.5-inch diameter pipe sunk 54 inches underground. The company estimates construction could start as early as 2026, although it is still negotiating right-of-way agreements with seven landowners along the route.

The pipeline would transport pressurized carbon dioxide from the ethanol plant to injection wells in North Dakota, which would pump the gas deep underground to be permanently stored in the rock. The goal is to prevent the greenhouse gas from entering the atmosphere and contributing to global warming.

Commissioners raised concerns about the project’s long term viability, given that the company will be almost entirely dependent on federal carbon tax credits that a new Congress could decide to revoke as early as next year.

Summit is a “startup company who has built their model on tax credits that are somewhat tenuous in my mind,” Commissioner John Tuma said. If the federal tax credits dried up, “it would definitely cause a reassessment” of the project’s viability, a company representative said.

However, those concerns weren’t enough to prevent the project from proceeding.

“We thank the Minnesota PUC for their thorough and diligent review of our project,” said Lee Blank, CEO of Summit Carbon Solutions, in a statement. “This decision underscores the importance of balancing economic opportunities for local communities with environmental stewardship.”

In a statement, rural advocacy group CURE, which opposes the pipeline, said “we are disappointed, if not surprised, by the PUC’s decision to give Summit its permit.” The group noted that “many questions remain about this project, how it will roll out, and what the impacts will be.”

Summit was founded in 2021 with an eye toward capitalizing on federal 45Q tax credits, which were greatly expanded under the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022. Carbon Capture has been a central pillar of President Joe Biden’s energy policy. If the project proceeds at the scale envisioned it could reap more than $18 billion in tax credits over 12 years.

Summit first applied for a Minnesota pipeline permit in 2022. In early 2023 the Public Utilities Commission asked the Department of Commerce to put together an environmental impact statement, which was completed in July 2024.

The Commission ruled today that the 394-page document is an adequate assessment of the project and its risks, and that those risks aren’t sufficient to prevent the permit from being granted.

Environmental and rural advocacy groups oppose the pipeline, noting that the carbon captured could one day be used to extract more oil from the ground, thus negating any decarbonization benefit.

A separate carbon capture project, the Heartland Greenway pipeline, was scrapped late last year due to difficulties navigating state regulatory environments.

This Minnesota Reformer article is republished online under  Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. 

Map:  A final EIS report offered three alternative route options for a carbon dioxide pipeline traveling from Otter Tail County to Wilkin County in Minnesota. Source. Minnesota Department of Commerce.

Related posts

• South Dakota Public Utilities Commission schedules public input meetings on Summit carbon pipeline application
• Summit ethanol CO2 injection wells up for approval but court appeal already in the works
• Oh the irony: ethanol carbon pipeline company has failed to address crossing concerns, DAPL oil pipeline company says
• Iowa Supreme Court upholds land survey abilities of pipeline companies in Summit case
• U.S. appeals court hears Summit pipeline case against Iowa's Shelby and Story counties
• Never mind the voters: ethanol carbon pipeline company reapplies for South Dakota permit
• Summit ethanol carbon pipeline news digest: Summit sues another Iowa county and more!
• North Dakota Public Service Commission approves Summit carbon pipeline route
• North Dakota couple plans to ‘dig in’ if Summit ethanol carbon pipeline is approved
• Summit ethanol carbon pipeline news digest: CO2 pipeline in MN moves forward; ND Public Service Commission decision coming Friday
• SD pipeline foes secure legislative leadership; MN Summit decision could come Dec. 12
• In unofficial results, ethanol carbon-pipeline law tossed out by South Dakota voters 
• CURE: MN Administrative Law Judge’s report on Summit’s CO 2 pipeline expected November 4
• Seven South Dakota ballot measures, $7 million and counting: Reports reveal total spending
• Jeepers: ethanol coop kicks in another $400,000 to support carbon pipeline ballot question 
• Ethanol carbon news digest: Summit Carbon pipeline in MN, Iowa & North Dakota media
• Summit Carbon Solutions CEO asks for prayer, while MN PUC wants public comment on FEIS of Otter Tail – Wilkin portion of CO2 Pipeline
• Public can comment on Otter Tail – Wilkin Co section of ethanol carbon pipeline until Sept. 11
• VIDEO: Carbon capture in Minnesota: public lands, fast money, and pipe dreams
• Summit pipeline segment enters final permitting stages in Minnesota; CURE raises objections
• Ethanol is fueling support of South Dakota carbon pipeline ballot measure
• Pipeline Fighters Hub: Summit Carbon Solutions numbers don’t add up in South Dakota 
• Referred Law 21 & carbon pipelines: A landowner bill of rights or an undermining of local control
• Summit Carbon Solution's ethanol carbon pipeline takes #2 spot on Heatmap's The Most At-Risk Projects of The Energy Transition 
• Ethanol carbon pipeline news: Attorneys differ on meaning of common carrier law in Summit case
• Summit Carbon Solutions pipelines won’t capture all carbon emitted by ethanol plants
• South Dakota Supreme Court ruling complicates Summit Carbon Solution’s push for land
• Referred pipeline law puts Summit Carbon Solution's permit quest in limbo
• Breaking crowded South Dakota ballot news: carbon pipeline law referendum validated
• Sustainable jet fuel company Gevo contributes $167K in defense of carbon pipeline law
• South Dakota Property Rights and Local Control Alliance turns in petitions to SD Secretary of State to force a vote on carbon pipeline policy
• South Dakota District 1 GOP House primary news round-up: carbon pipeline politics major issue
• New Midwest battles brew over CO2 pipelines

If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 600 Maple Street, Summit SD 57266) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post. 

Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email [email protected] as recipient.

I'm on Venmo for those who prefer to use this service: @Sally-Sorensen-6

South Dakota Public Utilities Commission schedules public input meetings on Summit carbon pipeline application

As I post this, I'm watching the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission decision hearing in St. Paul on IP7093/PPL-22-422 Summit Carbon Solutions, LLC In the Matter of the Application of Summit Carbon Solutions, LLC, for a Routing Permit for the Otter Tail to Wilkin Carbon Dioxide Pipeline Project in Otter Tail and Wilkin Counties, Minnesota. Online.

Meanwhile, there's news of another branch of the pipeline project here in South Dakota. I'll definitely be attending at least two of these meetings.

From the South Dakota Searchlight.

State schedules public input meetings on Summit carbon pipeline application
by South Dakota Searchlight Staff

The South Dakota Public Utilities Commission has scheduled a series of six public input meetings in January about a company’s permit application to construct a carbon dioxide pipeline.

The meetings are scheduled for Jan. 15-17 at various locations in eastern South Dakota near the proposed pipeline route.

Iowa-based Summit Carbon Solutions plans a 2,500-mile, $9 billion pipeline to capture carbon dioxide from 57 ethanol plants across five states, including eastern South Dakota, and transport it to North Dakota for underground storage. The project would capitalize on federal tax credits incentivizing the prevention of heat-trapping carbon emissions.

“The purpose of the public input meetings will be to hear public comments regarding the Application and the Project,” the commission said in a written order. “At the meetings, Summit will present a brief description of the Project, after which interested persons may appear and present their views, comments, and questions regarding the Application.”

Summit recently reapplied for a South Dakota permit after being rejected last year. The project has route permits in North Dakota and Iowa, while Minnesota is considering a permit and Nebraska has no state permitting process for carbon pipelines. North Dakota is also considering the proposed underground storage site.

The South Dakota public meeting schedule is:

• Wednesday, Jan. 15, at 10 a.m. CST at the Mitchell High School Performing Arts Center, 821 N. Capital St., Mitchell.
• Wednesday, Jan. 15, at 5 p.m. CST at the HUB Auditorium, Southeast Technical College, 2001 N. Career Ave., Sioux Falls.
• Thursday, Jan. 16, at 11:30 a.m. CST at De Smet Event Center Theater, 705 Wilder Lane, De Smet.
• Thursday, Jan. 16, at 6 p.m. CST at the Kampeska Hall, Ramkota Hotel & Watertown Event Center, 1901 Ninth Ave. SW, Watertown.
• Friday, Jan. 17, at 10:30 a.m. CST at the Dakota Room, The Dakota Event Center, 720 Lamont St., Aberdeen.
• Friday, Jan. 17, at 6 p.m. CST at Redfield School Auditorium, 111 E. Sixth Ave., Redfield.

Photo: South Dakota Public Utilities Commissioners, from left, Chris Nelson, Kristie Fiegen and Gary Hanson participate in a meeting Sept. 6, 2023, at the Capitol in Pierre. (Joshua Haiar/South Dakota Searchlight)

This South Dakota Searchlight article is republished online under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0.

Related posts

• Summit ethanol CO2 injection wells up for approval but court appeal already in the works
• Oh the irony: ethanol carbon pipeline company has failed to address crossing concerns, DAPL oil pipeline company says
• Iowa Supreme Court upholds land survey abilities of pipeline companies in Summit case
• U.S. appeals court hears Summit pipeline case against Iowa's Shelby and Story counties
• Never mind the voters: ethanol carbon pipeline company reapplies for South Dakota permit
• Summit ethanol carbon pipeline news digest: Summit sues another Iowa county and more!
• North Dakota Public Service Commission approves Summit carbon pipeline route
• North Dakota couple plans to ‘dig in’ if Summit ethanol carbon pipeline is approved
• Summit ethanol carbon pipeline news digest: CO2 pipeline in MN moves forward; ND Public Service Commission decision coming Friday
• SD pipeline foes secure legislative leadership; MN Summit decision could come Dec. 12
• In unofficial results, ethanol carbon-pipeline law tossed out by South Dakota voters 
• CURE: MN Administrative Law Judge’s report on Summit’s CO 2 pipeline expected November 4
• Seven South Dakota ballot measures, $7 million and counting: Reports reveal total spending
• Jeepers: ethanol coop kicks in another $400,000 to support carbon pipeline ballot question 
• Ethanol carbon news digest: Summit Carbon pipeline in MN, Iowa & North Dakota media
• Summit Carbon Solutions CEO asks for prayer, while MN PUC wants public comment on FEIS of Otter Tail – Wilkin portion of CO2 Pipeline
• Public can comment on Otter Tail – Wilkin Co section of ethanol carbon pipeline until Sept. 11
• VIDEO: Carbon capture in Minnesota: public lands, fast money, and pipe dreams
• Summit pipeline segment enters final permitting stages in Minnesota; CURE raises objections
• Ethanol is fueling support of South Dakota carbon pipeline ballot measure
• Pipeline Fighters Hub: Summit Carbon Solutions numbers don’t add up in South Dakota 
• Referred Law 21 & carbon pipelines: A landowner bill of rights or an undermining of local control
• Summit Carbon Solution's ethanol carbon pipeline takes #2 spot on Heatmap's The Most At-Risk Projects of The Energy Transition 
• Ethanol carbon pipeline news: Attorneys differ on meaning of common carrier law in Summit case
• Summit Carbon Solutions pipelines won’t capture all carbon emitted by ethanol plants
• South Dakota Supreme Court ruling complicates Summit Carbon Solution’s push for land
• Referred pipeline law puts Summit Carbon Solution's permit quest in limbo
• Breaking crowded South Dakota ballot news: carbon pipeline law referendum validated
• Sustainable jet fuel company Gevo contributes $167K in defense of carbon pipeline law
• South Dakota Property Rights and Local Control Alliance turns in petitions to SD Secretary of State to force a vote on carbon pipeline policy
• South Dakota District 1 GOP House primary news round-up: carbon pipeline politics major issue
• New Midwest battles brew over CO2 pipelines

If you appreciate Bluestem Prairie, you can mail contributions (payable to Sally Jo Sorensen, 600 Maple Street, Summit SD 57266) or use the paypal button in the upper right hand corner of this post. 

Or you can contribute via this link to paypal; use email [email protected] as recipient.

I'm on Venmo for those who prefer to use this service: @Sally-Sorensen-6