The Rural Lobbyist: SDFU Scores Key Victories in the 2017 Legislative Session.

South Dakota Farmers Union stayed busy this legislative session working on a number of legislative issues. These issues ranged from promoting the use of Premium E-30 to funding the Animal Disease Research and Diagnostic Lab. Fortunately, SDFU is able to boast a number of successes in this year’s efforts.There seemed to be a strong theme this year with the issues SDFU addressed throughout session. That theme focused on the relationship between the producer and the consumer. Our goal was to pass legislation to make those relationships stronger. Below you will find a list of our efforts and what we accomplished this past session.

• The Buffer Strip Bill

The “Buffer Strip Bill” is somewhat of a carryover from the 2016 legislative session. In 2016, Former Senator Jim Peterson presented a bill that incentivized the use of buffer strips around lakes, ponds, and streams in order to enhance and protect water quality in South Dakota. The bill had moved quickly through both the House and Senate and found significant support. However, when the bill reached the Governor’s desk it was vetoed. In cooperation with the governor’s office and the department of revenue, the bill was brought back this year with a more detailed structure and implementation process in place. Once again the bill found strong support this legislative session. SDFU was a strong advocate in 2016 and was again in 2017. This time, when the bill reached the governor’s desk, it wasn’t vetoed. It was signed and will take effect July 1^st. If you want to learn more about the “buffer strip bill” you can read more here and here.

• Premium E-30 Resolution

One of the major victories of the 2017 session was the passage of Senate Concurrent Resolution 14. SCR 14 urged Governor Daugaard to fuel the vehicles in the state fleet with Premium E-30. The bill touted 31 co-sponsors and was met with strong support in both the House and Senate. The text of the bill highlighted the misconceptions with Premium E-30, as well as the benefits of filling up with the premium fuel. The resolved statement indicated the state legislature’s support of Premium E-30 in the state fleet. The resolution passed 30-2 in the Senate and 58-9 in the House. Since the passage of SCR 14, the governor’s office has begun the bidding process for Premium E-30. This is a big step in the advancement of our homegrown fuel. With efforts taking place on the national level, including actions taken by a coalition of governors, this is a signal that states like South Dakota support the use of Premium E-30. You can read more here.

• Animal Disease Research and Diagnostic Lab Funding

Much of the conversation throughout the session dealt with funding for the ADRDL. With reports that revenue was far below budget estimates, it proved difficult finding $58 million to fund the new ADRDL. If you recall, the initial proposals listed a number of tax and fee increases that would further burden farmers and ranchers in South Dakota. This placed the burden solely on agriculture. At SDFU we were determined to make sure that did NOT happen. SDFU originally took the position that funding should be taken from the current budget surplus of over $150 million. However, it was made clear early on that certain entities would not allow that to happen in order to protect the AAA bond rating recently acquired by South Dakota. SDFU then focused on taking it from other funds like the Revolving Economic Development Initiative (REDI) fund. With Senate Bill 162, there was an attempt to take funds from the REDI fund, as well as diverting last year’s .5% increase in the farm machinery tax toward a bond payment. SDFU supported SB 162 but the bill was ultimate tabled due to preference of another funding option. You can read more about that bill here. At the midpoint of session, House and Senate leadership called a number of meetings to discuss the potential options for ADRDL funding. During these meetings and others, we developed a plan to divert a portion of last year’s sales tax increase toward a bond payment for the lab. It is important to note that the money diverted would not come from money previously dedicated to a teacher pay increase. Instead, the money would be diverted from the property tax relief portion of the increase. This was ultimately the path chosen by the majority and was passed by both houses. While we took a number of bites at the apple, we consider this option a victory because we avoided the initial proposal of a whole host of fee and tax increases on farmers and ranchers. By using the revenue collected from every sales tax payer (including residents and non-residents), we were able to avoid placing further burden on producers and still finding adequate funding for the lab. You can read more about the process in previous stories here and here.

• Country of Origin Labeling

A longtime issue of Farmers Union, country of original labeling (COOL) was once again discussed this legislative session in the form of Senate Bill 135. The bill attempted to provide for statewide country of origin labeling of all beef products. SB 135 was somewhat different from COOL on the national level because it focused on the retailer rather than the packer. With SB 135, retailers would have to provide a beef product’s country of origin through the use of a placard. If the country of origin was unknown, the retailer would simply have to provide that information to the consumer as well through the use of a placard. The penalty for failing to comply was a miniscule petty offense. Unfortunately, last minute scare tactics and a few unexpected events ultimately killed SB 135 on the Senate floor. However, it should still be considered a victory in the sense that we were able to get the bill out of committee and kept the conversation alive. The ultimate goal is still to get COOL reinstated on a national level and every step we can take, no matter how small, will help make that happen. To read more on COOL during this legislative session, click here and here.

• Rural Broadband

Rural broadband is an issue for many Farmers Union families. As advancements in ag technology move at a rapid pace, some farms only fall further behind without access to rural broadband. That’s why Farmers Union was happy and eager to support Senate Bill 71. During testimony on SB 71, proponents explained that there are still many rural pockets across the state without access. Groups across the spectrum joined in support of SB 71 including members from the telecommunications industry, the governor’s office of economic development, and the Public Utilities Commission. South Dakota Farmers Union was the only ag group to testify in favor of SB 71. Ultimately, SB 71 inserts telecommunication projects into the reinvestment payment program. This would allow projects up to $20 million for the purpose of expanding rural broadband. The success of SB 71 serves as another notch in the win column for SDFU this session.

• The Off the Radar License Bill

Sometimes bills fly under the radar only to become a bill that grabs the attention in the waning moments of the session. Senate Bill 130 was one of those bills. A bill that started as a simple license fee increase evolved into a piece of legislation that caught the attention of a number of ag groups late in the 2017 legislative session. The original increase from 2$ to 4$ for both retailers and the Game, Fish and Parks moved quickly through the Senate by a vote of 28-3. At that time the bill wasn’t even on the SDFU radar. Things quickly changed in the House Ag Committee when bill was deferred to the 41^st legislative day by a vote of 8-5. However the bill was revived by the same committee 5 days later by the same vote. The bill was then amended to only provide the increase for the retailers, not GF&P. After concerns arose about the competition between the retailers and the GF&P, a compromise was struck. The new bill would increase the fees for both retailers and GF&P but would specifically designate the increase in funds between two GF&P programs. The two programs are the wildlife depredation fund and the animal damage control fund. With this designation, GF&P would be given more resources to address problems like coyote control. In fact, GF&P testified that without this increase it was more likely than not that they would be back next year requesting additional revenue in order to further manage the ADC fund. It just goes to show that you always have to be on your toes when you wander the halls of the capitol. Who knows what bills will become a benefit or a burden. You can read more about that bill here.This legislative session was certainly jam packed with issues that kept the SDFU team busy during the winter months. We are happy to celebrate a number of successes and look forward to working even harder next session. Our efforts during this session were team efforts. With your support we were able to accomplish great things. Whatever you do, and no matter who is in this role, support your legislative team. When 18,000 members speak through one unified voice, people listen. Together you can grow family agriculture.