Fulltimer Voting in SD Might Be a Thing of the Past

[LindaH]

Just received an Escapees Advocacy News email this morning about a bill just recently introduced into the SD legislature. If this passes as written, voting by fulltimers domiciled in SD will be a thing of the past (there is a provision for appealing to the County Auditor, but there's no assurance that they would grant the appeal).

 

Here is the text of the bill (Senate Bill #164):

 

http://legis.sd.gov/Legislative_Session/Bills/Bill.aspx?File=SB164P.htm&Session=2016

 

The Escapees organization is on top of this and is attempting to contact the Senator and Representative who introduced the bill.

[markandkim]

Is the purpose of the legislation to target fulltimers?

[skp51443]

It looks to be aimed at fulltimers moving to SD from elsewhere and using a mail service, the linked PDF shows exactly what changes are proposed.

 

If SD becomes unfriendly to folks moving in they are going to miss out on a lot of income, both from taxes and fees and from Federal money based on population. Seems like a dumb thing to be doing unless there is a hidden motive to keep folks from voting.

 

Here is a printer-friendly version for folks that are wary of loading PDFs but it is missing the change markings that are in the original linked by LindaH above.

 

 

 

State of South Dakota

NINETY-FIRST SESSION

LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY, 2016

288X0421 SENATE BILL NO. 164

Introduced by: Senator Tieszen and Representative Otten (Herman)

FOR AN ACT ENTITLED, An Act to revise certain residency requirements for voter registration.

BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF SOUTH DAKOTA:

Section 1. That § 12-1-4 be amended to read:

12-1-4. For the purposes of this title, the term, residence, means the place in which a person has fixed his or her habitation and to which the person, whenever absent, intends to return.

No person may register to vote using a business location, campground, or post office box as the registration address. However, if no other residential address or valid physical description of the location of the residence is available, the person may appeal to the county auditor in the county of registration. The county auditor shall determine residency based on the following principles:

(1) The sole basis for the person's presence at the location is not based on a business or a commercial use, such as a mail forwarding service;

(2) The residence of the person is a place in which the person's habitation is fixed and to which the person has a definite plan to return following an absence;

(3) The person is not claiming residency of the state solely for taxation or insurance purposes with no intention of physically remaining or returning; and

(4) The person maintains a physical domicile with long-term sleeping accommodations at the residence.

If the county auditor denies the registration, the person may appeal to the Office of Hearing Examiners as a contested case pursuant to chapter 1-26D for the determination of residency. If the person does not meet the principles listed, the administrative law judge may still choose to allow voter registration if the judge determines circumstances indicate legitimate residence of the state. Prior long-term residence in the state shall be considered proof of intention to return to the state.

A person who has left home and gone into another state or territory or county of this state for a temporary purpose only has not changed his or her residence.

A person is considered to have gained a residence in any county or municipality of this state in which the person actually lives, if the person has no present intention of leaving.

If a person moves to another state, or to any of the other territories, with the intention of making it his or her permanent home, the person thereby loses residence in this state.

 

[Alie&Jim's Carrilite]

This is very simple to me. You take my right to vote away, I will leave your state today.

Texas will have an influx of residents.

We pay somewhere around $6-800 a year for our vehicles and use nothing in return other than being in their database. We also pay our health insurance to their state approved insurer, and vehicle / rv insurance to their approved and licensed company.

[Selah]

You are either considered a resident or not. If you are not a resident you cannot register vehicles or obtain a drivers license or a federal ID or a voters registeration. If that is the case then all full timers currently using SD will need to declare a new domicile and obtain new drivers licens, plates, voter ID, etc.

If you are considered a resident then the state cannot arbitrarily disenfranchise its citizens.

This should be interesting.

[mrschwarz]

You are either considered a resident or not. If you are not a resident you cannot register vehicles or obtain a drivers license or a federal ID or a voters registeration. If that is the case then all full timers currently using SD will need to declare a new domicile and obtain new drivers licens, plates, voter ID, etc.

If you are considered a resident then the state cannot arbitrarily disenfranchise its citizens.

This should be interesting.

 

A few friends and I were discussing this and came to the same conclusion. I understand that the legislators don't like foreign influence in their state, but they like the money. I wonder how this was tied to the driver's license issue that Escapees ran into last year?

[rynosback]

I wounder if this will just be on future people trying to get in the state if the bill passes. Will the ones who have had SD claimed as there domicile be grandfathered?

[Pat & Pete]

This from the other voting thread :

 

 

 

Send a letter to your rep or send a note to these gentlemen that wrote the bill-

288X0421 SENATE BILL NO. 164

Introduced by: Senator Tieszen and Representative Otten (Herman)

Just highlight their names and google them. The main state page will load and there is a "contact" button at the bottom of the left column.

Here is the reply already from the good senators office-

South Dakota issues and elections should be decided by South Dakotans. If you have connections here besides a P.O. Box you are welcome to vote. The $$ you spend on license plates is not part of residency for voting purposes. Senator Craig Tieszen

[Kirk W]

I wonder how this was tied to the driver's license issue that Escapees ran into last year?

I just reread your post and realized what you were asking as about the flap with SD only issuing a short term license over the address of a building there purchased by Escapees for that purpose. In this case it suree does seem to be the case in SD, based upon the statement of Sen. Tiezen. It sees that at least some of them do want to get rid of RV residents.

[LindaH]

Kirk, last year when Escapees was trying to set up their mail forwarding service in SD, they ran into a problem. I don't recall now what it was, but it was discussed in these forums. Whatever the problem was, it was finally resolved.

 

If this bill passes, not only will it affect fulltimers using SD as a domicile, it'll probably put a lot of SD mail forwarders out of business, or at least greatly affect their bottom line.

[TCW]

South Dakota has also attracted a lot of Trusts because of its tax friendly and Trust friendly regulations which help large trusts avoid the federal estate tax. The trusts have to have an actual physical presence so small offices are rented and I have read that many sit empty. I'm wondering how many of these folks with trusts also attempt to establish residency using the rented address as a means to avoid estate and other taxes in other states. This legislation may not just be about fulltime RVers.

[Mark and Dale Bruss]

I send the Senator a note reminding him that collecting fees from a citizen without having a voting power is something the future citizens of the United States faced a couple of hundred years ago from King George.

 

I just received the Senators response:

I think you just made my argument. The colonies didn’t want outsiders such as the King controlling their activities. I don’t want non-residents controlling the decisions of South Dakotans. Senator Craig Tieszen

 

I guess this Senator doesn't count us as citizens. And can you believe this guy is a Republican.

[bigboomer]

We are so glad to have moved to Texas from SD.....when this arrogant Senator finds himself answering questions from the various counties on why he put businesses out and that their tax/ fee coffers are reduced maybe he will then get it....

 

He obviously does not know his history. ...we fought the King because we did not have representation in Parliament but we're being taxed well beyond our means.....So I guess King Tieszen wants us to be royal subjects again.

 

Another example of an overreaching out of control government!

[BrianT]

I send the Senator a note reminding him that collecting fees from a citizen without having a voting power is something the future citizens of the United States faced a couple of hundred years ago from King George.

 

I just received the Senators response:

I think you just made my argument. The colonies didn’t want outsiders such as the King controlling their activities. I don’t want non-residents controlling the decisions of South Dakotans. Senator Craig Tieszen

 

I guess this Senator doesn't count us as citizens. And can you believe this guy is a Republican.

 

So we fulltimers that are domiciled in SD are "non-residents"? If we're not residents there, then in what state are we residents? We don't have a home elsewhere, we had to swear to that when we signed up for the mail service in Sioux Falls.

 

I was considering moving from SD this year. Sounds like it's a good time to do so. I guess SD doesn't want us anymore.

[Kirk W]

Kirk, last year when Escapees was trying to set up their mail forwarding service in SD, they ran into a problem. I don't recall now what it was, but it was discussed in these forums. Whatever the problem was, it was finally resolved.

 

If this bill passes, not only will it affect fulltimers using SD as a domicile, it'll probably put a lot of SD mail forwarders out of business, or at least greatly affect their bottom line.

I just realized that the question was not intended as I first read it. There was a problem with a county clerk not wanting to issue licenses to the RV residents under the Escapee plan. This one looks to me as though it would also impact those who use any of the other mail service providers as well, like America's Mailbox and My Dakota Address.

[Alie&Jim's Carrilite]

Seems to me the good senator doesn't want our tax dollars.

I have no issue moving to Texas and using Escapee's there. South Dakota was originally more convenient for us, but we'll see how this shakes out.

[LindaH]

With the Presidential elections coming up in a few months, if we were still domiciled in SD, I'd be changing to Texas (Florida would never have been an option for us) right NOW. I wouldn't take a chance that this bill would become law before November, and I wouldn't be able to vote!

[Mark and Dale Bruss]

I don't think we should move from South Dakota because of this Senator, we make him leave his office because he talking about depriving citizens of their vote.

 

Has the SD newspapers seen this yet?

[Alie&Jim's Carrilite]

I don't think we should move from South Dakota because of this Senator, we make him leave his office because he talking about depriving citizens of their vote.

 

Has the SD newspapers seen this yet?

I don't know if the newspapers have seen this. I did send it to our mail forward company, and asked them for their opinion. What I don't know is how often a stunt like this is pulled and then voted down. What the congressman doesn't realize is that most of us probably don't care about the local elections, just the national level- US senate and Congress and Presidency.

[FTsince2000]

Hi all. I just spoke with the General Manager of my SD mail forwarder, Dakota Post. According to him, this whole thing came about because the owner of another mail forwarding company sent out flyers that talked up the political opponent of the sponsor of Senate Bill 164. Obviously, the Bill's sponsor didn't like it, and decided that he would put the industry out of business, by specifically targeting the voting rights of fulltimers registered in SD.

 

(Gotta LOVE a politician, right?!?)

 

Anyway, as of now, the Bill is still in Committee. DPost's General Mgr. believes that it will die in Committee because other than this one Senator, there's no real support for it in the Senate. He also said that between 2002 and 2015, SD fulltimers have contributed over $12 million in taxes to the SD economy. He seriously doubts that SD will turn its nose up to that kind of money,

 

 

Dakota Post will be sending a newsletter to its subscribers in the next week or so, and will address the status of this Bill.

 

I know there's nothing certain at this time, but I felt a little better after our conversation.

 

-- Connie C., #41879

[Mark and Dale Bruss]

From our mail service, this Senator was ticked about the Wheel Tax in Rapid City and decided to take it out on us.

 

Again, any elected official who think they can take the vote away from citizens, should not be allowed to finish his term.

[JRP]

Yes, this all started over the recent fight over implementing a wheel tax in Pennington County. There was a special election a few months back to vote on the wheel tax. There was lots of press coverage at that time. The major mail forwarding company in Pennington County (Americas Mailbox) was very vocal in lobbying against the wheel tax. This senator took offense to their position and the idea that outsiders (fulltimers using mail forwarding for domicile) could possibly swing the vote. It was during that fight, that he made the threat to propose new rules to keep mail forwarding based residents from voting. In the end, the few number of fulltimers actually casting votes had no impact on the results, The wheel tax lost by about 2000 votes and only 400 votes came from PMB residents.

here is one of the news articles written back then, http://rapidcityjournal.com/news/local/predicted-rver-election-impact-fizzles/article_1871c14e-cdbf-5d1d-adaa-773523c0a9a9.html

Also worth noting, the Pennington County Commissioners had actually passed & approved the wheel tax and were preparing to implement it 1/1/16. However some locals passed around a petition and got enough signatures to force the issue onto a special election ballot.

 

Now he's following through on his threat. He just doesn't believe we're "residents" and doesn't care if the state allows us to get drivers licenses and vehicle plates, but he doesn't want us voting.

Thankfully he is in the minority and according to Don & Barb, the owners of Americas Mailbox, this bill is not going anywhere. But I'd certainly like to repay this senator the next time he comes up for election. The sad fact is, of the approx. 10,000 residents at Americas Mailbox, only 1/3rd of them even register to vote, and in this local election only 1/10th of those voted. I'm sure the statistics would be higher in a national election, but like the rest of the country, less than half of us actually exercise our right to vote.

 

 

PS: for those not familiar with the SD wheel tax issue. SD has always allowed for any SD county to implement a wheel tax. In the past it was purely voluntary & optional, a few counties had it, most did not. In preparing for the 2016 SD state wide budget, there was a major short fall in funding SD roads & bridges. To avoid a massive increase in one source, they spread the increase over 4 separate items: they raised the sales/use tax from 3 to 4% (the 1st increase in 20 yrs), they raised the state portion of fuel taxes slightly, they raised the vehicle registration/renewal fees, and they required each and every county in SD to implement a wheel tax. The penalty for not implementing a wheel tax is loss of all state funding for local roads/bridges, which in Pennington County would be a loss of about $2.5 million. That's why this is a sensitive issue for the politicians, if the wheel tax doesn't pass, they have to come up with $2.5 mil from other local sources. The state senators who passed this agreement, including the wheel tax penalty, assured all the county commissioners that there was no way the voters in any county would defeat the wheel tax if they knew it was going to cost them. Now they're finding out differently and the state senators who pushed this deal, including Mr Tieszen are taking some heat.

[bigjim]

I sure wouldn't want to let a guy like this force me to move to retain my voting privilige. I would be interested in at least one local election in the upcoming years. In his case it is just sour grapes it sounds like but it in not uncommon for anyone moving into a small town or rural area to be considered and outsider for more than a generation.

[Repkad]

Jim2 did a very good job of explaining the current situation. I posted results of my discussion with a Hansen County mail forwarder in the Sharing the Fulltime forum (by mistake). Hansen County already had a wheel tax (a whole $2 per wheel, I think). Representatives in that area of the state confirmed what Jim2 has reported here and apparently added their opinion that this bill will not move forward into law if they have any say. I sure hope not. All my paperwork to support SD domicile is ready to be mailed. I'm delaying for a while to see which way the wind blows, but need to make the change soon as all my NJ registrations come due in about six weeks. Hopefully, we will get some sort of Escapees Advocacy update before then.

[freestoneangler]

It's all about the money... 99.99% of the time. The 0.01% is simply the cases where they haven't figured out a way to get more money.