Jump to content

SD 2016 Senate bill 164


Recommended Posts

After deciding against Florida as a domicile, I was just about to send in all my paperwork for SD mail forwarding and vehicle registration when I was stopped in my tracks by the recent Escapees Advocacy report about SD Senate bill 164. I called the Hansen County mail service that I was about to sign up with. They met with three of their representatives yesterday and explained how much money (about $1million) their small service alone brings to the county because of RVers and other customers. The state reps said that they did not think the bill would move forward due to the economic impact across the state if RVers pulled out of SD in favor of a different domicile. This was a little encouraging, but I'm still concerned about making a domicile decision that may result in our not being able to vote in the Presidential election. Have any of you SD residents had similar discussions about bill 164 with your mail forwarding service? If so, what kind of feedback did you get?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dottie, Did you see the post from yesterday on the same subject? There's quite a bit of information there.



Actually, I did not see it. I completely missed the Action Items Forum. No wonder I could not find posts on this subject! Duh...my bad! Thanks for redirecting me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This was 2-17-16


SB 164: revise certain residency requirements for voter registration.

Presented by: Senator Tieszen


Moved by: Otten (Ernie)
Second by: Soholt
Action: Prevailed by roll call vote. (8-1-0-0)

Voting Yes: Hunhoff (Bernie), Sutton, Brown, Holien, Otten (Ernie), Soholt, Tieszen, Cammack

Voting No: Solano


Moved by: Brown
Second by: Soholt
Action: Prevailed by voice vote.

Rena Ortbahn


Committee Secretary

Gary Cammack, Chair
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hope that if, or when, if the senator is to be believed, this issue raises its head again, someone will remind the senator that most RV'ers claiming SD as their domicile have signed a notarized affidavit under penalty of perjury that asks just two questions:


"1. Is South Dakota your state of residence? _____Yes _____No"

"2. Is South Dakota the state you intend to return to after being absent? _____ Yes _____No"


By denying them resident voter status he is effectively saying that everyone that submitted that affidavit marked in the affirmative has committed perjury. The legal backlash could be interesting to say the least...

Link to comment
Share on other sites


This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Create New...