Laws governing the initiative process in South Dakota

Laws and procedures

Laws governing ballot measures
State
• Laws governing state initiative processes
• Laws governing state recall processes
• Changes to ballot measure law in 2024
• Difficulty analysis of changes to laws governing ballot measures
Local
• Laws governing local ballot measures
Learn about Ballotpedia's election legislation tracker.
2024 » « 2022

Citizens of South Dakota may initiate legislation as either a state statute or a constitutional amendment. In South Dakota, citizens also have the power to repeal legislation via veto referendum. The South Dakota State Legislature may also place measures on the ballot as legislatively referred constitutional amendments or legislatively referred state statutes with a majority vote of each chamber.

Crafting an initiative

Of the 24 states that allow citizens to initiate legislation through the petition process, several states have adopted restrictions and regulations that limit the scope and content of proposed initiatives. These regulations may include laws that mandate that initiatives address only one topic, restrict the range of acceptable topics for proposed laws, prohibit unfunded mandates and establish guidelines for adjudicating contradictory measures.

Single-subject rule

See also: Single-subject rule

In South Dakota, all citizen initiatives—both initiated constitutional amendments and initiated state statutes—must concern only one subject.

South Dakota did not have a single-subject rule for ballot measures until 2018. Constitutional Amendment Z was approved on November 6, 2018. It enacted a single-subject rule to initiated constitutional amendments and legislatively referred constitutional amendments and required that constitutional amendments be presented so that multiple proposed amendments to the constitution be voted on separately.

In 2018, the state Legislature passed and the governor signed a bill—House Bill 1007—to enact a single-subject rule for initiated state statutes as well.

See law: South Dakota Constitution, Article III, Section 1 and Article XXIII, Sections 1-3 and South Dakota Codified Laws, Title 2, Chapter 1 and Title 12, Chapter 13

Subject restrictions

See also: Subject restrictions (ballot measures)

In South Dakota, initiated measures and amendments may not create private or special laws. Also, they are not required to specify a funding source for mandated expenditures.

See law: South Dakota Constitution, Article III, Section 23

Veto referendums on emergency legislation

In South Dakota, veto referendums cannot be used on emergency legislation.

See law: South Dakota Constitution, Article III, Section 1

Competing initiatives

See also: Superseding initiative; "Poison pills"; List of South Dakota ballot measures

State law provides that if two initiatives with conflicting provisions or contrary intent are approved, the one that receives more "yes" vote supersedes in all areas of conflict. The law states the following:

“

If two or more initiated measures or amendments to the Constitution are approved by the voters at the same election, each initiated measure or amendment shall be given effect, unless the initiated measures or amendments conflict or a contrary intent plainly appears. For purposes of any conflict or the determination of intent under this section, the initiated measure or amendment receiving the greatest number of affirmative votes at the election shall be given effect.

”

See law: South Dakota Constitution, Article III, Section 1, Article XXIII, Sections 1-3 and South Dakota Codified Laws, Title 2, Chapter 1

Starting a petition

Each initiative and referendum state employs a different procedure for filing petition applications. Some states require preliminary signatures while others do not. In addition, several states review each proposed statute, verifying that the law conforms to the style and conventions of state law and recommending alterations to initiative proponents. Some of these states also review the law for more substantive considerations of content and consistency. Also, many states conduct a review of the ballot title and summary, and several states employ a fiscal review process which analyzes proposed laws to determine their impact on state finances.

Applying to petition

See also: Approved for circulation

Prior to collecting signatures, sponsors must file a copy of the proposed statute or amendment with the South Dakota Legislative Research Council for review. Once the review has been completed and the ballot language drafted by the South Dakota attorney general, a complete copy of the petition, including the full text of the proposed statute or amendment, the attorney general's summary, a notarized list of the names and addresses of the petition sponsors and a statement of organization, must be submitted to the secretary of state.

• An example of a completed initial filing can be found here.

For referendum petitions, a draft of the petition form must be filed with the secretary of state before circulation and must:

“

Contain the title of the referred law; Contain the effective date of the referred law; Contain the date of the general election at which the referred law is to be submitted; Be accompanied by a notarized form that includes the names and addresses of the petition sponsors; and Be accompanied by a statement of organization

”

The State Board of Elections has the authority to pass rules related to petition sheet size and font size.

See law: South Dakota Codified Laws, Title 2, Chapter and Chapter 13, Section 25 and South Dakota Administrative Rules, Chapter 5:02:08:07

Proposal review/approval

See also: Approved for circulation

Once the measure is submitted to the Legislative Research Council, the council reviews the measure for clarity, coherence and style. The council then provides comments to the sponsors as well as the secretary of state and attorney general. All suggestions made in the comments are optional.

• An example of LRC comments can be found here.

The secretary of state must determine if a proposed initiated constitutional amendment complies with the state's single-subject rule and if it is an amendment rather than a revision. The secretary of state cannot approve the initiative for signature gathering if he or she determines the initiative concerns more than one subject or is a constitutional revision rather than a constitutional amendment. The secretary of state must provide written notice to initiative sponsors of the determination, and sponsors can challenge the determination to the South Dakota Supreme Court within 15 days of the written notice.

See law: South Dakota Codified Laws, Title 12, Chapter 13, Section 25

Petition summary

See also: Starting a petition

After the council completes its review, proponents must submit the final draft to the attorney general. The attorney general then drafts a short, descriptive title for the measure. In addition, he or she must draft a clear, concise, and objective statement which explains the purpose and effect of the measure. The attorney general's statement must be provided for public comment for 10 days before being finalized.

See law: South Dakota Codified Laws, Title 12, Chapter 13, Section 25.1

Fiscal review

See also: Fiscal impact statement

South Dakota does not require a fiscal review of state ballot questions. However, state law instructs the attorney general to include in the summary "the likely exposure of the state to liability" as a consequence of adopting the measure, if applicable. The attorney general's statement must be provided for public comment for 10 days before being finalized.

See law: South Dakota Codified Laws, Title 12, Chapter 13, Section 25.1

Collecting signatures

Each initiative and referendum state employs a unique method of calculating the state's signature requirements. Some states mandate a certain fraction of registered voters while others base their calculation on those who actually voted in a preceding election. In addition, many states employ a distribution requirement, dictating where in the state these signatures must be collected. Beyond these overarching requirements, many states regulate the manner in which signatures may be collected and the timeline for collecting them.

Number required

See also: South Dakota signature requirements

In South Dakota, signatures are tied to the number of votes cast for the office of governor in the state's most recent gubernatorial election.

The following are the requirements for the types of citizen-initiated measures in South Dakota:

• initiated constitutional amendment (ICA): 10 percent of the votes cast for governor
• initiated state statute (ISS): 5 percent of the votes cast for governor
• veto referendum (VR): 5 percent of the votes cast for governor

The chart below shows election years and the signature requirement for initiatives designed to appear on the ballot in that year, with gubernatorial election years bolded.

Year	Constitutional Amendment	Statute	Veto referendum
2024	35,017	17,508	17,508
2022	33,921	16,961	16,961
2020	33,921	16,961	16,961
2018	27,741	13,871	13,871
2016	27,741	13,871	13,871
2014	31,708	15,854	15,854
2012	31,708	15,854	15,854
2010	33,551	16,776	16,776
2008	33,551	16,776	16,776

See law: South Dakota Constitution, Article III, Section 1 & Article III, Section 1

Distribution requirements

See also: Distribution requirements

South Dakota does not have a distribution requirement for petition signatures.

See law: South Dakota Constitution, Article III, Section 1 and Article XXIII, Sections 1-3

Restrictions on circulators

Circulator requirements

See also: Petition circulator

In South Dakota, there are no statutes that prevent a circulator from signing the petition being circulated. Each initiative petition contains a mandatory circulator affidavit. The circulator is required to sign these affidavits before a public notary and send these statements to the secretary of state. He/she must swear to and sign a statement, under the penalty of law, that he/she personally witnessed every act of signing the petition. The statement must also contain the following information:

• the state of driver license issue and driver license expiration date,
• the state in which the circulator is registered to vote,
• the length of time at the circulator's current residence and the addresses of his or her two previous residences,
• a sworn statement indicating the petition circulator's intention to stay in the state following the petition effort,
• other information to prove residency such as a library card or utility bill,
• whether or not the circulator pays in-state tuition at any college or university, and
• information about whether or not the circulator "obtains any resident hunting or resident fishing license of any kind."

Paid circulators must register with the secretary of state, whose office must keep a directory of paid circulators and provide paid circulators with circulator identification numbers and required badges.

According to South Dakota Statutes 2-1-1.2 and 2-1-10, those circulating petitions are required:

• to provide each person who signs the petition a form containing the title and explanation of the initiated measure as prepared by the attorney general
• to sign verification before filing

Once circulation is completed, the signatures are submitted to the secretary of state.

See law: South Dakota Statutes 2-1-10, Admin Rule 5:02:08:07 and South Dakota Statutes 2-1-1.2

Pay-per-signature

See also: Pay-per-signature

South Dakota prohibits paying signature gatherers based on the number of signatures collected. However, state law permits employers to set minimum gathering requirements and pay discretionary bonuses based on productivity.

See law: South Dakota Codified Laws, Title 12, Chapter 13, Section 28

Out-of-state circulators

See also: Residency requirements for petition circulators

South Dakota does not require signature gatherers to be residents of the state. South Dakota had a requirement, but a federal court struck down the law as unconstitutional in January 2023.

See law: South Dakota Codified Laws, Title 12, Chapter 1, Section 3 (9)

Circulators that are registered sex offenders

South Dakota forbids registered sex offenders from circulating petitions in the state. The law excepts offenders that are circulating petitions under circumstances where they are in the employ of, and under the immediate supervision of, another person and where the circumstances preclude any contact with children. The law also excepts any registered sex offenders circulating any nominating petitions on their own behalf for election to any federal, state or local office for which they are otherwise qualified.

See law: South Dakota Codified Laws, Title 12, Chapter 1, Section 32, 33, 34

Badge requirements

See also: Badge requirements

Paid circulators must wear a badge identifying them as paid circulators.

Prior to 2018, South Dakota law did not require the circulator's paid/volunteer status to be disclosed.

See law: South Dakota Codified Laws, Title 2, Chapter 1 and Title 12, Chapter 13

Electronic signatures

See also: Electronic petition signatures

Since electronic signatures are an emerging technology, the constitutionality of bans on e-signatures and the legality of e-signatures in states without bans is largely untested. South Dakota does mandate that signatures be collected in person.

See law: South Dakota Codified Laws, Title 2, Chapter 1, Section 7

Deadlines for collection

See also: Petition drive deadlines; Initiative petition circulation periods

Initiated constitutional amendment: Signatures must be filed by the first Tuesday in May of a general election year.

Initiated state statute: Signatures must be filed by the first Tuesday in May of a general election year.

Veto referendum: For referendum petitions, the completed signature petitions must be submitted within 90 days after the legislative session in which the targeted law was approved adjourns.

See law: South Dakota Codified Laws, Title 2, Chapter 1, Sections 1, 2, and 3.1

Getting on the ballot

Once signatures have been collected, state officials must verify that requirements are met and that fraudulent signatures are excluded. States generally employ a random sample process or a full verification of signatures. After verification, the issue must be prepared for the ballot. This often involves preparing a fiscal review and ballot summary.

Signature verification

See also: Signature certification

Once the signatures have been gathered and filed, the secretary of state verifies the signatures using a random sample method. At least 5 percent of the signatures must be sampled. South Dakota law provides that "mere technicalities" cannot invalidate a petition.

See law: South Dakota Codified Laws, Title 2, Chapter 1, Sections 11, 15, 16 and 17 and South Dakota Administrative Rules, Chapter 5:02:08:00.05

Signature petition challenges

See also: Signature certification

State law allows any interested person, within 30 days after a signature petition is validated and filed, to launch a complaint against the validity of the submitted signatures. Such a complaint must contain an itemized explanation of the deficiencies in the petition. This is a separate process from a legal challenge to the petition as a whole based on alleged signature validity deficiencies.

In legal challenges to petitions, petition sponsors are considered the defending party for the lawsuit except with regard specifically to the process of signature verification by the Office of the Secretary of State.

See law: South Dakota Codified Laws, Title 12, Chapter 1, Sections 13, 15

Ballot title and summary

See also: Ballot title

In South Dakota, the descriptive title and summary are prepared upon initial filing. Once a measure has qualified for the ballot, it receives a generic title. In 2004, amendments began receiving consecutive letters starting with "Amendement A." After "Amendment Z," lettering will begin again with "A." In 2004, statutes began receiving consecutive numbers, starting with "Initiated Measure 1." Each measure also receives short statements explaining the meaning of a "yes" vote and a "no" vote.

Standardized, precise wording to introduce the ballot language for initiated constitutional amendments, initiated state statutes, and veto referendums is set by state statute:

• For initiated constitutional amendments: "Vote 'Yes' to adopt the amendment" and "Vote 'No' to leave the Constitution as it is."
• For initiated state statutes: "Vote 'Yes' to adopt the initiated measure" and "Vote 'No' to leave South Dakota law as it is."
• For veto referendums: "Vote 'Yes' to repeal the Act of the Legislature" and "Vote 'No' to allow the Act of the Legislature to become law."

See law: South Dakota Codified Laws, Title 12, Chapter 13, Sections 4, 11 and 25.1

The election and beyond

Ballot measures face additional challenges beyond qualifying for the ballot and receiving a majority of the vote. Several states require ballot measures to get more than a simple majority. While some states mandate a three-fifths supermajority, other states set the margin differently. In addition, ballot measures may face legal challenges or modifications by legislators. If a ballot measure does fail, some states limit how soon that initiative can be re-attempted.

Supermajority requirements

See also: Supermajority requirements

In South Dakota, each ballot measure requires only a simple majority of the votes cast for or against it.

See law: South Dakota Constitution, Article III, Section 3 and South Dakota Codified Laws, Title 2, Chapter 1, Section 12

Effective date

South Dakota ballot measures take effect on July 1 following completion of the official canvass by the State Canvassing Board.

See law: South Dakota Codified Laws, Title 2, Chapter 1, Section 12

Litigation

See also: Ballot measure lawsuit news

Challenges to either the descriptive title or summary should be filed in state circuit court within seven days of the secretary's receipt of the text from the attorney general. Such challenges take precedence over other cases and can be appealed to the South Dakota Supreme Court. Challenges to the validity of signatures or other petition information should also be filed in circuit court.

See law: South Dakota Codified Laws, Title 2, Chapter 1, Section 18 and Title 12, Chapter 13, Section 9.2

Legislative alteration

See also: Legislative alteration

The South Dakota State Legislature may repeal an initiated statute with a simple majority vote. In order to change or repeal a constitutional amendment, lawmakers must place an amendment on the ballot via the ordinary referral process, which consists of a simple majority vote in each chamber.

See law: South Dakota Constitution, Article III, Section 1 and Article XXIII, Section 1

Re-attempting an initiative

South Dakota does not limit how soon an initiative can be re-attempted.

See law: South Dakota Constitution, Article III, Section 1 and Article XXIII, Sections 1-3 and South Dakota Codified Laws, Title 2, Chapter 1 and Title 12, Chapter 13

Funding an initiative campaign

See also: Campaign finance requirements for South Dakota ballot measures

The notable features of South Dakota's campaign finance law are:

• In 2018, voters approved an initiative banning contributions to ballot measure committees from outside of the state.
  • The initiative was overturned by a court ruling in May 2019 and blocked from enforcement.
  • Specifically, it was designed to only allow contributions to ballot measure committees from residents, committees organized inside of South Dakota, or other entities that had been on file with the secretary of state for at least four years prior to the contribution.
• Groups in support or opposition of a ballot issue are treated differently than other political committees.
• Corporations and labor unions can donate to groups in support or opposition of a ballot issue.
• South Dakota requires reporting of all advertisements costing over $1,000 made by independent expenditure groups within 48 hours after the ad was first disseminated.
• Corporations and labor unions who plan to donate to a Ballot Issue Committee must file a series of statements with the South Dakota secretary of state that certifies them to be in good standing.

State initiative law

Articles III and XXIII of the South Dakota Constitution address initiatives.

• Article III, South Dakota Constitution
• Article XXIII, South Dakota Constitution

Titles 2 and 12 of the South Dakota Codified Laws govern initiatives.

• South Dakota Codified Laws, Title 2, Chapter 1
• South Dakota Codified Laws, Title 12, Chapter 13
• South Dakota Administrative Rules, Chapter 5:02:08

External links

• South Dakota Secretary of State, "Ballot Question Information"
• South Dakota Secretary of State, "Signature requirements & general ballot question information"
• South Dakota Secretary of State, "Election History"
• South Dakota Secretary of State, "Ballot Measures Per Year (Chart)"

Changes in the law

The following laws have been proposed that modify ballot measure law in South Dakota. If a box is empty for any given year, it means Ballotpedia did not track any ballot measure or recall-related laws in that year.

Proposed changes by year

2022

See also: Changes in 2022 to laws governing ballot measures

Senate Bill 2: The bill required that ballot initiatives approved by voters be published in the state's session laws. Senate Bill 138: The legislation clarified provisions related to when a local referendum against an ordinance or resolution can be filed. Language changed from "within 20 days... after publication" to "within 20 days... after publication of the ordinance or resolution in the last to publish official county newspaper." Senate Bill 187: The bill required state agencies to provide information requested by the Legislative Research Council to prepare fiscal notes for ballot initiatives.

2021

See also: Changes in 2021 to laws governing ballot measures

House Joint Resolution 5003 (Amendment C): Voters rejected the constitutional amendment on June 7, 2022. The constitutional amendment would have required a three-fifths (60%) vote for the approval of citizen-initiated ballot measures or legislative referrals that would increase taxes or fees or require the state to appropriate $10 million or more in the first five fiscal years. Senate Bill 77: The legislation required a 14-point font for the text of citizen-initiated ballot measures. Senate Bill 86: The bill required the director of the Legislative Research Council to provide a written opinion regarding whether an initiative violates the state's single-subject rule, provided that the secretary of state cannot approve an initiative for circulation if the initiative violates the single-subject rule, and established a process for challenging the determination in the state Supreme Court. Senate Bill 123: The legislation created a 10-day comment period for the attorney general's draft ballot title and summary. SD Voice v. Noem See also: United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, SD Voice v. Noem, February 17, 2023 On February 17, 2023, the U.S. 8th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that South Dakota's signature filing deadline for ballot initiatives violated freedom of speech under the First Amendment. The filing deadline required that signatures be submitted one year before an election. "South Dakota failed to provide evidence connecting the one-year deadline to its asserted interests," wrote Judge Steven Grasz. He also wrote that while the one-year-prior filing deadline is enjoined, a federal court could not craft a new requirement. Earlier, on August 30, 2021, a district court struck down the filing deadline but ordered a specific deadline for initiated state statutes. The Eight Circuit decided that a court could not set a new deadline as that was a legislative matter. Cory Heidelberger, a plaintiff in the case, said, "Thus, the question on every petition sponsor‘s mind is, When are our petitions due? The answer is… We don’t know!" Heidelberger suggested the new deadline should be the second Tuesday of July, which "aligns with deadlines in Arkansas, Nebraska, and North Dakota, fellow Eighth Circuit states who require ballot measure petitions be submitted no later than early July." On March 23, 2023, Gov. Kristi Noem (R) signed Senate Bill 113 (SB 113), which changed the signature deadline to the first Tuesday in May of a general election year.

2020

See also: Changes in 2020 to laws governing ballot measures

House Bill 1049: The legislation capped the number of words for support and opposition statements about ballot initiatives found in voter information pamphlets at 300 words each. House Bill 1053: The bill made clarifying changes to the process for submitting initiatives to the Legislative Research Council. Senate Bill 180: The legislation required paid circulators to provide their residential address, phone number, driver's license state, voter registration information, sex offender status, and other information, and SB 180 classified this information as public record. Under SB 180, signatures were considered void when a signature gatherer did not meet the registration requirements. SB 180 also required signature gatherers — paid or volunteer — to be residents of South Dakota for at least 30 days. In 2023, the U.S. District Court for South Dakota ruled that SB 180 was unconstitutional. SD Voice v. Noem See also: United States District Court District of South Dakota Northern Division, SD Voice v. Noem, January 9, 2020 On January 9, 2020, U.S. District Judge Charles Kornmann ruled that House Bill 1094 (HB 1094), passed in 2019, violated the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. HB 1094 was designed to require paid petition circulators to pre-register with the state and provide certain information; established a paid circulator registration fee of $20; and required petitioners to wear a badge identifying the committee and ballot measure and their paid or volunteer stats, among other changes. Judge Kornmann wrote that the bill’s definition of a petition circular was too broad and restricted free speech. He wrote, "These disclosure provisions place serious and draconian burdens on protected speech. While the state's interests in effective administration of the law and ensuring that its laws are followed are important, the state has ample means of doing so that would not chill speech.”

2019

See also: Changes in 2019 to laws governing ballot measures

House Bill 1093: The legislation provided that the public can have access to a random sample of signed petitions for ballot initiatives within 30 days of a request. HB 1093 also provided that when a person challenges petition signatures from a random sample, the challenged percentage applies to the total batch of signatures. House Bill 1094: In SD Voice v. Noem, the U.S. District Court for South Dakota ruled that HB 1094 was unconstitutional. The legislation was designed to make several changes to the laws governing petition circulators, including: requiring paid signature gatherers to register with the state, obtain a circulator identification number, and provide certain information, such as the circulator's physical address, email address, phone number, occupation, and driver's license and voter registration state; creating a $20 registration fee for paid petition circulators; and requiring signature gatherers to wear a badge that identifies the committee and ballot measure for which they are collecting signatures, as well as their paid or volunteer status, among other changes. Senate Bill 92: The legislation provided that signature calculation for municipal initiatives and referendums is based on the number of registered voters in that jurisdiction on the second Tuesday in January in the year the petition was filed. SB 92 also provided that when a petition is filed before the second Tuesday in January, the prior year's calculation is applied.

2018

See also: Changes in 2018 to laws governing ballot measures

In 2017, a 13-member interim committee was established to investigate the state's initiative and referendum process and recommend changes for legislators to consider in 2018. House Bill 1002: The legislation redefined ballot question committee to also include committees spending funds to oppose ballot measures before their certification. House Bill 1004: The legislation gave the State Board of Elections the power to make rules related to initiative petition size and font size. House Bill 1005: The legislation established precise wording for the ballot language for citizen-initiated ballot measures as follows: For initiated constitutional amendments: "Vote 'Yes' to adopt the amendment" and "Vote 'No' to leave the Constitution as it is." For initiated state statutes: "Vote 'Yes' to adopt the initiated measure" and "Vote 'No' to leave South Dakota law as it is." For veto referendums: "Vote 'Yes' to repeal the Act of the Legislature" and "Vote 'No' to allow the Act of the Legislature to become law." House Bill 1006: The legislation provided that the Legislative Research Council should offer written comments regarding the substantive content of proposed ballot initiatives for the purposes of minimizing conflicts with existing laws and ensuring the effective administration of the measure. House Bill 1007: The legislation established a single-subject rule for citizen-initiated state statutes. House Bill 1177: The legislation required initiative petition sheets to include the name, phone number, email address, and the paid or volunteer status of the signature gatherer. HB 1177 also required paid signature gatherers to include how much they're being paid. House Bill 1196: The legislation required a signature gatherer to provide a sworn statement attesting to residency, as well as the circulator's vehicle license state, voter registration state, current address, addresses of two previous residences, a statement expressing the circulator's intention to remain in the state following the petition effort, other information to prove residency, and other information. House Bill 1304: The legislation provided that the defendants in legal challenges to signature petitions or a circulator's attestation are the petition sponsors, rather than the attorney general, except in cases about the state's process of signature verification. HB 1304 also allowed challengers to reference the secretary of state’s signature verification results in court House Joint Resolution 1006 (Constitutional Amendment Z): Voters approved the constitutional amendment on November 6, 2018. Constitutional Amendment Z created a single-subject rule for constitutional amendments, whether initiated or referred. Senate Bill 7: The legislation prohibited ballot question committees from making contributions to statewide candidates and political parties and specified that ballot question committees can receive unlimited contributions from various entities, such as individuals and political action committees. Senate Bill 9: The legislation provided that the Legislative Research Council must provide a fiscal note — to be included on the ballot — when a measure would have a fiscal impact, according to the office's analysis. Senate Bill 10: The legislation provided that when initiated measures or constitutional amendments passed at the same election conflict with one another, the measure receiving the highest number of votes becomes enacted. Senate Bill 11: The legislation required proponents of an initiative or referendum to submit the measure to the Legislative Research Council for review and comment at least six months prior to when the initiative can be circulated. Senate Bill 13: The legislation required the Legislative Research Council to provide the sponsor of an initiative with a fiscal note when the office determines that the proposed initiative would impact revenues, expenditures, or fiscal liability of the state. Senate Bill 77: The legislation provided that donors to a ballot question committee do not need to report certain information for donated goods or services. Senate Bill 128: The legislation required a ballot question committee to be terminated following two successive reporting periods without any activity. Senate Joint Resolution 1 (Constitutional Amendment X): Voters rejected the constitutional amendment on November 6, 2018. Constitutional Amendment X would have required a 55% vote to approve constitutional amendments.

2017

See also: Changes in 2017 to laws governing ballot measures

See also: Laws governing ballot measures in South Dakota a South Dakota House Bill 1141 was designed to establish a task force to investigate the state's initiative and veto referendum processes and suggest changes. a South Dakota Senate Bill 77 was designed to require a fiscal impact report and summary be provided for any initiated or referred measure. a South Dakota Senate Bill 59 was designed to make the effective date for approved ballot measures—initiatives and referred measures—the first day of July after the election results for the measure are certified instead of the day upon which the election results for the measures are certified. d South Dakota House Bill 1074 was designed to ban aggregate contributions from a single out-of-state source in excess of $100,000 during a general election cycle. d South Dakota House Bill 1153 was designed to establish a distribution requirement for initiative and referendum petitions to dictate that at least 50 percent of the signatures required to qualify the measure for the ballot must be collected from at least 33 different counties—amounting to half of the states 66 counties—with the remaining signatures collected from any of the remaining counties. d South Dakota Senate Joint Resolution 2 was designed to amend the state constitution to do the following: require a two-thirds (66.67%) vote in the legislature rather than a simple majority to approved proposed constitutional amendments for the ballot; and require a 60 percent supermajority requirement instead of a simple majority at a statewide election to approve constitutional amendments. Constitutional amendments require approval in the legislature as well as voter approval at a statewide election. d South Dakota Senate Bill 67 was designed to increase the number of signatures required to put initiated constitutional amendments on the ballot by making the basis of the 10 percent signature requirement the number of registered voters eligible to vote for gubernatorial candidates in the preceding gubernatorial election rather than the number of votes actually cast for gubernatorial candidates in the preceding gubernatorial election. The bill would not have changed the signature requirement for initiated state statutes or veto referendums d South Dakota House Bill 1130 was designed to do the following: establish a citizen review and public commentary period for initiatives, referred measures, and constitutional amendments; require the publication on the secretary of state's website the comments made about ballot measures; and require the publication on the secretary of state's website the campaign contributions in support of and opposition to ballot measures. d South Dakota House Bill 1200 was designed to require additional campaign finance disclosures from ballot measure committees. Some other nonsubstantive changes to laws governing ballot measures in South Dakota were also introduced, but not included in this list.

2016

See also: Changes in 2016 to laws governing ballot measures

See also: Laws governing ballot measures in South Dakota a South Dakota House Bill 1036: "Revise certain provisions concerning campaign finance requirements." a South Dakota Senate Bill 65: "Revise the procedure for a municipal recall petition." a South Dakota House Bill 1033: "Revise certain provisions concerning elections and election petitions and to declare an emergency." d South Dakota House Bill 1196: "Create a deadline for the preparation of statements for municipal referendum ballots." a South Dakota House Bill 1037: "Revise certain provisions concerning petitions for initiated constitutional amendments, initiated measures, and candidates." d South Dakota House Bill 1241: "Purpose: revise certain provisions regarding the petition signatures required for initiated measures and referred laws."

2015

See also: Changes in 2015 to laws governing ballot measures

See also: Laws governing ballot measures in South Dakota d Senate Bill 166: Changes the number of signatures for a successful initiative or referendum petition from 5 percent of the votes cast in the last gubernatorial election to 5 percent of registered voters. Due to low and fluctuating voter turnout this could double the number of signatures required. After vocal protestation from initiative proponents, Sen. Corey Brown (R-23), the sponsor of SB 166, abandoned his bill, leaving it to die without a hearing in the Senate State Affairs Committee. Corey still defended his bill as a necessary definition. He said that the state's constitution needed clarifying since it says, “Not more than five percent of the qualified electors of the state shall be required to invoke either the initiative or the referendum.” Corey believed that the state's interpretation of this as "voters in last gubernatorial election" is incorrect and expected a lawsuit to be filed when the next statewide initiative qualifies for the ballot. He said, “I do believe that there’s still a problem. I guess maybe there’s other avenues to fix that.” a Senate Bill 67: "Revise certain provisions regarding challenges to certain election petition signatures."

2014

See also: Changes in 2014 to laws governing ballot measures

The following bills were introduced in the South Dakota State Legislature: a HB 1096: Allows and makes changes to the procedure for challenges to sufficiency of signature petitions.

2013

See also: Changes in 2013 to laws governing ballot measures

2012

See also: Changes in 2012 to laws governing ballot measures

The following bills were introduced in the South Dakota State Legislature: d HB 1072: Provides for the recall of county commissioners. a South Dakota House Bill 1186 (2012): Prohibits registered sex offenders from circulating petitions. a South Dakota Senate Bill 70 (2012): Revises the procedures for filing referred laws, initiated constitutional amendments, and initiated measures and revises certain election provisions and campaign finance requirements for referred laws, initiated constitutional amendments, and initiated measures.

2011

See also: Changes in 2011 to laws governing ballot measures

The following bills were introduced in the South Dakota State Legislature: a South Dakota House Bill 1141: Bill description/summary: "An Act to establish a date to begin absentee voting and to revise the deadline for the printing of ballots."

2010

See also: Changes in 2010 to laws governing ballot measures

The following bills were introduced in the South Dakota Legislature: a South Dakota Senate Bill 13 (2010): SB 13 is a 2010 South Dakota elections reform law that recognized signatures as valid if the signer was on the active voter registration list at the time he or she signed the petition. In addition, the law requires the circulator's signature to be notarized. The law also allows secondary elections which do not involve federal races to use hand counted, rather than electronically marked, ballots. The law also requires the state to produce sample ballots at least 45 days prior to an election. The act also permits voters covered under the "Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act" to request that their ballot be sent electronically. The bill additionally sets procedures for handling absentee ballot which do not meet the legal requirements for opening, and the law details the items county auditors must provide to the recount board. The bill was approved by the South Dakota State Senate on January 21, 2010 by a 33-0 vote. The South Dakota House of Representatives later approved the bill by a 69-1 vote on February 24, 2010. Governor Mike Rounds approved the bill on March 8, 2010.