Patriot Ripple Effect Podcast

Adam Broin, Patriot Ripple Effect Founder, interviews Misty Furness, who is leading the petition drive.

Learn more, sign the petition, or carry a petition and collect signatures here: Stop The Opt Out Facebook Page

The Sioux Falls School District (five elected School Board members) unanimously passed a resolution on June 23 to opt out of the tax cap imposed by a statute in the general fund. This opt out is for $2,100,000 each year for ten years ($21,000,000). It’s important to understand that this is on top other opt outs that total well over $170,000,000 since 2017.

It’s time for voters to act! State law allows for referendum where voters can petition to have the opt out brought to a public vote.

6,500 confirmed petition signatures needed (5% of registered voters in the school district) and due by July 17, at 5 pm.

Read the Resolution: The GOVERNING BOARD OF THE SIOUX FALLS SCHOOL DISTRICT 49-5 do state that the above said Board is unable to operate under the tax limitation measure currently in statute in the general fund. We therefore OPT OUT of such tax limitation in the amount of $2,100,000 starting with the calendar year 2025 taxes payable in calendar year 2026. This opt out will be for ten years, which will be through taxes payable in calendar year 2035. This action has been taken by the Board and approved by at least two-thirds vote of the Board.

This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit patriotrippleeffectsd.substack.com

A movement is underway to address the out-of-control property taxes in South Dakota. Property taxation is a property rights issue. Can you ever truly own your land or home if the government can take it from you for non-payment? This is especially critical for people who own their homes but live on a fixed income, and for young people who can no longer afford to purchase a home.

Our guests are working on a three-pronged approach that includes an Initiated Measure (IM), a SD Senate bill and a SD House bill for the 2026 session.

The IM is being refined with the SD Legislative Research Council, and our guests are traveling across the state educating voters on an alternative option to property taxes that will not impact the amount of revenue in the state budget.

This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit patriotrippleeffectsd.substack.com

This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit patriotrippleeffectsd.substack.com

“Thank you, Adam, and Patriot Ripple Effect for what you've done for this state. From the VAX mandate protests to the pipeline, Amendment G, and protecting life, you’ve made a difference. There are people alive today in part because of this organization. What you’ve shown is when we stick together, focus on what unites us, and fight, we can win. And even when we don’t win right away, we fail together—and we rise together. It’s been an honor to be part of it.” - Jon Hansen

Hansen Lems Campaign Website

Transcript

NarratorWelcome to The Patriot Ripple Effect, a conservative grassroots podcast discussing the politics and policy most impacting South Dakota. Let's join our host.

Adam BroinThis is Adam Broin with Patriot Ripple Effect. I am pleased to be here today with Speaker Jon Hansen and Speaker Pro Tempore Karla Lems.

Jon HansenHow are you doing, Adam? Thanks for having us.

Adam BroinAs I was thinking about our conversation today, I’ve been reflecting on how you two really represent a paradigm shift in South Dakota politics. Until recently—at least in my memory—most politicians in South Dakota primarily represented business interests, the Chamber of Commerce, and so on. But no one has really captured the grassroots like you two have. I'm excited for today's discussion. I'm very passionate about grassroots politics myself, so why don’t you kick things off, Jon?

Jon HansenYeah, it’s funny you say “captured the grassroots.” For me, it’s not so much about capturing anything—it’s just being part of the grassroots. It’s who we are. I never came from a background in politics or money or establishment circles. I was just a guy who saw a particular issue—at the time, it was the life issue—and it disturbed me so much that I felt compelled to act. That’s how a lot of folks in the grassroots find their way into this crazy world of politics. Over the last five years or so—maybe it was COVID, or the pipeline issue, or something else—these moments arise where people are just living their lives and something happens that makes them say, “No, I’m not going to stand for that.” That was me. And once you're in, more and more issues arise—COVID, the pipeline, woke ideology—and you just keep fighting. That’s what it’s all about.

Adam BroinLove that. Karla, how about you? What was your impetus?

Karla LemsI grew up in a very patriotic family. Politics and God were regular dinner table conversations. We always recognized Veterans Day, Memorial Day, and especially the Fourth of July with big celebrations at our farm. We often invited people from town and even hosted politicians for meet-and-greets.So I was exposed to that environment. Not every day or even every year, but enough to make an impact. We were a very Republican family.I started getting more involved in county-level politics around 2014 or 2015. And then, around 2020, things got really strange—whether it was the election, January 6, or just the overall political atmosphere. I was on the Central Committee at the time and began to realize not everyone who claimed to be Republican actually stood by the platform. That was eye-opening.At the same time, there was an open seat in my district, and I felt like it was time to get more involved.

Adam BroinThat’s awesome. Talk about your journey since then—running for office and where you are now.

Karla LemsI didn’t get involved because of one specific issue, but the property rights issue quickly became central for me. Before I was even elected, I received a letter about the pipeline coming through our area, our family's land included. So I had already decided to run, and this issue just hit home.In 2023, once I was in Pierre, landowners approached me asking if I’d run a bill for them. I was scared to death! I knew nothing about how to do that. But I felt strongly about property rights and the constitutional right to own and hold property. Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness used to be life, liberty, and property. George Washington said, “Liberty and property are inseparable.”It's not about being anti-business. I'm totally pro–free market. But when the government starts picking winners and losers through subsidies, we’ve got to ask: Is this constitutional? If we can answer that correctly, we can move forward. Jon and I have both worked on many such issues over the past few years. It’s been quite the ride.

Adam BroinAbsolutely. Jon, let’s go back to you, what are the issues you're most passionate about in this campaign?

Jon HansenIt starts with what I’ve seen in the legislature. You’d think in a red state like South Dakota, we’d have easy wins on things like fairness in women’s sports, protecting kids from harmful medical interventions, defending property rights, and protecting life. But instead, we have to fight tooth and nail. People from all over the state come to Pierre, plead with their legislators, and still sometimes don’t get results.That’s why I’m passionate about making South Dakota a place where conservative values rooted in biblical truth are at the forefront. Faith, family, and freedom should be reflected in our government.Right now, we’re dealing with huge property tax burdens. Grandparents on fixed incomes, young families, recent grads trying to afford their first home—all of them are struggling. Reducing that burden is a priority.Property rights are still under attack, especially from federal overreach. Election integrity also remains an issue—we’ve seen too many scandals involving state employees embezzling funds. We need accountability in government. What sets Karla and me apart is that we’ve been in the trenches. We’ve fought these battles. We’re proven conservatives, and you can count on us to continue fighting, no matter what comes.

Adam BroinWe’re recording this in May, only a few months after what I’d call a fantastic session in Pierre for our movement. What were some of your favorite victories?

Karla LemsWell, definitely HB 1052—again, not to harp only on property rights, but that was a huge win. We’ve been fighting that battle for three years. I carried the bill in 2023, Jon carried a similar one in 2024, and this session we finally got it across the finish line. We also saw several election integrity bills pass, thanks in part to new legislators and a new committee makeup under Jon’s leadership. In 2023, I couldn’t even get a residency bill out of committee. This year, those bills got fair hearings and many were signed into law.

Jon HansenYes, residency is a great example. We had people voting in South Dakota elections who had never lived here—just rented a mailbox. I saw entire absentee request lists with out-of-state addresses. One man lived in Germany, worked for the federal government, had never been to South Dakota, and still voted here. Representative Tony Randolph helped pass strong legislation this session to end that loophole. Now, only South Dakotans will vote in South Dakota elections.

Adam BroinThat’s wild. I’d never heard the Germany story. So what’s the next big fight?

Jon HansenProperty taxes. It’s the issue I hear about the most. Families are struggling. We have to cut government spending to provide real tax relief.When I entered the legislature in 2011, we had a $127 million deficit and solved it by cutting 10% of the budget—not raising taxes. We can do that again. Real relief doesn’t come from tax shifts—it comes from spending cuts.We need to put more money in people’s pockets, not government’s. The government's gotten too big. Let’s reverse that trend and reprioritize people.

Adam BroinExactly. The dollar is better spent by the family trying to start a life here than by the government leasing office space for $300 million. That kind of reform could make a real difference.

Jon HansenYes, like the “One-Stop” building in Sioux Falls, we're leasing for $300 million over 30 years, and at the end, we own nothing. Compare that to buying an empty Citibank building for $34 million. It’s a no-brainer. We’re also wasting money trying to lure companies with subsidies—like Tru Shrimp. Millions spent, and they never came. That’s not conservative governance. We need to cut waste and let the free market work.

Karla LemsI think Speaker Hansen could also implement a South Dakota version of DOGE oversight. There’s a misconception that there’s no appetite in the state for cuts or transparency, but there absolutely is. People want accountability. We’ve seen embezzlement cases, and the Attorney General is pursuing them. We owe it to South Dakotans to be careful and transparent with their hard-earned tax dollars.

Jon HansenAbsolutely. And thank you, Adam, and Patriot Ripple Effect for what you've done for this state. From the VAX mandate protests to the pipeline, Amendment G, and protecting life, you’ve made a difference. There are people alive today in part because of this organization. What you’ve shown is when we stick together, focus on what unites us, and fight, we can win. And even when we don’t win right away, we fail together—and we rise together. It’s been an honor to be part of it.

Adam BroinThat’s a perfect way to end this podcast. Thank you for your kind words, and thank you both for being here, and for what you're doing for our state.

NarratorThanks for listening. Join us next time on Patriot Ripple Effect, or visit us at patriotrippleeffect.com.

This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit patriotrippleeffectsd.substack.com

“Everything that I have I owe to South Dakota. And so, my family and I are willing to risk all of that to fight for the future of South Dakota.” - Toby Doeden

This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit patriotrippleeffectsd.substack.com

“Right now there is a lot of uncertainty out there with the cuts. I believe 60% of the state budget in SD come from Federal funds. And with the Federal funds being cut there is a lot of uncertainty what we are going to have to deal with the next session.” - Richard Vasgaard

HCR 6013 -Supporting the Electoral College, denouncing the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, and inviting interested states to form the Electoral College Interstate Compact.

Campaign website

This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit patriotrippleeffectsd.substack.com

* SB 58 revises provisions related to human trafficking, prohibits the obstruction of human trafficking enforcement, and provides a penalty therefor

* SB 59 revises provisions relating to the delivery, possession with intent to deliver, and possession of unauthorized articles in a state correctional facility, and provides a penalty therefor

* SB 60 expands the access and investigatory authority of the state auditor

* SB 61 modifies the authority of the Board of Internal Control

* SB 62 establishes mandatory reporting requirements related to improper governmental conduct and crime, and provides a penalty therefor

* SB 63 establishes protections for state employees who report improper governmental conduct and crime

Transcription:

Dave Roetman: This is the Making Waves Podcast. My name is Dave Roetman. We're here with Attorney General Marty Jackley.

Marty Jackley: Dave, thanks for having me.

Dave Roetman: Thank you for being on. What are some of the issues that you see in South Dakota government in regards to transparency and accountability?

Marty Jackley: You know, certainly through the investigative process, we've learned that there are some supervision issues across the state government.

Those supervision issues really stemmed from numerous thefts that we've experienced, really going back to EB-5, GEAR UP, and then six additional investigations and prosecutions. As Attorney General, I've made it a focus of the office to begin and to continue addressing from a criminal standpoint those thefts of taxpayer dollars and from a legislative standpoint addressing how can we better manage taxpayer dollars and how we can bring accountability, especially to state supervisors, to make sure they're doing the work that they're being paid to do.

Dave Roetman: What sort of legislation have you brought? I know you've brought some this legislative session.

Marty Jackley: This last legislative session, I had a lot of help from both Rich Sattgast and Josh Haeder. Both the auditor and treasurer were involved in looking at the audit system and how can we better both protect the taxpayer dollars and catch it ahead of time and how we can then enforce the ability when that management fails. When we looked at the way to do that, I brought four pieces of legislation.

The first piece of legislation, and it came to surprise to me, but the elected state auditor, the ones that the convention delegates elect, the people of South Dakota pick, did not have access to the state books, to the accounting system of the state. We needed to change that. Both Rich Sattgast and Haeder jumped on board with that and ultimately the legislature said, yes, there needs to be an access of the state auditor so that he or she has the ability to potentially check and review what the executive branch is doing.

That made its way through the legislature and passed. The second protective component was the internal control board. After the wake of EB-5 and GEAR UP, the executive branch put in an internal control board.

But what didn't happen is there wasn't sufficient resources and teeth to that internal control board and group, so they weren't really catching these errors and these problems. So I wanted to have more accountability to that internal control board for their rule making authority so that they could have some teeth in what they were doing. Again, Rich Sattgast was really pivotal in that component because he serves as part of that internal control board.

Ultimately we reached a compromise with the governor and were able to pass what I think was good legislation for the executive branch to police itself better, to have each agency put in place a designee that's going to be held accountable. So if a potential theft comes to the Attorney General and it's from a particular agency, I'm able to have a person that I can go to and say, hey, it's alleged that this happened. What documents do you have? What has been reported to you? And to hold them accountable.

The third step was we were starting to see a lot of these cases by whistleblowers. It was state employees stopping a DCI agent at a gas station, state employees calling me late at night saying, I want to be careful to report this because I'm concerned that it might affect my job. As Attorney General, I can say, well, if I bring a criminal case, there are protections. There’s witness tampering and other things. But if we start looking into it and we don't bring a criminal case, there can be issues that maybe I can't assist as much as I'd like to. So we felt we needed a whistleblower protection.

I had actually brought this in the wake of EB-5 and GEAR UP, and a past legislature simply didn't feel it was time yet. With six additional criminal investigations, this current legislature said, yes, it's time to give state employees protection. Without me asking, the head of the state employees came and testified in support of it.

State employees wanted this, and I think it's been good legislation. We were able to work through some differences in that legislation and pass it. So now, when a state employee brings it to a supervisor, an issue, that supervisor can't take adverse employment against them. And I think that's important because it will bring up more transparency and protect those state employees trying to do the right thing.

The fourth component was really, I was asking the legislature for a heavier hammer. As Attorney General, to say when that supervisor doesn't report it to the Attorney General or law enforcement, when that supervisor conceals it, takes steps to hide it, there needs to be consequences.

That was probably the biggest difference that we experienced in trying to pass this legislation. I felt it should be a felony. I think when somebody knowingly tries to hide something, knowingly destroys evidence, that rises the level of a felony.

These are significant taxpayer dollars. Certainly the Senate agreed with me, but in the House side it got a little more difficult. So they passed a misdemeanor, which it's still going to be a crime, not as significant as I felt it deserved, but in July it will become a crime and we'll have to see where it goes.

If that works to try to keep this from happening as a deterrent, then good. If it doesn't, then you may see me back as Attorney General asking this legislature for a little heavier hammer. I would say, I talked about in the past trying to get whistleblower through.

This conservative legislature was very interested in passing laws that brought in transparency, government accountability, and I should say that transparency I put on the Attorney General to say that when we do receive complaints from supervisors, I was willing to report to the legislature what each of those complaints were, generally speaking, and what I did with them, whether they were investigated, criminal cases brought. So I think overall this was a good legislative package that dealt with prevention, finding these things earlier, which protects the taxpayer, and then really protecting state employees and giving me the ability to address it when something bad happens.

Dave Roetman: That sounds all very good. Is there any future legislation that you're planning on bringing?

Marty Jackley: As we move forward with some additional criminal investigations and criminal charges, we're just going to have to see on the felony versus misdemeanor. We're already starting to see some additional cases come out even after legislative session, which is a concern to me. One of the things I think we're seeing with EB-5 GEAR UP, six criminal cases, a couple more coming, that it sends the message that the Attorney General will continue to do something about it.

I mean, the reality is in EB-5 there was a conviction. In gear up there was a conviction. In every one of these cases we brought, with the exception of Sandra Day because she had passed away, criminal cases have been brought.

I personally tried the Lana Carroll case, and a Hughes County jury a couple weeks ago convicted her of stealing $1,777,685 and a few cents. I think that sends the right message, but again, it's disheartening that there will be additional criminal cases brought. I can say that with a level of certainty.

We're just going to have to see whether or not we need to make further adjustments to that. I hope that with what we've done to the Internal Control Board is sufficient, but we need to see whether or not… they have the rulemaking authority. Now they have to act on it, and we need to make sure those agencies that designate somebody are carrying through with what they said they would do and what they're required to do by the law.

Dave Roetman: Can you tell us a little bit more about some of the cases that are being brought or have been brought?

Marty Jackley: Certainly. You know, Lana Carroll was the big case. It was the $1.8 million theft. It was a situation where there just was not supervision. It was an individual dating back to 2010. So I don't say that as it's all on Kristi Noem.

It began happening as early as January of 2010. It was a situation where a state employee was allowed to make a voucher request or request for funds and then literally served as the approving supervisor at three levels. She was allowed to go to a bank, put the check in a kid's own account, and then 215 times pull the money out as cash.

She was also able to intercept those checks 215 times, and nobody caught it. It wasn't caught by the audits that were done. It wasn't caught by supervisors.

As testified by the witnesses, it was literally caught by an individual that had just begun working for the state, had a high school diploma, not an accountant, not a CPA, and did the right thing. Immediately saw something was wrong, took it to a supervisor. And as it went through the chain, I want to say this:

The minute the head of that agency saw it, she immediately stopped anything and said, you need to call the Attorney General, and they did. And that was a large part of the trial was whether or not the statute of limitations had run because this began in 2010. And so I as Attorney General felt just this last year, actually we began the case in February, whether or not we were time barred by that seven-year statute of limitations.

And I go back to that's why it was so important when I spoke to the legislature that this has to get reported to the Attorney General because I have seven years to act, and so I'm not able to go back beyond seven years if it's discovered. And the big issue was if a supervisor had put it, you know, swept it under the rug or hadn't properly reported it, I could not have obtained a conviction in that case. And that was a large part of what the trial was about for the full week was the conversation about and witnesses testifying as to what they knew and when they knew it. It wasn't whether or not she took the $1.77 million. It was when did DSS find out about it, and what did they do about that?

The other cases dealt with, and sometimes they're both a public health and a public safety issue. We had a state employee, and I want to be careful because some of these cases convictions have been obtained. Others are pending. They're presumed innocent, but had literally indicated that they had gone and done the food inspections, and they had forged the restaurant owner or the food server's signature because what's required is when there's an inspection that the owner of the business knows about it and has to sign off on it, and the inspections were never happening. So across our state on numerous occasions, food was not properly inspected.

They hadn't gone through the proper process, and a state employee had been paid with taxpayer dollars for not doing their responsibilities. We've had a couple other situations where there was personal gain by motor vehicles with tax consequences whereby they would designate a personal transaction as something it wasn't in order to save taxes. So it's a variety of different cases, and really, in my opinion, what it comes down to is a lack of proper supervision, a lack of proper accountability, and I think it's time to change that in state government.

And I say that because we have about 14,071 state employees. The vast majority of all those employees are hardworking. They want to see taxpayer dollars protected. They have a great lot of respect for their jobs. They have pride in what they're doing, and it's just a few of those bad apples have taken advantage of the lack of oversight in Pierre, and I think that needs to change.

Dave Roetman: Are there any tools that you think that the Attorney General's Office or other state agencies or state elected officials need to, in the future, to continue this transparency and accountability?

Marty Jackley: I think, first and foremost, a level of accountability of supervisors. If you're a supervisor in state government and you're being paid to supervise, you should have to supervise. And when there's a breakdown in that supervision, there needs to be consequences. Those consequences don't always need to be criminal.

One would hope that it's done administratively or with employment, but all too often, I see, and this is across state government, whether it be in the government accountability side or probation and parole, there isn't the necessary accountability. When there's a breakdown, there needs to be consequences in that breakdown. We do that at the Attorney General's Office, and we have numerous supervisors here, and they do their job, and they're required to do their job. They're paid to do that job. There's an accountability up the chain, and when you hold people accountable, this doesn't necessarily happen. And certainly, if it's caught much earlier, it would have saved the taxpayers a considerable amount of money.

In the Lana Carroll case, if that would have been caught back in January of 2010, like it should have been, the state of South Dakota would have been out $1.77 million.

Dave Roetman: What other legislation did you bring this session?

Marty Jackley: One of the goals I had as Attorney General was to make our communities safer and to address some of the concerns we saw within the walls of the prison. As far as keeping children and the public safer, we brought a human trafficking bill.

We've seen about 858 investigations last year dealing with the ICAC, which is the Internet Crimes Against Children Task Force. It is state, local, and federal authorities. So we felt we needed stronger protections for victims and stronger penalties for those that are trafficking, particularly young children and women.

So I brought an overhaul, so to speak, of our human trafficking rules. I wanted to better define some of the required items of proof, like coercion. Wanted stiffer penalties, including mandatory minimums, so that we were more consistent with some of the federal laws.

And that gained overwhelming support for the legislature. We also brought bills to better protect mainly our prison staff. Not just prison guards, but medical staff and other folks that are working in the prisons.

We felt we were seeing in our investigations tools such as cell phones being inappropriately used to harm guards, other lines of communication. So we wanted to bring more stiffer penalties for what was occurring within the walls of the penitentiary. Last year alone, we brought 117 criminal cases.

This is my fourth term as Attorney General. Never been even close to that, which sent us a signal that more needs to be done to protect prison staff. And the legislature, again, overwhelmingly supported that.

It was good legislation. And I think overall, it'll better protect our prison guards.

Dave Roetman: Going back to human trafficking, obviously human trafficking is increasing in the United States with the recent border being unchecked. But what do you see as problems in South Dakota that need to be addressed with human trafficking?

Marty Jackley: A couple things. One is we are doing a better job with victims. For the longest time, many of the grants that are out there, the federal grants and other dollars, go to domestic violence, which it needs to go to.

It's important. But they had qualifiers. And so certain human trafficking victims or survivors were not qualifying necessarily for certain funds.

One thing that I worked with the legislature on that was to fix that $5 million that was recently given to the Attorney General's Office to pass out in grants, we made sure that human trafficking was a qualifying for victims. And some of that went to the various human trafficking organizations. So that number one is important.

Number two, we have certain large events across the state that oftentimes attract the human traffickers. It could be a large event in Sioux Falls. It could be a large rally in western South Dakota.

I always want to be careful with that. I'm a Sturgis boy, and I love the Sturgis motorcycle rally. And at some level, though, when you bring a million people together, it's a signal for the bad guys to try to take advantage of that.

And so we continue to run those operations. As long as I'm Attorney General, we'll run those operations. We'll try to catch ahead of time those bad guys so that they go to meet up with a law enforcement officer rather than a young child to snatch up in a hotel or another meeting place.

Those are, I think, some of the big things. On the fentanyl side, of course, the legislature saw the need to pass additional legislation for those distributing fentanyl in our state. They strengthened the penalties.

I'm happy to report that I've been working with several nonprofits like Emily's Hope to get out naloxone or Narcan to better protect the public. I intend to continue to do that, everything we can, on prevention, treatment, and then heavier prosecution of those distributing fentanyl. On the treatment side, I think we have some future opportunities with some of the settlements that are coming in from the opioid companies.

We're using some of those settlement opportunities and dollars for naloxone and Narcan, which would be more on the prevention side. But on the treatment side, as we have the conversation about a new prison or penitentiary and what that looks like, I want to see a treatment component. And I think some of those settlement dollars, rather than putting them in a trust fund, we need to put those dollars to work right now for treatment.

I think it'll have a better benefit to our state overall, and I think overall it'll bring down the prosecutions for fentanyl as well as methamphetamine here in the state of South Dakota.

Dave Roetman: Tell us a little bit about your relationship with the legislature and how you've been able to cooperate with the legislature. What is the tone of your relationship with the legislature?

Marty Jackley: Right now, the conservative legislature has been very supportive of reasonable law enforcement legislation protections.

The legislature was very accommodating, very open to good ideas, not just with protecting taxpayer dollars and government accountability, but the human trafficking, the fentanyl distribution, certainly the Attorney General's budget. We had very good, productive conversations with appropriations. So I've enjoyed working with this legislature.

Certainly legislature leadership was accommodating. There was one occasion, I can't talk about caucus, but I was invited in as Attorney General on short notice. And again, that opportunity to work with them, and the Attorney General serves as a lawyer.

We worked with them on the legislative conflicts recently, and I want to continue to be that Attorney General that is an advisor to the legislature, but respectful that the South Dakota citizens elect 105 legislators to pass laws. I've always been given an opportunity to address them, to give my position on it, but then need to be respectful that they're the ones that are responsible for passing that legislation. The governor's responsible for signing that legislation.

My responsibility then is to enforce that legislation. But overall, it's been a good working relationship. I've enjoyed some of the new faces.

We had a law enforcement top gun shoot at the Attorney General's office. It's an opportunity to have the legislators see the office, to see what their appropriations go to, and I think a time to maybe get away from the Capitol and not talk about legislation, but just to get to know each other a little bit better. And I think that's all productive, and it's what we do best in South Dakota.

We have strong relationships. We're respectful. They come to Pierre and get the job done.

I always joke with other Attorney Generals. I live in a state where law enforcement's obtained a lot of trust over the years with the public, and we respect that and we want to keep that. We don't have to deal with defund the police.

Legislators frequently come visit the Attorney General and ask my position on whether legislation would be constitutional or not, and I want to keep it that way.

Dave Roetman: Who did win the top gun contest?

Marty Jackley: Representative Terri Jorgensen. She's an amazing shot.

Chris Karr's pretty dang good, though, I will tell you. It was close, and we switched it up on him a little bit. We didn't let them use their own guns in the last championship round.

We had an old DCI revolver that went way back, and we allowed them to shoot with that, but both of them are excellent marksmen and women, and they get a trophy when they win, and they get to display it on the legislative floor, and it was pretty impressive.

Dave Roetman: That's very cool.

Marty Jackley: In addition to that, we have a simulator that they paid for that better prepares our officers for an officer-involved use of force or shooting scenario, and it's always good to see the legislators try that.

I think they gain a higher respect for some of the split-second decisions our officers have to make, and I think it signifies why that 13 to 14 weeks training that we do up here as well as in Sioux Falls is so important. Keeping our officers safe, making sure they make the right decisions in those split seconds is very important, but again, it was that opportunity for legislators to be up here, to be away from lobbyists, to get to know each other better and see who's the best shot.

Dave Roetman: Any final thoughts?

Marty Jackley: You know, again, I appreciate this opportunity to talk with you.

I appreciate and love the opportunity to serve as Attorney General. I oftentimes joke that I love this job so much, I can't believe you pay me to do it.

Dave Roetman: Well, Marty, thank you very much for your time.

Marty Jackley: Thanks, Dave, for having me.

Dave Roetman: This has been the Making Ways Podcast. My name is Dave Roetman. We've been here with Attorney General Marty Jackley.

This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit patriotrippleeffectsd.substack.com

“We need to get a grip on our budget. We need to recognize that we are essentially a a welfare state… We’re worse than we were a few years ago as far as dependency on Federal dollars. And that has to end.” - Steve Haugaard

“We have 146 maximum security inmates in Jamison the new unit down there in the back of the existing penitentiary area - that has capacity for over 500 people. When you have 146, and we have capacity for over 500, I think we have enough maximum security space” - Steve Haugaard

Former House Speaker working to defeat prison plan

Summit Carbon Solutions suspends permit application for South Dakota pipeline route

South Dakota State Budget

Cash for Clunkers Was a Complete Failure

This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit patriotrippleeffectsd.substack.com

“Some of the best story tips that I ever got. writing in journalism, over the last several years came from ordinary people.” - Austin Goss

Austin Goss discusses transparency in government, and a recent hit piece about him for his stories about government credit card expenditures.

Kristi Noem threatens to sue The Dakota Scout over credit card spending stories

Kristi Noem's credit card expenses: Search database to see 5 years of charges

Taxpayer-backed credit card use rose with Kristi Noem’s national profile

This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit patriotrippleeffectsd.substack.com

School and Public Lands Website: sdpublicland.sd.gov

HB 1026 - make an appropriation for the replacement of the Richmond Lake dam and spillway, for the general maintenance and repair of other state-owned dams, and to declare an emergency.

HB 1266 - attach the South Dakota State Brand Board to the Office of School and Public Lands.

Brock Greenfield discuses managing public lands, mineral rights, dam maintenance, SD trust funds, the Brand Board. Oh, my!

This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit patriotrippleeffectsd.substack.com