In the end the amount of one-time school funding equals the Rhoden plan, SB 124 that many of us supported from the beginning. The total of one-time school funding in SB 192 and HB 1137 totaled $99/student, whereas in the Rhoden plan the amount would have been $105. The difference between these two funding options is that the adopted plans are only one time money and the Rhoden plan was funding to the base for education. This is a big difference because school districts can plan accordingly for the future with funding to the base, but one-time money they can not bank on being there next year.

When the budget debate started I partnered with my good friend Senator Billie Sutton from Burke, to submit an amendment to the general appropriations bill which would have reinstituted the Career and Technical Education challenge grant program. This highly successful program started back in 2007, but has not been funded since 2009. We were not able to get this amendment to have a fair up or down vote, because the amendment was used to ultimately send some more money to the technical institutes. The legislative process broke down in the closing days and many of us who supported the technical school scholarship program were not able to get the House republican leadership to allow the concept to move forward. As a last resort option the above mentioned amendment was the vehicle to get some additional funding to our top-notch technical institutes.

When we take a step back and look at some of the positives of this legislative session in targeted funding we should be proud of the fact that Medicaid service employees, state employees, and hopefully the teachers through the school one-time money will receive some type of a bonus. I am also glad that research in oilseed development for biofuel received some funding for a project that will ultimately partner South Dakota State University and the Navy. Drug and DUI courts which focus heavily on rehabilitation received a boost along with teen court. Lastly, congrats to Representative Susan Wismer for securing some funds for state-owned dam restoration projects.

As many of you have probably heard the HB 1234 petitions are being circulated to have it referred. I support this effort and I hope many of you will join with us to allow the voters the ultimate decision on education reform. Teachers, parents, school board members and administrators voiced their strong opposition and reassured legislators that our education system is broke, not broken. If the clear problem could be addressed coupled with a clear goal on improving student achievement through HB 1234 many more of us could have given it support.

The unfortunate result of the Governors plan to reform education is that the true waiver to the Federal Education plan, No Child Left Behind which was in SB 25 basically flew under the radar. I voted against this bill the first time because it contained language trying to compare rural schools versus urban schools. Thanks to folks on the House side for removing that last section which made the bill more palatable in the end which I gave my favorable support. In SB 25 the focus on career planning, individual student planning around the common core are areas that peak my interest. I do have reservations in the teacher accountability areas, but I hope the oversight committee will be responsive to input. The ONLY education reform bill we needed this session was SB 25, and we did not need the Governor’s political education reform bill of HB 1234!

I am pleased to share some of the good news from this legislative session. HB 1206 brought to us by Representative Susy Blake (D-Sioux Falls), ends bureaucratic obstacles to food security for low-income families. HB 1206 ends the food tax refund program, and instead appropriates money to the Department of Social Services to make grants for the purpose of emergency food assistance. Organizations dedicated to providing food to low-income families will be eligible to apply for the grant program. Both the Senate and the House of Representatives have approved HB 1206.

In a spirit of statesman bipartisanship both chambers of the legislature approved an override to the Governor’s veto on HB 1116 which exempts the consumable livestock bedding products from sales and use tax. Some examples would be corn stover, soybean stubble, and wheat straw. Currently State Revenue department tax agents are auditing dairy farmers and assessing a tax on all bedding regardless if it is often times used for feed as well. Feed is an input that we do not tax because the end product is taxed such as milk, beef, or pork.

HB 1247 would substantially change the voting rights of those with criminal convictions. Currently, under South Dakota Law certain criminal convictions do not result in the removal of the person from the voting rolls. HB 1247 would make it state law that anyone convicted of a felony does not have a right to vote. Both the Senate and the House of Representatives have approved HB 1247. This legislation will create confusion with the upcoming general election and is an issue that still will be revisited next year.

Northeast South Dakota is being proudly represented by one of our own, Courtney Peterson from Sisseton who is serving as Miss Rodeo South Dakota. We had the privilege of hosting her at the Capitol and approved a commemoration in her honor. Courtney is currently pursuing a master’s degree in agricultural economics.

The Black Hills are an important part of South Dakota’s history, culture, and industry, but are facing sever problems with pine beetles.  We were able to provide funds to fight this problem.  Still, it would have been nice to address all natural disaster issues in the state, including the flooded roads in the northeast part of our State.

HB 1046 addressed issues involving child custody during a soldier’s deployment.  It’s a complicated issue with many interests to keep in mind.  We were able to protect a soldier’s right receive custody regardless of whether he or she is fighting for our country, while still protecting the best interest of their children—the want of all parties involved.

The issue that has dominated discussion for the last eight weeks—education—came to a final vote this week.  The senate passed a significantly revised bill, but one that still failed to address the true problem with HB 1234—the lack of involvement of educators in the process.  Several Republicans joined my Democratic colleagues and me in opposing this bill, but it was still sent to the house for concurrence.  The house passed the bill Wednesday with only one vote to spare, a telling indicator that many—even Republicans—do not see this bill as the best approach to education.  The final bill contained no appropriation to support its mandates—six boards containing 93 individuals.  These boards do contain several teachers but as they will have to meet around the state, the teachers’ school boards will have to fund the costs of their time and travel or the teachers will have to.  Considering how strapped our schools are for funds, this lack of support is just one more burden on them.  The estimated total cost for the boards is $50,000 which will either be covered by school districts or the State.

HB 1234 has come to symbolize the dysfunction we have seen in Pierre.  The governor tried to impose his ideas—or rather those of a national agenda—on South Dakota’s communities without the input from those at ground level.  I imagine if a similar issue arose that affected farmers or ranchers so drastically, and they testified on the subject as much disdain as our teachers, the bill would die in its first committee.  We tried to bring comprehensive ideas and long-term approaches to fixing problems in education, but those who supported this bill would not even allow the issue to be studied before such drastic policies were put in place.

What I hope comes out of all of the discussion, is a reengagement in our community schools and the political process.  I hope educators, parents, and communities speak up about what they need from Pierre and help define what problems actually exist in education.  If we want to improve student achievement, it is time we support our teachers in the classroom by providing them with the best resources to educate students—whether those resources be better technology, adequate markers and pencils, or better pay to entice our best student to chose education.  Until we adequately fund education, on a steady, year to year basis, we cannot expect our schools to maintain the high standards we have set.

It is my pleasure to represent northeast South Dakota and I hope I will be able to continue that in the future.

Another piece of legislation that I have had the pleasure of working on with Rep. Feickert is HB 1116, which will exempt wheat straw, soybean stubble, and corn stover as bedding for livestock purposes. Tax agents with the revenue department have been auditing specifically dairy operations’ assess taxes on their bedding materials. The difference in bedding materials is whether the material can consumed. In the case of those mentioned above those items may be included in a ration as feed for livestock. However when dealing with woodchips or sand they are not readily consumable and are not included in the diet of livestock and therefore, would still be taxed. The Senate voted with a large margin to clean up this inequity in tax policy, because the end product of livestock is ultimately taxed.

On another note, I am pleased to report that we defeated the immigration reform legislation that would have created huge problems for employers to enforce a truly a federal issue. We owe it to all people who call South Dakota home to find ways to work together and give respect to each other.  We also defeated another bill, SB 160, which would have dissolved the James River Water Development District. This bill was an attempt to set a precedent on a state level with issues that need to be taken care of on a local level. Fortunately, the House Agriculture and Natural Resources committee tabled the bill. We have worked to ensure that this district functions properly in the future and is held accountable to the taxpayers.

The governor’s education reform, HB 1234, continues to be a primary focus. Unfortunately, discussions has diverted from a long term plan to fund the basic needs of our schools.  I like the concept of teacher scholarships in the high need areas and developing a taskforce with all of the education stakeholders. Parents, teachers, administrators, school boards and education leaders should come together for the ultimate goal of student achievement. That is not the case in the governor’s plan. It leaves out those most directly affected by its implications—teachers, parents, school boards, and school administrators. This is not the way we do business in South Dakota, and a politically driven piece of legislation, such as HB 1234, is not fair for our citizens.

During this 87^th Legislative Session, I want to focus on water management, especially in the area of flooded agriculture land. We owe it to our local partners (county, township, city governments), as well as our agriculture producers and those folks concerned with water issues, to give direction from a state perspective. Along with this direction we must also remember to maintain local control/input when managing water from a watershed approach. SB 169 received solid support in the Senate and will be up for discussion in the House Agriculture and Natural Resources committee very soon. This bill establishes an ongoing regional watershed oversight legislative taskforce. Initially, we also planned to create the James River Regional Watershed district in companion with this legislation, but we compromised to first start with the taskforce. I am proud that we are able to make progress in water management and all of this has been done on a non-partisan basis!

Speaking of compromise and non-partisan, I wish that would be the case with the Governor’s plan to completely overhaul the classrooms for our teachers. HB 1234 is the Governors legislation that is now on the Senate side and will be up for a hearing in the near future. Why should a person have to speak as a proponent for the Governors legislation in order to guarantee a spot at the table to “carve-up” the Governors plan? That was the case over in the House Education committee when various Pierre insider lobbyists representing education listed themselves as supporters of HB 1234. Fortunately many members of those education groups have sounded off that their “lobbyists” were not speaking for them in committee. I also realize that some of these lobbyists have recognized that they shouldn’t have put their organization on the line in committee. My hope is that these lobbyists will continue to reach out to their members and the whole education community, especially the teachers who strongly voiced opposition in committee to HB 1234! I, like many professional educators, believe the current proposals contain flaws. However, if we can do a better job including input from the educational community, I think we can drastically improve the proposals, and therefore provide South Dakota the education they deserve.

On paper, enticing new math and science teachers with $8000 in additional pay seems like a promising idea.  It would bring a new teacher’s pay up around $40,000, a decent starting pay for any recent college graduate.  However, this change in how to attract teachers to high needs fields still does not address several of the problems present in the original bill.  First, not all school districts in South Dakota have the same needs.  Some need math and science teachers, other lack elementary and special education teachers.  The state should not prescribe what is best for schools when what works for one may not work for another.  Second, the incentive for new math and science teachers may help them pay off student loans, but what kind of good will the departments see if a new teacher makes significantly more than a teacher who has five years of experience?  What will happen to the relationship among other first year teachers from other disciplines that are not eligible for the incentive, but may also have substantial student loans?

Third, after five years of earning $8000 more than their set salary, why would that teacher—who now has five years of experience teaching—stay in a town that drops his or her pay so significantly? Many states in our region pay teachers significantly more than South Dakota.  Often, teachers do not even have to leave the communities in which they live to work in a district that pays them better.  This incentive will only create divisions among colleagues and, in the end, possibly result in South Dakota losing teachers to states that pay better.

The other change to HB 1234 was to make the merit pay system voluntary for school districts, or for them to propose an alternative plan for rewarding excelling teachers.  This amendment still focuses too much on rewarding a small number of teachers instead of encouraging all teachers to do their best to improve student achievement.  The state’s plan puts teachers in competition with each other for a small pool of money that state has yet to fund.  If a school opts out of the state merit pay plan, they lose money; if they create their own plan, it still must receive the approval of the Department of Education.  For school districts, administrators, and teachers, it creates another problem among the many they already face.

Proposing to fix the problems with the student base funding formula—and actually funding students at an appropriate rate—may not sound as creative and innovative as the governor’s new merit pay and incentive plans, but it directly addresses the issues administrators, teachers, students, and parents face in South Dakota schools.  Providing adequate base funding allows districts the flexibility to address their needs whether they are reinforcing teacher salaries or providing special services to students, such as additional help in math or reading.  It ensures teachers have the supplies they need in their classroom.  It keeps students involved in student sports and organizations that help them build social and leadership skills.  Rather than unpredictably funding education based on the whims of the governor or the hip national trends, South Dakota needs to listen to those in the classrooms.  Teachers and principals know how to address students’ needs.

I am proud of the fact that my fellow Senate Agriculture and Natural Resources committee recognize the importance of taking the first step in giving direction on water management. The committee unanimously voted for SB 169, which establishes a regional watershed and watershed oversight advisory task force. Right now we are focusing on the James River watershed basin. A regional watershed would allow for communication on drainage, maintenance, and irrigation among local watershed districts. I am grateful to former Senator Paul Symens for making the trip to Pierre and garnering strong support to look at the entire basin. This topic of water management from a basin perspective is still a work in progress, and I welcome input on how we can make this first step work.

Last week I brought pipeline bonding legislation, SB 126, up for discussion.  It would have required large oil pipelines to post a $500 million indemnity bond to protect lands from potential oil spill cleanup and water aquifer contamination. I am proud to report that various landowners and grassroots groups testified in favor of my legislation. Unfortunately, by not passing this bill, the Senate Commerce and Energy committee fails to hold huge corporations like TransCanada and their Keystone XL pipeline accountable should a spill occur. A TransCanada representative told the committee that they are financially strong and will be responsible for any spills or leaks in their pipeline, but they failed to say whether Keystone, LLC is financially stable enough to withstand a catastrophe that could affect our land and water in South Dakota.

The senate debate on education focused on SB 25, a bill that will remove South Dakota from compliance with No Child Left Behind, and replacing it with a new approach to school accountability.  There are several issues I had with this bill because it does not address the true problems the state faces with NCLB.  States are currently allowed to seek a waiver from the national law that requires all students to meet adequate yearly progress.  However, soon Congress is likely to replace NCLB with a different plan for accountability that the state will again have to comply with.  SB 25 requires districts to change current plans now when they will likely face another change in the next year.  The evaluation system proposes that schools evaluate teachers every year, which will six to eight hours per teachers each year.  Currently, administrators spend two to three hours evaluating each teacher.  This proposal creates problems for our already tightly-staffed small schools that often share principals across multiple schools.  Even in larger schools, doubling the time spent evaluating will likely require additional staff that will cost additional funds in already cash-strapped districts.

The other aspect of SB 25 creates a board to rate districts on financial accountability.  In addition to leaving teachers off of the board, this part of the bill does not give any guidance as to what a school district must do to have the board determine that they are fiscally responsible.  So rather than encouraging creativity and innovation with technology in our classrooms, SB 25 may decide that the best districts are ones who spend the least, regardless of whether that means schools lack art and music programs, middle school sports, or the technology tools that help prepare students for college and the work place.

School accountability is essential to ensuring that students receive the best education they can, but teachers and administrators—those in the classroom working with students every day—should have a strong voice in the process.  Financial responsibility is also important, but it should not come at the cost of adequately funding education.  One-time money bills, such as one currently in the senate, help teachers and schools, but are only a bandage to a much deeper funding issue.  The state needs to revise its current base-funding formula to provide teachers better pay and provide students proper resources, and it needs to stop trying to conform to national movements that attack our public schools.

I am tentatively planning on hosting a listening session in Webster on the evening of February 24^th.  Please stay tuned for the time and location.  This will give me the chance to update you on the status of legislation, especially HB 1234, the governor’s plan to reform the role of teachers and administrators in our local school districts. It is a major undertaking with strong opposition and much skepticism from the teachers who will be most affected. In the end student success is our goal and we must keep that as our number one priority.

We had a resolution on the Senate Floor which would have pressed our congressional delegation to support legislation to help the postal service.  Especially in our rural districts, the post office is an integral part of our communities.  I am disappointed that our friends on the other side of the aisle were not able to recognize the importance of maintaining our mail processing centers.  I have signed on to support a resolution that encourages support to keep open our rural post offices.  Although these resolutions have no force of law, they show us where the priorities of many of our legislators are.  Instead of focusing on how to help communities thrive, they have turned to a national movement that fears differences and fosters divisions.

One successful bill that made it through the senate, SB 123 will change how rural electric cooperatives are taxed.  This bill changes the tax from a gross receipts to a per kilowatt hour tax.  One concern about this change was how it would affect funds going to schools.  With the current rate, electric bills would skyrocket.  The change will maintain adequate funding to schools from this tax, but will increase at a more manageable rate, protecting school funds and the families who pay the tax.

With all of the discussion over the controversial education proposals by the governor, my Democratic colleagues and I have offered a plan that promotes local control, student achievement, and collaboration among teachers.  I continue to forge working relationships with my Republican colleagues and the Governor’s Office as we work on these issues affecting our schools.  I am pleased to hear so much feed back from community members and I continue to request input if you have an idea on how to best approach the subject.

Education directly links to the economic development issues South Dakota is facing.  The Census Bureau estimates that around 41,000 jobs will be created in the state, many of them in health care, IT, accounting, engineering, and manufacturing sectors.  We have the opportunity in the state to help prepare students for well paying jobs in the future, but we are currently not meeting the demand.  Instead of funding new programs that bring in out of state workers, we propose funding current programs to retrain workers here and properly educate our students for many of these professions.

An effective economic development plan must involve all 66 counties.  Rural and urban communities alike need the support of our state legislature to prosper.  The Bel Brands’ recent decision to establish a cheese factory in Brookings is a great example of how the community has created an environment that is friendly to an international corporation.  Thank you to South Dakota State University, the Governors Office of Economic Development, and many other folks who rallied behind a common goal of providing good paying jobs and linking research to education.

The next few weeks promise to be interesting and exciting.  There are several areas in which the legislature has the ability to truly help South Dakotans prosper through education and economic development.  If you have any questions or comments on upcoming legislation, please email me at sen.frerichs@state.sd.us or call me at 949-2204.  I look forward to hearing from you.

Confirming the nominees for the governor’s cabinet positions and appointments to state boards and commissions has been the main focus of the state affairs committee.   As the bill introduction deadline recently passed, I expect to see a number of bills up for hearing soon.  Please contact me if you have any input or concerns about upcoming legislation.

The main focus of my attention this week was the education plan my Democratic colleagues and I laid out.  We focused on reforming the formula for school funding.  We also believe that prescribing a method for merit pay that schools and teachers do not want is not the best approach to increasing teacher salaries.  We believe the best way to help teachers is to allow them to work together. Teacher collaboration is crucial to improving effectiveness and student achievement.  The Governor’s merit pay system attempts to mirror other states’ approach to education, but it simply does not fit with South Dakota schools.

Our ideas, which have support among many of our Republican colleagues, allows local school districts to determine which approaches to teacher development work best for them.  Ultimately, we all want to see students in South Dakota succeed.  Leaving the measure of student success rely solely on standardized tests is not the answer.  Our teachers should not have to “teach to the test”; instead, as the Governor has also advocated, teachers should be able to maximize the common core standards.  This model ensures local flexibility, while maintaining appropriate benchmarks, and also allows the student to have options in their high school education.

House Bill 1234 is the governor’s omnibus education overhaul legislation. It includes everything from evaluating teachers and principals and phasing out continuing contract, to paying math and science teachers more and ending the teacher compensation assistance program. Flexibility is a common request of local school boards along with their teachers and administration, but the governor’s plan is anything but flexible.  Rather than stifling innovation in the classroom and creating competition among teachers, I hope the legislators can help school districts and teachers do best.  We can start by funding programs that reward professional development, such as National Board Certification.

Renewable energy is another area where the state can encourage economic development.  I have entered a bill (SB 170) that would eliminate the contractors’ excise tax on new or expanded wind energy development.  Currently, there is a half-rate contractors’ excise tax.  I am pleased to have Republicans supporting the legislation to do our part in South Dakota.

Another main concern of mine is watershed district legislation, Senate Bill, which is a bi-partisan work in progress to address the drainage and water management issues.  We hope to take an entire drainage basin approach specifically with the James River, Big Sioux River, and in northern Roberts County, the Red River Basin.  This is more of a pilot project that breaks down barriers for local control and involvement.  We know that many counties are choosing to remove their drainage ordinances, which will only increase drainage disputes to the courts system.  We must find a way to bring the effected parties together, along with the facts from engineers, for a fair hearing, and an appropriate appeals procedure.

It is my pleasure to serve you in Pierre.  Please keep in touch with pending legislation as the process will move along quickly.  We plan to wrap up the main run of session by March 2^nd.  I will not be able to attend the Webster cracker-barrel, but I hope to host a listening session towards the end of February.

In addition to my bill to require large oil pipelines to post a $500 million bond, I am assisting some folks on legislation updating the voting requirements for sanitary sewer district formation.

For school staff, students, parents, and anyone else with a strong interest in the governor’s plan to drastically change the role of teachers in our education system should participate in the process. I applaud the governor for making an effort to try to strengthen education and for looking at ways to update student learning, however, he has chosen to look only at divisive strategies such as merit pay and removing continuing contract.

Matched with local funds in the education formula, the funding put forth by the governor for teacher incentives could provide a boost to education. This would allow the local school board the chance to determine how they would enhance teacher effectiveness and student learning.

In the agriculture and natural resources committee, we heard an update from the Department of Game, Fish & Parks. Fishing across our State is a hot commodity and we are fortunate to have access to this resource. We also discussed the pheasant population, including habitat and winter feeding possibilities. Last winter was hard on all animals living outside, and along with the early spring snowstorms the conditions, it was particularly tough for our pheasants. I understand access to habitat is crucial, and we are fortunate in northeast South Dakota to have a variety of habitat. At the same time, I do not think that the loss in Conservation Reserve Program acres is the only reason why our pheasant population dropped. All of us need to do our part to continue to exercise a working lands approach to assist wildlife and support pheasant populations throughout the State.

In regards to developing a watershed/basin approach to drainage, I have a list of a few essential points. I have seen Republicans and citizens across the state expressing interest in the issue and have enjoyed their input.

Watershed/Drainage Basin Regional District Model:
• Focus on local control/cover a regional drainage basin (could be within 1 county or cover multiple counties)
• Involve all parties of interest (landowners/farmers, counties, townships, wildlife people)
• Hire water management experts (engineers/hydrologists)
• Have authority to tax (on property or drainage projects)
• Approve/enforce drainage requests
• Provide drainage maintenance
• Cleanout canals/ditches (i.e. Jim River)
• Guide irrigation efforts (maintain State Water permits)

I am proud to be serving you in Pierre. Please contact me with any suggestions you may have on the issues for the legislative session.

Governor Daugaard delivered his second State of the State Address during this first term serving the people of South Dakota. Technical education, jobs, and massive teacher reforms are the take home messages I gathered. Great to see that the Governor finally recognizes the importance of career and technical education and how we can make our young people better prepared for good jobs here in State. However the Governor had the chance ever since he took office to place a strong focus on technical education and good jobs, but he has waited until now and only presents a temporary plan. Let’s be visionary and dream big for the future of our State and put into action the necessary steps to prepare our young people for careers in engineering, biotechnology, machining, and energy industry. I disagree strongly with the Governor when he suggests that a third of our teachers is the result of “Government Creep”. Purely based on the numbers over the last 40 years the Governor thinks the increased number of teachers with a decrease in the number of students is reason for alarm.

Hands-on learning at the high school level to spark interest in technical careers requires a smaller class size and the needed funds to operate a classroom with expensive equipment. We didn’t hear from the Governor on how he plans to support those efforts. Experiencing the technical careers opportunities is a good start through “scrubs camps” and internships, but the teacher and classroom provide the foundation.

Distance learning through hybrid partnerships and new delivery methods to break down barriers for non-traditional technical training is on the right track. What a great concept to allow our technical institutes to provide their job training all across the State!

The rural health care plans by the Governor make good sense. I also hope that someday soon we can maximize technology and enable tele-medicine and allow our talented health care professionals the chance to serve South Dakotans in rural areas.

Merit pay and ending continuing contract are extreme ideas from a national movement by people who think they know what is best for education. Unfortunately by requiring our teachers to “teach to the test” will only reduce the amount of new curriculum that can be covered in the limited school year. Let’s truly measure student success based on how those young people are able to get a good job and benefit their community.

Governor Daugaard shared his plan to bring new South Dakotans into our State by hiring an international “headhunter” employment firm. This would be a partnership with corporations in the State who have a strong need for engineers, welders, information technology workers, and accountants. The State would cost share only if the new South Dakotan stays in the State for half a year. I think this might be well-intended, but we should also ask ourselves. If we are willing to pay $4,000 to recruit a worker from another State, how much would we invest in our students right now? I also wonder if we could create a second career option for some of our citizens who may want to go back for some more schooling, early retire, and then transition into one of these fields of work that is in high demand.

Chief Justice Gilbertson delivered his State of the Judiciary and he reminded us that the cost for probation is $3/day and to incarcerate inmates is at $63/day. The success of a solid probation program is paramount to saving our State precious tax dollars and making more productive citizens. Cameras in the courtroom continues to be implemented and the various people involved are able to offer their comfort level. The Chief also reminded us that the crisis is here for a lack of attorneys in rural areas.

I am working on a piece of legislation that will ask for the same as Nebraska was able to approve in regards to the Keystone XL oil pipeline. This would call for a $500 million surety bond that would cover any potential issues with aquifer contamination or hardship endured due to a possible leak from the oil pipeline.

Our rural electric cooperatives are bringing a piece of legislation that would change the gross receipts tax to a kilowatt per hour tax. In an effort to achieve tax equity this would ensure they pay taxes based on how much electricity is sold instead of based on the price that is paid for the power. The ratepayers are the true beneficiary because they will have some confidence in the amount of taxes they will pay that go directly to the schools outside of the general education per student formula.

Water management is an issue for many counties throughout Eastern South Dakota. I expect discussion in the areas of watershed management and finding ways to give more tools to local officials when granting drainage permits. Stay tuned for more on this issue.

Nearly all of us have our Bill Janklow story that is fresh on our minds during the recent passing of our former Governor. I am very thankful to Bill and his family for their dedication to our State and he truly has had a magnificent impact. May he rest in peace.

I continue to feel fortunate to be able to serve you in Pierre. Please contact me with any input you may have on the issues for the Legislative Session.

We had the chance to hear from an expert in the biomass district heating systems when we visited the energy academy in Linz.  Their focus is on replanting hardwood trees as they continue to harvest trees for both lumber production and powering their heating/electricity plants.  They maintain proper renewal of forests and tree plantings to displace any amount harvested. Touring the local heating and power plant, Linz Ag provided our tour group with the ability to walk through and witness the production of heat and electricity.  This plant is operated year around, even though some adjustments are made since homes do not need the heat portion.  Railroad, ship, and trucks haul the waste-wood lumber into the plant for proper storage and use.

Reduce consumption of electricity/energy and increase renewables is a motto followed by the people of Austria.  Control of heating is reserved by the state governments but the electricity is controlled by the federal government in Austria.

Linz, Austria is similar in population to Sioux Falls, South Dakota.  However, many of the buildings are very old and have elegant architecture.  The city is clean and also contains the capital for the Upper Austria state government.  Austria has similar aspects to South Dakota, but they have 8 million people and we have 800,000.

Our first day in Austria capped off with a very cool experience to hear from both the Upper Austria President of the Chamber of Agriculture (basically, their Secretary of Ag.) as well as Dr. Gerhard Dell who is the Energy Commissioner/Director for the Upper Austria Energy Office.  First class hospitality was the standard and these folks expressed the importance of agriculture and energy as the token to success in the country they are very proud to call home.  I was fortunate to speak on behalf of our delegation to thank our hosts and inform them that we are given confidence to forge ahead as we return to the United States to enhance renewable energy opportunities.