Amend the deadline for filing a petition to initiate a measure or constitutional amendment.
Summary
HB 1184 amends South Dakota’s laws governing the initiative and initiated amendment process by changing the filing deadline for petitions. Under the bill, a petition for an initiated measure or constitutional amendment must still be filed with the Secretary of State before circulation and at least one year before the general election at which it will be submitted, but the signatures themselves must now be filed by the first Tuesday in February of a general election year. The bill also preserves existing requirements that the petition include the full text, election date, attorney general title and explanation, sponsor affidavits, and a statement of organization.
The bill keeps in place the rule that no signature may be obtained more than 24 months before the designated general election and continues to require circulators to provide signers with a handout containing the attorney general’s explanation, fiscal note, sponsor contact information, and disclosure of whether the circulator is paid or volunteer. It also retains the requirement that at least two-thirds of petition sponsors file a sworn affidavit stating the petition documents are complete and, to the best of their knowledge, contain enough signatures. The State Board of Elections remains responsible for prescribing petition and affidavit forms where the statute does not specify them.
Impact
HB 1184 directly amends South Dakota Codified Laws §§ 2-1-1.1 and 2-1-1.2, which regulate the filing and circulation of petitions for initiated measures and initiated constitutional amendments. The practical effect is to set a clearer and earlier signature-filing deadline tied to the first Tuesday in February of a general election year, while leaving the pre-circulation filing requirements and other disclosure obligations intact. This affects petition sponsors, circulators, the Secretary of State, and voters participating in the initiative process.
Sentiment
The bill appears to have generally favorable support in the legislature, passing committee and floor votes by comfortable margins overall, though not unanimously. The recorded votes show broad approval in both chambers, suggesting lawmakers viewed the measure as a procedural clarification or tightening of initiative deadlines rather than a major policy change. The final Senate vote was closer than earlier votes, indicating some reservations remained.
Contention
The main point of contention is likely the effect on ballot initiative access and the timing burden placed on petition sponsors. Supporters appear to favor a more structured and earlier deadline for submitting signatures, which may improve administrative certainty for election officials. Opponents, reflected in the minority no votes, may have been concerned that the earlier filing deadline makes it harder for citizen-led measures and constitutional amendments to qualify for the ballot by compressing the signature-gathering timeline and reducing flexibility for sponsors.