DOCSLIB.ORG

Governor's Budget Report for FY2022

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Governor's Budget Report for FY2022 STATE OF SOUTH DAKOTA GOVERNOR’S BUDGET FISCAL YEAR 2022 OUR 132ND YEAR OF A BALANCED BUDGET KRISTI NOEM, GOVERNOR DEPARTMENT OF EXECUTIVE MANAGEMENT BUREAU OF FINANCE AND MANAGEMENT 500 East Capitol Ave. Pierre, South Dakota 57501-5070 Voice: (605) 773-3411 Fax: (605) 773-4711 TO MEMBERS OF THE 96th LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF SOUTH DAKOTA The Governor's Budget Report for Fiscal Year 2022 represents our state's 132nd year of a balanced budget. In November of 2012 South Dakota citizens passed Constitutional Amendment P, which explicitly added balanced budget requirements to the South Dakota Constitution. While we have practiced this in the past, it is now required by our Constitution. The report is designed to give an accurate and timely reflection of the financial conditions of the state and the proposals for spending the taxpayers’ money. It culminates budget activities by the agencies and the Governor's Office which began early this summer. The budget document contains a great deal of financial and program information, including the following: financial statements for the general fund and other funds; a history of the record of expenditures of the past two fiscal years; proposed funding by program for the coming fiscal year; statements of goals, objectives, and mission statements for the various programs, divisions, and departments; a listing of revenues generated by each program; and, various informational charts and graphs. Funding for each program is presented as general funds, federal funds, and other funds. In addition, expenditures for each program are broken down into personal services and operating expenses. Staffing levels for each program are expressed in terms of full-time equivalent employees (FTEs). It is our hope that the information contained in this book will be useful to you in your deliberations during this legislative session. Sincerely, Liza Clark, Chief Financial Officer Bureau of Finance and Management TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE Governor's Letter of Transmittal Commissioner's Letter Table of Contents Staff List General Fund Condition Statement .............................................................................................................................. 1‐3 General Fund Receipts .................................................................................................................................................. 4‐7 Highway Fund Condition Statement ................................................................................................................................. 8 Game and Fish Fund Condition Statement ...................................................................................................................... 9 School and Public Lands Fund Projected Revenues for Higher Education ................................................................... 10 Higher Education Facilities Fund Cash Flow Analysis ..................................................................................................... 11 General Fund Receipts and Expenditure Charts ....................................................................................................... 12‐15 Special Appropriations and Mid‐Year Adjustments .................................................................................................. 16‐21 Governor’s Recommendation for State Employee Compensation .............................................................................. 22 Total State Government Budget: (Excluding Informational Budgets) ............................................................................................................................... 23 Informational Budgets Contained in the General Appropriations Bill ....................................................................... 24 (Including Informational Budgets) ............................................................................................................................... 25 Self‐Liquidating Projects .................................................................................................................................................. 26 Executive Salaries ...................................................................................................................................................... 27‐36 SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDED BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS AND REORGANIZATIONS ........................ 37‐53 DEPARTMENTS Department of Executive Management ..................................................................................................... 01‐1 to 01‐44 Department of Revenue .............................................................................................................................. 02‐1 to 02‐10 Department of Agriculture and Natural Resources ................................................................................... 03‐1 to 03‐24 Department of Tourism ................................................................................................................................. 04‐1 to 04‐3 Department of Game, Fish, and Parks .......................................................................................................... 06‐1 to 06‐7 Department of Tribal Relations ..................................................................................................................... 07‐1 to 07‐2 Department of Social Services .................................................................................................................... 08‐1 to 08‐15 Department of Health ................................................................................................................................. 09‐1 to 09‐22 Department of Labor and Regulation ......................................................................................................... 10‐1 to 10‐19 Department of Transportation ...................................................................................................................... 11‐1 to 11‐3 Department of Education ............................................................................................................................ 12‐1 to 12‐12 Department of Public Safety ......................................................................................................................... 14‐1 to 14‐9 Board of Regents .......................................................................................................................................... 15‐1 to 15‐16 Department of Military .................................................................................................................................. 16‐1 to 16‐6 Department of Veterans' Affairs ................................................................................................................... 17‐1 to 17‐4 Department of Corrections ......................................................................................................................... 18‐1 to 18‐13 Department of Human Services .................................................................................................................. 19‐1 to 19‐10 South Dakota Retirement System ................................................................................................................. 25‐1 to 25‐2 Unified Judicial System .................................................................................................................................. 27‐1 to 27‐6 Legislature ...................................................................................................................................................... 28‐1 to 28‐5 Public Utilities Commission .......................................................................................................................... 26‐1 to 26‐4 Office of the Attorney General ...................................................................................................................... 29‐1 to 29‐6 Office of School and Public Lands ................................................................................................................. 30‐1 to 30‐2 Office of the Secretary of State ..................................................................................................................... 31‐1 to 31‐3 Office of the State Treasurer ......................................................................................................................... 32‐1 to 32‐6 Office of the State Auditor ............................................................................................................................ 33‐1 to 33‐3 GENERAL INDEX BUREAU OF FINANCE AND MANAGEMENT BUDGET ANALYSIS TEAM LIZA G. CLARK, CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER COLIN R. KEELER, DIRECTOR OF FINANCIAL SYSTEMS MARK A. QUASNEY, ECONOMIST DEREK W. JOHNSON, CHIEF BUDGET ANALYST HALLIE C. GETZ, SENIOR BUDGET ANALYST LARA M. WILLIAMS, BUDGET ANALYST MORGAN L. GRUEBELE, BUDGET ANALYST JACOB R. PARSONS, BUDGET ANALYST GENERAL FUND CONDITION STATEMENT ACTUAL ACTUAL REVISED PROJECTED FY2019 FY2020 FY2021 FY2022 RECEIPTS Sales and Use Tax A $ 1,025,401,209 $ 1,072,830,649 $ 1,140,054,313 $ 1,145,342,839 Lottery 123,815,501 122,489,001 134,800,192 135,752,140 Contractor's Excise Tax B 113,163,617 123,723,519 136,916,541 137,126,867 Insurance Company Tax C 90,347,541 93,271,112 95,978,625 97,850,017 Unclaimed Property Receipts 48,573,600 47,308,472 40,000,000 40,000,000 Tobacco Taxes 49,971,217 51,066,112 50,904,325 50,358,530 Bank Franchise Tax 17,256,120 12,060,604 14,889,195 15,604,949 Other D, E,
Load more

Recommended publications
  • "Opportunities for South Dakota" Report
    Opportunities for South Dakota Office of the Executive Director June 2003 Message from the Executive Director Armed with these issues during roundtables and other information about discussions with the Regents and its leadership. long-term The Regents’ partners in education, those in the demographic K-12 community, have been willing participants shifts taking place in multiple discussions. These have included in South Dakota, meetings with the South Dakota Board of the Board of Education, school leadership groups, the state’s Regents initiated a teachers, and several local school boards. discussion in Obviously, there are many others who might have March 2002 been consulted. Nonetheless, the variety of about South backgrounds of those involved has provided a solid Dakota’s future base for understanding the critical issues. educational opportunities. Linked to ever-present This report offers a synthesis of many ideas conversations about maximizing resource and opportunities. With continued examination investments in state services, including higher and dialogue, these ideas may make a difference education and the special schools, along with in long-term policy and actions. Hopefully, questions about how South Dakota would somewhere within the context of the 14 respond to changes in the national and opportunities identified, there is sufficient room international economy, this dialogue became an to address any substantive policy item that arises. opportunity to think more about where we are and where we might go. This is not a plan or roadmap for South Dakota regental policy and action. It is a tool, At the Regents’ direction, the Executive however, for continuing the review and Director was tasked with preparing a report on development of ideas.
    [Show full text]
  • Accountability Report
    Accountability Report Summer 2007 Policy Goal #1: Access: Every qualified South Dakotan shall have access to public postsecondary education. Policy Goal #2: Quality: South Dakota public universities and special schools shall provide a quality educational experience. Policy Goal #3: State Wealth: South Dakota public universities shall engage in activities designed to enhance the state’s long–term economy. Policy Goal #4: Efficiencies: South Dakota public universities and special schools shall continue to seek means for improving efficiency in the delivery of educational services. * Information in this publication was produced by Regents Information Systems unless otherwise noted. 1 Accountability Report 2006-2007 Policy Goal #1: Access: Every qualified South Dakotan shall have access to public postsecondary education. 1. Strengthen the connection of universities in the preparation for postsecondary education in the K-12 community. 2. Educate a greater proportion of high school graduates and the adult working population. 3. Increase retention and graduation rates. 2 Public higher education recognizes that Access curriculum delivery today must respond to the state's changing environment. Strategies are focused on K-12 preparation, non-traditional students, and improved retention and graduation rates. System Enrollment • Enrollment has continued to grow steadily. System Enrollment Fall Total Head Count Enrollment 30,720 30,901 29,533 29,716 29,844 28,446 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Retention • Emphasis is placed on the importance of retaining
    [Show full text]
  • Section II LEGISLATURES and LEGISLATION I. Legislative Organization and Services
    Section II ^ LEGISLATURES AND LEGISLATION I. Legislative Organization and Services 2. ation ^ SI v^ Legislative Organization and ServiGes STRUCTIJRE AND PROCEDURES •'»,•.-* ' BY WALTER T. GRIBBEN* ppoRTiOiNMENT problems continued commission provided for the purpose by to stand out in legislative activities the Legislature. In a few States apportion­ A*• during the 1966-67 biennium, but ment plans are still temporary, and the emerging theme was one of change in further action will be needed to fulfill other respects also—modernization of the judicial mandates, either legislatively or deliberative setting, removal of anti­ by constitutional amendment. Otherwise, quated restrictions, acceptance of new 1966-67 was a time for perfecting appor­ technolog)', revision of structures and tionment programs in anticipation of o|x;rating procedures, and improvement further action after the 1970 census. in compensation andworkingTonditions. When a chapter corresponding to this A spirit of modernization was marked in was written in late 1965 for the preceding the state capitols, reflecting new public edition of The Book of the States, only interest and involvement in legislative three Legislatures had not been reappor­ affkirs and concern for restoi-ation of the tioned since the decennial census of 1960: Legislature iis an equal force in American Minnesota's, where a 1965 apportion-: state government. -- ment plan was vetoed;- Pennsylvania's, where the State Supreme Court assumed APPORTIONMENT the task because of legislative disagree­ Since the 5flAer v. C^rr decision of the ment; nnd Rhode Island's, where a legis­ U.S. Supreme Gourt.in 1962, apportion­ lative commission waS establisheci to ment has followed a Tong, and in some supervise a state census and propose an States arduous, course.
    [Show full text]
  • Senate Bill 55 ENROLLED
    20.538.13 95th Legislative Session 659 2020 South Dakota Legislature Senate Bill 55 ENROLLED AN ACT ENTITLED An Act to require the Board of Regents to assemble a task force to study the operations and functions of the institutions of higher education under the board's authority. BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF SOUTH DAKOTA: Section 1. The Board of Regents shall assemble a task force consisting of at least eleven members to examine the possible program and administrative efficiencies and cost effectiveness that may be achieved through the shared administration of the South Dakota School of Mines and Technology, Black Hills State University, Dakota State University, Northern State University, South Dakota State University, and the University of South Dakota. The membership of the task force shall include four members of the Joint Committee on Appropriations appointed by the Joint Committee on Appropriations. All expenses incurred in carrying out the work of the task force shall be paid out of funds appropriated or otherwise provided to the board. The board shall present the findings of the task force to the Governor and to the Joint Committee on Appropriations no later than November 15, 2021. Section 2. The task force examination shall include the following: (1) The possible combining of administration at all levels of operation within an institution; (2) The possible combining of operations and functions across multiple institutions; (3) The possible combining of the administration of programs across multiple institutions; (4) A review of the duplication of program offerings; (5) A review of the academic majors with low enrollments and low numbers of graduates; (6) A review of functions outside the core missions of teaching, learning, and research; 20.538.13 2 659 (7) A review of the operations and functions provided as an efficiency through the central office of the Board of Regents; (8) A review of the viability of the university centers; and (9) Any other possible cost-effective measures the task force determines are worthy of examination.
    [Show full text]
  • Early History of South Dakota State Fair Documented
    FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: April 12, 2006 CONTACT: Matthew T. Reitzel, (605) 773-3615 or [email protected] Early History of South Dakota State Fair documented PIERRE, S.D. – The South Dakota State Fair noted its 100th anniversary in Huron in 2005. The 1903 South Dakota legislature passed a bill to permanently move the fair to Huron. Prior to that, the State Fair witnessed its share of different locations and scandal, according to research by the South Dakota State Historical Society. “It’s important to point out how the State Fair site was chosen,” said Matthew T. Reitzel, manuscript archivist for the South Dakota State Historical Society-Archives at the South Dakota Cultural Heritage Center. “Before 1905, towns throughout the state sent bids to a State Fair Board within the State Board of Agriculture to have their town hold the fair. In 1890, for example, Aberdeen paid $1,700 to secure the State Fair. It appears a winning town would hold the fair for two years and then the bidding process would start over.” Both the 1889 and 1890 State Fairs were held at Aberdeen. Each year saw attendance anywhere between 4,000 to 5,000 people. Some of the main attractions included grain, livestock, domestic exhibits, horse trotting and running, a tight rope walker and a balloon ascension. Sioux Falls had the fair in 1891 and 1892. The 1891 fair ran for two days and saw 20,000 people attend. The 1892 fair was extended to four days with Tuesday being “Old Soldier’s Day.” Horse racing purses ran as high as $1,000 with the average purse being $500.
    [Show full text]
  • Section II LEGISLATURES and F LEGISLATION 1 .Legislative
    •• 1 Section II LEGISLATURES AND f LEGISLATION ii •••:-•• •. • • , ,, • • 1 .Legislative Organization and Services 2. Legisl-ation V ^ 55- «;» >^ -^ V. 3CP Legislative Drganization; and Services TURE AND PROCEDURES BY HERBERT L. WILTSEE* F STATE legislatures have been the for­ apportionment issue has waned.,Several gotten or ignored brahch of govern­ new national programs, with appreciable I ment during the past generation or support from foundations, came into two, as many believe, that was conspicu­ existence in 1964^-65 to arouse and sustain ously not the case in 1962-65. It. is appor­ interest in representative lawmaking tionment, primarily, that has occasioned bodies, to stimulate needed research in this revival of attention. aspects of the legislative process, and to Apportionment was spotlighted on encourage adoption of needed changes. March 26, 1962, when the United States Notable in this connection is the Citizens Supreine Court rendered its decision in Conference on State Legislatures; another Baker'v. Carr (369 U.S. 186). It has com­ is the American Assembly (of Columbia manded public attention ever since as University) series of conferences on state judicial, legislative and" administrative legislatures, scheduled for inauguration actions have effected alterations in legis­ in 1966. The National Municipal League,"* lative districts, and as the voters have sponsor of the American Assembly confer­ elected reapportioned lawmaking bodies. ences, also has inaugura*: id a periodical In view of the remarkable speed with State Legislatures Progress Reporter as which state legislative reapportionment, part of its State Legislatures Project, had taken place by the close of 1965—es­ launched.in 1965. pecially remarkable since a new "round" Several constitutional conventions or of reapportioning activity was set off on constitutional revision commissions in a June 15, l'S64, with the Supreme Court's number of states have been or are to be ruling in Reynolds v.
    [Show full text]
  • Remote Legislative Sessions
    68-West–Statehouse | 300 SW 10th Ave. | Topeka, Kansas 66612-1504 (785) 296-3181 [email protected] kslegislature.org/klrd May 4, 2020 *Updated* REMOTE LEGISLATIVE SESSIONS In response to public health concerns regarding the COVID-19 pandemic, state legislatures are exploring means to convene remotely in order to protect their members, staff, and the public. This memorandum provides an overview of the common components contained in resolutions, legislation, and other documents identified by the National Conference of State Legislat u r e s 1 that enable legislative bodies to continue their work, remotely, during a time of crisis. The memorandum also compares actions taken to date by 19 legislative bodies in 13 states in 2020, on topics including voting, quorums, participation, committee meetings, and the trigger for a remote session, and includes information on a Wisconsin statute and Oregon Constitutional Amendment in place since 2009 and 2012 respectively on this topic. Attachment A provides more specific information on the provisions in other states. Additionally, this memorandum provides an overview of Kansas legislative activities, constitutional provisions, statutes, and legislative rules that refer to physical presence in the Statehouse for conducting legislative business. Authorizations Nearly all of the documents reviewed were resolutions that either changed rules or created new rules that, among other things, allow for remote sessions of legislative chambers and, in some instances, standing committees. The state legislative bodies that adopted such resolutions include one or both chambers from the states of Arkansas, California, Connecticut, Kentucky, Minnesota, New Jersey, New York, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Utah, and Vermont. Please note it was common for only one chamber of a legislature to adopt such a resolution.
    [Show full text]
  • BOARD of WATER and NATURAL RESOURCES James G. Bell, Chairman Steven Lowrie, Vice-Chairman Dale Kennedy, Secretary Thomas Everist
    BOARD OF WATER AND NATURAL RESOURCES James G. Bell, Chairman Rapid City Steven Lowrie, Vice-Chairman Watertown Dale Kennedy, Secretary Beresford Thomas Everist Sioux Falls John Loucks Rapid City Glen A. Severson Huron ,George Scully Wentworth 1990 Legislative Oversight Committee Senator Henry Poppen DeSmet Rep. Albert Schramm Winner Senator Doris P. Miner Gregory Rep. Steven K. Cutler Claremont To Governor George S. Mickelson and the Sixty-Fifth Session, Legislative Assembly 1990 1990 STATE WATER PLAN and 1989 ANNUAL REPORT Board of Water and Natural Resources January·l990 ~-1\..\.. Department of Water & Natural Resources Joe Foss Building 523 East Capitol Pierre, South Dakota 57501-3181 Governor George S. Mickelson and Members of the Legislature Sixty-fifth Legislative Session 1990 Transmitted herewith is the 1990 State Water Plan and the 1989 Annual Report of the Board of Water and Natural Resources. The State Water Plan outlines the projects in the State Water Facilities Plan and gives the Board's recommendations concerning projects for the State Water Resources Management System. The Annual Report describes the past year's water resource management activities throughout the State. During the past year, the drought, State Revolving Fund, water supply, and water quality issues have received widespread public attention. While many of these types of issues have required intense work and planning, I believe that the Department of Water and Natural . Resources has acted in a timely and positive manner and has addressed these diverse issues. Of course, this would not have been possible without the support of the State Legislature, the Governor, a dedicated professional staff, good relationships with the other State agencies, local governments, and project sponsors and the commitment of our citizen board - the Board of Water and Natural Resources (BWNR).
    [Show full text]
  • Issue 11: Missions of South Dakota Public Universities
    Missions of South Dakota Public Universities Issue Brief No. 11 January 31, 2007 Synopsis: The six public universities in South Dakota are mission-centered institutions. The South Dakota Legislature establishes public universities, and the missions of those universities are spelled out in state law. Only the legislature has the authority to enact laws establishing universities or to repeal existing laws. The South Dakota Board of Regents governs the public universities created by the legislature, consistent with the purposes provided in law. It is the job of the Board of Regents, through its intent to plan and program approval process, to ensure that academic programs at each university remain consistent with that institution’s unique mission, and do not encroach into or duplicate other universities’ areas of responsibility. Mission Differentiation at the Public Universities These are just a few examples of how the Board of Regents’ coordinated approach ensures that the unique mission of each public university is strengthened: • Rather than create a new information systems degree at Black Hills State University, the program is delivered in partnership with Dakota State University. • Schools of business at each university have a distinct and unique focus: international business at Northern State University, computer and information systems at DSU, tourism at BHSU, agricultural economics at South Dakota State University, and business management at The University of South Dakota. • In teacher education, an advanced degree in curriculum and instruction sought by West River–area students was transferred to BHSU, rather than be delivered remotely by SDSU. • Nursing education programs do not overlap: associate degrees are awarded by USD, while SDSU grants bachelor and graduate-level nursing degrees.
    [Show full text]
  • 2021 Legislative Report 2 Greater Sioux Falls Chamber of Commerce Table of Contents
    2021 Legislative Report 2 Greater Sioux Falls Chamber of Commerce Table of Contents Executive Summary .................................................... 4 Introduction ............................................................. 6 Setting the Stage: Who are the key Influencers ......................... 6 Elections’ Impact on Influencers . 7 Legislation Digest ...................................................... 10 Legislative Calendar and Vetoes ........................................ 12 The Chamber Platform Advocacy Efforts ............................... 13 Education and Workforce Development. 13 Business Climate. 14 Workforce Housing ............................................ 16 Economic Development. 16 Cannabis ..................................................... 18 Transportation Infrastructure .................................. 18 Diversity and Inclusivity ........................................ 19 Health Care ................................................... 20 Agribusiness Industry .......................................... 22 Environment. 22 Initiative and Referendum ..................................... 23 The State Budget ...................................................... 24 FY 2021 General Appropriations Bill . 24 FY 2022 General Appropriations Bill . 27 Looking Ahead to 2022 Legislative Session ............................ 28 Conclusion ............................................................. 29 Appendix 1: Chamber Platform ........................................ 30 Appendix 2: Policy Statements .......................................
    [Show full text]
  • Fellow Comrades: the Grand Army of the Republic in South Dakota
    Copyright © 2006 by the South Dakota State Historical Society. All Rights Reserved. Fellow Comrades: The Grand Army of the Republic in South Dakota STEPHEN T. MORCAN Thousands of former Union Army soldiers settled in Dakota Terri- tory after the Civil War seeking jobs, prosperity, and a new start. They homesteaded, founded towns, and participated in local affairs. They served in political office and established business enterprises. They carried on Memorial Day traditions and agitated for veterans' benefits that exist today. Many of these ex-soldiers were active in the Grand Army of the Republic (GAR), a fraternal organization that counted several hundred thousand former Union Army soldiers among its members nationwide, in Dakota, as elsewhere, these citizen soldiers shared a common bond of past experience and concern for the future. The nation owed veterans a large debt for having preserved the Union, GAR members contended, and they became politically active in order to see that the debt was paid. In so doing, GAR members Hke Arthur C. Mellette of Watertown, George S. Silsby of Mitchell, Oscar S. Gif- ford of Canton, Cornelius S. Palmer of Sioux Falls, and George W. Snow of Springfield not only played an important role in ensuring the welfare of their comrades but were also a significant force in shaping the Republican politics of the state of South Dakota.' The author thanks )aines Marten, professor of history at Marquette University, and the staff of the Mitchell Public Library. Mitchell, Soutli Dakota, for their assistance in the re- searching and writing of this article. I. The GAR has received little mention in the general works on South Dakota.
    [Show full text]