Interim Committee Agenda

Committee: Code Commission

Meeting: Hundred and Forty Third Meeting, South Dakota Legislature

Room: Sioux Falls Convention Center - Sioux Falls, SD

Date: Wednesday, June 24, 2026

Time: 11:30 AM-1:00 PM CT

Register electronically to testify: https://sdlegislature.gov/testify/306874

Representative Hughes and Senator Vilhauer and Non‑Legislators Margaret Vandemore Gillespie (Chair), Lindsey Riter-Rapp, and David Wheeler

11:30 a.m.

1. Call to order.

2. Roll call - Determination of quorum.

3. Approval of minutes - June 18, 2025, meeting.

4. Election of vice chair.

5. Staff update on SDCL technical revisions made per SDCL 2-16-9.

6. Staff notice on complex blending of two or more acts amending the same section of Code per SDCL 2-14-16.1.

7. Review the publication contract with Thomson Reuters (dba West Publishing Corporation) for the publication of the South Dakota Codified Laws.

8. Determine any republished volumes of the Official Code.

9. Direct code counsel to draft legislation to codify laws enacted in 2026.

10. Provide staff guidance on when chapters of the South Dakota Codified Law should be recodified.

11. Public testimony.

1:00 p.m.

12. Adjourn.

Please provide committee documents or written comments at least 48 hours prior to the meeting.

NOTE: The above times are approximate.

All committee agendas, minutes, and audio are available on the LRC website: https://www.sdlegislature.gov/. You may subscribe to electronic delivery of agendas and minutes at My LRC on the LRC website.

This meeting is being held in a physically accessible location. Any individual needing assistance, pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act, should contact the Legislative Research Council (605-773-3251) in advance of the meeting to make further arrangements.

Draft Interim Committee Minutes

Code Commission

The one hundred forty-third meeting of the South Dakota Code Commission was called to order by Chair Margaret Gillespie at 11:30 a.m. (CT) on June 24, 2026, in Meeting Room 10 at the Sioux Falls Convention Center, Sioux Falls, South Dakota.

A quorum was determined with the following members answering the roll call: Commissioners Margaret Gillespie (Chair), John Hughes, Lindsey Riter-Rapp, Glen Vilhauer, and David Wheeler. The staff member present was Justin Goetz, Code Counsel.

Two guests were in attendance, participating remotely: Ms. Lila Hambleton and Ms. Bridget Traut, representing Thomson Reuters.

NOTE: For purpose of continuity, the following minutes are not necessarily in chronological order. All referenced documents distributed at the meeting are hyperlinked to the document on the Legislative Research Council website.

Approval of Minutes

Chair Gillespie noted one revision, on page 1, to correct a typo in the spelling of "Ellsworth".

Commissioner Riter-Rapp moved, seconded by Commissioner Hughes, that the June 18, 2025, meeting minutes be approved as revised. Motion prevailed on a voice vote.

Election of Vice Chair

Commissioner Riter-Rapp nominated Commissioner Wheeler for the position of vice chair of the Commission. While Chair Gillespie left the floor open for additional nominations, none were offered. Commissioner Wheeler agreed to the nomination

Commissioner Hughes moved, seconded by Commissioner Riter-Rapp, that Commissioner Wheeler be elected to serve as vice chair of the Commission. Motion prevailed on a unanimous voice vote.

Staff Update on Technical Revisions Made Per SDCL 2-16-9

Mr. Justin Goetz, Code Counsel, reported that seven different revisions were listed in the spreadsheet of apparent errors in the Code that were fixed. Mr. Goetz noted that these fixes were the result of authority delegated by the Code Commission to code counsel pursuant to the delegated authority document, as was this report. In addition, Mr. Goetz reported out the approved uses of the Code that is requested annually by the South Dakota Retirement System and the South Dakota Secretary of State--again as authorized in the delegated authority document. The Commission accepted this report without comment.

Staff Notice on Complex Blending of Two or More Acts Amending

the Same Section of Code Per SDCL 2-14-16.1

Mr. Goetz explained that blending is a regular practice in codification when two or more bills revise the same section of codified statute. Complex blending is a more infrequent subset of blending, which occurs when two or more bills revise the same language in a particular codified statute. Care must be taken to determine, based on the substantive or stylistic nature of the revision, that all revisions are given effect. Mr. Goetz provided documentation showing the complex blending that occurred with the sections in the last session--SDCL 1-26-4, 1-26-6, 1-26-18, and 9-8-2. He extended his gratitude to Chair Gillespie and Lila Hambleton for their review and input on these blends. He also noted that this report was made in accordance with the delegated authority document.

Ms. Hambleton indicated that the complex blending looked good and she appreciated the color-coded method Mr. Goetz used to clearly showcase these revisions.

Chair Gillespie expressed her gratitude for the work of Mr. Goetz and Ms. Hambleton on this item.

Review of the Publication Contract with Thomson Reuters (dba West Publishing Corporation) for the Publication of the South Dakota Codified Laws

Mr. Goetz presented the updated proposed contract with tracked changes. The substantive changes to the prior year's publication contract included the usual revisions to the term and to the price of West Publishing's products associated with the published Code. Mr. Goetz indicated that the basis of the price increase is itself a part of the agreement and that he independently verified the basis for the price increase. A third, unique change was requested from Thomson Reuters--to remove the requirement, in section 16 of the agreement, that a "postage paid response or suggestion card[ ]" be provided in the shipped Code materials in order to provide suggestions or other feedback on the published Code. Mr. Goetz related Thomson Reuters' experience that only one such card had been filled out in the 22 years that West published the Code. He also noted that there are multiple other means for providing these comments, including e-mail addresses and the Thomson Reuters' website.

Ms. Hambleton added that South Dakota is one of only two states in the country--for which West Publishing publishes codified law--that has this suggestion card, and the only one that requires it in an agreement like this.

In response to Chair Gillespie's question about how many comments have been received via means other than the response card, Ms. Hambleton indicated she was unsure, as she did not receive these comments directly. She also noted that Westlaw reference attorneys are also able to take this feedback. Ms. Traut added that toll-free phone numbers for providing this feedback are also depicted in the physical and electronic materials published for the Code by Thomson Reuters.

Vice Chair Wheeler asked that LRC staff follow up with Thomson Reuters legal staff to see if there is any option to negotiate a longer-term publication agreement, up to the five-year maximum in SDCL 2-16-7.1, if it would result in any cost savings to users.

Commissioner Vilhauer inquired as to whether there was any cost to the state associated with this publication agreement. Mr. Goetz responded that there was no cost to the state for the publication and for the services of Ms. Hambleton. Commissioner Hughes added that these costs are essentially borne by users of the Code.

Chair Gillespie commented that, while the increased cost of the Code materials in the new term is accurate to the agreement, a twelve percent price increase is substantial. The Chair received confirmation from Ms. Hambleton that the same inflation index has been used for decades with these agreements.

Commissioner Wheeler moved, seconded by Commissioner Riter-Rapp, to authorize Chair Gillespie to execute the draft agreement as revised on behalf of the Code Commission. Motion prevailed on a roll call vote with 5 AYES. Voting AYE: Hughes, Riter-Rapp, Vilhauer, Wheeler, and Gillespie.

Determination of any Republished Volumes of the Official Code

Mr. Goetz summarized the information provided in the pocket part growth report submitted by Ms. Hambleton and noted his recommendation that it would appear, based on prior Commission metrics, that volume 14, containing SDCL titles 22 and 23, be split based on the number of pages in the main volume and the pocket parts, and that volumes 22 and 22A, containing SDCL title 36, be republished based on these volumes' pocket part page count. Mr. Goetz mentioned that, having consulted with Ms. Hambleton, a proper split both from a page count and a substantive perspective might be after SDCL chapter 22-24B. Ms. Hambleton added that this split keeps all sex crimes in the first volume.

Vice Chair Wheeler offered an alternative proposal, out of a concern that practitioners may have for splitting title 22. His suggestion was to move title 23 from volume 14 into volume 15--the latter containing SDCL title 23A--and then split the resulting volume into volumes 15 and 15A, republishing both. Vice Chair Wheeler suggested that this split would cause less inconvenience to practitioners.

When asked of the feasibility of this proposal, Ms. Hambleton noted that title 23 has about 200 pages in it, and would leave volume 14 at 850 pages in the main volume--a reasonable amount. Based on an equal page split alone, Ms. Hambleton noted that a volume split after chapter 23A-27A, on capital punishment, would make the most sense. Ms. Hambleton agreed with Chair Gillespie's hypothesis that titles 22 and 23 were likely placed in the same volume largely for page count purposes and to keep titles whole in a volume, and not for substantive reasons. When it comes to substantive reasons, Vice Chair Wheeler added that much of title 23A was once in title 23.

Chair Gillespie inquired as to whether there were any major revisions on the horizon for titles 22, 23, and 23A. Mr. Goetz provided a breakdown indicating that 14 sections had been added in the prior session to title 22, and based on his rough recollection, that appeared to be normal. He also indicated the last effort to comprehensively revise title 22 had been in the early 2000's, and that comprehensive revisions were not likely to increase the page count if the focus is on updating and consolidating, as most modern revisions have been. Vice Chair Wheeler suggested that a criminal procedure comprehensive revision is even less likely.

Vice Chair Wheeler stated that with his new proposal, he is comfortable with delegating to staff where the precise split of volume 15 should be. He also expressed concern about the initial proposal and the possibility of a second consecutive year of four split or republished volumes needing to be purchased by users. Ms. Hambleton added that the new proposal is a good one and would hold for some time before a republication or split.

Commissioner Wheeler moved, seconded by Commissioner Vilhauer, to move SDCL title 23 to volume 15 and split the resulting volume into volumes 15 and 15A, with the split to be made by staff consulting with West Publishing and the Chair, and then to also republish the resulting volume 14. Motion prevailed on a roll call vote with 5 AYES. Voting AYE: Hughes, Riter-Rapp, Vilhauer, Wheeler, and Gillespie.

Draft Legislation to Codify 2026 Laws

Mr. Goetz reviewed Draft 1068 and noted that it was created with staff's original republication proposal in mind, as described above. He specified where the changes would be made in section 1 relative to the new proposal approved by the Commission. Mr. Goetz noted that the purpose of the sections contained in the bill, and the other revisions that are made each year, are summarized in the staff memo.

Commissioner Wheeler moved, seconded by Commissioner Hughes, that Draft 1068 be referred to a legislator for introduction to the One Hundred Second Legislature at the request of the Code Commission, with revisions consistent with the republication decision made by the Commission. Motion prevailed on a roll call vote with 5 AYES. Voting AYE: Hughes, Riter-Rapp, Vilhauer, Wheeler, and Gillespie.

Guidance in Recodifying Chapters of the South Dakota Codified Law

Mr. Goetz requested Commission input on certain concerns that have come up as an increasing number of bills seek to effectively recodify content, sometimes entire chapters. He described how chapters may generally be organized based on chronology, often for procedural substance contained in law; as well as to organize content from more general to more specific concerns, noting that a definition section that often starts chapters of the Code is one such example. Mr. Goetz summarized the five questions posed in the staff memo.

Chair Gillespie appreciated this inquiry and that looking back at how things have been handled is an appropriate guide. She noted that the relative complexity of these questions will likely make this a continuing discussion, but that commissioners should provide feedback here if they can. To that end, Chair Gillespie strongly recommended that the general prohibition on reusing Code section numbers for new content should continue, given its impact on legislative history and the ability to analyze legislative intent. Vice Chair Wheeler agreed with this assessment.

Vice Chair Wheeler offered that sections should be added to the chapter based on which location will best help understanding. For instance, if a new section is added as a decimal-point section immediately under a repealed section because it makes sense given the chronological or general-to-specific progression of the chapter, that should be done, even if the decimal-point section has no relation to the repealed section above it in the chapter index. He also indicated that in recodified chapters where certain section numbers are skipped, those sections should be described as "Reserved."

Mr. Goetz thanked the Commission for its informal guidance and indicated that this input would be incorporated into the bill drafting process, where possible. He also provided that the "Reserved" convention described above would be applied to SDCL chapter 10-6.

Public Testimony

No additional public testimony was received.

Closing Comments

Chair Gillespie thanked the members for their flexibility in attending the meeting and the work of LRC staff in setting everything up so efficiently for the Commission's decision making.

Adjournment

Commissioner Vilhauer moved, seconded by Commissioner Wheeler, to adjourn. Motion prevailed on a unanimous voice vote. Chair Gillespie adjourned the meeting at 12:49 p.m. (CT).

Chair Gillespie adjourned the meeting at 12:49 p.m. (CT).