Yankton County adds two-year sunset to proposed road-and-bridge levy after public pushback

YANKTON — Facing sustained public concern that a proposed road-and-bridge property tax levy would become a permanent county funding source, the Yankton County Board of Commissioners voted to amend the levy resolution to include a two-year sunset clause.

The amendment, proposed by Commissioner Ryan and seconded by Wanda, was adopted by roll call during a special meeting after multiple residents urged the board to limit the levy’s duration or tie it to specific projects. County staff had earlier presented estimates using 2025 taxable-value figures and said a levy at the maximum 60 cents per $1,000 would generate roughly $1.57–1.79 million in new revenue for 2026 (staff read the 2025 base in the transcript as “2,977,356,149” and an estimated collection figure of about “1,786,413.69”; staff noted 2026 values were not yet available). The commissioners emphasized the figures are estimates and subject to updated valuation rolls.

Commissioners and public commenters framed the debate around two central concerns: whether the new revenue would truly add to road-and-bridge spending or merely free up general-fund dollars for other uses, and whether the levy should be limited in time or tied to named projects.

“We need our roads fixed,” said Martin Lawrence, a Volin resident, but he asked whether the levy would apply to all taxable property (staff confirmed it would apply to total taxable value, including commercial and utility assessments). Laura Catalik and others said the levy as presented could simply offset an existing $5.5 million highway budget and allow other general-fund expenditures to continue—“you're just sort of shuffling the funds,” Catalik said. In response, the board and staff said the levy revenue would be placed in the highway/road fund but also acknowledged that statutory or budget effects could change how general-fund transfers occur.

Opponents pressed for a sunset and project specificity. “A never-ending levy is just a slush fund,” a public commenter named Greg said, urging a one-year sunset and performance targets. Several other speakers recommended a shorter or phased-in rate (for example, starting at 30 cents per $1,000) or restricting dollars to named projects such as the Stone Church bridge.

Highway Superintendent Mike described sharp cost increases since 2019—examples cited in the meeting included higher asphalt, gravel, chip-seal and equipment prices—and warned that reducing the highway budget from the recent $7.2 million level down to $5.5 million would meaningfully cut the mileage and scope of improvements. “You accomplished a lot in the last five years,” Mike said, noting that with smaller budgets the county would likely move from overlays to preservation work and do fewer miles per year.

After discussion, Commissioner Ryan moved to amend the draft levy resolution to include a two-year sunset; the motion was seconded and carried on a roll-call vote as read by the clerk. Commissioners said the sunset would force accountability: if progress is not evident after two years, the levy would expire unless renewed.

The board also discussed SB96, a separate state-enabled half-cent local sales tax option intended to offset owner-occupied property taxes. Speakers raised equity concerns—renters would not receive the direct property-tax relief—and asked whether the county must adopt the full half-cent to achieve modeled relief. The county expects a state representative (the Department of Revenue secretary) to join a future meeting for technical briefing on SB96's mechanics and revenue estimates.

What the board did formalize: an amended levy resolution that includes a two-year sunset clause will be incorporated into the draft before legal advertisement. The measure must still be formally published and meet statutory notice deadlines before the county can finalize levies or place any measure to voters as required. Commissioners said they would continue public outreach and that no final decision on adopting the levy was required that night beyond the amendment.

The meeting closed after the board agreed to continue discussing SB96 and other budget matters at upcoming meetings, including a planned session with a state revenue official. The clerk offered to provide detailed revenue breakdowns to interested citizens.