Candidates come together for moderated debate before November election

Candidates to fill an available county commissioner seat, as well as a senate seat, participated in a public forum Oct. 1.


Tyler McElhany (Photo by Kyle G. Horst, Watertown Current)

Codington County Commissioner candidates for District 2 Tyler McElhany (Republican) and Rita Wishard (Democrat) participated in the first debate. Five questions were asked of the candidates, with first responses rotating between the two. While McElhany is not an incumbent, he has previously served as a commissioner. The two candidates are running for the seat currently occupied by Charlie Waterman.

Do you support the effort to have a new Codington County Detention Center constructed, and if the Nov. 5 vote fails, will you continue to work toward replacing the current 50-year-old detention center?

Wishard: Yes, I would vote for the jail. I was appalled at the conditions there during a recent tour, and my son worked there for 21 years. I even found cracks in the infrastructure.

McElhany: I support this as well. I want to note that my opponent and myself have a lot in common. Jail is very much needed. Yes, the jail need is definitely there, it is overly past due, and the longer we wait, the more and more money its going to cost. Too many inmates attempt suicide due to the conditions inside. It’s the county’s responsibility to provide protection to those inmates, as well as the workers. The most workers compensation claims in the county come from jail workers.

Are you in favor or against a pipeline carrying liquified carbon dioxide through private and public properties in Codington County?

McElhany: So the answer is yes, I do support it, but I do not support the eminent domain that will be necessary to complete the project. It’s considered a private industry and it’s there to make money. What it comes down to is the making sure the right price is met for landowners to allow the pipeline on their land.

Rita Wishard (Photo by Kyle G. Horst, Watertown Current)

Wishard: I would vote no on this matter after extensive research. I am a farmer and ethanol has been great for farmers and the country. But its based on SB 201, which takes away authority from the county and gives the authority to three PUC commissioners in Pierre—that’s who controls eminent domain in this case. The supreme court sided with the farmers finding that CO2 is not a public utility, and not eminent domain worthy.

McElhany: I look at is as pipelines are very useful and safe compared to trucking the product on roads, which increases traffic and danger.

Wishard: I have learned that there is so much pressure in that CO2 pipeline, that if there’s a rupture, its going to explode. I’m worried that if there’s a leak, the pipeline will open up like a zipper.

The current board of commissioners has pledged $150,000 over 5 years toward expanding child care opportunities in Watertown and the county. Is the county doing enough?

Wishard: I’ve been to three of the meetings focused on childcare. I commende the commissioners, the Watertown Development Company, and the city for coming together to solve this issue. Commissioners reallocated money from the WDC because childcare is an economic issue.

McElhany: I was originally opposed to the idea, but after research, I now support it. I’m glad the commissioners didn’t pull money out of the general fund for this project. This is the right thing to do to help the community out.

The state legislature has twice killed legislation that would have given counties the chance of levying a half-cent sales tax, with voter approval, for the purpose of new construction. Do you support the idea of this tax?

McElhany: Yes. I worked with Commissioner Lee Gable the first time it got brought up. Good legislation sometimes takes multiple runs, and this is one of those cases. The need is there and I think it’s going to happen someday.

Wishard: I think the state should have backed the tax to help with local costs for the new regional jail, but yet they didn’t support the expansion or construction of a new jail for us.

What is your higher priority—making certain county roads and bridges are safe or making sure property taxes as low as possible?

Wishard: I have been sitting in on meetings and am impressed with what the commissioners are doing in this regard. It takes 2-5 years in advance to get bridges and roads redone and brought up to modern codes. The bridges and roads in this county are important and every project seems to be a five-year lead time. Roads and bridges are part of public safety, and we need to be actively involved in that.

McElhany: Some county bridges are up to 25 years away from being fixed or replaced. I have suggested that some bridges could be replaced with culverts/box culverts at a huge cost savings. There are other ways around spending gobs of money on infrastructure.

Wishard: Commissioners are actively trying to apply for grants to save money, or have the state kick in money to support the projects. My main concern is keeping the bridges we have now safe for everyone.

 

Glen Vilhauer, at left, and Dennis Solberg, right. (Photo by Kyle G. Horst, Watertown Current)

District 5 senate candidates Glen Vilhauer (Republican) and Dennis Solberg (Democrat) also sat down for a scholarly debate to close out the evening. They followed the same debate format, answering five questions followed by closing remarks. The candidates are running to replace Senator Lee Schoenbeck.

If South Dakota voters approve Initiated Measure 28 (repealing state sales tax on groceries and consumables), what moves would you support to replace the lost revenue?

Vilhauer: That’s going to be tough. This could cost the state up to $700 million, at the low end. That’s seven percent of our state budget. Optimistically, that’s a 5% cut across the board. There’s no way in the world we can absorb that without failing some of the mandates that [the government] is required to meet. I don’t know where Pierre would start to cut to make things work. It’s going to be tough; it’s going to be painful, but if that’s what voters decide, that what we’re going to have to figure out. I’m concerned what it means for our cities too, if IM 28 were to pass.

Solberg: We have 48 states that don’t have a sales tax on food. It’s us and Mississippi that tax food at the maximum percentage. In 2020 the state had $91 million in surplus. I look at the sales tax on food as the most regressive sales tax we have. I believe this is a thing we need to correct.

Vilhauer: I applauded Noem for trying to repeal this tax years ago, but I would love to see this come back at another election with better clarification; the way this stands, it is poorly written. I would hate to see us tapping into budget reserves to cover the losses.

Solberg: I don’t believe it is poorly written. I think we need to write in that those in high income brackets would have to apply for a sales tax rebate for those earning over $100,000 annually. The average grocery tax bill in the state is $286. We need to look at the 48 states that don’t have it and figure out why this is.

Followup: Perhaps voters were against a regressive tax, rather than just seeking a tax cut. Would you consider adding some sort of non-regressive revenue enhancements?

Solberg: I think it’s just like anything else that is proposed. Republicans always say they want lower taxes and smaller government. This is our chance. We can live without it. We don’t have that many high paying jobs in the state for this to matter.

Vilhauer: I am vehemently against replacing food tax with state income tax to fulfill state obligations. If we’re trying to replace the food tax, as a republican we can curb government spending and government growth, but I will never support a state income tax.

Solberg: I’m for the lower income folks, and anything we can do to help them will make us better off. Food is not a luxury item, you have to have it.

Should the right of the people to place items on the ballot through ballot measures be more restrictive?

Vilhauer: We South Dakotans are unique in the fact that citizens can place items on the ballot, and I don’t want to take that right away from the citizens. I would not be in favor of making it more restrictive to place items on the ballot.

Solberg: I am not for taking any rights away from the citizens.

With many incumbent Republicans either losing in the primary, being term limited or choosing not to run again, the Legislature is expected to be more influenced by the hard-right conservative faction of the party. Is that a good thing, and how do you see yourself interacting with those hard right lawmakers?

Solberg: I’ve always been able to work with everyone, especially if they possess basic common sense. I look to is as how can we help the citizens of South Dakota. There are things we can do to make South Dakota so much better and pull those below the poverty line above it.

Vilhauer: We are losing a lot of experienced legislators and replacing them with those new to the scene. If you look at us republicans, I’m confident that we can come together and find common ground at the end of the day. I’m confident that we will all have the best interests of the citizens of South Dakota at heart, and that’s what matters at the end of the day.

What is your opinion of the Corps of Engineers flood mitigation proposal for Watertown?

Vilhauer: This is a tough topic. I was there for the flood of 1997 and I’m sure we’re going to experience something like that again. The plan really doesn’t do anything for the protection of property around Lake Kampeska. The Corps proposal doesn’t do anything for the lake, but it has merits for properties along the Big Sioux River in town. But what it comes down to is anything we do is going to be horrendously expensive.

Solberg: I disagree with Glenn, the weir is set up to be five inches higher than the lake. Now when the water gets too high, it’ll go over the weir and flood the lake and city.

Closing remarks:

Solberg: I served on city council for eight years, and on the municipal utility board for 10. I have got good grasp on what’s going on in the city. I have lots of good ideas we can do for Watertown, but we have to live within our means. I’m for lower taxes and smaller government. We have a great city to live in and I think we need to stay within our means.

Vilhauer: I support the need for the construction of a new state prison. I had the opportunity to tour the state prison, and conditions are similar to those seen in the Codington County Detention Center. Staffing, safety, and inmate safety are all problems. I support a proposed site south of Harrisburg for the new prison. I will have the best interest of my district in mind if I’m elected.

Solberg: The state has just short of 3,500 individuals in the penitentiary system. I have found that a common thread between inmates is a massive lack of education. Most individuals I encountered only had a high school diploma, if that. I contend that crime is based on education, and I propose a free education for everyone going to a vocational/technical school so they can be productive members of society with stable, in-demand jobs.

Candidates for for the District 5 State Representative contest chose not to sit for the forum.