Intervenors ask Hot Springs to chip in for state uranium hearing to be held locally

Ben Sharp, speaking for a group of intervenors who filed to participate in a proposed uranium exploration permit review, asked the Hot Springs City Council on Oct. 6 to join Fall River County and Oglala Lakota County in requesting that the South Dakota hearing be held in Hot Springs and to contribute toward the hosting costs. "We have applied to the South Dakota Board of Minerals" to ask that the hearing take place locally, Sharp said, adding that he and other intervenors want residents who would be affected to be able to attend without traveling to Pierre.

Sharp said state law requires the agency to be paid for travel and accommodation costs when staff travel to a local hearing and that the state estimated total travel and lodging expenses at about $5,870. He said he and the intervenors proposed the city pay one third of that amount—about $1,957—to cover Hot Springs—s share of hosting seven state staff for four days.

Why it matters: intervenors and several council members framed the request as a narrow procedural ask—covering costs and asking the state to hold the hearing locally—rather than a vote for or against uranium development. Sharp said this is about local access to public process: "democracy only works if the citizens that are affected actually have an opportunity to have a voice," he told the council.

Council discussion focused on finances and timing. Finance staff explained how the requested contribution would translate into local sales-tax‑able activity, and several council members said they would be open in principle but wanted more detail on the contributions other governments would make before committing city funds. Councilors also noted a December 1 deadline for making the formal request to the state and the state—s plan to set hearing dates once it receives jurisdictional filings.

City staff said a draft letter and a budget breakdown were in the council packet and that the city is already an intervenor in the state process, which permits the city to request the hearing and to be represented at it. Council members asked Sharp to return to a later meeting with a final request and contact information; Sharp said the intervenors could also pursue fundraising or conditional commitments (for example, pledging one third if the other jurisdictions likewise pledge their shares).

What was not decided: Council did not vote on the funding request that evening. Staff said the council could place a funding motion on the Oct. 20 agenda for formal consideration once the council has reviewed the counties— commitments and the draft letter language.