Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Jury Pay topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate committee debates larger jury pay; SB 370 left open for amendment after fiscal questions
Summary
Senate Bill 370 proposed raising juror pay from current statutory levels; committee testimony revealed two fiscal estimates (district‑only vs. statewide including county costs) and members discussed an amendment to limit the state responsibility to district courts. No final committee vote was taken on SB 370.
Senate Bill 370, a proposal to raise juror pay, drew extended committee discussion on March 5 about scale, fiscal responsibility and whether counties or the state would bear increased costs. The committee did not take final action on SB 370 and the sponsor said he would offer an amendment.
Senator Mike Yakowich (SD 24), the sponsor, said his intent was to increase juror pay to reduce the financial burden on people called to serve. He described a range of possible increases and told the committee he would be willing to negotiate the amount; earlier floor discussion had included amounts from $12 to $60 per day and a second‑day increase. "So it is a philosophical as well as a financial question," Yakowich told committee members.
Witnesses supplied two different fiscal perspectives. Kathy Penny, finance director for the judicial branch, and Dave McAlpin, court director, described a draft fiscal estimate showing a large statewide cost when county court costs were included; a more limited fiscal estimate focused on district court costs only and produced a smaller state fiscal impact (the smaller figure cited by the sponsor was about $436,000 for district courts). Committee members repeatedly asked whether the bill as drafted would shift county jury costs to the state; judicial branch staff said the bill language as drafted could make the state responsible for a larger share of jury costs.
Supporters, including tribal governments represented by Alissa Snow, urged higher juror pay to reduce barriers to service and improve representativeness of juries. Critics and several senators raised concerns that shifting county costs to state government would increase local property taxes or require counties to absorb higher costs. Judicial branch staff said implementation would likely require at least one additional FTE to process payments statewide if the legislature expanded the branch’s responsibilities.
Yakowich told the committee he planned to offer an amendment to make clear that the state would cover district court jurors’ pay while counties would continue to cover local court costs; he said he would present that amendment to the committee soon. Senate Finance and Claims deferred final action on SB 370 to allow drafting and review of an amendment and fuller fiscal analysis.
