Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Initiated Measure 28 topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Yankton commission adopts resolution warning of potential municipal impacts from Initiated Measure 28 after heated debate
Summary
The Yankton City Commission approved a resolution saying Initiated Measure 28 could negatively affect municipal budgeting and collection mechanics, despite Commissioner Hanoff arguing the attorney general’s ballot explanation indicates cities could continue taxing food; the measure debate highlighted uncertainty about who would collect taxes if the state stops.
The Yankton City Commission voted Sept. 9 to adopt a resolution describing potential municipal impacts if Initiated Measure 28 passes, after an extended debate among commissioners and staff.
Commissioner Hanoff said he disagrees with factual claims in the resolution and objected to language that he said overstated the measure’s effect. "I don't agree with a few statements in the resolution," Hanoff said, adding the attorney general’s ballot explanation indicates municipalities can continue to tax anything sold for human consumption and that the measure appears to target the state's 4.2% sales tax rather than the city's 2% local sales tax. Hanoff said he would "be voting yes on I'm 28 and no on this resolution." (Commissioner Hanoff)
City staff and other commissioners urged caution, framing the resolution as a recognition of the Municipal League’s concerns about administrative complications rather than as an instruction to voters. "If you look at the actual language on the resolution, it says ... initiated measure 28 would negatively impact the municipal budget. That's all it's saying," said Ross, a city staff member who spoke for administration. Ross flagged practical questions about tax collection if the state were to stop collecting a tax that cities currently receive via the state system: "If the state is not allowed to collect sales tax, but municipalities can, how? Do we have to start our own sales tax collection systems in all the cities in the state?" (Ross)
Charlie Gross, speaking from the public/staff perspective, emphasized the operational gap: "Department of Revenue is not willing to collect the tax for the cities. We don't have a mechanism in place to collect the tax for the cities." (Charlie Gross)
After discussion about ambiguity and the need for public education before early voting, a motion to approve the resolution was made and seconded. The roll call shows a majority voted Aye; Commissioner Hanoff recorded a No vote and the motion carried.
Why it matters: The resolution signals municipal concern about the administrative and fiscal implications should the ballot measure change state-level tax rules. The commission and staff repeatedly noted the resolution does not tell voters how to vote but intends to document possible impacts and urge clarity from state authorities.
Next steps: The resolution is intended as the city's formal statement to the Municipal League and a prompt to public education; early voting on the ballot measure was noted as imminent by commissioners.
