Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Right Of Way topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Rancher tells Commission DOT's easement practices threaten ranch property and safety on Highway 12

South Dakota Transportation Commission · March 26, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Daryl Smith, a rancher, told the Commission he objects to the DOT's use of his easement and contends the department may remove thousands of cubic yards of material; he warned he may pursue legal action if the administrative process does not resolve compensation.

Daryl Smith, who identified himself as a rancher west of Mulberry, described long-standing safety concerns on State Highway 12 on his property and a dispute over work the department plans on Highway 1806. "I didn't give you an easement to go on my property to fix a road... I did not think I was given you 18,000 cubic yards of dirt," Smith said, arguing that the department's interpretation of an easement would allow taking material he considers his property.

Smith recounted multiple accidents on the stretch of Highway 12 that crosses his ranch and said he prefers culverts over a bridge replacement because culverts would allow farm vehicles to pull off the road. He repeatedly urged DOT staff and commissioners to review prior testimony and records; he said if the administrative route does not resolve the dispute he will consult attorneys and may pursue litigation. "If I don't get this straight through you, I've gotta go home and... I'm gonna go to a court," he said.

Commissioners and staff asked clarifying questions about the contractor quantities (the transcript references both 18,000 and 19,000 cubic yards) and whether prior testimony and documentation support Smith's claim for compensation. The public comment was recorded during the meeting's public input period; staff did not resolve the compensation question on the record and directed the participant and staff to continue the administrative review.