In South Dakota, the legislative drafting process requires adherence to specific rules regarding bill structure and content to ensure clarity, consistency, and constitutionality. When a bill proposes to amend an existing statute, the South Dakota Codified Laws (SDCL) mandate a precise method of indicating changes. Specifically, SDCL 2-13-4 outlines that new matter to be inserted into a statute must be underscored, and matter to be omitted must be enclosed in asterisks or otherwise clearly indicated as deleted. This practice is crucial for legislative members and the public to easily discern what is being added or removed from the existing legal framework. Failure to properly format these amendments can lead to confusion and potential misinterpretation of the bill’s intent, which could impact its passage or subsequent legal challenges. The goal is to provide a transparent and unambiguous record of legislative modifications.

The South Dakota Codified Laws (SDCL) provide a framework for legislative drafting. Specifically, SDCL Chapter 2-6 addresses the engrossment and enrollment of bills. Engrossment is the process of preparing a bill for its final reading in a legislative chamber, incorporating any amendments that have been adopted. Enrollment, on the other hand, is the process of preparing the final, official copy of a bill that has passed both houses of the legislature and is ready for presentation to the Governor. This involves ensuring the bill is printed in its final form, free of any errors, and certified by the presiding officers of both houses. The distinction is crucial for maintaining the integrity of the legislative record and ensuring that the correct version of the law is enacted. When a bill passes the Senate and is then amended in the House, the Senate must concur in the House amendments, or the bill proceeds to a conference committee to resolve differences. If the House amendments are concurred in by the Senate, the engrossed bill reflects these changes. The enrolled bill is the final version after all legislative actions are complete and it is ready for the Governor’s action. Therefore, the process of preparing the final, official copy of a bill after it has passed both houses and is ready for the Governor’s signature is known as enrollment.

The South Dakota Codified Law (SDCL) Chapter 2-6, concerning the Enactment of Laws, outlines the process for bill passage and requires specific formatting and procedural adherence. When a bill is passed by both houses of the South Dakota Legislature, it is transmitted to the Governor. The Governor then has a period of time to act upon the bill. If the Governor approves the bill, it is signed and becomes law. If the Governor vetoes the bill, it is returned to the originating house with the objections. The Legislature may override a veto with a two-thirds vote of the members present in each house. If the Governor does not sign or veto the bill within the allotted time, and the Legislature remains in session, the bill automatically becomes law without the Governor’s signature. However, if the Legislature adjourns before the Governor acts, and the bill is not signed, it does not become law. The question focuses on the specific timeframe for gubernatorial action when the legislature is still in session. SDCL 2-6-7 specifies that if the Legislature is in session, the Governor has three days (excluding Sundays) after the bill is presented to him to sign it or return it with his objections. If the Governor fails to act within this period, the bill becomes law without his signature. The calculation of the correct option involves understanding this three-day period and how it applies to the scenario.

The South Dakota Codified Laws (SDCL) Chapter 2-6, concerning the engrossment and enrollment of bills, mandates specific procedures for ensuring the accuracy and integrity of legislative enactments. Engrossment refers to the process of preparing a bill in its final form after it has passed one house, incorporating any amendments adopted by that house. Enrollment, on the other hand, is the final preparation of a bill after it has passed both houses of the Legislature, ensuring it is in the precise form agreed upon by both chambers. SDCL 2-6-10 specifically addresses the certification of enrolled bills, requiring the Secretary of the Senate and the Chief Clerk of the House of Representatives to jointly certify that the enrolled bill is a true and correct copy of the bill as finally passed. This certification is crucial for the bill’s subsequent presentation to the Governor for signature or veto. The process ensures that the official record accurately reflects the legislative intent and the exact text approved by both the Senate and the House. Failure to adhere to these enrollment and certification requirements could render a bill procedurally defective.

The South Dakota Codified Laws (SDCL) Chapter 2-13 governs the process of legislative bill drafting and the establishment of the Legislative Research Council (LRC). Specifically, SDCL 2-13-3 outlines the duties of the LRC, which include preparing and assisting in the preparation of legislative measures, conducting research, and providing staff services to the Legislature. When a legislator wishes to introduce a bill, they must work with the LRC staff to ensure the bill is properly drafted according to established legal and procedural standards. This involves conforming to the style and format prescribed by the LRC, which is designed to ensure clarity, consistency, and legal sufficiency. The LRC’s role is advisory and technical; they do not determine the policy or substance of the bill, but rather ensure its legal and structural integrity. Therefore, the initial step for a legislator in introducing a bill is to engage with the LRC for drafting assistance.

The scenario involves the South Dakota Legislature considering a bill to regulate the use of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) for commercial purposes within the state. The proposed legislation aims to establish statewide standards for licensing, operational zones, and privacy protections. South Dakota Codified Law (SDCL) Chapter 7-18A governs county powers and duties, including the authority to adopt ordinances for public health, safety, and welfare. However, SDCL Chapter 1-26 outlines the state’s administrative procedure act, which generally preempts local regulations on matters of statewide concern unless specifically authorized. The question of whether a county in South Dakota could enact its own stringent licensing requirements for commercial UAV operators, separate from any statewide framework, hinges on the principle of preemption and the scope of county authority. Generally, if the state has occupied the field of regulation for a particular subject matter through comprehensive legislation, or if local ordinances directly conflict with state law, the local regulations are invalid. In this case, if the state legislature enacts a comprehensive UAV regulatory scheme, it would likely preempt county-level attempts to impose different or additional licensing mandates, as this is a matter of statewide interest concerning airspace management and public safety. Without explicit statutory authorization for counties to diverge on licensing, the state’s regulatory framework would prevail. Therefore, a county ordinance imposing unique licensing requirements would likely be superseded by a statewide law on the same subject.

The scenario involves drafting a bill to amend South Dakota Codified Law (SDCL) Chapter 23A-26, which pertains to sentencing. The core issue is whether the proposed amendment, which introduces a mandatory minimum sentence for a specific offense, can be applied retroactively to crimes committed before the effective date of the amendment. Generally, legislative intent is paramount in determining retroactivity. South Dakota law, like that of many states, presumes that statutes are prospective in operation unless the legislature clearly expresses an intent for retroactive application. SDCL 2-14-17 reinforces this presumption, stating that no law is retroactive unless expressly declared to be so. Therefore, for the mandatory minimum sentence to apply to offenses committed prior to the amendment’s enactment, the bill itself would need to contain explicit language indicating such retroactive intent. Without such clear legislative declaration, the amendment would only apply to offenses committed on or after its effective date. This principle ensures fairness and predictability in the application of criminal law, preventing individuals from being punished under laws that did not exist at the time of their actions. The drafting must therefore focus on the clarity of intent regarding the temporal application of the new sentencing provision.

The South Dakota Codified Laws (SDCL) outline specific procedures for the amendment of existing statutes. When a bill proposes to amend a section of the codified law, the legislative drafting process requires precise identification of the section to be modified. This involves referencing the exact chapter and section number as it appears in the current codification. For instance, if a bill aims to alter the provisions related to agricultural land assessment, the drafter must identify the precise SDCL section governing this matter. The process of amendment typically involves restating the section in its entirety with the proposed changes incorporated, or clearly indicating which portions are being added, deleted, or modified. The principle of clarity and precision is paramount to ensure that the legislative intent is accurately reflected and that future interpretation is unambiguous. The specific SDCL chapter and section number acts as the unique identifier for the statutory provision being affected, analogous to a unique identifier in a database or a specific address for a property. Without this exact reference, the amendment would be procedurally flawed and legally uncertain, potentially leading to confusion or unintended consequences in its application. Therefore, the correct approach is to pinpoint the precise existing statutory language that the amendment seeks to alter.

The scenario describes a bill introduced in the South Dakota Legislature that proposes to amend an existing statute concerning agricultural land valuation for property tax purposes. The core of the drafting challenge lies in ensuring the amendment accurately reflects the legislative intent without creating unintended consequences or conflicts with other existing laws. South Dakota Codified Law (SDCL) Chapter 10-6 governs property taxes, and specifically, SDCL 10-6-33.1 through 10-6-33.7 detail the valuation of agricultural land. If the proposed amendment in the hypothetical bill, HB 1234, aims to change the method of calculating the agricultural land valuation by incorporating a new factor, say, “soil productivity index,” it must be drafted with precision. The explanation of the correct option involves understanding the process of statutory amendment. When amending a statute, drafters must clearly identify the section(s) to be amended, state the proposed changes, and ensure the amended language is consistent with the overall statutory scheme. For instance, if HB 1234 seeks to replace the current valuation method with one based on a soil productivity index, the amendment would need to specify how this index is determined, who is responsible for its calculation, and how it integrates with the existing framework. The correct approach is to repeal the old language and insert the new language, or to amend specific subsections. The critical aspect is that the amendment must be clear, unambiguous, and legally sound, reflecting the legislative intent to modify the valuation method. The explanation of the correct option would detail how the proposed language in HB 1234, by explicitly referencing the relevant SDCL sections and outlining the new valuation methodology, achieves this clarity and legal consistency, thereby fulfilling the drafting requirements for statutory amendment in South Dakota.

The core principle tested here is the interpretation of legislative intent when a bill’s plain language appears ambiguous or leads to an unintended consequence, particularly in the context of South Dakota’s statutory framework. When drafting legislation, drafters must anticipate potential ambiguities and ensure clarity. If an enacted law, such as one concerning agricultural land valuation for property tax purposes in South Dakota, is later found to have an unintended effect due to a drafting oversight or an unforeseen interaction with other statutes, the legislative intent behind the original enactment becomes paramount. South Dakota Codified Law § 2-14-4 addresses the construction of statutes, emphasizing that statutes are to be interpreted to give effect to the intent of the Legislature. When plain language is insufficient, courts and legislative bodies may look to legislative history, including committee reports, floor debates, and the bill’s evolution through the legislative process, to discern that intent. In this scenario, the legislative drafter’s role is to identify such ambiguities and propose amendments that align the statute with the original legislative purpose. The most effective way to address an unintended consequence arising from the application of South Dakota Codified Law § 10-6-33.11, which pertains to agricultural land valuation, is to amend the statute to explicitly clarify the intended calculation or definition, thereby resolving the ambiguity and preventing future misinterpretations. This approach directly addresses the statutory language and rectifies the issue according to legislative will, rather than relying on external interpretations or administrative rules that might not fully capture the original intent.

The South Dakota Codified Laws, specifically Title 2, Chapter 2-13, addresses the process of legislative drafting and the role of the Legislative Research Council (LRC). Section 2-13-3 outlines the duties of the LRC, which include preparing and indexing bills, amendments, and resolutions for introduction. When a legislator proposes a bill, the LRC staff are responsible for ensuring it conforms to proper drafting standards, which encompass clarity, consistency with existing law, and adherence to constitutional requirements. This involves not only the substantive content but also the structural elements, such as section numbering, effective dates, and the correct citation of statutes. The LRC also provides legal and fiscal analysis of proposed legislation, ensuring that bills are legally sound and that their financial implications are understood. The process emphasizes precision to prevent ambiguity and to ensure that enacted laws are enforceable and achieve their intended purpose within the framework of South Dakota’s legal system. The LRC’s role is to facilitate the legislative process by providing expert assistance in the technical aspects of bill drafting.

The scenario involves drafting a bill to amend South Dakota Codified Law (SDCL) Chapter 2-6, which governs legislative procedures and ethics. Specifically, the proposed amendment aims to clarify the process for disclosing potential conflicts of interest for legislators when voting on matters that could financially benefit their immediate family members. Current law, as established in SDCL 2-6-13, requires disclosure of any direct or indirect pecuniary interest. However, the ambiguity lies in defining “immediate family” and the threshold for “indirect pecuniary interest” in the context of complex business holdings. A well-drafted amendment would build upon the existing framework by introducing a tiered disclosure system. For instance, a direct financial stake would require immediate disclosure. An indirect interest, such as a significant ownership percentage in a company that stands to benefit, would necessitate disclosure within a specified timeframe, perhaps 72 hours prior to a vote, as outlined in SDCL 2-6-13.1 for other disclosure requirements. The amendment should also define “immediate family” to include spouses, dependent children, and parents residing in the same household, aligning with common definitions in South Dakota Code. The objective is to enhance transparency without creating an undue burden on legislators, ensuring that the disclosure requirements are both practical and effective in preventing undue influence. The most comprehensive approach involves specifying disclosure triggers, timelines, and definitions, thereby providing clear guidance and strengthening the integrity of the legislative process in South Dakota.

The South Dakota Codified Law (SDCL) § 2-13-4 outlines the process for codifying and publishing the laws of South Dakota. It specifies that the Legislative Research Council, now the Legislative Research Services, is responsible for preparing the laws for publication. This involves organizing, arranging, and indexing the enacted laws. The codification process ensures that the laws are presented in a systematic and accessible manner for public use and legal reference. It is a critical step in maintaining the integrity and usability of the state’s statutes. The process is not about creating new laws or amending existing ones; rather, it is about the presentation and organization of those that have been duly enacted by the legislature and signed by the governor. The role of the Legislative Research Services is to act as the administrative and technical body that implements the legislative intent for publication.

The South Dakota Codified Laws (SDCL) Chapter 2-6 outlines the process for the introduction and numbering of legislative measures. Specifically, SDCL 2-6-1.1 states that the Legislative Research Council shall assign a number to each bill or resolution introduced, which shall be the official number for that measure throughout its legislative history. This numbering system ensures a clear and consistent identification of each proposed law or action. When a bill is introduced in either the Senate or the House of Representatives, it is assigned a sequential number within that legislative session, typically starting with “SB” for Senate Bills and “HB” for House Bills, followed by the numerical designation. For instance, the first bill introduced in the Senate of a given session would be SB 1, and the first in the House would be HB 1. This numbering is not arbitrary; it reflects the order of introduction and serves as a critical organizational tool for tracking legislation. Understanding this fundamental aspect of legislative procedure is crucial for drafting and referencing bills accurately within the South Dakota legislative framework.

South Dakota Codified Law (SDCL) Chapter 2-6 outlines the procedures for the legislative bill drafting process. Specifically, SDCL 2-6-10 addresses the requirement for a fiscal note to accompany any bill that proposes to increase or decrease state revenue or expenditures by more than five thousand dollars in any fiscal year. The fiscal note must provide an estimate of the financial impact and be prepared by the director of the legislative research council or the state auditor, depending on the nature of the bill. The purpose of the fiscal note is to inform legislators and the public about the potential financial consequences of proposed legislation. If a bill requires a fiscal note and it is not attached, the bill is typically not considered for further action by the legislative body. This requirement ensures transparency and fiscal responsibility in the legislative process. The threshold of $5,000 is a key element in determining when a fiscal note is mandated.

South Dakota Codified Law (SDCL) Chapter 2-6 outlines the process for the codification and publication of the laws of South Dakota. Specifically, SDCL 2-6-1 establishes the legislative intent to provide for the continuous revision and publication of the official statutes. SDCL 2-6-1.1 mandates that the Code Commissioner shall, under the direction of the Legislative Research Council, prepare and publish the South Dakota Codified Laws. This process involves not only incorporating new enactments but also ensuring that existing statutes are presented in a clear, organized, and accurate manner. The Code Commissioner’s role is crucial in maintaining the integrity and accessibility of the state’s legal framework. This includes the responsibility for the arrangement, numbering, and indexing of all laws. The biennial publication of the codified laws, as per SDCL 2-6-1.2, ensures that the public and legal professionals have access to the most current version of South Dakota statutes. The authority granted to the Code Commissioner extends to the preparation of supplementary pamphlets and pocket parts to keep the codified laws updated between full biennial publications. This continuous revision process is fundamental to the legislative drafting process, as drafters must be aware of how their proposed legislation will integrate with the existing body of law and how it will be presented in the codified statutes.

The South Dakota Codified Laws (SDCL) Chapter 2-13 governs the process of legislative drafting and bill filing. Specifically, SDCL 2-13-3 outlines the requirements for the engrossment of bills. Engrossment is the process of preparing a bill for its final reading and passage, which involves incorporating any amendments that have been adopted during the legislative process. The engrossed version of a bill is the official text that is voted upon by the legislative body. This process ensures that the final version of the legislation accurately reflects the decisions made by the lawmakers. The question asks about the specific stage when amendments are incorporated into the official text of a bill for the purpose of final consideration. This is precisely what engrossment entails. Other stages, such as introduction, committee review, or enrollment, serve different purposes in the legislative lifecycle. Introduction is the initial filing of a bill. Committee review involves examination and potential amendment by a standing committee. Enrollment occurs after a bill has passed both houses and is being prepared for the Governor’s signature, at which point it is printed in its final form, incorporating all agreed-upon amendments and ensuring it is error-free. Therefore, the incorporation of amendments for final consideration is the definition of engrossment.

The South Dakota Codified Laws (SDCL) Chapter 2-6 outlines the process for legislative bill drafting and introduction. Specifically, SDCL 2-6-1 states that the Director of Legislative Research shall prepare all bills, resolutions, and amendments for introduction. This office is responsible for ensuring that all legislative measures conform to the rules of the Legislature and are drafted in a clear, concise, and legally sound manner. When a legislator wishes to introduce a bill, they submit their request to this office. The Director of Legislative Research, or a designated staff member, then drafts the bill based on the legislator’s instructions, ensuring it aligns with existing South Dakota law and constitutional provisions. This drafting process involves careful consideration of statutory language, legal precedent, and the intended policy outcome. The drafted bill is then returned to the legislator for review before it can be formally introduced. This process ensures a standardized and professional approach to legislative drafting, maintaining the integrity and clarity of South Dakota’s statutes.

South Dakota Codified Law (SDCL) Chapter 2-13 governs the legislative process, including the drafting and enactment of bills. Specifically, SDCL 2-13-10 outlines the requirements for bill drafting, emphasizing clarity, precision, and consistency with existing law. When drafting legislation that amends or repeals existing statutes, drafters must carefully identify the precise sections to be affected. For instance, if a bill proposes to modify the penalty for a specific offense defined in SDCL 22-1-1, the bill’s language must clearly state which subsection or provision of SDCL 22-1-1 is being altered. The principle of statutory construction dictates that amendments should not introduce ambiguity or unintended consequences. Therefore, a drafter would meticulously review the current text of the law to ensure that the proposed changes are surgically integrated. If a bill seeks to repeal an entire chapter, the repeal must be explicitly stated, referencing the chapter number and its title as found in the codified law. For example, a bill to repeal the chapter on “Public Utilities Regulation” would specifically cite “Chapter 49-34 of the South Dakota Codified Laws.” The goal is to create legislation that is self-executing and leaves no room for misinterpretation regarding its scope or application. This meticulous attention to detail prevents conflicts with other statutes and ensures the smooth operation of the legal framework within South Dakota.

The South Dakota Codified Laws (SDCL) govern the legislative process and the structure of state statutes. Specifically, SDCL Chapter 2-13 outlines the rules for the preparation and introduction of legislative measures. When a bill is introduced, it must be accompanied by a fiscal note if it has a potential fiscal impact on state government. This fiscal note, prepared by the Bureau of Finance and Management (BFM), provides an estimate of the costs or savings associated with the bill. The process of creating a fiscal note involves analyzing the bill’s provisions, identifying affected agencies, and projecting expenditures or revenue changes. SDCL 2-13-10 mandates that the fiscal note must be submitted to the presiding officer of the house in which the bill is introduced. Furthermore, the legislative research council plays a crucial role in bill drafting and review, ensuring compliance with procedural rules and legal requirements. The legislative process in South Dakota, like in many states, is designed to promote transparency and informed decision-making, with fiscal notes serving as a key component in evaluating the financial implications of proposed legislation. The question tests the understanding of the procedural requirements for introducing legislation with a fiscal impact, specifically referencing the relevant South Dakota Codified Laws and the responsible state agency.

The South Dakota Codified Laws (SDCL) Chapter 2-6 outlines the process for the codification and publication of legislative measures. Specifically, SDCL 2-6-1.1 mandates that the Director of the Legislative Research Council, or their designee, is responsible for preparing the laws for publication. This includes ensuring that all enacted bills are correctly incorporated into the official statute books. When a bill is enacted into law, it must be properly formatted and assigned a chapter number within the session laws. The subsequent step involves integrating this new law into the South Dakota Codified Laws, which is an ongoing process. The Director of Legislative Research is tasked with the continuous revision and updating of the codified laws to reflect all legislative changes. This involves not only adding new laws but also repealing or amending existing ones to maintain the accuracy and currency of the state’s legal code. The preparation for publication involves careful attention to detail to ensure that the codified laws accurately represent the current statutory framework of South Dakota.

The South Dakota Codified Laws (SDCL) establish specific procedures for the amendment of existing statutes. When a bill proposes to amend a section of the South Dakota Codified Laws, the drafting process requires precise identification of the section to be amended and clear articulation of the changes. SDCL 2-13-4 outlines the requirements for amending statutes, emphasizing that the new act must set forth the section as amended at length. This means that the entire text of the section being modified must be included in the amendatory language, with the proposed changes clearly indicated, typically through the use of underlining for additions and strike-through for deletions. Failure to do so can render the amendment procedurally defective. For instance, if a bill intends to modify SDCL 34-1-10 concerning public health regulations, the amendatory language in the bill must present the full text of SDCL 34-1-10, with the specific alterations highlighted. Simply referencing the section number and stating “is amended to read as follows:” followed by only the changed portions, or attempting to repeal and reenact the entire chapter without specific amendment language, would not comply with the statutory mandate for amendment. The principle is to ensure that the legislative intent is unambiguous and that the codified law accurately reflects the enacted changes. The process ensures clarity and prevents inadvertent repeal or alteration of unaffected portions of a statute.

The South Dakota Codified Laws (SDCL) provide the framework for legislative drafting within the state. Specifically, SDCL Chapter 2-6 governs the form and style of legislative measures. When a bill is introduced, it must adhere to established formatting and content requirements to ensure clarity, consistency, and legal efficacy. This includes proper titling, section numbering, and the use of precise language. The process of amending existing law requires careful attention to detail to avoid unintended consequences. A bill that proposes to amend a specific section of the South Dakota Codified Laws, such as SDCL 1-1-10, must clearly identify the section being amended and then present the proposed changes in a manner that reflects the intended modification. If a bill aims to repeal a section, it must explicitly state the section number to be repealed. The principle of “no surplusage” is paramount, meaning that every word and phrase in a legislative measure should serve a purpose and contribute to its meaning without redundancy. Therefore, a bill that seeks to amend SDCL 1-1-10 by adding a new subsection, while also repealing the entirety of SDCL 1-1-10, would create a contradiction and an irreconcilable conflict within the proposed legislation, rendering it defective. The correct approach would be to either amend the existing section or repeal it entirely, but not both in a manner that negates the intended action.

In South Dakota, the process of amending the state constitution is a multi-step procedure designed to ensure deliberate consideration of proposed changes. Article XXIII of the South Dakota Constitution outlines these requirements. An amendment can be proposed by either the Legislature or by initiative petition. If proposed by the Legislature, it must be agreed to by at least two-thirds of the members elected to each house. Following legislative approval, the proposed amendment must be submitted to the voters at the next general election. For the amendment to be ratified, it must receive the approval of a majority of the voters who cast ballots on the proposed amendment. Alternatively, an amendment can be proposed by an initiative petition signed by at least ten percent of the qualified electors in the state, with at least five percent of the signatures coming from each of the several counties. This petition must also be submitted to the voters at the next general election and requires a majority vote for ratification. The critical aspect for a legislative drafting exam is understanding the procedural safeguards and the specific thresholds required at each stage, particularly the supermajority vote needed in the legislature and the simple majority vote by the electorate. The question tests the understanding of these constitutional requirements for amendment, focusing on the legislative proposal route. The correct answer reflects the constitutional mandate for legislative approval.

South Dakota Codified Law (SDCL) Chapter 2-13 outlines the process for the codification and publication of the state’s laws. Specifically, SDCL 2-13-1 mandates that the Legislative Research Council (LRC) prepare and publish the South Dakota Codified Laws following each regular session of the Legislature. This involves organizing, indexing, and annotating enacted legislation to ensure a coherent and accessible body of law. The process requires careful attention to the legislative intent, the effect of amendments on existing statutes, and the proper placement of new provisions within the existing statutory framework. The LRC staff must ensure that the codification accurately reflects the laws as passed by the Legislature and signed by the Governor, maintaining the integrity of the statutory code. This is a crucial step in making the law accessible to the public, legal professionals, and government officials, enabling them to understand and apply the operative statutes of South Dakota. The accuracy and completeness of this codification directly impact the rule of law and the administration of justice within the state.

The South Dakota Codified Laws (SDCL) Chapter 2-13 governs the legislative process for bill drafting and enactment. Specifically, SDCL 2-13-10 outlines the requirements for the title of a bill, stating that it must accurately reflect the subject matter of the bill. If a bill’s title is misleading or fails to encompass the entire scope of the proposed legislation, it can lead to legal challenges regarding the bill’s validity. In the scenario presented, Representative Eleanor Vance’s proposed bill addresses changes to county road maintenance funding mechanisms, which are primarily governed by SDCL Title 31. However, the title chosen, “An Act to Revise Certain Provisions Relating to Public Infrastructure,” is overly broad and does not specifically mention county roads or funding. Such a title could be challenged as not being sufficiently descriptive of the bill’s actual content, potentially violating the spirit and letter of SDCL 2-13-10. The legislative counsel’s role is to ensure that titles are precise and reflective of the bill’s substance to avoid such procedural defects. Therefore, a more appropriate title would directly reference county road funding or the specific mechanisms being altered.

The South Dakota Codified Laws (SDCL) Chapter 2-13 governs the process of legislative bill drafting and the publication of enacted laws. Specifically, SDCL 2-13-4 outlines the requirements for the engrossment of a bill, which is the process of preparing a bill for its final reading after amendments have been made. Engrossment involves incorporating all adopted amendments into the original text of the bill and presenting it in a clean, unified form. This ensures that the legislative body votes on the final, amended version of the bill. The engrossed bill then becomes the official version that is printed and distributed for further legislative action. The process of enrolling a bill, as described in SDCL 2-13-5, occurs after the bill has passed both houses in its final form and involves preparing the bill for presentation to the Governor. Enrollment is the final official copy of the bill as passed by the Legislature, incorporating all amendments and corrections, and is the version that is signed into law or vetoed. Therefore, the engrossment process is a critical step in accurately reflecting the legislative intent through amendments before the bill is prepared for enrollment and presentation to the Governor.

The South Dakota Codified Laws (SDCL) provide the framework for legislative drafting within the state. Specifically, SDCL Chapter 2-6 outlines the general provisions related to the legislative process, including the drafting and introduction of bills. When considering the amendment of an existing statute, such as SDCL 39-1-1.2, which pertains to pesticide registration fees, a legislative drafter must adhere to precise statutory language requirements. The process involves clearly identifying the section to be amended, indicating the precise changes through strike-through for deletions and underlining for additions, and ensuring the bill text accurately reflects the legislative intent. The drafter must also consider the bill’s structure, including its title, enacting clause, and the body of the proposed changes, all of which must conform to established drafting conventions and the requirements of SDCL 2-6. The aim is to create a bill that is clear, unambiguous, and legally sound, facilitating its passage and proper codification. The example provided in SDCL 2-6-14 concerning the format for amending sections is crucial here. If a bill proposes to amend SDCL 39-1-1.2, the bill’s text would explicitly state the section number and then present the amended language with the necessary strike-throughs and underlines to show the modifications from the current law. This meticulous attention to detail ensures that the legislative record accurately reflects the proposed changes to the statute.

The South Dakota Codified Laws (SDCL) Chapter 2-13 governs the process of legislative bill drafting and filing. Specifically, SDCL 2-13-10 details the requirements for the enrollment of bills, which is the final step before a bill can be presented to the Governor. Enrollment involves preparing a clean, accurate copy of the bill as it has been finally passed by both houses of the Legislature, incorporating any amendments. This enrolled bill is then certified by the Secretary of the Senate and the Chief Clerk of the House. SDCL 2-13-11 outlines the procedure for presenting enrolled bills to the Governor, requiring that they be presented within three days after final passage, excluding Sundays, and that the Governor has five days (excluding Sundays) to act upon the bill. If the Governor vetoes the bill, it must be returned to the house in which it originated with the objections. If the Legislature is adjourned when the bill is presented to the Governor, the bill does not become law unless the Governor files it with the Secretary of State within fifteen days after adjournment. The question tests the understanding of the specific timelines and procedures for bill presentation to the Governor and the Governor’s subsequent actions, as defined by South Dakota law. The scenario describes a bill passed on April 3rd, presented to the Governor on April 4th, and the Legislature adjourning on April 5th. The Governor must act within five days of presentation. April 4th + 5 days = April 9th. Since the Legislature adjourned on April 5th, the fifteen-day rule for adjourned sessions applies if the Governor fails to act within the initial five-day period. However, the question asks about the Governor’s action *before* adjournment. The Governor has until April 9th to sign or veto the bill. If the Governor does not act by April 9th and the Legislature has adjourned, the bill becomes law if filed with the Secretary of State within fifteen days of adjournment. The key is the Governor’s action within the five-day period following presentation. The Governor has until April 9th. Since April 5th is the adjournment date, the Governor still has April 6th, 7th, 8th, and 9th to act. The Governor can still sign the bill on April 9th. Therefore, the bill becomes law if the Governor signs it on April 9th.

The South Dakota Codified Laws (SDCL) Chapter 2-6, concerning the Enactment of Laws, outlines the specific procedures for how bills become law. A bill must pass both the Senate and the House of Representatives in the same form. After passage by both chambers, the bill is presented to the Governor. The Governor then has a period of time, typically five days (excluding Sundays), to either sign the bill into law or veto it. If the Governor vetoes the bill, it is returned to the house in which it originated with the objections. The legislature can override a veto with a two-thirds vote in each house. If the Governor does not sign the bill and does not veto it within the specified timeframe, the bill becomes law without the Governor’s signature. This process ensures legislative intent is considered and provides a mechanism for executive review and potential legislative response. Understanding the precise timelines and the conditions under which a bill becomes law without executive action is crucial for legislative drafting to ensure proper procedure is followed and the enacted law is legally sound.