Public Comment

Amendment K would constitutionalize a trust for South Dakota’s unclaimed-property fund. State law enacted in 2025 already created a trust for net unclaimed-property receipts exceeding specified general-fund contribution limits. The statutory structure preserves trust principal, uses the fund to support payment of claims and related expenses, and permits a calculated distribution to the general fund without invading principal. The ballot question is whether those protections should be elevated into the Constitution, making it harder for future legislatures to draw down the accumulated fund for unrelated budget needs. The state may hold unclaimed money for years, but the underlying obligation to return valid claims does not disappear just because the budget wants cash. The question is how much money must remain protected for future owners.

How should South Dakota protect money received from unclaimed property?

Overall results

1
54% support · excluded by 7%
7

Legislatures should be able to respond to future fiscal conditions rather than having another pool of money permanently constrained by constitutional text.

2
52% support · excluded by 7%
7

A stable distribution rule makes investment and budgeting more predictable while maintaining a corpus capable of paying claims.

7

Constitutional protection reduces the temptation for one difficult budget year to consume assets that were accumulated for another purpose.

3
52% support
7

A reserve formula tied to historical claims could balance owner protection with the opportunity cost of holding a growing fund.

4
42% support · excluded by 12%
7

Money originating as private property should remain dedicated primarily to returning claims rather than financing unrelated government programs.

About the author