November 4, 1977

The Honorable Lorna B. Herseth 
Secretary of State 
State Capitol 
Pierre, South Dakota 57501

Official Opinion No. 77-93

Time frame for filing initiative, referred or initiated amendment petition

Dear Mrs. Herseth:

You have requested an opinion from this office on the following question:

QUESTION: 

Can signatures collected in 1977 for an initiative, referred or initiated amendment petition be held until 1980 if an insufficient amount of signatures are collected by the deadline for filing for the 1978 election?

Article XXIII, section 1 of our state constitution provides: 
    
Amendments to this Constitution may be proposed by initiative or by a majority vote of all members of each house of the Legislature. An amendment proposed by initiative shall require a petition signed by qualified voters equal in number to at least ten percent of the total votes cast for Governor in the last gubernatorial election. The petition containing the text of the proposed amendment and the names and addresses of its sponsors shall be filed at least one year before the next general election at which the proposed amendment is submitted to the voters.  A proposed amendment may amend one or more articles in related subject matter in other articles as necessary to accomplish the objectives of the amendment.

SDCL 2-1-2.1 provides: 

A petition of the voters proposing an amendment to the Constitution shall be filed in the office of the secretary of state and if timely filed shall be submitted to the voters at the next general election in the same manner as other questions and measures are submitted under the provisions of chapter 12-13.

There is no specific precedent in South Dakota for answering the question you raise.  However, as discussed in Memorandum Opinion No. 75-11, it appears to me that such signatures collected in 1977 could not be used for a petition to be filed for the 1980 election.

If one contends that signatures on a 1977 petition drive would be sufficient for the purposes of the 1980 petition drive, one comes to the ultimate question of where one draws the line on these old signatures.  Obviously, it is not reasonable to argue that one can circulate a petition for thirty or forty years and then present the petition to the Secretary of State after having finally received the required number of signatures.  It is also my opinion that it is not reasonable to argue that fifteen years or ten years is a reasonable time to allow such petition signatures to be deemed valid for these purposes.

In my opinion, it must be presumed that in the passage of article XXIII the people intended a reasonable provision to be enacted.  Without further legal precedent to base my opinion on, I can only conclude that the Legislature must have intended that signatures for such petition drives be obtained for the upcoming general election and would not constitute valid signatures for purposes of petitions for subsequent elections.

Respectfully submitted,

William J. Janklow
Attorney General

WJJ:DOC:pk

Enclosure