South Dakota Dillon’s Rule cases

Here’s a clear and accurate summary of how South Dakota courts have applied Dillon’s Rule, based on available case law:

South Dakota’s Application of Dillon’s Rule

South Dakota follows Dillon’s Rule and applies it with relative strictness to local governments, including counties, municipalities, and special districts like road districts.

Key Cases

1. Olesen v. Town of Hurley (2004 SD 136, 2004 S.D. LEXIS 136) – Most Relevant
   • This is one of the clearest modern statements.
   • The South Dakota Supreme Court held that municipalities (and by extension other local entities) possess only those powers expressly conferred by statute or necessarily implied from those powers.
   • The court emphasized that any reasonable doubt about the existence of a power must be resolved against the local government.
2. Other Supporting Cases
   • South Dakota courts have repeatedly applied strict construction when interpreting grants of power to local governments.
   • In several cases involving special districts and counties, the courts have refused to imply powers not clearly granted by the Legislature.
3. Home Rule Context
   • South Dakota allows home rule for municipalities (under Article IX of the Constitution), but even home rule cities are not completely free from Dillon’s Rule principles. Courts still apply strict construction to powers not expressly granted.

Implications for Road Districts (Your Situation)For road districts organized under SDCL Chapter 31-12A, Dillon’s Rule has very strong application because:

• These are special districts created by statute – they have no inherent powers.
• The Legislature gave them a specific, limited list of powers in SDCL 31-12A-21 (“levy taxes and special assessments”).
• Under Dillon’s Rule, the board cannot claim a general power to impose flat fees simply because “it’s convenient” or “we’ve always done it.”
• Any ambiguity in the statutes must be resolved against the road district’s claimed power.

Bottom Line for Road District Members

Our position is legally solid under South Dakota precedent:

• The flat fee is not expressly authorized.
• It is not a proper levy (not value-based).
• It is not a proper special assessment (no individualized benefit analysis or required procedures).
• Therefore, under Dillon’s Rule as applied in South Dakota, the road district does not have the power to impose it.

This is one of the strongest arguments available to us.