Constitutional Amendment KConstitutional amendment · Put on the ballot by lawmakers
Unclaimed property trust fund
Explain it like I'm 5
When people forget money in old accounts, the state holds it and people can still claim it. This would put the money in a protected savings fund that can earn interest, like a lost-and-found box that also grows money.
Yes vote
Net unclaimed-property receipts would go into a constitutional trust fund, with claims paid and part of the earnings available to the state.
No vote
The new constitutional trust fund would not be created and current law would continue.
The question to ask yourself
Should unclaimed-property proceeds be protected in a permanent invested fund or remain more flexible under ordinary law?
The case for
- Protects money needed for future owners' claims.
- Allows the fund to earn investment income over time.
- Keeps the principal separate from ordinary short-term budget spending.
Backed by: State Treasurer Josh Haeder, South Dakota Republican Party
The case against
- Restricts future legislatures' ability to use the money for current needs.
- Puts detailed financial rules in the Constitution.
- A statutory system could protect claims without making the arrangement harder to change.
Opposed by: No organized opposition found
- Money
- The measure would not create a new tax, and no fiscal estimate of its budget effect was identified.
- Don't be misled
- It is misleading to say owners lose their property, because the proposal preserves their ability to claim it.