## Facts

- South Dakota enacted SDCL ch. 34-11B authorizing municipalities to form a regional emergency medical services authority as an “independent public body, politic and corporate,” empowered to operate and regulate EMS and to incur debt with related financing mechanisms.
- The Sioux Falls City Commission adopted Resolution 408-92 creating the Sioux Falls Regional Emergency Medical Services Authority (SFREMSA), appointed its commissioners, and SFREMSA received a certificate of incorporation.
- The City Commission adopted Resolution 241-93 authorizing SFREMSA to borrow funds.
- A city resident/taxpayer and firefighter, joined by the Sioux Falls Firefighters Association, sought prohibition and declaratory relief, alleging SDCL ch. 34-11B unlawfully delegated municipal functions to a special commission, violating S.D. Const. art. III, §§ 1 and 26.
- The trial court held SDCL ch. 34-11B unconstitutional, issued a peremptory writ prohibiting implementation of the borrowing resolution, and entered declaratory judgment invalidating the statute.
- The City appealed.

## Issues

1. Whether the trial court applied the correct burden and presumption when evaluating the constitutionality of SDCL ch. 34-11B.
2. Whether SDCL ch. 34-11B violates S.D. Const. art. III, § 26 by granting a special commission power to perform municipal functions and control municipal finances through an independent EMS authority.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court of South Dakota affirmed.
- The trial court applied the correct standard: statutes are presumed constitutional, and challengers must prove invalidity beyond a reasonable doubt.
- SDCL ch. 34-11B was unconstitutional because it created an independent “special commission” to perform municipal functions (operation and regulation of EMS) with significant fiscal authority, without sufficient municipal control.
- The peremptory writ prohibiting implementation of the borrowing resolution and the declaratory judgment invalidating the statute were upheld.

## Legal Principles

- Legislative enactments are presumed constitutional; a challenger must show a clear constitutional violation beyond a reasonable doubt.
- S.D. Const. art. III, § 26 bars laws granting a “special commission” power to make, supervise, or interfere with municipal improvements, property, money, or effects, to levy taxes, or to perform municipal functions.
- Provision and management of emergency medical/ambulance services are municipal functions for purposes of art. III, § 26.
- An entity labeled independent and operating outside effective municipal oversight may be treated as a “special commission” when it is insulated from municipal control yet exercises authority over municipal services and related public financing.

## Conclusion

The court held that SDCL ch. 34-11B impermissibly delegated municipal EMS responsibilities and related fiscal powers to an independent authority functioning as a special commission, violating the state constitution; the trial court’s prohibition of the borrowing authorization and declaration of unconstitutionality were affirmed.


Specht v. City of Sioux Falls, 526 N.W.2d 727 (S.D. 1995)