South Dakota’s HB 1030: Municipal Election Timing

By Susan Rasmussen, a Woods Fuller Associate

In 2026, South Dakota made a significant shift in how cities and towns can run their elections. House Bill 1030 gives municipalities the option to refrain from holding annual elections and instead consolidate their regular municipal elections into even-numbered years only. For communities long accustomed to yearly elections each June or November, this represents a meaningful change in both structure and flexibility. 

This shift away from mandatory annual elections responds to several challenges municipalities have faced since the Legislature overhauled municipal election laws in 2025 by requiring municipalities to combine their elections with either the primary or general election. As a result, many municipalities began working with their local counties to share resources and conduct combined elections. HB 1030 builds on that framework by allowing cities to hold regular municipal elections only in even-numbered years, in coordination with county-run election cycles. This approach can reduce administrative costs, avoid low-turnout odd-year elections, simplify election calendars, and improve voter engagement by aligning municipal elections with the state and federal election cycles that already occur in even-numbered years. For some municipalities, the change may also reduce or eliminate the need to conduct stand-alone municipal elections.

The Central Reform: Moving Municipal Elections to Even-Numbered Years

At the heart of HB 1030 is Section 19, which allows a municipality to adopt an ordinance consolidating its regular elections into even‑numbered years. When a city chooses this route, any official whose term was set to expire in an odd‑numbered year simply continues serving until the next even‑year election—a practical extension designed to prevent gaps or special elections.

Previously, municipalities had to hold an election every single year—even if only one or two offices were on the ballot. HB 1030 introduces flexibility where none existed, allowing a municipality to decide whether sticking with its annual cycle or moving to an even‑year cycle better fits its needs.

How the Rest of the Bill Supports This Shift 

While Section 19 is the centerpiece, the remainder of HB 1030 updates numerous statutes so that the new election‑timing option works smoothly. In broad terms, these supporting sections simply realign existing election procedures—such as special elections, vacancy filling, petition timing, annexation votes, term staggering, precinct rules, and notice requirements—so they remain compatible whether a city continues annual elections or switches to even‑year elections. Rather than changing policy, these amendments ensure that references to “the next regular municipal election,” term lengths, and procedural deadlines all function correctly under the newly permitted schedule.

A More Flexible Future for Cities and Towns

HB 1030 marks an important modernization of municipal election law. The bill doesn’t force any municipality to change its election cycle. Instead, it offers a practical and voter‑friendly choice: maintain the status quo or shift to the more efficient and more widely attended even‑year cycle.

For municipalities considering the shift, the next steps will involve adopting a local ordinance, adjusting term expirations, updating calendars, and communicating clearly with residents.

Woods Fuller offers a team of municipal lawyers who can help navigate the unique complexities of municipalities.