The future of a big carbon capture project in the Midwest was thrown off balance after a new South Dakota law was adopted. Rural property owners made a big push for the policy and their organizing is getting noticed.

South Dakota's governor just signed a bill prohibiting eminent domain for carbon dioxide pipelines. It is in response to a proposed line where the company behind it has not secured all the voluntary land agreements it needs. Worried landowners found sympathetic ears in the Legislature.

Sarah Jaynes, executive director of the Rural Democracy Initiative, said outcomes like these reflect the mindset of smaller communities when big projects come their way, potentially affecting their way of life.

"Rural people are not in the habit of fighting things," Jaynes pointed out. "They're in the habit of taking a close look at what's proposed for their communities after decades of exploitation."

She is referring to corporations outsourcing jobs from rural areas, as well as agricultural firms wanting to add larger animal feedlot operations. Jaynes noted the decline of local news outlets is likely playing a role in how communities are responding. Without access to key information, residents are enhancing their coordination to have a bigger voice.

The multistate carbon pipeline is proposed by Summit Carbon Solutions, which wants to capture ethanol plant emissions and store them underground. It touts economic and environmental benefits but some skeptics see it as a power grab, especially if objecting landowners are forced to let it run along their property through eminent domain.

Jaynes explained in a broader sense, rural residents are not confined to narratives about what they care about.

"They want to make sure that they have clean air and water and access to nature," Jaynes emphasized. "They want to take care of their land."

Such sentiments have surfaced in polling from the Rural Democracy Initiative.

As for the Summit project, the new law might lead to a legal challenge. Summit has won permit approval in other states and is trying again in South Dakota. But the uncertainty, along with the land restrictions, could make it harder to begin construction. The governor insists the action will not kill the project, calling it an "opportunity for a needed reset."


get more stories like this via email

Main Street businesses in South Dakota are playing what some describe as a "scramble game" in the fast-changing and challenging U.S. economy. As business owners keep an eye on new tariffs, they hope customers stay loyal.

Economists said the latest tariffs announced by President Donald Trump could lead to higher costs for products like electronics, clothing and food. Coffee is one of the popular items poised to become more expensive.

Deanna Muellenberg, who owns The Purple Pigeon Coffeehouse in Chamberlain, said she has not weighed all the details yet from last week's announcement but noted coffee prices for her have already increased by 40% since opening last year.

"I want to keep prices affordable for people that live in these small towns," Muellenberg explained. "But in order to be able to keep the doors open too, I might have to increase my costs."

So far, she has had to resort to a small price hike, with other popular sellers helping offset budget headaches tied to coffee supplies. The Federal Reserve Chair warned the new tariffs could lead to higher inflation again. Muellenberg recommended when locals do have a little extra to spend, they should keep small businesses in mind over corporate chains, because it benefits the town.

Nathan Sanderson, executive director of the South Dakota Retailers Association, acknowledged President Trump's argument about the need to "reset" the global trade market to establish fairness. But he does agree with other business voices an even bumpier road lies ahead.

Sanderson said with uncertainty almost a constant, policymakers need to set a tone emphasizing buying local.

"(Small) businesses are absolutely the heartbeat of rural communities," Sanderson stressed. "They are the entities that are supporting the local baseball team or the FFA chapter, or the dance troupe or what have you."

Outside of tariffs, Sanderson noted Main Street economies are seeing older business owners nearing retirement without enough younger generations to take over. According to federal data, South Dakota is home to nearly 90,000 small businesses.


get more stories like this via email

North Dakota has launched a new centralized online data hub and small-town mayors see it as an asset because information is power in trying to make their communities appealing to residents and future businesses.

The state's Information Technology department is out with a new platform it said will collect and disseminate reliable, up-to-date information from multiple sources, such as the Census Bureau. There are dashboards if you want to look up housing or workforce trends.

Michael Faught, mayor of Casselton, likes the idea of leaning on the tool when trying to boost development in his town of about 2,600 people. He said they need amenities to capitalize on population gains.

"There's a potential need for a new school, there's a potential need for a grocery store," Faught outlined. "With that growth comes growing pains."

Faught pointed out they have an economic development director but the town still faces limitations in retaining a robust staff to map things out. Like other cities, he noted when prospective businesses pay a visit, they need up-to-date details on local characteristics. For the most part, Casselton's population has climbed higher since the 2020 Census, putting pressure on the town to meet the needs of residents.

Kim Weis, chief data officer for the North Dakota Department of Information Technology, said a lot of the information is out there to find but it is often siloed. She agreed a central landing spot could remove barriers in seeking out community needs. She emphasized residents around the state might find it valuable, too.

"If they're looking to relocate in the state to be able to see, 'Hey, I'm interested in moving to this area, but boy, based off the data that's available, housing is pretty tricky there.' Or, 'They have workforce shortage issues in certain areas, so that'd be a great place for me to relocate,'" Weis pointed out.

Some dashboards on the platform have information which can be broken down at the county level. There are links to other sources allowing users to search for municipal characteristics. Weis added they plan to add more data and other bells and whistles moving forward.


get more stories like this via email

Virginians who work at low-wage jobs often don't have a workplace retirement plan so they can save money through payroll deductions.

A new study finds a similar gap between rural and urban workers, across the country.

The research by the Economic Innovation Group finds rural workers are less likely to have an employer-based retirement account compared to their urban counterparts.

Among high-income workers in both areas, the disparity narrows.

But overall, Sarah Eckhardt - a research associate with the Economic Innovation Group - said the gap between people in rural and urban settings who are offered a workplace retirement account is wide.

"Over half of full-time workers in rural areas do not have access to any kind of employer-based retirement plan," said Eckhardt. "This number is only 40% for people who live in urban areas. This is quite substantial and becomes even more salient when you look at the amount that people are actually able to save."

To help close the gap, Eckhardt's group is urging Congress to take up the Retirement Savings for Americans Act.

The bill would create retirement accounts for employees without one - and offer tax credits for lower-income workers as a matching contribution.

It has bipartisan support, but has sat in committee in Congress since 2023.

And it's about more than having a workplace retirement account. The disparity also includes how much people are able to save. The study found rural workers who do have a retirement plan have saved $55,000 less than their urban counterparts.

Eckhardt said the difference has real-world impacts on rural workers.

"Outside of retirement accounts, they tend to have fewer assets than people in urban places do, which means that they are less able to accumulate wealth and save for retirement," said Eckhardt. "Which could have consequences for how long they're in the labor force. Rural workers could be forced to work for more years than urban workers do, in order to make enough money to pay for their retirement years."

Eckhardt added that those gaps in retirement funds mean rural workers rely more heavily on Social Security -- and more frequently end up in poverty in their retirement years.



get more stories like this via email