The McCook County Sheriff drives his personal car for sheriff work. The police radio, antenna, and red warning lights are owned by the county and have to be drilled into the car. When he buys a new car, can the county pay to take the equipment off the old car, install it on the new one, and also pay to repair the holes in the old car?
Plain-English summary
The McCook County Sheriff drove his personally owned car for his sheriff duties. McCook County, rather than buying him a sheriff's cruiser, owned the police-band radio, the antenna, and the red warning lights that were bolted into his car. Installing them required drilling holes in the body of the vehicle.
The county had two questions for AG Frank Farrar. First, when the sheriff replaced his personal car, could the county pay to remove the radio and lights from the old car and install them on the new one? Second, if so, could the county also pay to patch the holes and otherwise restore the old car to its original condition?
Farrar answered yes to both. His reasoning rested on three statutory pieces working together.
Chapter 233 of the 1965 Session Laws defined "emergency vehicle" to include any motor vehicle designated as such by the sheriff of any county in South Dakota when the vehicle is assigned the use of the county's assigned police frequencies. So once the sheriff designated his personal car as the county's emergency vehicle and installed the county radio on the county frequencies, his car was legally an emergency vehicle.
SDC 1960 Supp. 44.0303 (as amended by Ch. 254 of the 1963 SL) set the rules for emergency vehicles: speed limits did not apply when responding to emergency calls, provided the vehicle sounded a siren or horn and displayed two red lights to the front or a 360-degree beacon. The warning lights were not optional accessories; they were legally required on the emergency vehicle.
SDC 12.1012 (added by Ch. 40 of the 1963 SL) gave the county Board of Commissioners discretion to either furnish the sheriff a county-owned vehicle or pay the sheriff to provide his own. McCook County had chosen the second option. The sheriff was using his own car, but the county still had to supply the radio and lights because the law required them on any sheriff emergency vehicle.
Put together: the county equipment had to be on the sheriff's car as a matter of law; the sheriff was required to provide his own car under the county's choice; the equipment had to move when he changed cars. The county's payment for the install-and-remove labor was therefore a legitimate county expense.
The restoration question followed the same logic. If the holes in the old car existed only because the county had insisted on drilling them to mount required emergency equipment, the cost to undo that damage was likewise a legitimate county expense. Farrar limited his answer to damage caused by the installation and removal of the county-owned equipment; he did not endorse repainting the whole car or repairing unrelated wear.
Currency note
This opinion was issued in the mid-1960s during AG Frank Farrar's tenure (1963-1969). Subsequent statutory amendments, court decisions, and AG opinions have substantially changed how counties equip and fund sheriff vehicles in South Dakota. Treat this page as historical context, not current legal advice. The cited 1965 emergency vehicle statute and 1963 sheriff-vehicle provisions have been recodified into SDCL and amended multiple times. Modern questions about county payment for sheriff vehicle equipment, take-home vehicle policies, and reimbursement of personally owned vehicle costs should be verified against current SDCL chapters 7-12, 32-31 (or successor provisions), and any applicable county vehicle policies.
What the opinion meant at the time
For McCook County, the answer was clean: pay the installation and removal labor when the sheriff bought a new car, and pay the restoration cost on the old car. The county's purchase of the radio and warning lights had created a custodial relationship that did not end when the sheriff switched cars. Moving the equipment was the county's expense.
For other South Dakota counties using the "sheriff provides own car" arrangement under SDC 12.1012, the opinion broadly endorsed paying for the necessary integration costs. The county could not require the sheriff to absorb the cost of drilling and patching that was necessary only because of the county's policy choice.
For the sheriffs themselves, the opinion confirmed that the dual character of the vehicle (personally owned, but legally an emergency vehicle when on county duty) did not push the equipment-installation costs onto them.
Common questions
Q: Why didn't the county just buy the sheriff a cruiser?
A: It could have. SDC 12.1012 explicitly gave the Board of Commissioners discretion to either furnish a county vehicle or pay the sheriff to provide his own. McCook County chose the latter, likely for budget or convenience reasons. The opinion did not second-guess that choice.
Q: Did the sheriff have to designate the car as an emergency vehicle in writing?
A: The 1965 statute did not specify a written designation procedure. The opinion treated the sheriff's installation of county-frequency radio equipment and use of the car for sheriff duty as effectively a designation. Modern practice would likely involve more formal documentation.
Q: Could the county pay for fuel, insurance, or maintenance on the sheriff's personal car?
A: That was outside the scope of this opinion. SDC 12.1012 and SDC 12.10 provided for the county to "pay the sheriff to provide his own car," but the specific cost categories covered by that payment would be set by the Board of Commissioners' resolution authorizing the arrangement. The opinion only addressed the county-owned equipment install/remove and the related vehicle restoration.
Q: What if the holes had been drilled before the equipment was county-owned?
A: The opinion did not address that scenario. Farrar's reasoning depended on the holes existing because the county had insisted on installing county-owned equipment. Pre-existing damage would not fit that rationale.
Q: Was there a limit on how often the county could pay for this?
A: The opinion did not impose one. As a practical matter, county Boards of Commissioners would set reasonable expectations about vehicle replacement frequency through the underlying agreement with the sheriff.
Q: Did this apply to other county law enforcement, like deputies?
A: The opinion was specifically about the sheriff. The same general analysis would likely apply to any county officer who, under a similar statutory authorization, used a personal vehicle equipped with county-owned emergency equipment, but the specifics would depend on the underlying authorization.
Background and statutory framework
South Dakota's mid-20th-century rural counties faced a real budget choice between buying dedicated sheriff cruisers and paying mileage or vehicle allowances to sheriffs who used their own cars. Chapter 40 of the 1963 Session Laws codified that flexibility in SDC 12.1012, giving Boards of Commissioners explicit discretion to do either.
The emergency-vehicle statutory framework (Chapter 233 of the 1965 SL) layered on top of that funding flexibility. Regardless of who owned the vehicle, when the sheriff used it for emergency response, it had to be equipped with statutorily required gear: police radio on the assigned county frequencies, red warning lights or beacon, siren or horn. These were not options; they were prerequisites for the vehicle's emergency-vehicle status.
The structural problem this opinion addressed was the seam between the two regimes. The vehicle was personally owned but the equipment was county-owned, and the integration required physical modifications to the personal vehicle. Farrar's reading was that the county's obligation to supply the equipment carried with it the obligation to pay the costs of moving the equipment between vehicles and the costs of remediation when the equipment came off.
The broader principle implicit in the opinion is that a government's policy choices that impose costs on a private party (here, drilling holes in the sheriff's personal car) cannot reasonably be shifted to that private party for repair. The county got the benefit of equipping the car; the county bore the cost of the equipping.
Citations and references
Statutes:
- Ch. 233, SL 1965 (emergency vehicle definition and frequency rules)
- SDC 1960 Supp. 44.0303 (emergency vehicle warning lights and siren), as amended by Ch. 254, SL 1963
- SDC 12.1012 (added by Ch. 40, SL 1963; county may furnish sheriff vehicle)
- SDC 1960 Supp. 12.10 (sheriff may furnish own vehicle with county payment)
Source
Original opinion text
Payment by county of installation and removal of county owned equipment to and from Sheriff's personally owned car
Dear Mr. Nagel:
You have requested an official opinion of this office based upon the following factual situation;
"The McCook County Sheriff owns his own car. The police frequency radio, antenna and the red warning lights are owned by McCook County. This equipment is such that installation requires holes to be bored into the body of the car."
You have asked the following questions:
"1. May the county pay for the installation and removal of this emergency equipment from the Sheriff's old car and onto his new one?
"2. In the event the answer to the above question is affirmative, may the county also pay for restoring the Sheriff's old car to its original condition?"
Chapter 233 of the Session Laws of 1965 states in relevant part:
"Section 1. As used in this act, the term 'emergency vehicle' shall mean . . .: (d) any motor vehicles designated as an emergency vehicle by the sheriff of any county in South Dakota, when said vehicle is assigned the use of frequencies assigned to said county; "Section 2. No persons, firm or corporation shall install in any motor vehicle or business establishment, except emergency vehicles as herein defined, or places established by municipal, county, state or federal authority for governmental purposes, any frequency modulation radio receiving equipment so adjusted or tuned as to receive messages or signals on frequencies assigned by the Federal Communication Commission to local governing police or law enforcement officers of any city, or county of the State of South Dakota, or to the State of South Dakota or any of its agencies, provided, nothing herein shall be construed to affect any radio station licensed by the Federal Communications System."
SDC 1960 Supp. 44.0303 as amended by Chapter 254 of the Session Laws of 1963 states in part:
"The speed limit set out in this section shall not apply to authorized emergency vehicles when responding to emergency calls provided the drivers thereof sound audible signals by siren or horn and two lighted red lights are displayed to the front, or one beacon light visible 360°."
It would follow that the sheriff's car would be classified as an emergency vehicle and that such car must be equipped as required by law with police radio and emergency lights.
The county may arrange for such cars within the discretion of the Board of County Commissioners furnishing them at county expense, as provided for in SDC 12.1012 as added in Chapter 40 of the Session Laws of 1963, or by paying the sheriff to provide his own car, as allowed in SDC 1960 Supp. 12.10 and amendments.
Since McCook County has chosen the second alternative and since the county owned equipment must be used as a requirement of the office, I am of the opinion that the answer to question NO.1 should be, and is answered, in the AFFIRMATIVE.
The answer to question No.2 should be, and is answered, in the AFFIRMATIVE to the extent that such change of condition is caused by the installation and removal of the county-owned equipment.
Respectfully submitted,
Frank L. Farrar
Attorney General