If the county commissioners in South Dakota want a light bar and county decals put on the sheriff's county-owned car for safety and identification, and the sheriff doesn't want them, can the commissioners buy the equipment and force the sheriff to use it?
Plain-English summary
Hanson County had given its sheriff a county-owned automobile. The county commissioners decided every county vehicle should have warning lights, and the sheriff's vehicle should also have county decals. The highway department went along. The sheriff did not. The state's attorney asked the AG three questions: Could the commissioners buy the lights and decals? Could they force the sheriff to use them? And was the equipment legally required when the sheriff wanted to disregard traffic laws on a call?
On the first question, the AG read SDCL 7-12-12, which gives county commissioners discretion to furnish "any motorcycle, automobile, truck or other vehicle, uniforms and other equipment to the sheriff or his deputies, or both, for law enforcement purposes only." That broad authority included buying the light bar and decals for the existing county car. A prior AGR opinion (68-41) had already approved the county paying for installation of emergency equipment on the sheriff's personally-owned car, since the equipment was tied to office duties. Buying lights for a county-owned car was an even cleaner case.
On the second question, the AG said no, the commissioners could not directly order the sheriff to use the equipment. South Dakota law does not give county commissioners general supervisory authority over an elected county sheriff. The sheriff is an independently elected constitutional officer in South Dakota, and the commissioners have no statutory power to dictate the sheriff's operational choices. The AG quoted a prior opinion (AGR 89-30) directly: "There are no provisions under the South Dakota law which grant authority to county commissioners to control the actions of the county sheriff. The only conceivable method of control the county commissioners would have over a sheriff would be through the power of the purse."
The "power of the purse" was the AG's practical answer. If the commissioners were concerned about the county's liability exposure from the sheriff operating an unlit car in emergency conditions, they could exercise their SDCL 7-12-12 discretion the other way: stop providing the car entirely. That was a financial lever, not a direct command. The AG flagged but did not resolve the question of how dropping the car would affect the county's liability in emergencies.
On the third question, the AG walked through SDCL 32-31. SDCL 32-31-1 says an emergency vehicle driver "responding to an emergency call or when in the pursuit of an actual or suspected violator of the law" may exercise the privileges in SDCL 32-31-2 (parking irrespective of restrictions, proceeding past red lights and stop signs after slowing, and disregarding direction-of-movement regulations). But SDCL 32-31-3 conditions those exemptions on the use of audible and visual signals meeting the requirements of law. SDCL 32-31-4 separately authorizes exceeding the speed limits, but only if the vehicle is sounding a siren or horn and displaying two lighted red lights to the front, or a combination of blue or clear lights visible 360 degrees, or both. So yes, lights (and a siren for speed) were legally required to disregard traffic regulations.
The AG closed with an unusual editorial line. The sheriff should use a bar light. The county should keep providing the car. The parties should work it out before someone gets hurt.
Currency note
This opinion was issued in 1994. Subsequent statutory amendments, court decisions, or later AG opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current legal advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or remedy mentioned here. SDCL 7-12-12 and the SDCL 32-31 emergency vehicle provisions have been amended in the decades since this opinion. Modern sheriff equipment and emergency-driving practice also follows updated POST training standards. Counties and sheriffs working through similar disputes today should consult current SDCL provisions and POST guidance.
What the opinion meant at the time
For county commissioners statewide, the opinion drew a sharp line. They had broad statutory authority over what equipment the county would pay for, but no authority to dictate how the sheriff used it. The power of the purse was their only practical lever. They could turn off the spigot (stop providing the car or the equipment), but they could not give operational orders.
For sheriffs, the opinion confirmed their structural independence. The sheriff is not a subordinate of the county commission. The sheriff answers to the voters and to state statute, not to the board. That independence comes with corresponding accountability: the sheriff bears the operational consequences of equipment and procedural choices.
For state's attorneys advising on county-sheriff disputes, the opinion provided a usable framework. Step one: identify what the commissioners can spend money on. Step two: identify what the commissioners can direct (very little). Step three: identify what state law requires of the sheriff regardless of either commissioner or sheriff preference (e.g., emergency-vehicle equipment for speeding through stop signs).
For sheriff deputies operating county vehicles in emergencies, the opinion underscored that the SDCL 32-31 exemptions from traffic regulations are conditional. Disregarding a stop sign without lights and siren was not legally authorized. Speeding without siren and proper red/blue lights was not legally authorized. The exemptions are a privilege earned by complying with the signal requirements.
For county risk managers and liability insurers, the opinion identified a real exposure point. A sheriff who drove a county car in emergency mode without the legally-required lights and siren could lose the SDCL 32-31 statutory protections, and the county might be on the hook for damages. The AG explicitly noted that he was not resolving how a county-funding-cutoff would affect liability, signaling that the answer would be context-specific.
Common questions
Q: Can our county commissioners require deputies to wear uniforms?
A: Same analysis. Under SDCL 7-12-12, commissioners can provide uniforms; they cannot direct the sheriff to require deputies to wear them. The sheriff's discretion over operational practice is the same as for vehicle equipment.
Q: Can commissioners refuse to provide a car if the sheriff won't equip it properly?
A: Yes. SDCL 7-12-12 makes the provision of a county-owned car discretionary ("Any county may, at the discretion of the board of county commissioners, furnish any motorcycle, automobile, truck or other vehicle..."). The discretion runs both directions: they can provide the car, and they can stop providing it.
Q: Can the sheriff sue the commissioners for cutting off the car?
A: The opinion does not address that question. The discretion language in SDCL 7-12-12 suggests the commissioners have considerable latitude, but a court would look at the surrounding circumstances. Cutting off the car retaliatorily or in a way that prevented the sheriff from performing statutory duties could face a different analysis than a budget-driven choice.
Q: What signals does SDCL 32-31-3 require?
A: For disregarding stop signs, signals, and direction-of-movement rules (SDCL 32-31-2(2) and (3)), both audible and visual signals are required. For parking irrespective of restrictions (SDCL 32-31-2(1)), only visual signals are required. The visual signals must meet the requirements of law (typically two lighted red lights to the front, or a 360-degree blue or clear light, or a combination, per SDCL 32-31-4 for the speed limit context).
Q: Can the sheriff exceed the speed limit without a siren?
A: No. SDCL 32-31-4 specifically requires both an audible signal (siren or horn) and the appropriate lights to invoke the speed-limit exemption. A silent emergency response does not get the speed exemption.
Q: Does the speedometer exception in SDCL 32-31-4 require lights and siren?
A: SDCL 32-31-4 includes a separate provision for emergency vehicles operated by law enforcement officers "measuring the speed of other vehicles by use of the emergency vehicle speedometer." That use is exempt from the speed limits but is a distinct authorization. The pacing-speed-of-other-vehicles activity does not require the lights and siren the response-to-emergency activity does.
Q: What if the sheriff personally owns the car and the county is just funding it?
A: AGR 68-41 (cited by this opinion) approved the county paying for installation and removal of emergency equipment on the sheriff's personally-owned car, because the equipment was tied to office duties. The same analysis would apply to lights and decals on a sheriff's personal vehicle.
Q: Can deputies refuse to use the lights too?
A: Deputies serve under the sheriff. The sheriff has supervisory authority over deputies. So the sheriff (not the commissioners) is the one who decides deputy practice, including light use.
Q: What about non-sheriff county vehicles?
A: The opinion addressed the sheriff's car specifically. For non-elected-officer county vehicles (highway department, county engineer, etc.), the commissioners have direct supervisory authority over the operating officers and can require equipment use without the structural-independence concern that applies to the sheriff.
Background and statutory framework
The South Dakota sheriff is an independently elected county officer. Unlike heads of administrative departments, the sheriff is not subordinate to the county commission. SDCL 7-12-12 reflects that structure by making the commissioners' funding role explicit and discretionary: the commission may furnish the sheriff with vehicles, uniforms, and other equipment "for law enforcement purposes only," but the funding decision is the only direct lever the commission has.
A line of prior AG opinions (cited in 94-02) had developed that structural-separation theme. AGR 89-30 in particular had concluded that "the only conceivable method of control the county commissioners would have over a sheriff would be through the power of the purse." The 1994 AG quoted that line and applied it to the light-bar dispute.
The SDCL 32-31 emergency vehicle provisions formed a separate regulatory layer. They define when an authorized emergency vehicle may disregard traffic regulations and what equipment is required to invoke that privilege:
- SDCL 32-14-1(2) defines "authorized emergency vehicle" to include police vehicles.
- SDCL 32-31-1 gives the driver permission to exercise the privileges in SDCL 32-31-2 when responding to an emergency call, pursuing a violator, or responding to (but not returning from) a fire alarm.
- SDCL 32-31-2 lists the specific privileges: park irrespective of restrictions; proceed past red or stop signal after slowing as necessary for safe operation; disregard direction-of-movement regulations.
- SDCL 32-31-3 conditions the SDCL 32-31-2(2) and (3) privileges on use of audible and visual signals meeting the requirements of law. The parking privilege requires only visual signals.
- SDCL 32-31-4 separately exempts emergency vehicles from speed limits in SDCL 32-25-1 to 32-25-17 if the driver sounds a siren or horn and displays two front-mounted red lights (or 360-degree blue/clear lights, or both).
- SDCL 32-31-5 is referenced as a safe-operation requirement.
Putting both layers together, the AG arrived at the framework: commissioners can spend money on the equipment; sheriff decides whether to use the equipment; state law makes the equipment legally necessary if the sheriff wants to invoke the SDCL 32-31 emergency-driving privileges.
Citations and references
Statutes:
- SDCL 7-12-12 (county may furnish automobiles, uniforms, and other equipment to sheriff at commissioner discretion)
- SDCL 32-14-1(2) (definition of authorized emergency vehicle)
- SDCL 32-31-1 (driver of authorized emergency vehicle may exercise privileges in 32-31-2)
- SDCL 32-31-2 (specific traffic regulations that emergency vehicle may disregard)
- SDCL 32-31-3 (audible and visual signals required to invoke 32-31-2 exemptions)
- SDCL 32-31-4 (speed limits do not apply to emergency vehicle with siren and red/blue lights)
- SDCL 32-31-5 (safe-operation requirement cross-referenced from 32-31-1)
- SDCL 32-25-1 to 32-25-17 (speed limit statutes)
Prior AG opinions referenced:
- AGR 68-41 (county may pay for installation and removal of emergency equipment on sheriff's personally-owned car)
- AGR 89-30 (county commissioners' only control over sheriff is the power of the purse)
Source
Original opinion text
OFFICIAL OPINION NO. 94-02
County commissioners' authority to purchase and require a light bar and decals to be placed on the sheriff's county-owned automobile over his objection
Dear Mr. Davies:
You have requested an opinion from this Office based upon the following facts:
FACTS:
Hanson County provides its county sheriff with his official automobile. The county commissioners have decided that all county vehicles should be equipped with warning lights, and the sheriff's vehicle should also have decals on its outside. The highway department has agreed, but the sheriff has not complied with the county commissioners' request.
Based upon the above facts, you have asked the following questions:
QUESTION NO. 1:
Can county commissioners purchase a light bar and decals to be placed on the sheriff's county-owned vehicle?
QUESTION NO. 2:
Can the commissioners require the sheriff to use this equipment over his objection?
QUESTION NO. 3:
Is the use of appropriate lights on a police vehicle a requirement to allow the operator to disregard stop signs and traffic speed laws?
IN RE QUESTION NO. 1:
SDCL 7-12-12 provides that:
"Any county may, at the discretion of the board of county commissioners, furnish any motorcycle, automobile, truck or other vehicle, uniforms and other equipment to the sheriff or his deputies, or both, for law enforcement purposes only."
County commissioners are given statutory authority to furnish an automobile "and other equipment" to the county sheriff. Therefore, since the commissioners in Hanson County have, in their discretion, provided an automobile for the sheriff, they may also buy a light bar and decals to place on the vehicle. Furthermore, in a previous opinion issued by this Office, a predecessor of mine opined that the county may pay for the installation and removal of emergency equipment such as a police radio, antenna and red warning lights, for a sheriff's personally-owned automobile, since this equipment must be used as a requirement of his office. See AGR 68-41. The answer to your first question is "yes," the county commissioners may purchase a light bar and decals for the sheriff's automobile.
IN RE QUESTION NO. 2:
Your second question is whether the commissioners can require the sheriff to use this equipment. Another previous Attorney General opinion addressed a similar question whether county commissioners could require a sheriff to sign a joint law enforcement agreement. My predecessor's response concluded with the opinion that the commissioners could not direct the sheriff to undertake any particular action:
"There are no provisions under the South Dakota law which grant authority to county commissioners to control the actions of the county sheriff. The only conceivable method of control the county commissioners would have over a sheriff would be through the power of the purse." AGR 89-30.
Therefore, while the county commissioners have authority to buy the equipment and install it on the vehicle, they have no statutory authority to direct the sheriff to use it. As noted in the previous opinion, the county commissioners do have the power of the purse which provides them some degree of control. Thus, since the county is concerned about potential liability if the sheriff operates the county-owned vehicle without proper emergency equipment, the commissioners could decide to no longer finance an automobile to the sheriff via their discretion under SDCL 7-12-12. Please note that this opinion does not address how such an action by the commissioners would affect the county's liability in times of emergency. However, the requirement of using emergency equipment is governed by statute which is the subject of your final question.
IN RE QUESTION NO. 3:
Your third question regarding whether the use of emergency equipment is required when disregarding traffic regulations is answered by SDCL §§ 32-31-1 through 32-31-4. SDCL 32-31-1 provides:
"The driver of an authorized emergency vehicle, when responding to an emergency call or when in the pursuit of an actual or suspected violator of the law or when responding to but not upon returning from a fire alarm, may exercise the privileges set forth in § 32-31-2, but subject to the conditions stated in §§ 32-31-3 and 32-31-5."
SDCL 32-14-1(2) defines "authorized emergency vehicle" as including police vehicles. SDCL 32-31-2 sets out the particular traffic regulations which may be disregarded:
"The driver of an authorized emergency vehicle may:
"(1) Park or stand, irrespective of the provisions of chapter 32-30;
"(2) Proceed past a red or stop signal or stop sign, but only after slowing down as may be necessary for safe operation;
"(3) Disregard regulations governing direction of movement or turning in specified directions."
SDCL 32-31-3 then provides:
"The exemptions granted in subdivisions (2) and (3) of § 32-31-2 to an authorized emergency vehicle apply only if the vehicle is making use of audible and visual signals meeting the requirements of law. However, the exemption granted in subdivision (1) of § 32-31-2 to an authorized emergency vehicle applies only if the vehicle is making use of visual signals meeting the requirements of law."
Finally, SDCL 32-31-4 provides:
"The speed limit set out in §§ 32-25-1 to 32-25-17, inclusive, does not apply to authorized emergency vehicles when responding to emergency calls if the drivers thereof sound audible signals by siren or horn or both and two lighted red lights are displayed to the front or any combination of blue or clear lights which are displayed to be visible 360 degrees, or a combination of such red lights and blue or clear lights are displayed. The speed limit set out in §§ 32-25-1 to 32-25-17, inclusive, does not apply to authorized emergency vehicles operated by law enforcement officers who are measuring the speed of other vehicles by use of the emergency vehicle speedometer."
Therefore, the answer to your third question is "yes." The use of appropriate lights is required by statute when an emergency vehicle is disregarding traffic regulations.
I will offer one final editorial comment. The sheriff should use a bar light; the county should continue to provide the sheriff's car. I hope the parties will work it out without leaving the citizens unprotected.
MWB:PJF:nan