SIOUX FALLS, S.D. (KELO) -- A new South Dakota law will extend the terms of certain officials, including Sioux Falls Mayor Paul TenHaken, but the question of how late that term will run has yet to be decided. House Bill 1130, an act to provide permissible dates for municipal and school district e lections, was signed by South Dakota Governor Larry Rhoden on March 25, 2025. Among other things, the bill states that elections for municipal officers must be held "on the first Tuesday after the first Monday in June or the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November." The municipality's governing body -- the city council in Sioux Falls -- is responsible for selecting which of these dates should be selected. Mayor wants to shore up Link funding City elections in Sioux Falls had been held in April, with the next election coming up in 2026. If the council selects June for the election date, TenHaken would serve an extra two months in office, and if the council selects November, he will be in office for seven months longer. "Our city council is the decision maker on when that will be," said TenHaken, speaking with KELOLAND's Sydney Hoier on Thursday. "So my guess is in the next two months-ish they will be making that decision." If November was chosen for the election, TenHaken theorizes that his term could last even longer than the potential seven-month extension. "My guess is the new mayor and city council would take office January 1st," speculated TenHaken. "So, it would extend my term through all of 2026, instead of just through May next year." Hoier asked TenHaken about his thoughts on the June/November decision, and he laid out some pros and cons for each. "I think, in June, one of the benefits is the ballots aren't quite as cluttered," said TenHaken. "I think one of the cons is it's a little more partisan because those are primaries," he added, noting that the June option would place city elections alongside the primary elections for mid-term/general election primaries. Providing a pro for a November municipal election, TenHaken noted that it would result in the winners taking office at the beginning of a calendar year and a fiscal year. "There may be a benefit to that," he said. TenHaken did express a preference for one of the two options. "I think you could go either way," he said. "My opinion, if you're asking, would be that we move our elections to June. I think it makes a lot of sense. It’s very similar -- the time frame -- to what we're doing now. The cost to the candidates would be a lot lower, and their messages would stick out a lot more versus cluttering them up in the November election." ...read more read less