District 38 features state House race (2024)

District 38 Republicans endorsed Rep. Dan Ruby and newcomer Christina Wolff. Lisa Olson also entered the race, but only two can advance to the November general election. Voters will narrow the choice to two on June 11.

Ruby was first elected to the North Dakota House in 2000. He is majority owner and president of Circle Sanitation.

Wolff, Minot, is a small business owner, District 38 secretary and president of Republican Women of Minot.

Olson, Minot, is a retired educator and member of the Minot City Council since 2010. She was unable to seek endorsem*nt because the District 38 executive board declined to approve her local party membership. One concern cited was a post Olson made on a nonpartisan social media site promoting women candidates for public offices. Olson had posted she could provide contacts for any women interested in running on the Democratic-NPL ticket in District 38.

Dan Ruby

Running unopposed in the primary in District 38 are Republican Sen. David Hogue and Democratic-NPL House candidate Lisa Hermosillo.

The district’s Republican House candidates responded to questions related to their thoughts on legislative issues.

What priority issues would you want to focus on and/or legislation would you introduce, if elected?

Olson: Local residents have indicated that high property taxes are their number one concern and I believe that sentiment can be found across the state. Local taxing authorities do not have much flexibility in budgeting, so it is important for the Legislature to address this and find sensible ways to support local communities through tax reform. I also support efforts to address workforce issues, childcare needs and education funding.

Wolff: My focus this session will be finding ways to reduce government spending and overreach. In North Dakota our budget has exploded as well as the size of the government. I think it is time to tighten the purse strings. We need to change the budgeting thought process. There are many inefficiencies and redundancies that we can look at but really our government is just overreaching into areas that would be better served by the private sector.

Christina Wolff

Ruby: The priority issue that is always at the top of every session is to fund the agency budgets as efficiently as possible. Many other issues arise but in the end, the budgets will determine if we can provide for tax reductions or fund important needs like flood protection and good roads.

Do you see areas where the state needs to recalibrate its course? How do you plan to assess whether proposed legislation will steer the state in the right direction?

Wolff: I do see areas where the state needs to recalibrate its course. The compulsion to control every aspect of our people’s lives does not promote a healthy self-sustaining population. Regulations are strangling our businesses and causing more harm than good. We cannot govern with our feelings. I plan to take a close look at every bill with the lens of “is this a valid function of the government” and vote accordingly.

Ruby: Many people in North Dakota don’t feel like the Legislature or state government is representing the citizens of the state in their best interest. We have to be more transparent and open in our process. I have always looked at bills with the thought in my mind whether they are right for the state.

Olson: I believe that there are a variety of directions that state leadership is heading and it is time to hear from voters as to what they find most important. In the recent past, state legislators have tackled culture wars while still attempting to strengthen our economy and maintain a lifestyle that many North Dakotans enjoy. With a limited amount of time to meet in session, legislators should focus on what voters determine is imperative and within their scope of responsibility. As a voter and possibly a future legislator, I feel that managing the state’s finances, within a manageable budget, is the primary goal. Legislation related to taxes, finances and economic growth are very easy to evaluate.

Should the state pick up 100% of elementary and secondary education costs? If so, why? If not, what would you like to see in funding?

Ruby: I can support the concept of the state paying for elementary and secondary education. I would be interested to see what changes would need to be made to the funding formula, if any. This would be a direct reduction in property taxes.

Olson: Yes, I believe the state should pick up 100% of elementary and secondary education costs and that up to 80% of the per pupil payment should follow the student to whatever school they attend. With that flexibility, the receiving school would be expected to adhere to the same standards as a public school. With the state picking up education costs, a portion of each property owner’s taxes would decline. I see this as tax reform and not temporary tax relief. The funds needed to cover these costs could come from the Legacy Fund, the School Lands Trust Fund or a combination of both.

Wolff: According to the North Dakota Constitution Article VIII section 2, yes. It states, “The legislative assembly shall provide for a uniform system of free public schools throughout the state, beginning with the primary and extending through all grades up to and including schools of higher education, except that the legislative assembly may authorize tuition, fees and service charges to assist in the financing of public schools of higher education.” With that being said, I think it is important that we focus on the quality of education in North Dakota.

Do you support elimination of property taxes? What would North Dakota’s tax structure look like if you could redesign it?

Olson: I do not support a proposed plan to eliminate ad valorem property taxes because I have a number of concerns related to it. I support property tax reform, such as the state picking up 100% of K-12 education costs. I also support expanding the Homestead Tax Credit so that more individuals could qualify for this tax abatement. While I am cognizant that no one likes paying property taxes, I understand the necessity of covering important local expenses such as emergency services and public works services along with the cost of employing staff to carry them out.

Wolff: I do support the elimination of unfair assessed value property tax. For years now the political subdivisions have been taking advantage of the people and the Legislature’s attempts to reduce the burden of property tax on the citizens. Redesigning the tax structure would require a review of every single line item of the budget and deciding if it is necessary or if it would be better handled by the private sector. People, in general, don’t mind paying taxes for services. They do mind being used like an ATM by a government that does not act responsibly with their money.

Ruby: I like the way the proposed measure requires the state to replace the funds generated by property taxes. I think the state could sustain funding at that level. That would increase sales tax revenue for all entities that impose sales taxes. My concern is the measure doesn’t prevent a version of property tax based on other criteria that isn’t based on valuation. We don’t know if they would be more or less equitable than what we have now.