VALLEY CITY, N.D. (NewsDakota.com) – District 24 Republicans passed a resolution to censure Representative Dwight Kiefert during a re-organizational meeting on Saturday, April 17th according to a document submitted to NewsDakota.com
District 24 Republican Party Treasurer Shane Anderson said he submitted the resolution, and it passed overwhelmingly on a voice vote only during the re-organizational meeting. He said there were some who opposed the resolution but none felt it was close enough to call for a division of the house.
According to the resolution, submitted by a member of District 24, Representative Kiefert’s vote to remove and expel fellow legislator Representative Luke Simons earlier this year without due process goes against established legislative rules, the North Dakota Republican Platform, the constitution of North Dakota, and the constitution of the United States.
The resolution said, despite Republican Representatives in the House offering various amendments to change the expulsion to censure, due process for the accused, and an option to follow adopted rules of procedure and investigate the allegations made against Representative Luke Simons. Representative Dwight Kiefert did not support most of these efforts according to the District 24 Republican party.
The North Dakota District 24 Republicans respectfully request that Representative Dwight Kiefert resign from his position as representative of District 24 for failing to uphold the adopted legislative rules of procedure, the 2020 North Dakota Republican Platform, the constitution of North Dakota, and the constitution of the United States, for supporting the first ever in the nation expulsion of a fellow legislator without due process, and for failing to exercise the integrity and diligence expected when voting and representing District 24 Republicans.
District-24-Republicans-Censure-Rep.-Kiefert
District 24 Republican Party Chairman Daniel Johnston talked about how the actions of Representative Dwight Kiefert led to this resolution.
Representative Dwight Kiefert said he would not resign and he plans to run for re-election in the next primary. Kiefert also said some people in the Republican Party are actually Libertarians who are attempting to take over the Republican Party in North Dakota.
To provide some background with this story, we have attached some previous stories and documents that center on the North Dakota House vote to expel Representative Luke Simons of Dickinson, North Dakota.
The story below was published on NewsDakota.com on March 5th 2021.
Dickinson Representative Luke Simons was expelled from the state House of Representatives over allegations of sexual harassment by legislative staff, interns and House colleagues. Simons denied the allegations. The North Dakota House vote to expel Simons was 69 to 25.
Representative Dwight Kiefert of Valley City voted to expel Simons because, “the past complaints and failure of him (Simons) to correct his inappropriate behavior is why I voted to expel him. Instead of apologizing for his actions over the past four years he asked “What am I guilty of? His comment, Let’s have some fun with it”, regarding an investigation was very troubling. I think this sounds like someone who needs a psychiatric evaluation.”
Kiefert said he voted for an investigation, but that amendment failed.
Meanwhile, Representative Cole Christenson said he voted against the expulsion because, “due process was not followed according to House rule and to Masons rules of order. My no vote was for a fair trial and to ensure rules are followed.”
Opponents of expulsion offered several amendments to reduce the punishment to censure, and to refer the matter to an outside commission to investigate. All failed on Thursday, March 4th.
Below is a story and redacted documents about Representative Luke Simons posted by Paul Jurgens on February 25th 2021
BISMARCK (KFGO) – Several employees of the research division of the North Dakota Legislature have complained about the behavior of a Republican state representative.
Some of the claims of sexual harassment and inappropriate behavior against Luke Simons go back to shortly after he was elected. They were obtained through an open records request by KFGO News.
In one case, a council employee described Simon’s behavior as “really creepy.” She said Simons talked at length about shopping for thong underwear and gave her a shoulder massage. A number of women asked that they no longer be required to work with the lawmaker.
State Rep. Brandy Pyle of Casselton, also a Republican, wrote that on Jan. 27 of this year, Simons made an intern feel uncomfortable when he made comments like “I would like to put my hands in your hair.” Pyle also said that over the years, some of her interactions with Simons were a bit uncomfortable and odd. Referring to the intern, Pyle said that he (Simons) isn’t self-aware of his words and that in my opinion it was like spending too much time with cows than people.
Simons, in a statement on his Facebook page, denied the women’s allegations. He said he respects women and would never touch a woman, other than his wife. Simons joined the legislature in 2017.
North Dakota Legislative Council files and emails redacted concerning Representative Luke Simons.
March 21, 2018 Staff meeting to discuss hostile workplace policy -discussed various inappropriate behavior by legislators. After meeting, visits with me to express concern that the example she cited at the meeting not be used as part of our training for legislators. We visited about that and other instances that she mentioned and appeared to come to the realization that behavior, as a whole, is “really creepy”. Since she is leaving for vacation in a few minutes, we agreed to continue the conversation when she returns. She related the following incidents: • The first time Rep. Luke Simons visited her office during the 2017 legislative session, he leaned over his desk and made a remark about her eyelashes being very beautiful sort of like his wife’s. • At an interim Judiciary Committee hearing, Rep. Simons approached her while she was sitting in her chair and began to give her a shoulder massage. • This week, Representative Simons called her regarding a work matter and proceeded to tell her a long story about shopping for thongs at Victoria’s Secret because that is what his wife like to wear. He apparently “jokingly” added that he wears thongs also. He told this story in the context that he was approached by mall security at a shopping center in Montana because he was carrying a weapon. When I first brought up the second incident at a staff meeting, she indicated it was not a big deal because “she is a big girl and can handle that kind of stuff”. After bringing up the third incident at our staff meeting today, and further discussing the three incidents, she indicated the totality of the circumstances added up to inappropriate and really creepy behavior. When we began to discuss how we would proceed, she indicated she would like to discuss it further later rather than doing anything at this point. I offered to address the situation with Rep. Simons or bring it to the attention of Rep. Carlson, and she asked me to wait. She further expressed concern regarding how she would be perceived if we addressed the situation. I assured her it was Rep. Simon’s behavior that was inappropriate, not her. March 27, 2018 stopped to visit and discuss her plan for “resolution”. She stated “when”, not “if”, it happens again, she intends to let Rep. Simons know his comments or actions are not appropriate and he should not do that again. She said that would be his one warning and “when” it happens again, she would file a formal complaint. I reiterated our concern and support and asked her to keep me up to date on anything.
To: John Bjornson From:Date: November 15, 2018 On Tuesday, November 13, 2018, Representative Luke Simons visited my office. Upon entry I said “I apologize for the papers on my desk” and proceeded to clean them up. He said: “You always apologize. I recently attended a seminar on personalities and people watching, I notice you always say you have to clear your desk.” I said: “We maintain attorney/client relationships with all legislators so it is important that I ensure everything is put away as necessary.” During a discussion about Chapter 36-21.2 the following exchange occurred: He said: “What does immune from liability mean, like if you were in a car accident and I came upon the scene and you were lying on the side of the road, if I took your shirt off to administer aid to a wound I wouldn’t be guilty of sexual harassment.” I said: “That is an inappropriate example.” He said: “Oh ya, I took it too far.” The discussion continued relating to livestock: He said: “The call was about a thoroughbred horse in the ditch, you know thoroughbreds, they just have that hungry look in their eye, like some women. Quarter horses are bred to be sweet and kind and made for the job, kind of like my wife, she is definitely like a quarter horse but she has a little thoroughbred in her.11 He again said: “Sorry, I got off topic.” The above exchange made me feel extremely uncomfortable. Moving forward I will no longer work with Representative Simons and the House Majority Leader will be made aware of the inappropriate behavior.
November 19, 2018 MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: John Bjornson RE: Representative Simons This is a follow-up to our November 14, 2018, conversation and your written explanation of inappropriate comments by Representative Simons, which you submitted on November 15, 2018. As you indicated in our conversation, you are choosing to not file a formal complaint under the North Dakota Legislative Assembly Policy Against Workplace Harassment. However, you have requested to not work with Representative Simons in the future. I support that request, and I have spoken with the House Majority Leader, Representative Pollert, regarding the behavior of Representative Simons and my intention to not allow Representative Simons to have any contact with you. Representative Pollert agreed and indicated he would be calling Representative Simons as soon as possible to reiterate his behavior has been inappropriate, instruct him to have no contact with you, and inform him any further inappropriate conduct will result in a formal complaint. I request you to inform me immediately if Representative Simons has any contact with you. Also, remember you have the right to file a formal complaint under the workplace harassment policy at any time you believe you have been subject to behavior in violation of that policy.
From: Bjornson, John D. Sent: To: Thursday, March 14, 2019 4:34 PM Cc: Subject: (7 RE: Rep. Simons Thank you for your comments regarding your interaction with Rep. Simons. I will confirm with the administrative staff that Rep. Simons may speak only with male staff members, except for female staff who have indicated they will speak with him. Your name will not be on the approved list. I will discuss with the House Majority Leader our continued concern with Rep. Simons failing to understand appropriate behavioral norms in the workplace and the fact the Workplace Harassment Policy must be taken seriously .. If Rep. Simons has any other contact with you which you consider to be inappropriate, I hope you will report it to me immediately. John John Bjornson Director North Dakota Legislative Council 600 East Boulevard Avenue Bismarck, ND 58505 701-328-2916
From: Sent: Thursday, March 14, 2019 3:43 PM To: Bjornson, John D.<jbjornson@nd.gov> Cc: Subject: Rep. Simons John, I wanted to let you know of Rep. Luke Simons’ recent visit to my office. He asked to see me about Senate Bill 2344. She called me, and I said it was ok to send him back. I could not recall whether he was still restricted from visiting female staff members. I asked my son to leave my office, but Rep. Simons introduced himself to my son before he was able to leave. Rep. Simons then asked me for an explanation of the bill, and I walked him through it. He asked some questions about the bill, but throughout the meeting, he made some disturbing comments. For example, at one point, he slid one of his papers across my desk, told me the stain on it was chocolate ice cream, and told me I could “lick and sniff it”. At another point, he told me “I don’t need laws because I follow the Bible” and then said “it would be really bad if [he] was driving [his] car and ran over [my] son,” whom he had just met. I was very disturbed by the comment because it was threatening and completely unrelated to anything we had discussed. I cannot imagine why he thought or mentioned it. Later, as he asked questions, he told me I was “seeing the inner workings of [his] mind.” Although he called me “ma’am” during the meeting, his tone and mannerisms indicated it was not genuine. I believe some of his comments may have been intended to find out whether he could provoke a reaction from me. Thank you,
Bjornson, John D. From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: John, \Thursday, March 14, 2019 3:43 PM Bjornson, John D, \ Rep. Simons I wanted to let you know of Rep. Luke Simons’ recent visit to my office. He asked to see me about Senate Bill 2344. She called me, and I said it was ok to send him back. I could not recall whether he was still restricted from visiting female staff members. I asked my son to leave my office, but Rep. Simons introduced himself to my son before he was able to leave. Rep. Simons then asked me for an explanation of the bill, and I walked him through it. He asked some questions about the bill, but throughout the meeting, he made some disturbing comments. For example, at one point, he slid one of his papers across my desk, told me the stain on it was chocolate ice cream, and told me I could “lick and sniff it”. At another point, he told me “I don’t need laws because I follow the Bible” and then said “it would be really bad if [he] was driving [his] car and ran over [my] son,” whom he had just met. I was very disturbed by the comment because it was threatening and completely unrelated to anything we had discussed. I cannot imagine why he thought or mentioned it. Later, as he asked questions, he told me I was “seeing the inner workings of [his] mind.” Although he called me “ma’am” during the meeting, his tone and mannerisms indicated it was not genuine. I believe some of his comments may have been intended to find out whether he could provoke a reaction from me.
March 19, 2019 In response to the report submitted by regarding inappropriate comments by Rep. Luke Simons (3-14-19 email), I spoke with Majority Leader Pollert on Friday, March 15. Rep. Pollert requested I meet with him and Assistant Majority Leader Louser, which we did on the afternoon of March 15. They indicated they would speak with Rep. Simons on Monday, March 18. When updating Rep. Louser on the incidents with Rep. Louser, Rep. Louser inquired whether she would have done anything to give Rep. Simons the impression she would be interested in his advances. I responded that would be the last thing she would do and she has acted in a professional manner. On March 18, at about 5:30 p.m. Rep. Pollert and Rep. Louser visited with me in my office. They indicated they spoke with Rep. Simons and Rep. Simons confirmed he made the comment about licking and sniffing his paper. They also indicated the comment made by Rep. Simons in which he indicated it would be bad if he drove overson was made with respect to being subject to laws. I indicated the comment had no relevance to anything being discussed bd Rep. Simons, and even if Rep. Simons thought he was being funny, the comment was inappropriate and consistent with strange comments he made to i a few months ago. Although Rep. Pollert agreed the comments were inappropriate, Rep. Louser suggested Rep. Simons lacks social skills and doesn’t realize he can’t make comments like that. Again, I reiterated there is no excuse for the comments. Rep. Louser indicated friends of Rep. Simons had suggested they were going to talk to me about the situation, but Rep. Pollert and Rep. Louser told them not to do so. I indicated I would not discuss personnel matters with other legislators who are not involved or not in leadership. The leaders indicated Rep. Simons and Rep. Louser would visit with me in the next day or two to further discuss the matter. They indicated Rep. Simons had suggested that I be present at any future meetings Rep. Simons has with female LC staff. I indicated I would consider it, but would prefer not doing so. (My impression is it suggests the female staff are not capable or have done something wrong.) March 22, 2019 Rep. Louser and Rep. Simons met with me in my office. Rep. Simons was very upset and believes this is part of an effort to get him and it is the kind of thing that caused him to run for office -not being politically correct and fighting against overly sensitive people. Rep. Louser tried to mediate and find a solution and suggested Rep. Simons and I meet again to discuss next week. Rep. Louser requested to meet witr because they have a good relationship (to try understand the extent of the problem with Rep. Simons). I stated that would be fine i doesn’t mind. I also stated most women in the office want to avoid Rep. Simons.
Bjornson, John D. From: Sent: Tuesday, February 25, 2020 2:13 PM To: · Bjornson, John D. Subject: Rep. Simons Rep. Louser came up to discuss the Commerce Committee agenda and some bill drafts. He also asked me how things have been with Rep. Simons, and I said I don’t think Rep. Simons has been in our office since the session. I said he has access to our services but, to my knowledge, has not used them lately. Rep. Louser then said he thinks Rep. Simons is “harmless”, “naive”, and “just from the ranch”. I do not agree with this assessment. He said Rep. Pollert had tasked him with dealing with the Rep. Simons situation and characterized the communications to Rep. Simons as calls to “grow up”. He said he thinks Rep. Simons will win re-election because he was the second place vote getter at the district meeting. Thanks,
August 14, 2020 – Representative Pollert had indicated he was informed Rep. Simons would be calling me. Had long phone conversation with Rep. Luke Simons about him not feeling comfortable working with the LC staff because it has been his perception we are tainted against him due to earlier circumstances. I assured him it is our responsibility to work with all legislators in a professional and confidential manner, and we have and will continue to do so with him. Although it was suggested to him after prior incidents he should work only with male staff, we have not prohibited him from access to staff services – some female attorneys had indicated they would help him if necessary. The timing of the call was particularly odd considering the capitol had been closed since March due to the pandemic and there had been very limited interaction between legislators and staff during that period. As part of this discussion, he indicated he had conversations with numerous other legislators regarding the idea of replacing the LC staff with staff who would be more responsive to legislators. He also indicated he had conversations with an attorney in his district who had suggested he should sue me for some reasons unknown to me and that he would reserve that option. I listened to him rant for several minutes and tried to propose solutions to assuage his hurt feelings and provide him full access to male attorneys, including me. The entire call really appeared to be an attempt to threaten and intimidate in a manner in which he could deny by saying he was just discussing things that other people have said. I did not take his bait and tried to offer solutions to no real avail. I followed up with Rep. Pollert by text message and a 10 minute phone conversation to make it clear I will ensure Rep. Simons has access to our staff and that I would not be intimidated by threats whether legal in nature or against my job or the independent nonpartisan nature of our office.