South Dakota will continue to provide additional aid and consolidation protection for districts serving sparsely populated areas, according to a legislative compromise awaiting the governor's approval.

The agreement comes after a session-long debate that was ultimately settled by providing $1.7 million to the state's most rural schools.

Lawmakers reacted differently to the deal.

Some legislators called the compromise a funding cut, saying the legislation amounts to $600,000 less than qualifying districts would have received if current law was extended. The agreement reduced the maximum amount any district could receive from $165,000 to $123,750 – a change some lawmakers criticized as an attack on the state's rural schools.

But backers of the plan, found in an amended SB 106, say that the proposal represents an increase of $1.7 million above the governor's proposed budget, which eliminated the additional aid entirely.

Sparsity funding was one of the last sticking points in a proposed school funding compromise package that restored a number of the cuts initially suggested by Gov. Rounds.

After the passage of the federal stimulus act, the governor told media outlets that he would back off his proposal to eliminate sparsity aid. But the governor stood his ground at $1.7 million, pushing back legislative attempts to fully fund sparsity.

The negotiations came to a head after the Senate failed to agree with a House's decision to offer $1.7 million. In an attempt to restore the full $2.3 million, Senators pushed the issue into conference committee

During House-Senate negotiations, lawmakers proposed an amendment to restore full funding for sparse schools. The amendment failed. The House and Senate both strongly endorsed the amended version.

The compromise represents the third time sparsity funding caps have been lowered. Originally passed with a $250,000 limit, the cap was lowered to $165,000 and now to $123,750.

Comments (0) | Link to this story | Send to a friend | Print Story

The South Dakota Senate has put an end to a two-year program that provides additional money to South Dakota teachers, voting along party lines Monday to pass HB 1252.

The legislation transfers tobacco tax revenue to the state's general fund, where it will be used to fund the state's ongoing expenses.

In 2007, lawmakers created the education enhancement tobacco tax fund by setting aside $9 million from a voter-initiated tobacco tax increase. Legislators used the new revenue source to fund TCAP, ESAs and $1.5 million in career and tech education.

In response to the state's declining revenue, Gov. Rounds proposed eliminating the special fund and using the money for state aid to general education. Lawmakers went along with that plan Monday.

There may be some money in the final budget for Education Service Agencies, lawmakers said.

Comments (0) | Link to this story | Send to a friend | Print Story

Facing a threat of a governor's veto to any legislation that would fully fund sparsity, lawmakers passed compromise legislation Monday that legislators said will push the issue into conference committee.

Two days after 55 state representatives endorsed a plan to continue sparsity funding according to current law, legislators passed a hog-housed version of SB 106 that lowers the maximum amount of sparsity funding any district can receive to $123,750. The current maximum is $165,000.

The legislation promises $1.7 million in state sparsity aid next year, $600,000 short of the $2.3 million that state officials estimate would be needed to fully fund the program.

House Majority Bob Fahen, R-Watertown, asked lawmakers to vote for the compromise, saying any amount above $1.7 million took the issue into “veto-land.”

Rep. Tom Brunner, R-Nisland, tried again Monday to ensure full funding, but this time his amendment narrowly failed.

Stay with Open Forum for more updates.

Comments (0) | Link to this story | Send to a friend | Print Story

The House Education Committee voted down a proposal Monday that would establish a framework to evaluate the state's interest in pre-k education.

Lawmakers voted 9-6 to send SB 191 to the 41st Legislative Day, calling state-supported pre-kindergarten an intrusion into family lives and private business.

Supporters say the issue isn't settled and pre-k advocates are working to secure a House floor vote through the Legislature's “smoke-out” process.

Before voting, committee members heard testimony for more than an hour.

Proponents of the plan sang the praises of pre-k education, noting the differences early childhood education can have on student achievement. Supporters also stressed the voluntary nature of the legislation, attempting to beat-back fears that pre-k would become mandatory.

Critics decried the measure, arguing that the bill would take away parental responsibility and infringe on private businesses.

Rep. Tom Brunner, R-Nisland, said he was “very much opposed” to any plan that would allow the government to compete with private businesses. He also expressed concern about funding a program when the state can't afford to property fund K-12 education currently.

Rep. Mitch Fargen, D-Flandreau, asked committee members to vote based on the legislation in front of them, not the legislation opponents are making it out to be. The bill doesn't ask for funding, he said.

For more information on the legislation, click here.

Comments (0) | Link to this story | Send to a friend | Print Story

A veto-proof majority of the South Dakota House of Representatives voted Thursday to fully restore Gov. Rounds' proposed cuts in aid to districts serving sparsely populated areas, departing slightly from a rumored school funding compromise agreed upon by the governor and legislative leaders.

The action came during SB 88, a measure that was intended to repeal the sunset on two sparsity laws enacted in 2006.

Rep. Kent Juhnke, R-Vivian, introduced an amendment shortly after the House started debate on the issue. The proposed language limited the amount any district can receive from the measure. The cap, which was lowered from $165,000 to $123,000, was instrumental in bringing the cost of the legislation down to the $1.7 million that was rumored to be available for the program. According to the governor, $2.3 million is needed to fully fund the program.

Lawmakers resisted the amendment, calling the funding cut unfair to rural schools. Funding cuts have been restored for other programs, and supporters of full funding argued the resources are greatly needed by those schools that are “small by necessity.”

Rep. Tom Brunner, R-Nisland, said the compromise was an attack on rural schools and he shamed the governor for proposing the cut in the first place.

After defeating the amendment, lawmakers endorsed the original bill on a 55-15 vote. The Senate endorsed the legislation by a 32-vote margin.

The bill now moves to the governor's desk. Since sparsity funding is typically a special appropriation – and not formula aid – it's likely the funds will have to be added to the general appropriations bill, meaning the debate to fully fund sparsity may not be over.

Comments (0) | Link to this story | Send to a friend | Print Story

It appears the final decisions on school funding will not be put on hold until the final days of Legislative session.

Two converging forces – depleted state revenues and the passage of the federal stimulus package – created a unique situation. State funding must be at a certain level to obtain stimulus funds, but lawmakers and state officials are budgeting cautiously to ensure the state can come out of the recession on solid financial footing.

Further complicating the picture is South Dakota's short legislative session, which is set to conclude on March 13, with one day reserved for the consideration of the governor's vetoes. The United States Department of Education has yet to publish official guidance for the stimulus, meaning the state's budget must be prepared with the limited information available now.

Gov. Rounds' revised budget, presented in January, called for a nearly $20 million net cut to state K-12 education aid, programs and services after including the 3 percent increase to the per-student allocation that the governor asked lawmakers to maintain.

The FY10 school funding proposal, which is not official but is the subject of considerable conversation, would restore a significant portion of the governor's proposed cuts. The details of the proposed school finance package are:

• A 3% increase ($139.94) to the per-student allocation;
• Increasing and decreasing enrollment aid, structured according to current law;
• Restoration of funding for schools serving sparsely populated areas, with a $100,000 maximum cap (decreased from $165,000);
• A reduction in local general fund property tax levies to comply with the Cutler/Gabriel amendment;
• Restoration of full funding for the birth-to-three program;
• A total of $500,000 in funding for Education Service Agencies, down from $2.2 million (DOE officials maintain that Title funds provided directly to schools from the stimulus may be a source of funding that districts could use to purchase service either from ESAs or for services similar to those provided by ESAs.);
• Flat funding for per-student state aid to special education;
• Elimination of the Teacher Compensation Assistance Program, Career and Technical Education grants, Alternative Education program funding and a suspension of grants paid to national board certified teachers.

Comments (0) | Link to this story | Send to a friend | Print Story

Members of Senate Education voted Thursday to transfer funds from an education enhancement fund to the state's general fund – an action that legislators said will set off a “domino effect” of other education funding proposals.

Legislators passed HB 1252 on a 6-1 vote. Legislators said the move effectively ends the state's short-lived Teacher Compensation Assistance Program and clips $1.5 million in career and tech education grants.

“I think we're kind of painted into a corner right now,” said Sen. Ben Nesselhuf, D-Vermillion. “It's my understanding that a lot of dominos will be falling once we place this vote.”

Sen. Nesselhuf's comments underscore the notion that administration officials regarded HB 1252 as an essential piece of legislation. Any attempt to block the legislation or to save the programs would have been considered a deal-breaker, jeopardizing the broader funding package being circulated.

That proposed package, which isn't final, includes restoration of the lion's share of Gov. Rounds' proposed cuts while maintaining the governor's proposed 3 percent increase to the per-student allocation. The final package reportedly involves maintaining aid for districts with fluctuating enrollments and restoring funding for districts serving sparsely populated areas.

Sen. Dave Knudson, R-Sioux Falls, said the education community shouldn't focus on the elimination of two programs. Local schools should consider the entire package, he said.

“When you look at the totality, it seems reasonable to me to eliminate the earmarks,” Sen. Knudson said, referring to TCAP and CTE grants.

Education Service Agencies will survive, but with reduced state funding, Knudson said, adding that schools should purchase service from the agencies and that schools should not be forced to use them.

The Senate Majority Leader also offered forward-thinking advice to school districts. The CPI-W, an inflationary factor currently used to calculate state aid, is dropping, which means schools will likely go without an increase next year, he said.

“I think the education community needs to budget on that assumption,” Knudson said.

The Senate will take up the measure on Monday.

Comments (0) | Link to this story | Send to a friend | Print Story

Lawmakers approved SB 91 with just one vote to spare, voting 37-30 to give schools the option to spend up to 45 percent of capital outlay revenue to pay for property insurance, casualty insurance, fuel, utilities, energy cots and contract bus services. The local option ends in three years.

The measure now returns to the Senate, where lawmakers in the upper chamber must agree to House amendments. The Senate approved an earlier version of the legislation on 25-9 vote. It's unclear whether Gov. Rounds will sign the bill if lawmakers send it to the governor's desk.

The evolution of SB 91 has been one of the most closely watched legislative issues of the session. Small and mid-sized schools worked with legislators to craft and introduce the legislation, but the plan has met opposition from the state's larger school districts, whose lobbyist has argued against the expansion of capital outlay.

The policy debate played out on the House floor Wednesday.

Rep. Ryan Olson, R-Onida, led the charge against the measure. Rep. Olson, who chairs the House Taxation Committee, told lawmakers that the legislation would essentially give schools two general fund levies.

“If we pass this bill, we may have to amend the title of the fund to the Capital, Transportation, Insurance and Energy Fund,” said Rep. Olson. “Or we could simply say, ‘Let's add three mils to the general school fund levy.'”

He also said the legislation has implications for local property tax payers.

“This bill is a tax increase. If you don't need the levy for capital expenses, the levy would be going down,” said Rep. Olson, adding later that the plan allows local districts to increase taxes for general operations without referring the issue to voters through the opt-out process.

Supporters of the measure challenged those claims, arguing that schools need flexibility to make it through tough economic times and that local school boards and administrators are in the best position to make the decision.

Rep. Quinten Burg, D-Wessington Springs, said the state doesn't have any problems changing rules on funding sources to balance the state budget. He cautioned legislators against telling local school districts how to manage finances.

“Frankly, maybe, sometimes they know how to [manage finances] much better than we do,” Rep. Burg said.

House Education Vice Chair Bill Van Gerpen, R-Tyndall, said lawmakers create problems when they tell school leaders how to spend district resources.

“This Legislature, and prior Legislatures, has consistently and consistently told our schools to spend your reserves down,” said Rep. Van Gerpen, a former school board member, suggesting that the legislation wouldn't be needed if lawmakers hadn't enacted fund balance restrictions. Schools need spending flexibility during the economic recession, he added.

Another former school board member, Rep. Charles Hoffman, R-Eureka, said he trusts local school boards and administrators to protect facility funds. He also likened Senate Bill 91 to the economic stimulus package.

Comments (0) | Link to this story | Send to a friend | Print Story

The measure, filed as SB 140, grants local school boards more authority to improve academic course offerings and realize financial efficiencies by working through local cooperative agreements. The bill has been touted as the academic equivalent to athletic sports co-ops.

Sen. Julie Bartling, D-Burke, worked with ASBSD and the Department of Education to develop legislation that she told lawmakers was “another tool for school districts to offer a well-rounded education for students in their districts.”

ASBSD Executive Director Wayne Lueders testified in support of the legislation, telling lawmakers that the concept provides more flexibility to school districts and has wide support within the education community.

“It's one of the top three priorities for associated school boards this year,” Lueders said, referring to legislative priorities adopted by the ASBSD Delegate Assembly.

Representatives from the Department of Education, School Administrators of South Dakota, the South Dakota Coalition of Schools and the South Dakota Education Association also supported the legislation.

Committee members praised the legislation, calling it a “good step forward” an effort to “do what's best for kids" and "a win-win."

The measure will be debated by the full House this week.

Comments (0) | Link to this story | Send to a friend | Print Story

Members of House Education endorsed a change in the state's graduation pathways that supporters say will eliminate confusion and give students more options to pursue career and technical education courses.

Melody Schopp, a representative of the Department of Educaiton, asked lawmakers to approve the SB 185, telling lawmakers that the four-year-old graduation requirements have created confusion. The law outlines two pathways, the Department of Education outlines a third and local school districts often add a fourth, Schopp said.

She also told legislators that, though the department felt the three-tiered plan was a good idea four years ago, it has had unintended consequences of labeling children as low-achievers. Having are more responsive recommended program is a better solution, Schopp said.

The bill's House sponsor, Rep. Jason Frerichs, D-Wilmot, said that the measure also provides students with greater flexibility under the state's recommended graduation path by allowing the state department to include career and tech education courses within the state's recommended program.

The committee voted 13-1 to approve the measure.

Comments (0) | Link to this story | Send to a friend | Print Story

Members of Senate Education stalled an effort Tuesday to prevent a transfer of education-specific tobacco tax revenues to the state's general fund – a maneuver that one lawmaker says would be the “death knell” for the Teacher Compensation Assistance Program and technical education grants.

The measure, proposed by Gov. Rounds, eliminates the Education Enhancement Tobacco Tax Fund, a special account established in 2007 following passage of an initiated measure that raised per-pack taxes on cigarettes by $1.

During the 2007 Legislative session, legislators diverted $9 million of the increased tobacco tax revenue to the education fund to pay for the Teacher Compensation Assistance Program, Education Service Agencies and $1.5 million in career and technical education grants.

Jim Terwilliger, a representative of the state bureau of finance and management, told lawmakers that the change is needed to balance the states budget.

Regardless of the budget situation, Terwilliger says the change should be made because the increased tax isn't generating as much as legislators originally anticipated. Less revenue will come into the fund in the future because the federal government has increased cigarette taxes, he said.

ASBSD Executive Director Wayne Lueders testified in opposition to the measure.

“We're concerned that in talking about transferring funds, we're actually talking about ending programs,” Lueders said, making a final pitch for lawmakers to continue TCAP and ESAs, two programs that provide professional development for school staff.

Dick Tieszen, a lobbyist representing the Sioux Falls School District, also opposed the legislation, reminding legislators that voters wanted the tobacco money dedicated for education enhancement.

While lawmakers acknowledged the fund transfer will impact the programs, they said that the state's tight budget situation means some cuts will have to be made.

“There's a reasonable chance that [HB 1252] represents a death knell for TCAP, CTE grants and a very substantial portion of ESA funding,” said Sen. Dave Knudson, R-Sioux Falls.

Sen. Knudson said the Legislature will preserve the “most important” cuts proposed by Gov. Rounds, including aid for districts with fluctuating enrollments, sparsity funding, and the birth-to-three program. Lawmakers can't preserve all cuts while at the same time approving a 3 percent increase to the per-student allocation, he said.

Comments (0) | Link to this story | Send to a friend | Print Story

Two pieces of legislation aimed at changing the index factor have stalled in response to fears that changing the state's funding formula would jeopardize access to federal stimulus dollars.

Lawmakers have stripped SB 106 and HB 1254 of their original content, leaving the simple phrase “education shall be enhanced” remaining. In each case, lawmakers were responding to Department of Education requests to kill legislation which they say will prevent South Dakota from accessing more than $100 million in state stabilization funds.

The bills were amended Monday and Tuesday during education committee meetings in the House and Senate, clearing the way for possible House-Senate negotiations in the final day of session.

Department of Education officials cautioned lawmakers against making changes to the law, telling legislators that their informal conversations with advocacy groups suggest no changes can be made to the formula. Other states are trying to attempt formula changes, but have been told they can't, they said.

“Everything we have gotten form the feds say that the existing formula is king,” said Education Secretary Tom Oster. “I know that we're fine if we spend money through the existing formula.”

Not all lawmakers are convinced that changes can't be made. Rep. Ed McLaughlin, R-Rapid City, and Sen. Dave Knudson, R-Sioux Falls, both challenged the department's interpretation of the law and said more information is needed before the state can proceed.

Sen. Knudson, whose effort to change the index factor fizzled Monday in House Education, admitted that index factor language had come down with a case of “stimulitus” – a condition that he said has impacted several bills this year.

Worried that changing the index factor would hurt South Dakota's chances of gaining stimulus funding, Sen. Knudson asked committee members to amend SB 106 to implement the index factor change for FY12, one year after stimulus money runs out.

Lawmakers resisted that notion, arguing that the state can't afford to offer school districts additional dollars than what is currently permitted. Members of House Education then stripped the bill of its contents before passing the legislation to the House floor.

Sen. Knudson returned the favor Tuesday in Senate Education, hogging House Education Chair Rep. Ed McLaughlin's index factor legislation, HB 1254.

Both pieces of legislation will likely head to conference committee, but it's unclear whether the issues can or will be resurrected this session.

Comments (0) | Link to this story | Send to a friend | Print Story

The South Dakota Senate passed legislation that will advance the state's interest in pre-kindergarten education - a move that supporters say will establish a framework to better define the need and desire to expand access of voluntary pre-k programs to economically disadvantaged students.

Senators approved SB 191 on a 20-15 vote after trading spirited arguments encompassing a range of philosophical policy positions that has made the pre-k discussion one of this year's most interesting legislative debates.

According to the legislation, pre-k providers aren't required to adhere to any set of state pre-k standards, but they have the option to seek certification based on “evidence-based quality benchmarks.”

Though the legislation mentions state-funded pre-k programs, it doesn't contain an appropriation. The measure does clarify that any future state-funded pre-k programs could only serve students from families whose household income is at or below 130 percent of the federal poverty level.

The bill also contains other safeguards intended to mitigate concerns of voluntary pre-k opponents, including a provision that no child may be required to attend pre-k. The legislation also makes it clear the communities – not school districts – will drive any expansion in pre-k access at the local level.

The merits of pre-kindergarten education

Lawmakers traded talking points, sharply disagreeing about the impact pre-k education has on student achievement.

Leading pre-k advocate Sen. Tom Dempster, R-Sioux Falls, relied heavily on a compilation of research from the Minneapolis Federal Reserve, arguing that economically disadvantaged students attending pre-k are less likely to fall behind, less likely to need special education or remedial services, and are more likely to graduate from high school.

Sen. Dempster also referred to gains made by pre-k students currently served by a pilot program launched two years ago in Sioux Falls, which he said has led to “huge increases in the kids' results.”

Lawmakers from Lead, Pine Ridge and Rapid City recalled pre-k success in their respective communities, urging their fellow Senators to support the bill.

Sen. Jeff Haverly, R-Rapid City, who owns a daycare business in and acknowledged being “involved in the industry,” questioned the academic benefits of pre-k programs.

He criticized prominent pre-k research, saying it was based on an academic environment that isn't easily duplicated. Gains experienced in pre-k are demonstrated to fade-out later in a student's academic life, he said.

Fighting over funding

Even though the bill doesn't contain an appropriation, critics of the legislation waged arguments against the measure they said will require state funds in the future.

Even the suggestion that the state would fund pre-k programs is troublesome, according to Sen. Haverly, who has been quoted as saying that the program would cost the state as much as $50 million annually.

“We as legislators already have a problem funding K-12 education,” Sen. Haverly said, adding that he believes most Senators would agree that local school districts aren't sufficiently funded.

“We should not strap future legislators with the decision to fund community programs, especially in these tough economic times,” he argued.

Pre-k advocates rejected those concerns, saying instead that the bill is structured to provide lawmakers with the information and data needed to make a decision about funding. Without the legislation, the state officials don't have the authority to develop a structure for high-quality pre-k program – an element supporters said is needed to empower communities to plan local pre-k programs.

Even if the Legislature does decide to fund pre-k programs in the future, Sen. Dempster maintained that the money would be a wise investment.

Taking on poverty

Supporters of the plan locked onto to the legislation's requirement to target pre-k services to children from households that are at or below 130 percent of the federal poverty level.

Sen. Jim Bradford, R-Pine Ridge, asked lawmakers to consider the impact the legislation could have on the state's Native American students – a sub-group of students who perform far below their peers on state achievement tests.

“Sad to say, being poor is part of that,” Bradford said, referring to the academic struggles of Native American children. “Is it wrong to invest in them just because they're poor?”

Lawmakers turned to statistics to create urgency for the legislation, saying the number of single mothers and the high percentage of households with two-parent income earners suggest that families may not be able to afford high quality pre-k programs.

Waiting lists to access the federally funded early childhood education programs continue to balloon, proponents argued, meaning a need is not being met. The state's role in filling that gap would provide targeted assistance to students who are already at-risk of arriving to kindergarten behind their peers.

The proper role of government

Pre-k opponents raised fears of future mandatory participation and suggested that measure amounts to “nanny-state” legislation.

Sen. Larry Rhoden, R-Union Center, assailed the legislation, calling it another attempt to take away responsibility from parents.

“Every time we in state government assume another responsibility, and take it out of the home, there are responsible parents in this state that are more than happy to turn over their obligation to the state,” Sen. Rhoden said.

To further his point, Sen. Rhoden used an example from his time serving on the Meade School Board. He told his fellow Senators that once the school offered a breakfast plan to provide a morning meal for students who wouldn't get one, parents in the community deferred to the district to provide that meal.

“We end up with another government program that's mandated,” said Sen. Rhoden.

Sen. Stan Adelstein, R-Rapid City, said he wasn't concerned about a government mandate and that the legislation wouldn't take over for parents. If pre-k programs are created, they will only to serve those children whose parents aren't currently providing their children the opportunity.

“Are we willing to throw away children and their opportunity in this state and in this nation?” asked Sen. Adelstein.

Comments (0) | Link to this story | Send to a friend | Print Story

The House of Representatives' vote to transfer revenue from voter-initiated tax increase away from a fund earmarked for K-12 education has some lawmakers suggesting that history is repeating itself.

Lawmakers approved HB 1252 on a 43-26 vote Tuesday. The measure, proposed by Gov. Rounds, eliminates the Education Enhancement Tobacco Tax Fund, a special account established in 2007 following passage of an initiated measure that raised per-pack taxes on cigarettes by $1.

During the 2007 Legislative session, legislators diverted $9 million of the increased tobacco tax revenue to the education fund to pay for the Teacher Compensation Assistance Program, Education Service Agencies and $1.5 million in career and technical education grants.

Rep. Val Rausch, R-Big Stone City, said the three programs were “very much appreciated, very much used and very much liked.” Lawmakers were smart to earmark the money two years ago, he said. “But that's when we had revenue,” Rep. Rausch added.

The programs were recently created, which targets them as the first to be cut, Rausch told lawmakers. He also said approving the measure didn't prevent legislators from providing funding for the three K-12 initiatives in the state's general appropriations bill.

Rep. Oran Sorenson, D-Garretson, opposed the measure, telling lawmakers that eliminating the fund will cause confusion. Citizens in his district still question why video lottery dollars aren't being used for K-12 education, he said, suggesting passing the revenue through to the general fund goes against the intent of the voter-initiated tax that was sold as a way to help fund public education.

During the measure's first hearing in front of the House State Affairs Committee, members of the House Republican leadership said “the money would be there” to continue the three programs.

Members of Gov. Rounds' administration will continue to push for the cuts.

Comments (0) | Link to this story | Send to a friend | Print Story

The House of Representatives has approved a change in the index factor that would guarantee per-student increases of between 3 and 4 percent annually.

Lawmakers voted 41-29 in favor of HB 1254 Tuesday, although there's reason to believe that many lawmakers who voted for the plan may not support it in the future.

House Chair Rep. Ed McLaughlin, R-Rapid City, asked lawmakers to approve the measure so the House would have a vehicle to negotiate with the Senate. The bill may be changed later in the process, he said.

If passed by the Senate, HB 1254 would offer per-student funding increases of 3.9 percent in FY10 and 3 percent in FY11. The totals represent significantly higher increases than Gov. Rounds has proposed this year, and would provide a minimum of 3 percent in the future.

The passage of the legislation provides somewhat of a twist in a year when Gov. Rounds has asked for significant cuts in K-12 programs and services. Bills to redefine the index factor and to provide higher increases to K-12 education have died on the House floor many times.

Comments (0) | Link to this story | Send to a friend | Print Story

Lawmakers strongly endorsed legislation Wednesday to give local school districts additional temporary flexibility to spend capital outlay dollars.

Members of House Education voted 11-4 in favor of SB 91, a measure that will allow school districts the option to spend up to 45 percent of capital outlay revenue to pay for property insurance, casualty insurance, fuel, utilities, energy cots and contract bus services.

Before approving the bill, lawmakers limited the flexibility to three years, rather than the five originally included in the legislation.

Committee members also scratched what became a controversial Senate amendment that would have given local schools broad authority to use the capital outlay flexibility. The bill now says that says school can only use the new spending authority if the district has not increased the capital outlay levy since 2008.

Lawmakers and state officials said the bill had to be changed back to its original version to prevent a large-scale increase in local property taxes.

Dick Tieszen, a lobbyist representing the Sioux Falls School District, opposed the legislation, telling lawmakers that if the legislation locks-in school levies at 2008 levels fewer districts will be able to take advantage of the flexibility offered in SB 191.

“If this is about providing another tool to any district, then don't amend it,” Tieszen said. “I believe you ought to do it for all districts.”

Though the committee endorsed the legislation, some lawmakers became loud critics of a proposal that they said deteriorates the capital outlay fund.

“We are just exchanging one crisis for another crisis,” said Rep. Roger Hunt, R-Brandon. “This is not – and I repeat – not what the capital outlay fund was intended for.”

Comments (0) | Link to this story | Send to a friend | Print Story

A third attempt to revive a bill that would require all schools to adopt bullying policies has stalled on the House floor.

Lawmakers decided Tuesday not to allow further debate on HB 1279, ending a procedural maneuver called a “smoke-out” that allows lawmakers to circumvent the committee process to pass legislation.

In this case, lawmakers voted 36-34 to uphold the House Education Committee's recommendation that the bill “Do Not Pass.” By sticking with the committee recommendation, the issue was not granted a debate on the House floor.

Following the failure of the smoke-out, ASBSD lobbyists learned that the bill's sponsor, Rep. Dan Lederman, R-Dakota Dunes, may try to revive the issue in the Senate Education Committee.

Comments (0) | Link to this story | Send to a friend | Print Story

Republican leaders in the House of Representatives say they believe in three education programs that Gov. Mike Rounds has slated for elimination and that money will be available to continue the programs.

The comments came Monday during a House State Affairs committee hearing on HB 1252, legislation that seeks to transfer tobacco tax proceeds from a secondary education enhancement account to the state's general fund.

The dedicated account, called the Education Enhancement Tobacco Tax Fund, was created in 2007 after voters approved a $1 per-pack tax increase on tobacco products. The fund has been used to pay for the Teacher Compensation Assistance Program, Education Service Agencies and $1.5 million in career and technical education grants.

“I think we can support these programs in the final budget using general funds,” said House Speaker Tim Rave, R-Baltic, who said he supports the programs but voted for the bill.

Rave said that approving the measure wouldn't kill funding for the programs, but it would fix concerns raised by Rounds Administration officials that suggest the fund is not meeting expectations.

State budget chief Jason Dilges, who presented the legislation on behalf of the governor, told lawmakers that the dedicated fund hasn't generated enough revenue to pay for the programs. The state general fund had to chip-in $400,000 last year, he said.

When pressed by Rep. Bernie Hunhoff, D-Yankton, Dilges said the governor will continue to push for the cuts. But if legislators chose to fund the programs, they should provide a fix for the cash-strapped special fund by making appropriations through the general fund.

Assistant Majority Leader Rep. Krysti Noem, R-Castlewood, said financial circumstances have changed, but her support for the three programs hasn't faded.

“I believe in all of these programs and all of them have had a great benefit,” Rep. Noem said, adding that they will have an opportunity to build the funding back into the general appropriations bill later.

The committee passed the legislation on a 9-4 vote, despite objections from Democratic lawmakers who said that killing the legislation is the only sure way to continue the programs.

Rep. Noem disagreed, telling lawmakers that the tobacco tax fund isn't a sound funding source.

“This fund doesn't have enough dollars in it,” she said.

Comments (0) | Link to this story | Send to a friend | Print Story

Lawmakers on Tuesday rebuffed efforts to make a change to state special education law that critics said is redundant and ripe with legal consequences.

Rep. Jacqueline Sly, R-Rapid City, was the prime sponsor of HB 1241, a measure that states districts receiving special education students would have to follow the child's existing individualized education program (IEP) “to the extent possible” until a new plan is developed.

Currently, school districts are required by IDEA and South Dakota administrative rule to provide “comparable services” when a new student transfers into the district.

Existing requirements are sufficient enough, according to Michelle Powers, a special education administrator for the Brookings School District, who called the legislation an “unneeded expansion.”

“We have a responsibility to provide a free and appropriate public education,” Powers said, telling lawmakers that HB 1241 “sets up a level of expectation that really begs to be defined in the courts.”

Powers asked lawmakers to dismiss the legislation that she said “muddies the water” for administrators who are trying to meet the diverse needs of special education students.

“It's my privilege – my honor – to be an educator of these students,” Powers said.

Dick Tieszen, a lobbyist for the Sioux Falls School District, also questioned the need for the change, telling lawmakers that the legislation will set a new precedent that would allow parents and students to seek the exact same services they were once provided, even if it may not be possible in the new district.

“While the bill is well-intended, I believe what we have now works well,” Tieszen said before suggesting to lawmakers that IDEA and administrative rules were carefully thought out and put into place.

Comments (0) | Link to this story | Send to a friend | Print Story

Lawmakers officially broke ranks with Gov. Rounds' recommended budget two more times Monday, meaning four of the governor's proposals to balance the state budget have now fizzled-out during the legislative process.

Saying the changes could disqualify South Dakota from receiving federal stimulus dollars, legislators dismissed the elimination of increasing and decreasing enrollment payments and killed legislation to freeze property tax levies.

House Bill 1067, which was Gov. Rounds' bill to eliminate aid for districts with enrollment fluctuations, was amended heavily in House Education to remove any reference to the funding cut. The bill now deals with a school board governance issue.

Members of House State Affairs killed HB 1068 – the bill that the governor introduced to freeze property tax levels at FY2009 levels. The bill would have saved the state more than $6 million.

In each case, Administration officials asked lawmakers to defeat the legislation. The issues may resurface once more is known about the federal stimulus package, they said.

The Senate has already passed measures to restore funding for the Birth-to-Three program and to remove the sunset on sparsity aid – two pieces of legislation that were counter to Gov. Rounds' proposed budget.

Comments (0) | Link to this story | Send to a friend | Print Story

Charter schools aren't a silver-bullet solution to meeting the needs of struggling students, members of House Education decided Monday.

Lawmakers killed HB 1295 on a 10-5 vote, citing problems with the structure of the legislation but verbally committing to explore the charter school issue further.

Supporters of the measure said enabling charter schools would provide alternative routes for struggling students, focusing specifically on charters as an avenue to improve outcomes for Native American students.

ASBSD opposed the legislation, telling lawmakers that the plan would allow for the creation of publicly funded private schools that would lack public oversight. Representatives from the Sioux Falls School District, Rapid City Area Schools and a lobbyist for 11 large schools also testified against the plan.

Despite turning the measure away, one lawmaker pledged to continue to investigate charter schools and the impact they could have on Native American students.

“Our reservation schools are failing our kids,” said Rep. Ryan Olson, R-Onida, before suggesting that the Legislature study the issue in the summer interim and bring forward recommendations on how to improve the legislation.

Comments (0) | Link to this story | Send to a friend | Print Story

Legislation that would have given the Department of Education control of the state's four technical institutes was defeated Monday on a 14-1 vote.

Committee members rejected HB 1269, praising tech schools for their successes and citing unresolved legal questions as justification for allowing local school boards to maintain governance authority over the state's postsecondary technical institutes.

Though the committee took action today, testimony was handled by a sub committee last week.

Advocates of the change, which included several state government department heads, said transferring authority would broaden the mission of the tech schools and strengthen the current system by giving the institutions a “place at the table” when funding decisions are made.

Critics of the legislation said the plan was developed without consent of the technical schools or lawmakers and expressed worry about eventual transfer of the tech schools to the board of regents. Opponents also questioned whether local assets, including buildings and equipment, could be legally transferred to the state.

ASBSD opposed the legislation based on a resolution adopted at the ASBSD Delegate Assembly.

Comments (0) | Link to this story | Send to a friend | Print Story

Though lawmakers seem to agree that federal stimulus legislation will significantly impact the state's budget process, state officials are keeping quiet about how the plan would impact K-12 education.

Gov. Mike Rounds told reporters during his week-end press conference that lawmakers can “incorporate into our budget” an estimated $100 million in stimulus money earmarked for education. The money could be used to “reinstate some of the cuts,” Rounds said.

ASBSD has been waiting for state officials to detail their stimulus plans, hoping to gauge how much of the $100 million in “state stabilization” money would be used to restore cuts to K-12 education.

Earlier in the week, Senate Majority Leader Dave Knudson said that the stimulus money could impact formula cuts, such as increasing and decreasing enrollment aid. Programs like birth-to-three and the TCAP could also be affected, he said.

During a press conference today, Sen. Knudson said bills that will freeze special education funding and revise the index factor have a 75 percent chance of being re-worked.

According to the stimulus provisions, money allocated in the state stabilization fund must first be used to restore K-12 and higher education cuts. Any remaining money would be sent to K-12 schools based on their percentage of Title I student population.

Gov. Rounds' revised budget made nearly $20 million in cuts to K-12 education funding and services. Cuts were also made to higher education, but to a lesser degree.

There is still question whether non-formula programs, such as ESAs or TCAP, will be funded. The governor has continued to press lawmakers to balance the structural deficit, and has yet to publicly support any K-12 programs he cut as a part of his revised budget.

There's also uncertainty as to how much – if any – of the state stabilization fund would remain after cuts are restored. Money that flows to K-12 districts through the state stabilization fund can be used at the local districts discretion, and may be used to modernize and repair facilities.

Comments (0) | Link to this story | Send to a friend | Print Story

Parents, school board members and administrators turned out in force Friday to stand-up for small schools, turn away mandatory consolidation and stall cuts to the small school adjustment.

The grassroots advocates – some with matching shirts and coordinated testimony – were in Pierre to testify against HB 1254, a plan by House Education Chair Ed McLaughlin, R-Rapid City, that would have closed 60 South Dakota schools and dramatically reduced the value of the small school adjustment.

Rep. McLaughlin called the plan “comprehensive,” saying it delivers higher per-student increases to all schools while taking away what he said was a “financial incentive” for districts to stay small by choice.

Diana Miller, a lobbyist for 11 large school districts, spoke in favor of the legislation, urging lawmakers to keep the bill alive as a bargaining chip for negotiations with the Senate. She said she's not opposed to small schools or the small school adjustment, but told lawmakers that schools shouldn't be used to keep small towns alive.

After hearing from the bill's few supporters, committee members heard from a long-line of critics, including officials from ASBSD and the South Dakota Department of Education.

A contingent of small-school champions representing the Langford School District told lawmakers that parents make a conscious decision to send their children to smaller schools. Children benefit from small class sizes and the sense of community, they argued.

Langford resident Jennifer Gustafson, who testified against consolidation mandates earlier this session, questioned why lawmakers would consider forced consolidation.

“I see no evidence that forced consolidation either saves money or improves education,” Gustafson said, after presenting lawmakers with a collection of research she had compiled on the impact of forced consolidation in other states.

Joining Jennifer in opposition was Gina Williams, a member of the Langford School Board, who urged lawmakers to vote in favor of local control.

“Our school board takes its job very seriously,” Williams said. “We remain vigilant in ensuring the quality of education.”

Administrators and parents from Estelline and Oldham-Ramona also testified against the bill, affirming the quality of education in their local schools and stressing the importance of parental choice.

Iroquois resident Lori Hintz took her opposition to the bill a step further, telling lawmakers that the constant discussion about minimum school size is deterring families from making a home in the rural town.

“It's hard to get our numbers up when there is this constant fear about schools closing,” Hintz said. “There's a fear factor with the consistent scare tactic.”

Representatives from the South Dakota Coalition of Schools and the Sioux Falls School District also testified in opposition.

Lawmakers, clearly moved by the host of small school supporters, quickly dispatched of the forced consolidation provision and cuts to small school funding, leaving only language that would change the definition of the index factor.

The amendment says per-student increases will be between 3 or 4 percent annually, but several legislators said they likely wouldn't support the language and were just amending the bill alive so they can make changes to it later.

Comments (0) | Link to this story | Send to a friend | Print Story

Lawmakers turned away legislation Friday that would have allowed local school districts the flexibility to charge participant fees for high school activities, voting 10-5 to send HB 1198 to the 41st Legislative Day.

One critic of the plan, Rep. Todd Schlekeway, R-Sioux Falls, said he feared the legislation would create a “class system” between students who could afford to participate.

“There are just some parents who would not want to ask for funding, and that would leave their children out,” Rep. Schlekeway said.

Rep. Tom Brunner, R-Nisland, supported the legislation. He said that parents already pay for non-school sanctioned activities and that activity fees have been charged in the past.

“The is not a new notion,” Brunner said, saying that activities fees were collected in the 1970s.

A host of opponents originally testified against the measure, including the Department of Education, who argued that athletics were an extension of the classroom and fall under the provisions of a free and appropriate public education.

Comments (0) | Link to this story | Send to a friend | Print Story

Members of House Education rejected HB 1279 on an 8-7 vote, capping a lengthy discussion on the status and importance of school district bullying policies.

“I don't think that the bill is quite ready to be put on the books yet,” said House Education Chair Ed McLaughlin, R-Rapid City, who cast the deciding vote. “We'll leave it to local school districts to address it.”

Nearly every committee member stressed the need to protect students through bullying policies, but less than half voted for it – a dynamic that concerned Rep. Ryan Olson, R-Onida.

“I think this committee agrees that this policy should be adopted,” Rep. Olson said, saying that if the committee voted down the bill, they'd each to have to consider what they would accept as evidence that schools have responded appropriately.

Rep. Bill Van Gerpen, R-Tyndall, voted against the legislation, but said the bill succeeded in creating awareness. It should be clear to school districts that lawmakers are interested in the issue, he said.

ASBSD opposed the legislation, walking a nuanced line against complicated state mandates while encouraging schools to develop local policy. The association has several policies relating to harassment and bullying, and ASBSD will draft a comprehensive sample policy and regulations to disseminate to schools.

The association also plans to work alongside the Department of Education and education advocacy groups to ensure school districts have resources at the local level to address the situation.

Comments (0) | Link to this story | Send to a friend | Print Story

Legislation to establish quality benchmarks for voluntary pre-k programs cleared its first hurdle Thursday, winning approval from the Senate Education Committee on a 5-2 vote.

Committee members endorsed SB 191 (read more on the legislation here) after education advocates and business leaders told lawmakers that pre-k is a sound economic investment and will narrow achievement gaps between advantaged and disadvantaged students.

The hearing brought a familiar band of critics, including Concerned Women for America, the Family Policy Council and Eagle Forum. The groups spoke against past attempts to establish pre-k programs.

Opponents levied harsh criticisms for pre-k programs, calling the legislation the “community organizer pre-k plan” and a “fast-track to socialism.” In general, the groups were concerned that “government programs” are too costly and would replace parental rights.

Sen. Dave Knudson, R-Sioux Falls, who supported the legislation, offered what he called a “reality check” for the measure's opponents. He said there is a great need to provide at-risk children with access to quality pre-k programs – especially those from unstable home environments.

“These kids have a very dim future unless we can rescue them at an early age,” Sen. Knudson said.

Testimony in support of the legislation took two distinct tracks, with some supporters speaking directly to the economic benefits of pre-k programs.

Rob Gunewald, an economist with the Minneapolis Federal Reserve Bank, told lawmakers that the bank's research indicates strong public benefit from investments in high-quality pre-k programs.

“On the margin, the next dollar spent on early childhood education, before children come to kindergarten, would have the strongest impact on human capital and also have the highest return to the public,” Grunewald said.

Public benefit comes from eliminating achievement gaps before they impact a student's long-term academic success, he told lawmakers. Grunewald also praised the structure of the legislation, balling the bill voluntary, targeted and market-based – components he told lawmakers are essential to good public pre-k policy.

While Grunewald's testimony focused mostly on public investments in pre-k, Deputy Education Secretary Deb Barnett told committee members that it's too early to talk about state appropriations.

Barnett said the state must first establish a framework for high-quality pre-k programs – a process required by SB 191. Authoring high-quality benchmarks would ensure maximum benefit to students and taxpayers, Barnett said.

Sen. Bob Gray, R-Pierre, voted against the bill, expressing concerns about the need to fund the bill in the future. He said estimates suggesting the state would spend as much as $4,500 per-student for pre-k programs is triple the cost of private sector programs.

“Leave it to government to make something cost much more than it does in a private setting,” he said.

The legislation will be considered by the full Senate this week.

Comments (0) | Link to this story | Send to a friend | Print Story

Legislators and state government officials will attempt to appropriate federal stimulus dollars during the regular session, according to testimony offered Wednesday in the Senate State Affairs Committee.

Assuming normal business of a 40-day session, lawmakers will have approximately 12 legislative days to chart a course for stimulus funding – a task Administration officials and lawmakers acknowledge will be difficult.

The commentary came during a hearing on SB 197, a measure that would have established a special stimulus commission to provide recommendations on how to allocate more than $100 million in stimulus funds earmarked specifically for education.

Neil Fulton, the governor's chief of staff, opposed the legislation, saying the commission wasn't needed because the governor plans to have the Legislature weigh in on stimulus spending through the appropriations process.

Fulton told lawmakers that there would be “discretionary funds of consequence” within the education portion of the stimulus aid, suggesting to lawmakers that they may want to stretch that funding through the state's 2010-11 budget year.

Lawmakers rejected the idea of the commission, saying they hope to handle the stimulus package during the course of the regular session.

Sen. Dave Knudson, who voted against the proposal, said other pieces of legislation can be reworked to include stimulus appropriations.

“This may well have big implications for things such as special education, the TCAP program and the various pieces of our funding formula,” Knudson said.

Comments (0) | Link to this story | Send to a friend | Print Story

The Senate State Affairs committee unanimously voted to fund the birth-to-three program Wednesday, restoring $2.1 million in state general funds originally cut by Gov. Mike Rounds.

“I can think of a lot of areas we could have cut the budget,” Sen. Abdallah said. “This program should have never been cut in the first place.”

No one testified in opposition to the measure, which is unusual considering the governor's staff typically testifies in opposition to any legislation that changes the Administration's recommended budget.

Comments (0) | Link to this story | Send to a friend | Print Story

House Education heard testimony but delayed action on a bill that would require the Department of Education to create regional school administration structures.

Under HB 1293, the Department of Education will assign school districts into “school administration regions.” Each geographic region needs to be comprised of at least 3,000 students. Districts with enrollments above 3,000 students are exempt, and the secretary can organize smaller regions to serve sparsely populated areas.

Rep. David Lust, R-Rapid City, the prime sponsor of the measure, said the legislation would create a county-superintendent structure – an alignment he said worked well in the past. Approving the bill could improve teacher salaries, Lust said.

Sheryl Kirkeby, president of the Rapid City Area Schools Board of Education, said the legislation was a good idea. She said sharing would provide school districts with access to a more diverse set of administrative services and would be a better use of taxpayer dollars.

ASBSD opposed the bill, reminding lawmakers that administrators wear multiple hats in small districts and the law wouldn't lead to building-level savings.

ASBSD Chief Financial Officer Bill Lynch, a former business manager, told committee members that the bill would be a challenge for administrators. He said having to handle administrative duties for multiple school districts would mean overseeing separate policy manuals, separate negotiated agreements, separate budgets and separate sets of board minutes.

“I think you're asking a great deal of one individual,” Lynch said.

Harding County Superintendent Ruth Krogh also testified against the legislation. Her district spent two years without a Superintendent and the school board and staff asked her to testify on their behalf because they want to keep their superintendent local, Krogh said.

The committee will take action of the legislation on Friday.

Comments (0) | Link to this story | Send to a friend | Print Story

Students working toward a GED will satisfy the state's compulsory attendance law, according a measure passed Tuesday by Senate Education.

According to SB 126, 16- and 17-year olds students can enroll in GED programs if their parent or guardian gives the student permission. Students can be excused from public school attendance for one of five reasons, including:

• The student will not graduate with their cohort class because of credit deficiency;
• Authorization from a court services officer;
• A court order requiring the child to enter the program;
• Verification that the child is under the direction of the Department of Corrections; or
• Verification that the child is enrolled in Job Corps

Representatives from the Rapid City and Sioux Falls School Districts supported the change, saying the compromise provides much-needed flexibility for school districts and students.

Comments (0) | Link to this story | Send to a friend | Print Story

A legislative proposal to change state law that governs annual increases in state aid to education won the approval of the Senate Tuesday.

Senators passed SB 106 on a 26-7 vote, paving the way for the House to consider a measure that would change the state's index factor from “CPI-W or 3 percent, whichever is less” to “CPI-W or 4 percent, whichever is greater.” The bill also contains what supporters call a ‘safety valve' provision that allows for smaller per-student increases in poor economic times.

The measure's prime sponsor, Senate Majority Leader Dave Knudson, R-Sioux Falls, called the measure an “important step forward” for K-12 education funding.

Sen. Knudson told lawmakers that K-12 education's share of the state budget has declined from 39 percent to 31 percent during the past decade – a statistic that business leaders and education advocates say has led to the erosion of South Dakota teacher salaries.

The measure is a long-term solution that would put an end to annual school funding debates, he added.

ASBSD supports the legislation based on a resolution formally adopted at the annual Delegate Assembly.

Comments (0) | Link to this story | Send to a friend | Print Story

A bill requiring all school districts to develop policies prohibiting bullying and harassment was brought back to life Wednesday.

Members of House Education brought HB 1279 off the table after the bill's sponsor, Rep. Dan Lederman, R-Dakota Dunes, said he drafted amendments to resolve opponent objections to the legislation.

The committee quickly accepted Rep. Lederman's changes, and then amended the bill a third time to refine the definition of harassment to mirror language from a Brandon Valley School District policy that prohibits bullying.

The rapid pace of action and lack of public testimony on the new measure concerned some lawmakers.

“I feel like we're running through this very rapidly, making changes on the fly that could have some unintended consequences,” said Rep. Kim Vanneman, R-Ideal. “We need to step back here and really evaluate this.”

Comments (0) | Link to this story | Send to a friend | Print Story

If there was any doubt that the 2009 Legislative Session is a different than any other, we now have a move by some South Dakota Senators to block a gubernatorial appointment.

At issue is Gov. Rounds' appointment of former House Education Chair Phyllis Heineman to the State Board of Education. Approval of the nomination squeaked out of Senate Education Thursday on a 4-3, party-line vote.

Democratic members of the committee said they could never find agreement with Heineman on education policy. Republicans said they didn't agree with her much either, but they still support the nomination.

Read more from the Associated Press, via the Rapid City Journal.

A short Open Forum Commentary on the situation: Wow.

Comments (0) | Link to this story | Send to a friend | Print Story

A plan to allow a temporary increase in capital outlay spending authority cleared another hurdled today, winning approval from the Senate on a 25-9 vote.

Sen. Russ Olson, R-Madison, is the prime sponsor of SB 91, legislation that will allow individual school districts the option to spend up to 45 percent of capital outlay revenue to pay for property insurance, casualty insurance, fuel, utilities, energy cots and contract bus services. The spending authority sunsets in five years.

“We are at the beginning of very tough economic times,” Sen. Olson told committee members, reminding committee members that legislators could return home without giving K-12 education a per-student increase.

Olson said school district budget problems are compounded by the rising cost of energy and fuel.

“In any other year, in any other time, I wouldn't bring this bill forward,” he said.

Sen. Jean Hunhoff, R-Yankton, voted against the measure. She said school districts will use the money for ongoing expenses and, when the law phases out, ask the Legislature to make up the difference.

“It's going to have an impact down the road on the Legislature,” she said.

Sen. Cory Brown, R-Gettysburg, said lawmakers should trust local school boards to make prudent decisions.

“I see this as a way to give a little bit of flexibility to our local school boards were were elected and were chosen to make these decisions,” he said.

The legislation must now pass the House.

Comments (2) | Link to this story | Send to a friend | Print Story

Members of Senate Education unanimously endorsed legislation Thursday that would allow school districts to share entire grades of students.

Lawmakers showered praise on SB 140 and eventually placed the bill on the consent calendar – a move usually reserved for legislation that will face no opposition.

ASBSD worked with Sen. Julie Bartling, D-Burke, and the Department of Education to develop and introduce the legislation. The legislation marks ASBSD's commitment to fulfilling legislative priorities set by school board members during the ASBSD Delegate Assembly.

Sen. Bartling told committee members that the legislation would give schools another tool to improve educational opportunities for students. She also said the legislation may encourage cooperation as a step towards consolidation.

Jack Broome, superintendent of the Burke and Bonesteel-Fairfax school districts, testified in support of the legislation. Broome said the two districts share a number of staff and programs, but consolidation isn't financially feasible because a merger would result in the loss of $1 million in federal funds.

“This is just another step to allow us to do more sharing,” Broome said. “It's a logical step.”

Committee members offered full-throated support for the measure.

“Everybody testified stated that the kids' needs are first,” said. Sen. Russell Olson, R-Madison. “I think this a good piece of legislation.”

State Senator Sandy Jerstad, D-Sioux Falls, called the bill a “creative and positive solution that is going to be for the betterment of students.”

The measure will be heard by the full Senate next week.

Comments (0) | Link to this story | Send to a friend | Print Story

The state should hold the line on school funding decisions made two years ago and should boost per-pupil funding when the economy rebounds, members of the Senate Education Committee decided.

Lawmakers unanimously endorsed SB 106 Thursday, legislation that would change state law – referred to as the index factor - that governs annual per-student increases to K-12 education.

Currently, the per-student allocation increases annually by 3 percent or the rate of inflation, whichever is less. Under SB 106, per-student funding couldn't be cut and would increase by a minimum of 4 percent in most years. However, passing the legislation would likely mean next year's per-student allocation wouldn't increase.

Sen. Dave Knudson, R-Sioux Falls, asked lawmakers to pass the legislation.

“I think the bill adjusts to fit the time,” Sen. Knudson said, adding that the bill would provide the state with flexibility in tough budget times but gives schools larger increases when the state's economy rebounds.

Passing the legislation makes it possible to save funds for districts with fluctuating enrollments, aid to districts serving sparsely populated areas and money set aside for the Teacher's Compensation Assistance Program, according to Knudson.

Tammy Darnall, a representative of the Department of Education, opposed the legislation. She said current law serves as the basis for the governor's budget, which she said “holds school districts harmless” in tough economic times.

Sen. Knudson was quick to contest Darnall's arguments, reminding her that the governor has cut non-formula K-12 aid and programs. The Senator also pointed out that current law is supposed to guarantee an increase in per-student special education funding – a provision that the governor has chose not to honor this year.

“How much is that guarantee worth?” Knudson asked.

Building off the hold-harmless discussion, Sen. Knudson asked committee members to approve and amendment that would ensure the per-student allocation couldn't decrease in any given year.

Under current law, the per-student allocation could decrease accordingly if inflation is negative – a situation that may occur next year, given the continued downward trend of the CPI-W, the inflation measure currently used to calculate state aid.

Inflation statistics released for December show a decline in consumer prices relative to the previous year – an event that hasn't occurred since the South Dakota decided to use the CPI-W to govern state aid increases. If the trend continues, CPI-W will be negative 1.25 percent for FY11.

In briefings with the media, Gov. Rounds has acknowledged that trends in the CPI-W would mean schools wouldn't get an increase in per-student funding next year. The governor hasn't commented on whether K-12 aid would decrease if the CPI-W is negative.

The full Senate will consider the measure next.

Comments (0) | Link to this story | Send to a friend | Print Story

Comments (0) | Link to this story | Send to a friend | Print Story

Members of Senate Education endorsed a measure Tuesday that will give local school districts more flexibility with the use of capital outlay funds.

Lawmakers passed SB 91, legislation that will allow individual school districts the option to spend up to 45 percent of capital outlay revenue to pay for property insurance, casualty insurance, fuel, utilities, energy cots and contract bus services.

Several administrators testified that the legislation would free up much-needed general fund revenue to help school districts cope through tough economic times.

As originally drafted, schools qualified for the spending authority only if the district's capital outlay levy was less than or equal to the district's levy for the 2007-08 school year.

Lawmakers changed that this morning, saying the original language wasn't fair to all school districts.  

Comments (0) | Link to this story | Send to a friend | Print Story

Lawmakers signaled reluctance Monday to change the state's open enrollment laws, killing a tandem of bills that legislators said would hinder student and parental choice.

A measure that would have barred districts from sending busses into neighboring districts to pick-up open-enrolled students was killed at the request of the sponsor.

Rep. Brock Greenfield, R-Clark, said he brought HB 1235 to stimulate discussion on the state's open enrollment policies. After hearing from school leaders, Rep. Greenfield felt the bussing issue no longer needed legislative attention.

The committee also dismissed HB 1236, a bill that would have prevented students from open-enrolling after the statewide enrollment count in September.

The bill's sponsor, Rep. Greenfield, told lawmakers that, unlike the bussing issue, prohibiting mid-year transfers has some support among educators. He asked lawmakers to hold the bill so he could prepare amendments adding a second spring transfer deadline and a waiver process, but legislators didn't think that was necessary.

Comments (0) | Link to this story | Send to a friend | Print Story

Lawmakers unanimously endorsed legislation Thursday that supporters say will protect South Dakota's initiative process from being abused by out-of-state interest groups.

The House State Affairs Committee passed HB 1184, a measure that will provide citizens with more information during the petitioning process and allow for an intervening legislative session prior to a statewide vote on any initiated measure.

According to the legislation, signatures gatherers would be required to provide citizens an explanation – written by the Attorney General - of the proposed law's impact. Currently, the Attorney General writes the explanation displayed on the ballot.

The bill's House sponsor, Rep. David Lust, R-Rapid City, said the changes would ensure citizens have accurate information before signing a petition. Signature gatherers in 2006 and 2008 misrepresented and oversimplified the “Jail 4 Judges” and “Open and Clean Government” initiated measures to gain signatures, Lust said.

The bill also states that Legislative session must occur before the any initiated measure or referred law is placed on the state ballot – the same threshold required for proposed Constitutional amendments.

ASBSD supports the legislation.

If passed, it would go into effect after the 2010 statewide election. The bill will be debated on the House floor next week.

Another bill – HB 1188– also makes changes to the initiative process. Under the proposal, petitioners would have to gather signatures from 5 percent of the registered voters in each county. Currently, the process requires 5 percent of registered South Dakota voters.

Comments (0) | Link to this story | Send to a friend | Print Story

Lawmakers killed legislation that would have allowed school districts to publish minutes and other legal notices on an official web site instead of paying to have them published in newspapers.

The House Local Government committee voted 7-5 to defeat HB 1135, arguing the money spent on publishing notices is an investment in government transparency.

“I'm very concerned about transparency,” said Dennis Feickert, D-Aberdeen. “My mother, who is 84 years old in the nursing home, is not going to read this information over the Internet.”

Representatives from state and local government organizations, including ASBSD, testified in favor of the bill, saying the money would free up much-needed general fund dollars.

Rapid City School Board Member Wes Storm, who also serves on the ASBSD Board of Directors, told lawmakers that his school district spent $66,000 printing public notices last year.

“That's the starting salary of two teachers,” Storm said, urging lawmakers to pass the legislation.

The measure faced strong opposition from the South Dakota Newspaper Association. The organization's lobbyist, Dave Bordewyk, told lawmakers that the move wouldn't save money and would allow public notices to be manipulated.

Comments (0) | Link to this story | Send to a friend | Print Story

The state won't require early childhood education providers to adopt state-developed pre-kindergarten standards, according to measure lawmakers will consider this session.

Legislation authorizing the State Board of Education to develop pre-k standards has failed during the past two legislative sessions, largely due to opposition voiced by private pre-k providers who argued that minimum standards would create unfair competition and increase private-sector costs.

According to SB 191, pre-k providers aren't required to adhere to standards, though they have the option to seek certification. However, the bill does require that any state-subsidized pre-k programs must adhere to “evidence-based quality benchmarks.”

Though the legislation mentions state-funded pre-k programs, it doesn't contain an appropriation. The measure does say, however, any future state-funded pre-k programs could only serve students from families whose household income is at or below 130 percent of the federal poverty level.

The bill also contains other safeguards intended to mitigate concerns of voluntary pre-k programs opponents, including a provision that no child may be required to attend pre-k. The legislation also makes it clear that K-12 schools won't automatically secure state funding – the process must first go through a early learning advisory group comprised community stake holders and then needs to be approved by the State Department of Education.

Sen. Tom Dempster, R-Sioux Falls, and Rep. Shantel Krebs, R-Sioux Falls, are the prime sponsors of the legislation.

Comments (0) | Link to this story | Send to a friend | Print Story

Senate Education took testimony but delayed action on legislation that a Sioux Falls lawmaker says would allow students to transfer into GED programs if completing high school isn't an option.

With a law requiring students to stay in high school until 18 set to go into effect in July, Senate Majority Leader Dave Knudson, R-Sioux Falls, introduced SB 126, a measure he said would provide “additional alternatives for students who don't flourish in a traditional high school.”

Once the new compulsory attendance law goes into effect, 16- and 17-year-olds would no longer able to leave school to work towards a graduate equivalency because, under law, the student would be considered truant.

Judith Roberts, a lobbyist for the Unified Judicial System, testified in support of the bill. The court system has jurisdiction over truant students, and, without a GED option their caseload could increase by 700 cases per year, Roberts said.

Rapid City School Board Member Wes Storm, who also serves on the ASBSD Board of Directors, asked lawmakers to pass the legislation.

“It gives us some opportunities to work with students who may have some problems,” Storm said, adding the Rapid City has more than 160 students who are currently seeking a GED. “Some of these kids are married, some have families, some have two jobs,” he said.

Representatives from the Sioux Falls School District and School Administrators of South Dakota also supported the bill.

Wade Pogany, a representative of the South Dakota Department of Education, opposed the legislation. He said school districts are working to implement the new law and asked lawmakers to give the policy a chance to work.

Pogany also pointed out “logistical problems” within the legislation.

According to Pogany, 16- and 17-year-olds are required to be in school and wouldn't be allowed to take GED tests. The students wouldn't be allowed to enroll in Department of Labor programs either, Pogany said, because the agency has restructured programs to comply with compulsory attendance laws and no longer allows children under 18 to participate.

Pogany also said the legislation would impact graduation rates, because NCLB counts students enrolled in GED programs as high school drop-outs.

The committee delayed action on the legislation to allow sponsors time to gather amendments.

Comments (0) | Link to this story | Send to a friend | Print Story

Lawmakers seeking to curb K-12 administrative costs have proposed a plan to force the state's school districts to share school administration.

Under House Bill 1293, the Department of Education will assign school districts into “school administration regions.” Each geographic region needs to be comprised of at least 3,000 students. Districts with enrollments above 3,000 students are exempt, and the secretary can organize smaller regions to serve sparsely populated areas.

The proposal calls for each school district to appoint one local school board member to an oversight board that hires personnel – including superintendents and business managers – to provide administrative services to the member districts. The "school administration region board" can also hire curriculum directors, technology coordinators and speech pathologists.

Building principals remain under the authority of local school boards, and don't fall under the authority of the regional school administration board.

Comments (3) | Link to this story | Send to a friend | Print Story

Lawmakers will consider whether to require school districts to adopt policies prohibiting harassment and bullying.

Rep. Dan Lederman, R-Dakota Dunes, is the prime sponsor for HB 1279, a measure that defines bullying and harassment and requires school districts to adopt anti-bullying policies by Dec. 1, 2009.

Under the bill, bullying is defined by “causing of physical hurt or psychological distress on one or more students or employees.” Harassment is defined as use of “data or computer software, written or verbal communication, or conduct” that places a student or school employee “in reasonable fear of harm” and “substantially interferes with a student's educational performance” or “substantially disrupts the orderly operation of a school.”

According to the legislation, local policies would have to:

• Define and prohibit bullying;
• Outline consequences for bullying;
• Develop mechanism for reporting bullying; and
• Develop a procedure to investigate and respond to any report of bullying.

The legislation allows local school districts the option to incorporate several other elements in to bullying and harassment policies, including a system to notify parents of any bullying incident and to determine whether any act of bullying is within the jurisdiction of the school district.

ASBSD opposes the legislation, but not the concept. The state school board association encourages school boards to adopt bullying policies, but recognizes that the scope and form of policy varies by school district and should be left to each community.

Most schools already have bullying policies. But, even if a school board has adopted a formal policy prohibiting harassment and bullying, the legislation stipulates that the board must review the policy to ensure compliance.

Comments (0) | Link to this story | Send to a friend | Print Story

Teacher salaries are eroding and the state's “3 percent or less” school finance policy is to blame, business leaders told lawmakers Tuesday.

The comments came during a Senate Education committee hearing on SB 106, legislation that will permanently change the definition of the index factor that governs annual increases to state aid to education.

Bob O'Connell, a representative of the Sioux Falls Chamber of Commerce, told lawmakers that the business community relies on K-12 schools to ensure the state's students are prepared for the workforce.

“We need to have the best educated and able citizens that we can produce,” O'Connell said. “The most important element in academic achievement is a good teacher.”

To outline limitations the state's “3 percent or less” school finance policy places on school districts, O'Connell shared a 12-minute video featuring data on K-12 funding and labor market trends (see the presentation here).

According to the data, increases in average teacher salaries began falling in 1995 with the adoption of the new K-12 funding formula. During that time, changes in private sector salaries outpaced K-12 teacher salaries, causing what business leaders called the “erosion of teacher salaries.”

O'Connell asked lawmakers to pass SB 106, a measure to change the state's index factor from “CPI-W or 3 percent, whichever is less” to the “CPI-W or 4 percent, whichever is greater.” The bill also contains a safeguard that will tie per-student increases to the state's economic prosperity in years that state revenues don't increase by more than 4 percent.

The bill's prime sponsor, Sen. Dave Knudson, R-Sioux Falls, told members of Senate Education that the bill is an alternative to Gov. Rounds' K-12 funding proposals.

“The governor has proposed a number of cuts to education and has left the per-pupil amount at 3 percent,” Knudson said. “This has been a case of the left hand giveth and the right hand taketh away.”

Sen. Knudson also said that his proposal is designed to work in conjunction with formula changes made in 2007, including sparsity funding and aid for districts with increasing and decreasing enrollment. The measure is also designed to maintain the Teacher's Compensation Assistance Program, he said.

A number of education advocacy groups supported the legislation, including ASBSD, the South Dakota Education Association, the School Administrators of South Dakota and the South Dakota Coalition of Schools.

State government officials provided the only opposition. They said the proposal would make the school formula more complex and that the state' couldn't afford the legislation – claims that Sen. Knudson dismissed.

The committee will take action on the legislation at a later date.

Comments (0) | Link to this story | Send to a friend | Print Story

House Education dismissed a plan Wednesday to close 30 school districts, arguing that consolidation is best left in the hands of local school boards.

The committee voted 12-3 to kill HB 1182, a measure that would have raised the minimum district size to 195.

The bill's prime sponsor, Rep. Jim Bolin, R-Canton, cited clustered school districts in Turner and Aurora counties as examples of schools that could make more efficient use of taxpayer dollars. He acknowledged opposition to the bill, but insisted that forced consolidation remains a topic lawmakers should discuss, especially in tough economic times.

House Education Vice Chair Bill Van Gerpen, R-Tyndall, opposed the legislation.

“I think we've seen forced consolidation just doesn't really work,” Van Gerpen said. “I think that if we just sit back and let the local people take action that this thing will resolve itself.”

The committee took action today, but the majority of the testimony was offered Monday (read more here). ASBSD opposed the legislation.

Comments (0) | Link to this story | Send to a friend | Print Story

South Dakota could have 100 fewer school districts by 2013 if legislation filed Monday makes its way through the Legislature.

House Education Chair Ed McLaughlin, R-Rapid City, is joined by a host of Rapid City area legislators in proposing HB 1254, a measure that will increase the minimum school size to 250 and dramatically slash the small school adjustment.

The plan triggers two waves of forced consolidation. Districts with enrollments below 175 will have to consolidate immediately. Schools with less than 250 students will have to merge starting in 2011. According to current fall enrollment numbers, the measure forces the closure of approximately 60 South Dakota school districts.

The remaining small schools aren't likely to survive, though. That's because the proposal also contains a 75 percent reduction in the small school adjustment, dropping the maximum value to $211 per-student by 2012.

That's not all – HB 1254 also:

• Eliminates declining enrollment aid, but keeps increasing enrollment aid for districts that experience a 25-student increase in enrollment.
• Changes the index factor from “3 percent or CPI, whichever is less” to “the CPI-W up to a maximum of 4 percent or the 3 percent, whichever is greater.”
• Increases consolidation incentives temporarily, until 2013.

ASBSD opposes the bill.

Comments (0) | Link to this story | Send to a friend | Print Story

Opponents of mandatory school consolidation finally have an ally in state government.

Newly appointed Secretary of Education Tom Oster signaled a change in the Department of Education's philosophy on forced consolidation Monday, testifying in opposition to legislation that would increase the minimum school size to 195 students.

Oster asked lawmakers to defeat HB 1182, leveraging arguments against the perception that state-mandated consolidation saves money.

“Anyone suggesting consolidation saves money has not looked at the facts,” said Secretary Oster, reminding committee members that the state funds students, not school districts. “When you throw into the mix increased transportation costs, [consolidation is] not a saver.”

Oster told lawmakers that schools should be free to operate without state intervention if the district satisfies provisions of No Child Left Behind and offers coursework required by South Dakota's opportunity scholarship.

Secretary Oster's testimony marks a shift in the state department's philosophy under Dr. Rick Melmer, who served as state school chief since 2003.

Melmer advocated consolidation, often challenging school districts to realize efficiencies and improve academic course offerings. During his tenure as secretary, Melmer said the Legislature must force consolidation because many school districts, even when provided with incentives, would not decide to merge on their own.

On Monday, Secretary Oster countered that notion, telling lawmakers that consolidation is happening naturally due to “economic requirements.” According to the state department, 156 school districts will operate next year, down from 195 in 1980.

ASBSD joined in opposition to the legislation, telling lawmakers that school board members believe in voluntary reorganization.

Representatives of the South Dakota Coalition of Schools and School Administrators of South Dakota also asked lawmakers to defeat the bill.

Though the Department of Education will oppose efforts to increase the minimum districts size above 100, Secretary Oster is committed to ensuring the current law is enforced.

Before testifying in opposition to HB 1182, Oster stood against measures that sought to create exemptions or delay implementation of the law. He has also sought more authority to implement consolidation if schools falling below the minimum size fail to act.

Action on HB 1182 was delayed until Wednesday.

Comments (0) | Link to this story | Send to a friend | Print Story

Members of House Education approved HB 1171 Monday, legislation that would create an exemption to the state's minimum school size law if there's only one high school remaining in a county.

Rep. Charles Hoffman, a Republican who served on the Eureka School Board for 12 years, was the prime sponsor of the measure he said would “give credence to democracy” by allowing local communities to control the fate of their school district.

Legislators disagreed, passing HB 1171 on a 9-6 vote.

ASBSD supported the legislation, telling lawmakers that reorganization should be voluntary and voted upon by local citizens.

Comments (0) | Link to this story | Send to a friend | Print Story

Students who are sixteen years or older wouldn't have to attend public schools if they are working toward a GED, according to legislation introduced in the South Dakota Senate.

Sen. Dave Knudson, R-Sioux Falls, is the prime sponsor of SB 126, a measure that provides an exemption to a law passed two years ago that requires students to stay in school until age 18 or the student graduates.

Some educators and lawmakers have expressed concern about the new compulsory attendance law, suggesting that it places an unworkable mandate on to local schools.

Comments (0) | Link to this story | Send to a friend | Print Story

School districts wouldn't be able to send busses into a neighboring district without the consent of the neighboring school board, according to a measure introduced in the House of Representatives.

House Bill 1235 changes a current open enrollment law that allows a school to cross district boundary lines to pick up students open enrolling from another district.

If the measure passes, a school district would have the authority to regulate the route of any busses transporting students within their district, even if the bus is the property of another school system.

The measure is sponsored by Rep. Brock Greenfield, R-Clark.

Comments (2) | Link to this story | Send to a friend | Print Story

A legislative proposal that would close approximately 35 school districts will be up for consideration as early as Monday.

According to HB 1182, school districts with enrollments below 195 would be forced to prepare a consolidation plan within two years of dipping below the enrollment threshold. It's sponsored by Representative Jim Bolin, a teacher from Canton.

The current minimum districts size, established in 2007, is 100 students.

ASBSD opposes the legislation based on our standing position that reorganization must be voluntary.

The bill is scheduled for House Education on Monday, but may not get a hearing that day. If it passes, it must go to the House floor and make its way through the Senate before becoming law.

Comments (1) | Link to this story | Send to a friend | Print Story

Public school advocates and administrators urged lawmakers Friday to keep additional state aid for districts with enrollment fluctuations, saying the funding is necessary to stabilize district budgets.

Members of House Education took testimony on HB 1067, a measure that would eliminate increasing enrollment aid and end enrollment averaging for districts losing students, but delayed final action on the legislation until a later date.

Jim Terwilliger, a staffer in the Governor's Bureau of Finance and Management was the only proponent of the legislation. Eliminating the provisions would save the state $6.8 million and is part of the Governor's plan to balance the FY10 budget.

“We all know the budget is in a difficult situation,” Terwilliger said. “If you add this back in, we're going to be dipping into the budget reserve fund.”

ASBSD joined a parade of opponents who asked lawmakers to maintain funding for increasing and decreasing enrollment.

ASBSD lobbyist Dick Tieszen reminded lawmakers of a two-year study of school finance that led to a host of reforms passed in 2007. That legislation added increasing and decreasing enrollment aid, but also included cuts to small school funding and forced consolidation for school districts.

Tieszen cautioned lawmakers that passing HB 1067 would mean they've taken away the positive aspects of the 2007 legislation, leaving only the negative reforms.

“This was important part of a larger package passed in 2007,” Tieszen said (read ASBSD's testimony).

The School Administrators of South Dakota, the South Dakota Education Association and a lobbyist for 11 large schools also testified against the legislation.

Two school superintendents also travelled to Pierre to testify how the loss of the funds would impact their districts.

Parker Superintendent Shayne McIntosh told lawmakers that declining enrollment aid provides a cushion for his district, allowing Parkston to make gradual budget cuts and reduce staff through attrition.

McIntosh also told lawmakers that school district revenue is declining from several sources, including bank franchise tax and apportionment from the Office of School and Public Lands. The fluctuation in state revenue makes it difficult to budget, he said.

Harrisburg Superintendent Jim Holbeck provided legislators with perspective from districts with significantly increasing districts.

“In a school district that always grows, we never catch up,” Holbeck said, telling lawmakers that in some situations his district doesn't receive funding for students until a year and a half after the student arrives.

“I have to hire teachers now,” he said.

The School Administrators of South Dakota, the South Dakota Education Association and a lobbyist for 11 large schools also testified against the legislation.

Comments (0) | Link to this story | Send to a friend | Print Story

Lawmakers rejected an attempt Thursday to lower the compulsory attendance age to 18.

Sen. Gordon Howie, R-Rapid City, asked members of Senate Education to pass SB 87, a measure that would have allowed students to drop out of high school after turning 16.

According to Sen. Howie, requiring 17- and 18-year-olds to stay in school amounts to “incarceration.” If students don't want to be in school, they will be a disruption to the other students who want to learn.

A parade of opponents, including ASBSD, countered that notion, saying the decision to raise the compulsory attendance was a meaningful policy statement.

“Compulsory attendance to age 18 will require some adjustment at the local level, but we ultimately believe it will challenge our education system to meet the needs of every student,” said ASBSD Executive Director Dr. Wayne Lueders, who compared the law to the federal No Child Left Behind Act (read ASBSD's testimony here).

School board members adopted a resolution last November that supports compulsory attendance to age 18. ASBSD also supported the policy when it was put in place.

Joining ASBSD in opposition was the Department of Education, the South Dakota Education Association, the Sioux Falls School District and Diana Millier, a lobbyist representing 11 school districts.

Sen. Dave Knudson, R-Sioux Falls, opposed the legislation, saying he will offer a better solution later in session. He said it would be a better idea to allow students to leave high school if they are enrolled in a plan to earn a GED.

Comments (0) | Link to this story | Send to a friend | Print Story

Lawmakers supported defining and funding sparse school districts, unanimously approving SB 88during a Senate Education Committee hearing Thursday.

Passing the legislation goes against Gov. Rounds' FY10 budget plans, which included $2.3 million in cuts for school districts serving sparsely populated areas.

Sen. Dave Knudson, R-Sioux Falls, voted in favor of the change. He said sparsity funding was added after at two-year study of education funding in South Dakota and it needs to continue.

“There really are no other options for these sparse schools,” Sen. Knudson said.

According to Sen. Knudson, the state should adhere to the host of K-12 formula adjustments that were made in 2007 following a two-year study of education funding. That means keeping sparsity and aid to districts with fluctuating enrollments.

Sen. Knudson also said he knows lawmakers are trying to fund sparsity through other cuts to K-12 funding.

“I think that's the way of madness,” Sen. Knudson said.

School superintendents from Faith, McIntosh and Bison made the trip to testify in support of the legislation, telling lawmakers that eliminating the aid would leave gaping holes in their district budgets.

“In our situation, when we'd have an 11 percent general fund cut,” said Mel Dutton, superintendent in Faith. “It's a matter of necessity,” he added.

The district has 18 certified staff and Dutton said Faith runs a very lean K-12 program, providing only what's required for district accreditation.

“Where are we going to cut?” he asked lawmakers before pointing out that the district has already passed a local opt-out that brings in $175,000 a year.

Superintendents outlined how sparsity payments enable rural districts to provide an education to students scattered across vast areas of South Dakota. The administrators were joined in support of the legislation by various education advocacy groups, including ASBSD.

ASBSD Executive Director Wayne Lueders stressed the need to continue sparsity funding, but also reminded lawmakers that SB 88 was necessary to protect rural districts from forced consolidation.

Lueders said the state's mandatory consolidation law, passed in 2007, included an exemption for sparse school districts – a provision that would be eliminated if sparsity laws were allowed to sunset (read ASBSD's testimony on SB 88).

School Administrators of South Dakota, the South Dakota Education Association and the Sioux Falls School District also testified in support of the legislation.

A member of Gov. Rounds' administration provided the only opposition to the bill. The Governor's staff said that sparse schools got by with the money before it was installed and that the only financial burden placed on sparse schools is the added cost of transportation.

Comments (0) | Link to this story | Send to a friend | Print Story

Comments (0) | Link to this story | Send to a friend | Print Story

Lawmakers have filed legislation to allow payments to sparse school districts to continue.

Senate Education Chair Cooper Garnos, R-Presho, and Rep. Kent Juhnke, R-Vivian, are prime sponsors for SB 88, a measure that would eliminate the sunset clause originally put into the 2006 legislation that created sparsity funding.

Senate Bill 88 serves two purposes. Not only will the bill trigger critically important sparsity payments for the state's most rural schools, the legislation also ensures districts serving sparsely populated areas won't be forced to consolidate.

South Dakota's minimum enrollment law, established in 2007, exempts sparse schools from the 100 student enrollment floor. If the law is allowed to sunset, the exemption goes away, essentially shutting K-12 education out of the state's most rural areas.

The bill is scheduled for debate tomorrow.

Comments (0) | Link to this story | Send to a friend | Print Story

State lawmakers will revisit a state law aimed at improving South Dakota's drop-out rate.

Sen. Gordon Howie, R-Rapid City, and Rep. Chuck Turbiville, R-Deadwood, are prime sponsors for SB 87, a measure that would repeal state law that requires South Dakota students to stay in school until age 18.

The law, passed in 2007, raised the compulsory attendance age from 16 to 18. The move was an integral part of Gov. Rounds 2010 Education Initiative and was intended to increase the number of students that move on to post-secondary education. Unless lawmakers decide otherwise, the law will go into effect on July 1, 2009.

Prior to session, Sen. Howie said he would move to repeal the law. He says the law places an unfunded mandate on local school districts and causes problems because it keeps students in school who don't want to be there.

ASBSD is opposed to the legislation. During the November ASBSD Delegate Assembly, school board members passed a resolution supporting the implementation of the law.

Comments (0) | Link to this story | Send to a friend | Print Story

Lawmakers have introduced legislation allowing state and local governments to take advantage of technology to publish legal notices and meeting minutes.

According to HB 1135, the state and political subdivisions will be given the option to designate a web site as an official repository for public notices, minutes, bids or anything legally required to be published in newspapers.

School districts wouldn't be required to publish the notices online. Internet posting would be permissible in addition to, or instead of, publication in the local newspaper.

The flexibility could save the state's school districts several hundreds of thousands of dollars. Larger school districts reportedly spend $50,000 annually to publish meeting notices in local newspapers.

The legislation has been introduced before, but has been defeated. Historically, the state's newspapers have strongly opposed the change, claiming it would be a blow to open government.

UPDATE: Perhaps South Dakota is ready for this discussion – assuming there should be no “sacred cows” when navigating budget issues. For more, read this editorial from the Aberdeen American news.

Comments (0) | Link to this story | Send to a friend | Print Story

School districts may be able to pay insurance, energy and transportation costs using capital outlay dollars - a change that could free-up resources in cash-strapped general funds.

Sen. Russell Olson, R-Madison, and Rep. Kim Vanneman, R-Ideal, are prime sponsors on SB 91, a measure that will allow individual school districts the option to spend up to 45 percent of capital outlay revenue to pay for property insurance, casualty insurance, fuel, utilities, energy cots and contract bus services.

According to the legislation, schools only qualify for the spending authority if the district's capital outlay levy is less than or equal to the district's levy in the 2007-08 school year. Districts will lose the option in fiscal year 2015.

Originally, the capital outlay levy was intended to allow school districts to acquire land, build or renovate buildings and purchase equipment. It has since been expanded to allow school districts to reimburse parents for transportation costs and to purchase textbooks, instructional software and warranties.

Comments (0) | Link to this story | Send to a friend | Print Story

Comments (0) | Link to this story | Send to a friend | Print Story

Comments (1) | Link to this story | Send to a friend | Print Story

The Senate scored an early victory for local control advocates Wednesday, defeating legislation that would have given the state the authority to close small school districts that fail to plan for consolidation within two years of dropping below 100 students.

Senators voted down SB 34 on a 11-23 vote, proving they aren't willing to give the state the power to override the will of local voters.

Sen. Cory Brown, R-Gettysburg, asked lawmakers to defeat the bill.

“This is a government by the people, for the people,” Sen. Brown said. “Any time we try to abrogate that right from the people, it should not be taken lightly.”

The Department of Education asked for the change. It's thesecond time the DOE asked lawmakers to clarify the minimum size enrollment law. Last year, DOE officials proposed SB 23 only to see it defeated in the Senate floor.

Comments (0) | Link to this story | Send to a friend | Print Story

A $825 billion federal stimulus package working its way through the U.S. House of Representatives could provide South Dakota districts relief in meeting the demands of No Child Left Behind (NCLB) and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA).

The House Appropriations Committee reported the “American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009” Wednesday night on a 35-22 vote, clearing the way for Congressional sub committees to consider the various sections of the bill.

The legislation provides needed increases for key education programs and school districts nation wide, including two-year boots in Title I and IDEA funding for local school districts.

• Read a summary of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 by clicking here.
• Find out how much South Dakota schools would receive in Title I, IDEA and school construction by clicking here.

According to the National School Board Association, major components of the stimulus package include:

• $41 billion to local school districts through: Title I ($13 billion), IDEA ($13 billion), a new School Modernization and Repair program ($14 billion) and the Education and Technology program ($1 billion);
• $79 billion in fiscal relief to states, including $39 billion for K-12 and higher ed through existing state and federal formulas, $15 billion in bonuses for meeting key performance measures, and $25 billion for other high priority purposes - which can include education; and
• An extension of school-based Medicaid Services reimbursement to Oct. 2009.

State lawmakers have approached the concept of the federal stimulus with caution, suggesting that the state's budget concerns must be solved without the help of the federal government.

Despite the tempered approach, the stimulus could offer significant relief to the state's troubled general fund, either through unrestricted block grants or by changing the Medicaid match rate.

When asked about the stimulus package, Gov. Rounds said he may have to call a special session if the funds are released after the Legislature adjourns. He also said lawmakers could chose to allow the one-time federal stimulus to accumulate in reserves.

Comments (0) | Link to this story | Send to a friend | Print Story

Gov. Rounds' K-12 education recommendations aren't sitting well GOP lawmakers, Republican legislative leadership said during their weekly press conference.

Senate Majority Leader Dave Knudson, R-Sioux Falls, said proposals to cut sparsity funding, eliminate aid for districts with fluctuating enrollments and to freeze property tax levies will meet opposition.

“There is great distaste for those proposals,” Knudson said, adding that the Senate caucus is looking for funds to restore the cuts.

Sen. Knudson thinks many of those provisions could be saved if legislators changed state law that governs annual per-student increases. He favors language that ties per-student increases to the state's economic prosperity. Under that plan, K-12 per-student aid wouldn't increase this year but would be in for a boost when the state's economy recovers.

“If schools are going to be asked to share on the way down, we are going to share the increase on the way up,” Sen. Knudson said.

House Assistant Majority Leader Kristi Noem, R-Castlewood, said House Republicans are also looking for ways to restore Gov. Rounds' proposed cuts.

She said cutting sparsity funding and aid for districts with fluctuating enrollments shows a lack of regard for the situations those schools are in.

“To just cut those causes me great concern,” Noem said.

Both lawmakers also expressed interest in maintaining the Teacher Compensation Assistance Program, which provides $4 million to K-12 school districts.

Comments (0) | Link to this story | Send to a friend | Print Story

Non-formula state funding for K-12 education will suffer significant cuts under Gov. Rounds' revised FY10 budget.

The Teacher Compensation Assistance Program (TCAP) and the state's Education Service Agencies are on a list of K-12 programs that the governor has targeted in a second wave of cuts aimed at balancing the state's budget in the face of declining revenue and a struggling economy.

Gov. Rounds presented his recommendations to lawmakers Thursday, six weeks after presenting his initial budget request to the Legislature. Since then, the state's revenue projections have changed, prompting the governor to eliminate $46 million from his original FY10 request.

In his Dec. budget message, Gov. Rounds asked legislators to approve a 3 percent increase to the per-student allocation while requesting approximately $8 million in K-12 cuts, including proposals to eliminate aid for enrollment fluctuations and funding for districts serving sparsely populated areas.

Gov. Rounds' FY10 K-12 recommendations include:

• A 3 percent increase to the per-student allocation for state aid to general education ($10 million increase);
• Flat per-student funding for state aid to special education;
• Elimination of increasing a decreasing enrollment aid ($5.7 million cut);
• Elimination of sparsity funding ($2.3 million cut);
• Elimination of TCAP funding ($4 million cut);
• Elimination of Education Service Agencies ($2.2 million cut);
• Elimination of Career and Tech Ed grants ($1.5 million cut);
• Cuts to K-12 technology services ($611,000 cut)
• Elimination of funding for National Board Certified Teachers and the Alternative Education Program ($543,000 cut)

K-12 Education and the State's FY10 Budget

The $46 million in cuts outlined Thursday were relative to the governor's original FY10 budget request, but actual state general fund spending will only decrease $10 million compared to the state's FY09 budget, a dip of 0.8%.

The governor's proposed 3 percent increase to the per-student allocation amounts to approximately $10 million in increased state spending – an investment offset by other cuts, resulting in a $611,000 reduction in state aid spending compared to FY09.

Programs and services targeted for elimination, including the TCAP, ESAs and CTE grants, were initially funded using revenue generated when voters approved a $1 per-pack tax increase on tobacco. Lawmakers set $9 million aside to provide an ongoing funding stream for the three programs, but Gov. Rounds has shifted that money to the state's general fund.

Dismal Revenue Forecast

During a morning press conference, Gov. Rounds' stressed that his revised budget is “fraught with tough decisions” before he explained the state's bleak revenue forecasts.

The state will be short more than $52 million in the current year – a deficit likely to be made up using the balance of the state's property tax reduction fund. Despite the budget revisions, the governor said the state will still enter FY11 with a $30 million structural deficit.

In a press conference last week, the governor said his economic forecasts show the state pulling out of the recession next year, making $50 to $60 million in new revenue available for FY11.

Looking Forward

Gov. Rounds told reporters his decision to maintain the 3 percent increase for the per-student allocation was based, in part, on the trends in the Consumer Price Index.

Currently, per-student funding increases each year by 3 percent or the CPI, whichever is less. Inflation this year was 4 percent, but will likely be close to zero next year, Rounds said, meaning K-12 wouldn't receive an increase for FY11.

Sen. Dave Knudson, R-Sioux Falls, will introduce legislation to change the index factor that governs annual per-student increases. Under Knudson's plan, the per-student allocation would grow by 4 percent or the rate of inflation, whichever is greater, provided state revenue grows by 4 percent.

Comments (0) | Link to this story | Send to a friend | Print Story

Comments (0) | Link to this story | Send to a friend | Print Story

• Teacher Compensation Assistance Program - $4 million
• Education Service Agencies - $2.2 million
• Special Education Funding (no increase from FY09) - $1.6 million
• Career and Tech Education Grants - $1.5 million
• State Aid to Technology Increase - $309,000
• Increasing and Decreasing Enrollment Aid - $5.7 million
• Sparsity Aid: $2.3 million

Stay with Open Forum for more updates.

Comments (0) | Link to this story | Send to a friend | Print Story

Multi-districts that offer career and technical education courses will also be able to offer academic course offerings, a House panel decided Wednesday.

Members of House Education unanimously endorsed HB 1044, a measure that Department of Education officials say will provide local school districts with greater flexibility and make high school more relevant for students.

Mark Wilson, state director for career and technical education, told lawmakers that the legislation allows students to choose which setting fits their learning style. A student who learns more effectively working with their hands could take other subjects in conjunction with trade education.

According to Wilson, the change coincides with the state’s High School 2025 initiative to strengthen the high school experience. In addition to the change proposed in HB 1044, the state is also working to develop alternate certification to make it possible for current CTE teachers to also teach core subjects, such as math.

A multi-district is a agreement between several school districts to provide career and technical education. Currently, multi-district centers are set up in Aberdeen, Brookings and Watertown. There’s also a mobile multi-district arrangement in Northwest South Dakota. According to Wilson, Madison Central is also working on a similar venture.

The legislation will be considered on the House floor this week.

Comments (0) | Link to this story | Send to a friend | Print Story

Comments (0) | Link to this story | Send to a friend | Print Story

A proposal to prevent non-contiguous districts from consolidating is being held while lawmakers await more detail.

Education Secretary Tom Oster asked members of Senate Education to pass SB 38, a measure that requires merging districts to be geographic neighbors. According to the law, the Secretary can make an exception if a merger between non-contiguous districts is appropriate.

Oster told lawmakers that the change isn't intended to prevent non-contiguous mergers that “make sense.” Instead, the bill is aimed at closing a loophole in state law that could allow a small district to consolidate with a larger school on the other end of the state.

“There are some situations where it would make some sense to have a non-contiguous district exist,” Oster said. “But there are some situations where it doesn't make sense.”

To illustrate what would be considered an unacceptable merger, Oster cited a hypothetical example involving the Hurley School District, in Southeast South Dakota, voting to attach itself to the Rapid City School District.

“That would be a way for a school district to guarantee themselves an elementary school,” Oster said before clarifying for the committee that dissolve-and-attach laws only require the voter approval from the dissolving district.

ASBSD lobbyist Dick Tieszen opposed the bill, saying the proposal was unconstitutional and gave too much latitude to state officials.

“[The bill] doesn't provide the department with any guidance,” Tieszen said before asking lawmakers to clarify when the Secretary's exemption may be used. “Before you can delegate responsibility there has to be some careful criteria set forth.”

During committee question-and-answer, Oster told lawmakers that the Department would be open to creating conditions for the waiver process, saying it would make it easier to evaluate future reorganization plans.

The committee deferred action on the legislation, pending amendments.

Comments (0) | Link to this story | Send to a friend | Print Story

School districts that fail to prepare a reorganization plan within two years of dipping below the state's minimum enrollment will have a plan prepared and implemented for them, according to a piece of legislation endorsed by the Senate Education committee Tuesday morning.

Senators passed SB 34 on a 4-3 party-line vote, saying the legislation provides clarity to the state's minimum enrollment law passed two years ago.

Education Secretary Tom Oster asked for the change, telling legislators that the state needs some remedy for school districts that “have not done anything” since the enrollment floor became law.

Current law says districts must prepare a reorganization plan two years after falling below 100 enrolled students. The statute is silent, however, on what would occur if a district failed to prepare a plan or if a plan was prepared then voted down by the community.

Sen. Dave Knudson, R-Sioux Falls, voted for the proposal.

“I think this bill makes sense,” Knudson said. “You just need some sort of default position when you don't have cooperation.”

It's the second time the Department of Education has asked lawmakers to clarify the minimum size enrollment law. Last year, DOE officials proposed SB 23 only to see it defeated in the Senate floor.

The language proposed in 2008 was more heavy-handed, stating that districts must reorganize within two years or face state restructuring. Under SB 34, districts are required only to prepare a plan.

Sen. Ben Nesselhuf, D-Vermillion, voted against the measure, saying he opposes any attempts to force school districts to close.

“As somebody who is adamantly opposed to arbitrary minimums set by the state, I feel no obligation to make it easier,” he said.

The bill will be considered by the full Senate this week.

Comments (0) | Link to this story | Send to a friend | Print Story

The state won't be able to balance its budget without making cuts to K-12 education funding, Gov. Mike Rounds told reporters Friday.

“We will probably join the ranks of about 20 states in the nation that are looking at cutbacks in education,” the governor said. “That's not something that any of us relish.”

Gov. Rounds explained that no area of the state budget is safe as state officials look to trim more than $80 million in ongoing general fund expenses – a move the he said is a necessary response to a struggling state economy that is beginning to feel the impact of a national recession.

When asked whether he'd ask legislators to change a state law that mandates per-student education funding to increase by the lesser of 3 percent or the rate of inflation, Gov. Rounds didn't answer directly. Instead, he insisted that proposed cuts would be “broad-based” and that it would be difficult to make the necessary reductions without impacting every part of the state budget.

“They will cut very deep. They will impact people,” Gov. Rounds said, referring to the proposed cuts. “This will make a difference in people's lives in South Dakota.”

The governor will present a revised budget recommendation Thursday, Jan. 22, about six weeks after he presented an initial budget offering a 3 percent increase to the per-student allocation along with a host of K-12 funding cuts. That plan has been shelved due to declining state revenues and a worsening economic climate.

According to figures presented by Gov. Rounds, the state will need $52 million just to balance the current year's budget. That figure is nearly twice the $27 million FY09 shortfall the governor outlined during his Dec. 2 budget address.

Comments (0) | Link to this story | Send to a friend | Print Story

The legislature should not increase taxes or fees and needs to reprioritize in tight economic times, democratic legislative leaders said during their Friday press briefing.

Sen. Minority Leader Scott Heidepriem, D-Sioux Falls, and House Minority Leader Bernie Hunhoff, D-Yankton, told reporters that on Monday they will unveil a list of state budget cuts and ways to increase state revenues.

Both lawmakers said they will not propose to cuts to essential services – like K-12 education and Medicaid – but every other area of the state budget is on the table.

“I think our message is, we don't need to increase property taxes or fees,” Sen. Heidepriem said. “We don't need to talk about big government, but smart government.”

Sen. Heidepriem said past governors have proposed across-the-board cuts in state government during tough economic times and that those discussions should be part of the conversation this year.

Comments (0) | Link to this story | Send to a friend | Print Story

Comments (0) | Link to this story | Send to a friend | Print Story

Amid an otherwise positive state-of-the-state message, Gov. Mike Rounds seemingly warned legislators to reject a proposal to change a state law that dictates annual increases in state aid to education.

The governor asked legislators to resist spending increases for next year and warned them against obligating future Legislature's by making long-term commitments.

“We should not commit dollars that may or may not be there in the future,” Gov. Rounds said.

Gov. Rounds reacted similarly following his Dec. 2 budget address, according to a report by the Argus Leader. When asked his thoughts on a proposal by Sen. Dave Knudson, R-Sioux Falls, to change the state's index factor, the governor likened the plan to “giving future legislators advice.”

Taking off on a message that made headlines last week, the governor told legislators that tax collections have decreased and asked to present a new budget to the Legislature – a proposal he says will come on Thursday, Jan 22.

In his original budget address, Gov. Rounds proposed relatively flat spending for K-12 state aid, balancing a 3 percent per-student increase by making cuts to additional aid for districts with increasing or decreasing enrollment and opting not to renew aid to districts serving sparsely populated areas.

Much of Gov. Rounds' presentation was focused on positioning South Dakota to survive and prosper during the national recession, making special point to contrast our state's relatively stable economy with the gloomy national trends.

The governor had kind words for educators, thanking teachers and administrators who continue to push students to achieve.

Comments (0) | Link to this story | Send to a friend | Print Story

Legislation has been introduced to repeal state laws delivering aid to school districts with increasing or decreasing enrollment.

Since House Bill 1067, put forward by the State Bureau of Finance and Management, was filed prior to session, discussion and action on the measure may come in the early days of session.

The legislation is part of a trio of cost-saving measures Gov. Rounds announced during his budget address Dec. 2 in Pierre. A bill to freeze property tax levies, filed as HB 1068, is also part of the governor's plan.

ASBSD opposes both pieces of legislation.

Since his budget address, Gov. Rounds has told legislators he will remake the state budget and submit a new plan on Thursday, Dec. 22. It's unclear whether the funding cuts and property tax levy freeze will be a part of the revised recommendations.

Additional aid for districts with increasing or decreasing enrollment was part of an “omnibus” education bill passed during the 2007 legislative session.

According to the law, when a school district's enrollment increases by 5 percent or 25 students, the state issues a one-time payment worth half the aid a district would received if state aid was based on the district's current fall enrollment rather than the previous year's student count.

Comments (0) | Link to this story | Send to a friend | Print Story

A struggling economy and dwindling state revenues may jeopardize the annual increase to the per-student state aid, according to a Rapid City Journalreport.

In an interview following Gov. Rounds' state-of-the-state address, Senate Majority Leader Dave Knudson, R-Sioux Falls, said he expects the governor to lower his requested increases when he presents his revised budget to the Legislature on Jan. 22.

“It just seems likely to see all those numbers go down,” Sen. Knudson told the Journal. The Sioux Falls lawmaker did not indicate whether he would support or oppose the governor's plan.

During his Dec. 2 budget address, Gov. Rounds proposed a 3 percent increase to the per-student allocation. The recommendation was offset by nearly 8 million in funding cuts, meaning the proposal amounts to approximately 1.4 percent statewide, according to an ASBSD analysis.

But new talk of freezing the per-student allocation could mean the governor's proposals would amount to a net reduction in state aid, assuming Gov. Rounds would hold firm on his plans to eliminate additional aid for districts with increasing or decreasing enrollment and funding for districts serving sparsely populated areas.

Comments (0) | Link to this story | Send to a friend | Print Story