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

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

A legislative subcommittee believes the state's economy is set to rebound next year.

Members of the Joint Appropriations Committee approved a $1.14 billion FY11 state budget revenue estimate Monday. The estimate is up from $1.107 in FY10, which amounts to a 3 percent increase.

In essence, the action means lawmakers have enough confidence in the state economy for state revenue to increase by more than $33 million next year. The change is accounted for by projected increases in sales tax revenue and contributions from the state’s trust funds, which are projected to regain enough principle to contribute to the state’s general fund next year.

The estimate adopted by legislators is approximately $10 million less than the revenue estimates the governor proposed in December. Gov. Rounds’ initial budget was based on $1.150 billion in revenue, but actual collections have caused the governor to revise the estimates. 

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

The House continues to stall action on school funding decisions, but will likely take action tomorrow. Lawmakers continue to hold their intentions close, so House votes tomorrow on SB 124 and SB 22 will provide the first formal direction we’ve had from the House this session. At this point in the session, the two issues on the table are per-student funding and changes to the index factor.

Per-student funding:

Both pieces of legislation the House will consider tomorrow contain a per-student funding freeze for FY11. The governor’s plan to freeze per-student funding is alive in SB 22. The bill, which originally had to due with the birth-to-three program, was changed completely by the House Appropriations Committee and approved to be a “bargaining chip” for ongoing negotiations with the Senate. Senate Bill 124 also contains a per-student funding freeze, but also includes changes to the index factor. We know there are several legislators from both parties who are committed to reinstating the 1.2 percent increase, but the idea has not caught on with the legislative leadership and has been voted down twice in the Senate.

Index factor:

Senate Bill 124 seeks to change the index factor, the law that determines annual increases in per-student funding. The measure the House will consider tomorrow was changed in the House Education committee earlier in February – in its current form, it changes the “3 percent or the CPI-W, whichever is less” language in state law to “2 percent or the CPI-W, whichever is greater.” In its Senate-approved form, it changed the index factor language to “4 percent or CPI-W, whichever is greater” with some limitations that tie per-student increases to state continuing receipts.

ASBSD will continue to advocate for the Senate-passed SB 124, which contains “4 percent or greater” language. We will also support amendments to restore the 1.2 percent for FY11.

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

He has tried for several years to revise part of the school funding formula that generates annual per-student increases in state aid to education. His plans have typically met their demise during final-hour negotiations with the House.

During his weekly press conference, the majority leader indicated he doesn’t intend to compromise on the index factor plan this year.

Sen. Knudson told reporters that it appears as though there is a “fairly strong divide” in between the House and Senate regarding an index factor language.

“I don’t personally expect the Senate to have much give from the way SB 124 passed,” he said. “I think the possibility of passing anything that has a zero percent increase in K-12 education, without having SB 124 in its Senate form, is close to zero.”

The Senate’s version of SB 124 aims to change the index factor to give schools less in difficult budget times but more when the economy rebounds. In most years, per-student funding will increase by 4 percent or the rate of inflation, whichever is greater. In a tight economy, aid will go up at the same rate as the state budget.

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

Shortly after his political party’s legislative leadership announced their plans to significantly scale back the governor’s recommended budget, Gov. Mike Rounds pushed back against the plan.

Open Forum wasn’t around to cover the governor’s comments, so we’ll give you a small sentiment from today’s news reports. Here's a hint: Gov. Rounds isn't a fan.

From the Pierre Capitol Journal:

And from the Rapid City Journal:

But Rounds said the proposed cuts are irresponsible, in part because they include across-the-board reductions that leave the difficult duty of deciding who and what to cut to department and agency heads. The cuts could be especially harmful to programs, services and employees who are struggling in a difficult recession, Rounds said.

Using a portion of the state's reserves, often called "rainy day" funds, makes more sense, he said.

"At a time when we still have a national recession, we should be doing everything we can not to inflict pain on citizens, but rather reduce the amount of pain they're suffering," Rounds said. "I think this qualifies as a rainy day."

Knudson said the economic weather will be much worse next year if something isn't done now.

"I kind of like the rainy day analogy, and there's no question it's raining outside," he said. "The problem is we've got a hurricane heading toward us next year, with a deficit of $100 million to $120 million."

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

The revelation came Thursday as Senate Majority Leader Dave Knudson and House Majority Leader Bob Faehn revealed their long-awaited plan to cut the governor’s recommended budget by more than $43 million. The cuts, which are intended to be ongoing, are part of an effort to eliminate a $40 million budget deficit without dipping into state reserves.

Schools won’t escape completely unharmed. The proposal eliminates funding for Education Service Agencies and the South Dakota School for the Deaf.

The plan calls for a 2 percent across-the-board reduction in state general fund spending, excluding dollars that flow to K-12 education or Medicaid. Legislators also targeted phantom employees and travel expenses, trimming an additional $8 million from the state agencies.

In addition to broad-based cuts, lawmakers targeted specific programs within several state departments, including the Board of Regents, corrections, agriculture, tourism and health.

On top of cuts to the FY11 budget, GOP leadership outlined an additional $9 million in savings they expect to capture next budget year. Consolidation incentives and aid to growing enrollment districts are counted as ongoing reductions, but the items don’t come as a surprise.

Legislation to eliminate consolidation incentives has already passed the House and Senate. The bill strikes incentives going into the future, but honors commitments to recently completed mergers. The proposal won’t have much effect next year, considering the lack of consolidation planning currently going on across South Dakota.

The deficit reduction blueprint also claims $3.5 million by eliminating payments to growing districts. That item is also related to recently passed legislation that allows for on-time funding for districts with increasing enrollment, and will not result in financial hardship for schools.

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

The Senate gave a unanimous endorsement Wednesday to HB 1248. The upper chamber modified the legislation slightly, opting to make the legislation effective next year instead of delaying until the 2013-14 school year.

Sen. Sandy Jerstad, D-Sioux Falls, praised the Senate’s vote. She has attempted to move the legislation in previous years, but support for the idea never materialized.

The sudden change in sentiment is a credit to the bill’s supporters, who were able to convince lawmakers that the bill would save the state $3.5 million per year while meeting the needs of rapidly growing districts.

Education Secretary Tom Oster lobbied diligently for the change. He persuaded lawmakers that the measure eliminates a hiccup in state law that makes the state pay for a semester of education that students don’t receive.

Harrisburg Superintendent Jim Holbeck also gave reasoned supporting testimony. He pointed out that the change would bring fairness into the school funding process and allow Harrisburg to hire staff necessary to handle booming enrollment.

If approved, a growing district’s state aid would be based on the current year’s fall enrollment. If a district is losing students, formula revenue is determined by averaging the previous two year’s fall enrollment.

Because the Senate changed the bill, the House must concur with the change before it can move onto the governor.

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

A proposed law aiming to trim the amount of small school funding that follows students who open-enroll from larger to smaller districts was dismissed Tuesday by the Senate Education Committee. Lawmakers rejected the bill on a 6-1 vote.

House Bill 1150 creates a new mechanism to calculate state aid for students who open enroll, basing per-student funding on the fall enrollment of the larger of two schools involved in the transfer.

The bill has been one of the more controversial measures of the legislative session.

It has been characterized as a battle between large schools and small schools and has drawn fierce opposition from Education Secretary Tom Oster. Lawmakers even ramped up the rhetoric during debate – supporters tagged it as taxpayer abuse and opponents characterized it as the end of small schools.

Superintendents from both large and small school districts traveled to Pierre to air their respective opinions on HB 1150.

Joe Graves, superintendent of Mitchell School District, told lawmakers that debate over the legislation had drifted off course. He said the legislation was about fairness and equity, not about limiting choice or ending small school aid. Graves also challenged the notion that the bill had driven a wedge between small and large districts.

“We can have a civil discussion about legislation without it splitting up schools in the state,” he said.

Other supporters, including superintendents from Huron and Madison, told lawmakers that it is difficult for taxpayers to understand why buses from several districts travel into their district to pick up students.

Britton-Helca Superintendent Don Kirkegaard testified against the legislation. He said approving the legislation would limit choice, particularly for low-income students whose parents may not have resources to transport their children.

“You can't have open enrollment for minorities, for the economically depressed, unless you have transportation,” he said.

Administrators from Florence, Elkton and Gayville-Volin joined lobbyists and education department officials in opposition to the bill. They called the measure bad public policy and said it would represent a financial double-hit against the state's smaller schools.

Nearly every member of the committee voted against the legislation. But several lawmakers only did so after issuing a word of caution for the future.

Sen. Dave Knudson, R-Sioux Falls, suggested the issue will persist as long as schools don't work out busing issues at the local level.

“As long as we have districts running busses into a neighboring district, this is going to be a source of significant irritation,” he said. “We're going to be back year after year after year with this issue.”

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

After suffering defeat earlier this week, pre-k supporters turned to legislative procedure Wednesday to resurrect a bill designed to expand voluntary access to high quality pre-k programs.

The move sets SB 191 up for a series of votes next week. Because the bill was defeated Monday in House Education, a majority must vote to overturn the committee’s recommendation before the bill can be debated on the House floor. The vote, likely to occur Monday, will be close.

The House of Representatives has rejected pre-k bills in each of the past two legislative sessions. Following Monday’s hearing in House Education, it appeared as the bill was destined for a third defeat. But for the first time ever, pre-k advocates are taking the fight to the next level.

Rep. Shantel Krebs, R-Sioux Falls, made the motion to revive the bill. She was supported by a handful of her fellow Republicans and nearly the entire Democratic caucus. The number of lawmakers who voted for the smoke out is close to the 36 votes needed to pass Monday's procedural test.

Pre-k advocates are hoping the bill’s fate will be different this year. But, if testimony and commentary during the committee hearing is any indication, the debate surrounding the bill hasn’t changed.

Opponents branded the bill as costly, unnecessary and anti-family before committee members voted 9-6 on Monday to defer the measure to the 41st legislative day. After suggesting achievement gaps can be eliminated with more active parenting, legislators called for a return to traditional American values.

Rep. Jim Bolin, R-Canton, told committee members they had a choice to follow one of two roads.

“The sign on the one road is Lyndon Johnson Boulevard,” he said. “It’s the road of bigger government, more programs, higher taxes, and more deficits.” Rep. Bolin went on to describe the second path as “Reagan Road” – a term he used to describe limited government and a values-oriented society.

Supporters of Senate Bill 191 pushed back against those claims, arguing that struggling families can’t afford quality pre-k and there isn’t enough room in existing federally subsidized head start programs.

“I challenge you to do something to help those parents that are really unable to help their children,” said Rep. Elaine Elliot, D-Aberdeen. “I challenge you to come up with something that’s going to fix society.”

Pre-k advocates also stressed the benefits pre-k has on early learning and emphasized that early education helps close achievement gaps, particularly for low income children.

Senate Bill 191 establishes academic standards for quality pre-k programs and establishes a community planning process to expand access to voluntary early education programs. The measure is targeted to only serve students at or below 130 percent of the federal poverty level, which is defined as a family of four living on less than $28,000 per year.

ASBSD testified in support of the legislation.

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

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

• The annual "hog-cross" has started. Following House Education's hoghouse of SB 124, the Senate hoghoused HB 1051 into the original language of SB 124 and sent it back to the Senate. The two bills relate to changing the index factor. The hog-cross process typically comes just before lawmakers appoint conference committees.
• House retirement laws passed a group of bills that makes modifications to South Dakota Retirement System laws and practices, including changes to South Dakota's return-rehire process.
  
• House Education killed SB 191, legislation that would have established pre-k standards and a process for communities to establish voluntary pre-k for children from low income families.
• The Senate passed HB 1248, a measure designed to provide on-time funding for districts with growing enrollment. The body amended the legislation to make it effective for next year.
  

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

• Senators killed HB 1150, a measure that would have limited per-student small school aid that follows students who open enroll from larger districts to smaller districts.
  
• Voted to eliminate consolidation incentives (HB 1181).

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

Lawmakers have yet to bridge the partisan divide on school funding issues, but the House of Representatives showed Monday that Republicans and Democrats can work together on tough policy issues.

Facing opposition from a group of lawmakers concerned the proposal would lead to racial segregation, a bipartisan contingent coalesced to pass legislation allowing the state to create a pilot charter school designed to boost academic outcomes for American Indian students. The plan, found in Senate Bill 63, moved to the governor’s desk on a 49-20 vote.

The legislation allows the state to authorize and oversee a publicly funded private school, provided South Dakota is chosen from the pool of 41 states vying for a federal Race to the Top grants. Authorized by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, the competition allows the U.S. Department of Education to hand out more than $4 billion to states that initiate education reforms.

On Monday, all the typical policy issues related to charter schools – privatization, school choice, funding – took a back seat to race.

Rep. Noel Hammiel, R-Mitchell, referenced landmark U.S Supreme Court cases Plessy vs. Ferguson and Brown vs. Board of Education during his five-minute speech against SB 63. He told lawmakers that starting a charter school for American Indian students would amount to racial segregation.

“I don’t know if transporting American Indian kids from around the state to a central location is a good idea,” he said. “I have some concerns about that.”

Rep. Hammiel also cited a recent UCLA study that found that charter school enrollment lacks diversity and is split along economic lines. He cautioned lawmakers against endorsing legislation that he said may make it tougher to bridge the state’s racial divides.

The bill’s supporters acknowledged sharing concerns about segregation. But rather than using race as a reason to vote against the measure, proponents instead focused on the what they said were glaring achievement gaps between American Indian students and their peers.

“What we are doing now for our children on the reservations is not working,” said Rep. Oran Sorensen, D-Dell Rapids. “Maybe we need to have the courage to go one step further.”

The law enabling the creation of the state-run school is contingent upon receiving the federal grant. According to the federal education department, South Dakota can receive up to $75 million if the state’s plan is chosen. South Dakota submitted its application last February, and the U.S. Department of Education will likely announce its first round of selections sometime this week.

South Dakota Education Secretary Tom Oster has openly acknowledged that he doesn’t believe the state will receive the funding.

If the state is awarded the grant, the funds will be used to establish a secondary school that gives enrollment priority to students from federally recognized American Indian tribes. The facility will offer instruction focused on science, technology, engineering and mathematics. The campus will also feature dormitory housing and offer enough classes to allow students to complete two years of college.

The bill now moves onto the governor, who has already given his blessing to the project.

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 criticism that they’re putting partisanship above the state’s economic prosperity, Democratic lawmakers have doubled-down on their commitment to establish education funding as a priority.

House Democrats blocked legislation Tuesday that would have appropriated $5.4 million to keep the Deep Underground Science and Engineering Laboratory in Lead operational until the state receives another installment of federal cash. The minority party orchestrated a similar maneuver last Friday.

Republicans quickly seized on the tactic, accusing Democratic lawmakers of playing politics with the state’s future.

In a rare mid-session press release issued Tuesday, Gov. Rounds blasted the minority party for cutting off money he believes is critical to the lab’s survival. During a press conference Thursday, the governor reiterated his disappointment and suggested the vote could hurt the state’s chances of earning the National Science Foundation’s blessing.

House Majority Leader Bob Faehn, R-Watertown, echoed the governor’s sentiments during his week-end press briefing. He characterized the vote as a political posturing and questioned why members of the minority would choose the lab – a project Faehn described as the biggest legislative achievement made during his political career – to make a point.

Despite GOP outrage, Democratic legislators aren’t backing down.

House Minority Leader Bernie Hunhoff, D-Yankton, used his media availability Thursday to explain his caucus’ decision and to challenge the majority party’s budgetary priorities.

He told reporters that Democrats wouldn’t fund the laboratory with money that could be provided to schools. The minority party wanted to use one of the governor’s economic development funds – called the Future Fund – to financially support the lab, but the GOP voted against the plan.

Rep. Hunhoff also criticized Republicans for three education-related votes prior to Tuesday’s deadline to pass bills out of the House.

“Republicans voted time and time again to take money away from schools, away from students,” he said. “It looks like the intention is to balance the budget on the backs of our school students.”

According to Rep. Hunhoff, Democrats are willing to defend education funding, which he said was his caucus’ top budgetary priority. House Democrats “really have drawn a hard line in the sand” regarding spending the state’s limited resources, he said.

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

It was the second legislative day when Republican lawmakers first pledged to cut their way out of a $32 million deficit. Seven weeks later, the budget hole has grown by $8 million and the majority party has yet to announce a single proposal to limit expenditures.

Though silent on details, the GOP leadership expressed confidence Thursday that the majority party can bring the state’s budget into balance by trimming spending.

When reporters asked when the public might see a list of cuts, Senate Majority Leader Dave Knudson, R-Sioux Falls, laughingly suggested that the GOP may wait until the last legislative day to announce which programs and services will get the axe.

The hold-up, Sen. Knudson explained, is the arrival of the latest state revenue projections. The state’s budget builders expect the economic data to arrive the second week in March, on or about day 33 of the 38-day session.

Lawmakers have plenty of practice making last-second compromises; they routinely wait until the final legislative day to agree on school funding. But, given the magnitude of the challenge – the GOP will have to cut $40 million in less than four days – some doubt whether legislators can pull it off.

The list of skeptics includes Gov. Mike Rounds. The governor has regularly questioned whether legislators have the resolve to trim more than 3 percent from his proposed budget. He has even publicly counseled the GOP leadership to stay away from firm commitments, suggesting they should back away from their pledge not to dip into state reserves.

Sen. Knudson panned that brand of pessimism Thursday, bluntly telling reporters that he doesn’t share the governor’s view.

“I think we’re going to get there,” he said.

Sweating through the final days of session is standard operating procedure for public education supporters, but the majority party’s task is large in scope and will impact a broader segment of the state’s population. It remains to be seen whether legislators can hurriedly slash the state’s budget without inviting public backlash.

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

After a two-year effort to turn consolidation incentives into a reimbursements for some costs associated with school mergers, the House of Representatives has voted Tuesday to eliminate the three-year payments to schools who reorganize.

Rep. Thomas Brunner, R-Nisland, spoke in favor of the bill on the floor. He told lawmakers that the payments haven’t worked to decrease the number of school districts because schools don’t decide to merge for financial reasons. The savings to the state, he suggested, could be used in the future to increase the per-student allocation.

Democrats, who block-voted against the bill, were joined in their opposition by three Republican lawmakers.

Rep. Paul Dennert, D-Columbia, said the incentive helps ease the financial burden that comes with consolidation and suggested the move falls into the category of “promises made, promises broken.”

The bill is won’t save the state any money next year. Currently, no schools are scheduled to merge next year, meaning the state won’t pick up any costs it otherwise wouldn’t have incurred. Passage of the bill doesn’t impact incentives currently being paid.

The bill now goes to the Senate. ASBSD opposes the legislation.

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

Students will have to stay in school until they graduate or turn 18, members of House Education decided Monday. The 9-5 vote turns back an effort, found in HB 1168, to reverse a law passed in 2007 that increased the state’s compulsory attendance age from 16 to 18.

The bill’s prime sponsor, Rep. Kristi Noem, R-Castlewood, made a reasoned case for the repeal.

She argued that requiring school attendance until age 18 isn’t proven to improve graduation rates and stands in the way of a family’s choice to manage their child’s education. Rep. Noem also questioned whether schools were up to the challenge of meeting the needs of students who struggle to stay in school.

The Castlewood lawmaker was the only one to speak for the bill before a wave of opponents lined up against HB 1168. Representatives of the Department of Education, Department of Corrections, school boards, school administrators, large schools, small schools and teachers all asked lawmakers to defeat the bill.

Wade Pogany, the director of assessment and technology for the education department, was the sharpest in his criticism, challenging lawmakers to stick with state’s policy.

“Leadership is not about doing what’s convenient,” Pogany said, admitting that schools will have a tougher job under the new law but insisting that the state's education systems are up to the job. He spoke at length about how schools have prepared for the law to take effect and asked lawmakers to give schools more time to work.

A teacher by trade, Rep. Jim Bolin, R-Canton, outlined his support for the repeal by suggesting his colleagues have thanked him for not supporting the “line of the educational establishment.” He challenged the notion that the law can make a difference for kids.

“Family, moral and spiritual issues are just as important as a compulsory attendance effort by the state,” he said.

Committee members weren’t ready to abandon the compulsory attendance law, which only took effect last July.

After acknowledging the difficulty of educating students at-risk of dropping out, Rep. Bill Van Gerpen, R-Tyndall, explained that a vote against the legislation was a vote of confidence in the state’s public schools.

“Schools are willing to take-up the challenge because of their sincere concern for children,” he said.

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

• House Education killed legislation to lower the compulsory attendance age to 16
• Senate State Affairs passed a heavily amended SB 104. ASBSD worked with the sponsors to outline acceptable amendments, and we believe the hog-housed version provides clarity and preserves governance - and its a vast improvement from SB 104 as introduced, which would have had a chilling effect on citizen participation.
  

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

House Democrats took a stand against freezing education funding Friday, block voting against a $5.4 million appropriation for the Deep Underground Science and Engineering Laboratory. Without the funds, the project may come to to a screeching halt.

House Minority Leader Rep. Bernie Hunhoff, D-Yankton, outlined his caucus’ opposition to the measure, saying the lawmakers object to the priorities Republicans are establishing and the lack of clarity on their proposed budget reductions.

According to Hunhoff, democrats have come to the table with ways to trim government spending while maintaining funding for education and other important programs, only to have the Republicans reject those proposals without debate.

He also challenged GOP legislators to be more transparent with their intentions to cut the budget. The majority party has said it wants to cut $40 million from the state budget, but has yet to announce those cuts – a fact that Rep. Hunhoff argued hurts the legislative process.

During the debate on HB 1083, several democrats stood to oppose the $5.4 million appropriation because the majority has not budged on its plan to freeze per-student education funding.

Republican lawmakers questioned the move, saying the minority party was passing up a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to create the underground lab. They called the lab a "gold mine" that will provide the state with a significant economic boost. To fund the lab, lawmakers were willing to transfer money from a host of small funds outside of the state’s general fund.

Legislative rules say all bills that spend money must be approved by a two-thirds vote, meaning the minority party's 26-member caucus can stall appropriations bills. A handful of lawmakers were excused for the vote.

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

Members of House Education endorsed a measure Wednesday that will reduce small school aid provided for students who open enroll from larger schools to smaller schools.

The proposal, filed as HB 1150, creates a new mechanism to calculate state aid for students who open enroll. If passed, per-student aid would be based on the fall enrollment of the larger of two schools involved in an open enrollment.

Lawmakers heard testimony on the bill nearly two weeks ago. During its initial hearing, the bill’s main sponsor, Rep. Deb Peters, R-Hartford, told committee members that the measure would save $1.3 million. She also testified the savings would be redistributed to all schools – a statement later refuted by Education Secretary Tom Oster.

With an eye on the potential savings in a tight budget year, lawmakers backed the bill on a 9-5 vote. The committee’s endorsement came following an amendment that would exempt sparse schools from funding restrictions the bill puts in place.

The measure now moves onto the House.

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

A measure that to expand voluntary pre-k education for at-risk students earned the endorsement of the Senate Tuesday, paving the way for the House of Representatives to consider a concept it has rejected the past three years. Senators approved SB 191 on a 19-14 vote.

The measure sets up a process for communities to build voluntary pre-k programs for children who come from low income families. With a plan in place, the community can apply for state funding to initiate the early childhood programs based on educational standards set by a state-level early learning council.

The bill’s prime sponsor, Sen. Tom Dempster, R-Sioux Falls, urged lawmakers to approve the measure, which he said is necessary to provide a level playing field to our state’s most disadvantaged children.

He assured lawmakers that public, private and faith-based pre-k providers would be involved in voluntary pre-k offerings and stressed the voluntary nature of the legislation.

Opponents lashed out the bill as intrusive to business and a “massive government expansion” in a time of tight budgets.

ASBSD supports SB 191.

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

Growing school districts should receive state aid based on the number of students they actually educate in a given year, members of House Education decided Wednesday.

Lawmakers gave unanimous approval to HB 1248, a measure sponsored by Rep. Roger Hunt, R-Brandon. The bill modifies legislation passed in 2007 that provides additional aid to districts with increasing enrollment.

Under the proposal, the amount of state aid deliver to a growing district would be based on the current year’s fall enrollment. Under current law, state aid is based on the previous year’s enrollment, and growing districts receive a one-time payment to help them deal with the influx of students.

Harrisburg Superintendent Jim Holbeck told lawmakers that current formula treats the rapidly growing district unfairly.

Under the current structure, when Harrisburg receives 300 new students each year, the district only receives funding for 150 students that year. Making matters worse, Holbeck added, if a student enrolls after the fall head count, the district won’t receive funds for that student for two years.

In asking for the change, Holbeck also pointed out that the bill doesn’t change the formula that provides declining enrollment districts with a budgetary cushion.

“We did not want a bill that would take from one to give to another,” he said, after suggesting that K-12 education too often looks to “rob Peter to pay Paul.”

Brandon Valley Superintendent Dave Pappone also made the trip to testify. He was joined by representatives from the Department of Educaiton, ASBSD and other education groups who also asked lawmakers to pass the bill.

The measure now goes to the House floor for consideration.

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

Local school districts with have greater autonomy in spending federal special education funds, according to a pair of bills signed into law this week.

Gov. Mike Rounds has put his signature on House Bills 1020 and 1021, two pieces of legislation brought by the South Dakota Department of Education that won near unanimous approval from legislators.

Under House Bill 1020, districts would be able to transfer up to 50 percent of an increased IDEA allocation to any other district fund, provided the transferred money is used in accordance with the federal Elementary and Secondary Education Act. In most cases, districts will use the new authority to transfer some of the two-year IDEA boost provided through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act.

House Bill 1021 provides schools with an additional leeway in spending IDEA money, allowing districts to transfer federal money to the capital outlay fund in order to purchase equipment that can be used for special education purposes.

Both bills were passed with emergency clauses attached, meaning schools can legally make the transfers now.

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

Schools would be able to maintain a 40 percent general fund balance if the governor signs legislation that has passed both the House and Senate.

Legislation passed in 2007 was designed to gradually lower a school districts maximum general fund balance to 25 percent by 2012. House Bill 1108 suspends that law through 2015, allowing districts to hold up to 40 percent of their budget for cash flow and budget reserve.

The bill, sponsored by Rep. Bill Van Gerpen, R-Tyndall, faced little opposition throughout the legislative process. Just four lawmakers voted against it on its journey through both legislative chambers.

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

Sensing the demise of the governor’s plan to freeze the state’s property tax levies, the state’s budget chief told lawmakers on Monday that he plans to seek alternative ways in which to shift state costs on to local property tax payers.

Jason Dilges, the commissioner of the Bureau of Finance and Management, made the comments during a House Taxation Committee hearing on HB 1084.

He told legislators that the state has considered preparing an amendment that would “go about things a little bit differently.” The plan, Dilges said, was to “roll some additional items into the state aid formula.”

Digles’ comments could mean the state plans on resurrecting a proposal floated the last two years to create a “technology and assessment adjustment” component of within the state aid funding formula. The move forces local property tax payers to contribute local effort to help pay the costs associated with technology and assessment.

According to Dilges, the state will work through the appropriations committee in its attempt to shift approximately $4 million in state responsibility onto local tax payers.

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

The motion to table – which temporarily kills HB 1050 – was approved by a 66-0 vote. The House has delayed action on the legislation for more than a week.

While the bill may be dead for now, the issue isn’t. The Senate has already approved a funding freeze as part of a measure that will provide higher per-student funding increases when the economy recovers.

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

• Passed legislation that requires the Unified Judicial System to notify school administrators if a student age 18-21 has violated laws relating to controlled substances.
• Passed legislation to allow school boards to allow expelled students to return to school if the student meets board-established criteria.
  
• Passed a bill requiring the Department of Education to develop a framework for entrepreneurship eduacation
  

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

• While Open Forum was focusing Tuesday on the House (waiting for them to take action on HB 1050, the governor's funding freeze), the Senate passed legislation (SB 191) allowing communities to plan for standards-based pre-k on a 19-14 vote.
• Passed HB 1150, legislation that would strip small school adjustment funding for students who open enroll from larger districts to smaller districts. It passed on a 8-6 vote.
  
• Passed legislation to modify the funding formula to deliver timely funding for districts with increasing enrollments (HB 1248).
  
• Tabled a measure that would have eliminated declining enrollment aid.
  
• Delayed action on HB 1168 without testimony. The legislation returns compulsory attendance age to 16.
  
• Killed a measure to allow school boards the option of charging fees to participate in extracurricular activities. 
  
• Stalled when debating legislation seeking to eliminate consolidation incentives. A motion to pass the bill was defeated 8-7, and then the committee tabled the measure.
  

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

Concerned that the legislation would be too costly and would jeopardize federal funding, lawmakers killed a measure Friday that would have allowed school districts the option to buy into the state employee health insurance pool.

Rep. Mitch Fargen, D-Flandreau, the bill’s prime sponsor, pitched the plan as a cost-savings option for local governments, suggesting it would help curb rising employee health care costs. Under HB 1193, local schools could buy into the state's plan, provided they participate for five years before opting-out of the pool.

As has been the case in previous years, the proposed law drew opposition from the agency that administers the state employee health insurance pool.

Sandra Zinter, commissioner of the South Dakota Bureau of Personnel, told committee members that a pool that combines state and local government employees would require additional employees and may trigger the loss of up to $16 million in federal funds.

Even if the state could figure out how to manage the system, Zinter questioned whether local governments would want to participate. Local officials have inquired about joining the state’s health insurance plan in the past, but she said interest dwindled once she described employee assessments and health management programs the state uses to hold down premium costs.

“We start talking about the structure, then they’re not very interested and I don’t hear from them again,” Zinter said.

According to Zinter, the state would only be interested in managing the pool if all local governments were mandated to participate. Voluntary participation would likely mean those with the highest amount of claims would turn to the state, while low-claim employers would remain on their current plans – a scenario that Zinter told lawmakers defeats the purpose of cost sharing.

Rep. Tim Rounds, R-Pierre, joined eight other lawmakers in opposition to the plan. He said the Legislature has studied similar proposals in the past, ultimately concluding that it would be too costly for state and local governments.

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

• The committee approved, after a lengthy debate and a flirtation with amendment, legislation to link South Dakota's new graduation requirements to the requisites for South Dakota's Opportunity Scholarship.
  
• Senators killed a measure that would have allowed local school boards to decide if drug traffickers are rehabilitated enough to work in school districts.
  

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

State revenue collections are down 6.2 percent from FY09, Gov. Mike Rounds told reporters Friday during his weekly legislative press conference. In total, collections are a full 3 percentage points lower than his budget office anticipated in November, he said. 

The updated numbers reflect revenue estimates through December, but the data has not caused the governor to change his budget plans for FY11. According to state documents, the governors FY11 budget represents a 4.4 percent increase in state expenditures. However, factoring out reserves and one-time transfers, the governor projected a 1.2 percent increase in continuing state revenue.

While he's not changing his budget yet, the governor did say the downward turn in collections is a “concern” and that his budget office will continue to review collections to see if “pent-up demand” caused by winter weather eventually leads to greater than expected returns through July.

According to the governor, dwindling revenue is a sign the recession is still ongoing in South Dakota.

“We have not bottomed out yet,” Gov. Rounds cautioned.

He also re-issued his challenge to lawmakers, asking them to not spend more than $32 million in reserves and to stick as close as possible to his proposed budget. The governor said actual revenue collections are a sign that his FY11 budget estimates may, if anything, need to be lowered. 

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

Lawmakers are now officially on record backing the governor’s recommendation to freeze per-student funding for FY11, following a close 18-17 vote Thursday in the Senate.

The vote came during floor debate on SB 124, a measure offered by Sen. Dave Knudson, R-Sioux Falls. The intent of the legislation is to boost per-student increases when the state’s economy recovers, but it also contains a funding freeze for FY11.

During debate, Sen. Sandy Jerstad, D-Sioux Falls, proposed an amendment to provide schools with the 1.2 percent increase currently required by law.

“Do we want to completely wipe out their budget for next year?” asked Jerstad. “I think it’s going to be an awful burden on them.”

Sen. Knudson resisted the amendment, suggesting that the state can’t afford the increase this year. Saying again that the freeze is a “bitter bill to swallow,” Knudson recounted the state’s budget deficit, which he says now approaches $40 million, as justification to hold the line on per-student spending.

The amendment failed, but SB 124 passed on a 28-7 vote.

Senators who voted for 1.2 percent increase:

• Abdallah; Adelstein; Ahlers; Bartling; Bradford; Gillespie; Hanson (Gary); Heidepriem; Hundstad; Jerstad; Kloucek; Maher; Merchant; Miles; Nesselhuf; Peterson; Turbak Berry

Senators who voted against a 1.2 percent increase:

• Brown; Dempster; Fryslie; Gant; Garnos; Gray; Hansen (Tom); Haverly; Howie; Hunhoff (Jean); Knudson; Nelson; Novstrup (Al); Olson (Russell); Rhoden; Schmidt; Tieszen; Vehle

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

Members of House Education said Friday that they aren’t ready to adopt legislation to curtail busing of open enrolled students, but they also suggested they may not be far off from action if school districts don’t work out busing issues in the near future.

The commentary came during debate on HB 1219, a measure offered by Peggy Gibson, D-Huron, that would require schools to transport students to centrally located distribution points.

Rep. Gibson told legislators that school districts have confused and upset taxpayers by sending buses into neighboring districts to pick up students. In particular, elderly constituents in her district have questioned the need for additional education funding because they see buses from different districts passing each other on roadways.

Diana Miller, a lobbyist for a group of large schools, echoed Rep. Gibson’s concerns, telling lawmakers that the unprecedented budget shortfall – as indicated by the lack of increase proposed for education – requires lawmakers to look at “fresh, new ways to do things.” Passing the measure, she said, would save districts money.

The South Dakota Department of Education, the Sioux Falls School District and the South Dakota Coalition of Schools testified against the legislation.

Charlie Flowers, a lobbyist for small and mid-sized schools, asked lawmakers to defeat the measure and support local control. Districts that lose students to open enrollment “need to look at why you are losing these students,” he said.

Committee members nearly unanimously voted to kill the bill, but not without qualifications.

Lawmakers, including Rep. Oran Sorensen, D-Garretson, challenged big and small schools to eliminate animosity and begin working together on enrollment issues. He suggested that if schools can’t come to a compromise, the Legislature will have to act.

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

A proposal to allow the department of education to create school administration regions was soundly defeated Friday in House Education, voting 11-3 to send HB 1247 to the 41st Legislative Day.

The proposal, sponsored by Rep. Jacqueline Sly, R-Rapid City, authorized the Department of Education into 500-student regions that would share administrative positions. While it didn’t force consolidation, school boards lost the authority to hire any administrative position other than principals.

According to Rep. Sly, the bill promised savings up to $5.5 million by reducing the number of administrative centers to approximately 100. The savings would devote more resources to the classroom, she said.

Opponents blasted the concept, suggesting that the proposal ignores the realities of South Dakota school districts. Many said forced sharing of superintendents and business managers wouldn’t save money and would be extremely difficult for administrators to manage up to five separate districts.

For the committee members, the plan offered too much too fast and was an affront to local control.

Rep. Noel Hamiel, R-Mitchell, voted against the bill, questioning whether the bill would deliver the promised savings. He also spoke up in favor of school superintendents, professing to their value to the school and community.

Though he voted against the bill for its top-down focus, Rep. Thomas Brunner, R-Nisland, cautioned lawmakers against “glorifying the role of the superintendent” and challenged school boards “to start waking up” and to “do the right thing” by sharing administration.

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

Legislation enabling local communities to plan voluntary standards-based pre-k programs for children coming from low income families passed an initial test Thursday, winning approval from the Senate Education Committee on a 4-2 vote.

Sen. Tom Dempster, R-Sioux Falls, pitched SB 191, stressing its voluntary nature while articulating the need and value for increased access to high quality pre-k programs.

More than 1,500 South Dakota children are currently on a waiting list to join federally funded pre-k programs – a fact that Sen. Dempster said creates early academic divides and will eventually lead to more stress on the state’s budgetary commitments to social assistance programs.

A parade of proponents – including ASBSD, state agencies, public and private pre-k providers, pre-k teachers and parents – urged lawmakers to support the measure, praising pre-k programming for its benefits on early learning. They also tried to head-off anticipated attacks against the plan by highlighting cooperation with private pre-k providers and steadfastly declaring pre-k programs as voluntary.

“There is no state in the nation that has, or has contemplated, mandatory pre-k,” said Greg Boris, a pre-k policy expert with South Dakota Voices for Children.

The measure drew familiar opposition from Concerned Women from America and the Family Policy Counsel, who have rallied against similar measures in the past. Detractors painted the legislation as deceptive, anti-family, budget-busting and mandatory.

Following nearly an hour of committee testimony, legislators entered briefly debated the legislation.

Sen. Russell Olson, R-Madison, opposed the plan, telling committee members that the he believes students belong with their parents until they enter kindergarten.

“In a perfect world, I would agree with you,” Sen. Ben Nesselhuf, D-Vermillion, said, responding to the Madison lawmaker’s statement. “But we live in far less than that.”

The measure moves to the Senate 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

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

• After lengthy debate, the committee endorsed SB 191, the pre-k planning and standards bill.
  
• Committee members unanimously extended fund balance flexibility by adopting HB 1108.
  

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

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

• Passed legislation that allows school boards to reinstate expelled students if the student meets conditions established by the school board. 
• Passed legislation requiring the Department of Education to create a framework for entrepreneurship programs at the middle and high school levels.
  
• Conducted a partial hearing of legislation to create school administration regions.
  

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

Members of Senate Education dismissed legislation Tuesday aimed at amending the South Dakota Constitution to prohibit school districts from challenging any decision made by the Legislature.

Senate Education Chair Sen. Cooper Garnos, R-Presho, broke with this caucus and joined democrats to defeat SJR 7, a measure that would have asked voters this November to change the state’s constitution to ban districts from being a party to or contributing funds to a court case challenging a law enacted by the Legislature.

Sen. Dave Knudson, R-Sioux Falls, who supported resolution, openly admitted that the proposal was a reaction to the Legislature’s “frustration” surrounding an ongoing lawsuit that challenges the state’s system for funding public schools.

“As somebody who has been fighting, for the eight years I’ve been here, to improve school funding – it’s just added to the steepness of the hill,” said Sen. Knudson. “It just has made life tougher and, I think, has just been a misguided effort.”

For some, the motivation behind supporting the resolution went beyond frustration.

Sen. Bob Gray, R-Pierre, accused schools of running around the legislative process to seek remedy from the courts. Schools should work with lawmakers, hire lobbyists, and allow the system to work, he said, adding that legislators have had to make “hard” decisions regarding education funding.

In a less emotional appeal, Sen. Ben Nesselhuf, D-Vermillion, asked lawmakers to step back and consider the implications of a measure he called poorly worded, far-reaching and an attempt at intimidation.

“This is making a clear statement: ‘If you challenge us, we’re going to come after you,” said Sen. Nesselhuf. He also railed against the supporters’ claims that it would only curtail funding lawsuits, cautioning lawmakers that the sweeping language would tie the hands of local school boards in seeking clarification on the range of legal issues that impact schools.

ASBSD Director of Legal Services Bill Engberg testified against the resolution, reminding lawmakers that the South Dakota Supreme Court had already settled whether schools have a right to fund a legal action against the state. Passing the resolution goes against separation of powers and ignores the complexities of legal arguments, Engberg said.

As of yet, there has been no move by supporters to try to revive the measure using legislative procedure.

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

School districts won't receive a per-student increase next year but could be in line for larger increases in the future, according to a plan approved Tuesday by the Senate Education Committee. 

The committee unanimously endorsed SB 124, a measure to change a decades-old state law, known as the index factor, that limits annual per-student state aid increases to 3 percent or the rate of inflation, whichever is less.

Sen. Dave Knudson, R-Sioux Falls, the prime sponsor of the bill, told legislators that his proposal appropriately balances the needs of K-12 schools with the broader interests of the state budget.

Under the Knudson plan, schools would receive a 4 percent per-student increase unless the state budget is in trouble or inflation is abnormally high. In tight economic times, increases would mirror state revenue growth. When inflation is higher than normal, schools are eligible to receive up to a 7 percent per-student increase. 

In addition to changing the index factor, Sen. Knudson’s proposal also implements a freeze in K-12 spending for FY11, eliminating the 1.2 percent increase required by current law.

Sen. Knudson, who has historically fought to boost state aid to schools, characterized the funding freeze is a “very bitter pill to swallow.”

He told lawmakers that the state’s budget deficit has grown $8 million since December, when the governor first presented a recommended state budget. Lawmakers' insistence on reversing the governor's property tax freeze, combined with an unexpected 500-student jump in the K-12 fall enrollment, has lifted the total FY11 budget shortfall to $40 million, Sen. Knudson said. 

“As much as I would like see schools have an increase this year, I don’t see how we can afford it,” Sen. Knudson said.

The state’s budget picture didn’t prevent Sen. Sandy Jerstad, D-Sioux Falls, from offering an amendment to SB 124 to reinstate the $57 per-student increase. She positioned the vote as a rubber-meets-the-road moment.

“Do we value education or not?” asked Sen. Jerstad.

The amendment failed on a partisan vote, but SB 124 drew unanimous support from the committee.

The Senate will consider the full measure this week.

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

• The committee killed SJR 7, a bill that would have asked voters to approve an amendment to the South Dakota Constitution to prohibit schools from using public funds to challenge state laws. Senate Education Chair Cooper Garnos, R-Presho, was the swing vote on the 4-3 decision to send the measure to the 41st Legislative Day.
  
• After a failed attempt by Sen. Sandy Jerstad, D-Sioux Falls, to restore the 1.2 percent increase for K-12 education for FY11, the committee unanimously endorsed SB 124, better knowing as the "Knudson bill". 
  

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

A House Committee voted Thursday to endorse Governor Rounds' plan to freeze the per-student allocation, passing HB 1050 on a partisan 6-2 vote.

Jim Terwilliger, a representative of the state budget office, briefed lawmakers on the mechanics of the legislation. The proposal freezes the amount of per-student funding delivered in FY 11, he said, meaning the dollar amount would continue to increase in future years.

The governor's representative told lawmakers that the funding freeze is necessary, given the state's economic downturn. In asking for their support, he reminded lawmakers of past sessions when lawmakers provided additional money to K-12 education. Those decisions, he said, delivered a total of $125 per student more than the law required.

ASBSD Executive Director Wayne Lueders testified against the legislation, challenging the need to implement an education funding freeze and offering comparisons of how state government has grown at nearly twice the rate of per-student education funding.

“The state's financial troubles aren't the result of overspending on K-12 education,” he said, before asking lawmakers to honor a state law that requires a $57 increase for FY11.

Lueders also reminded legislators of their past decisions to cut aid and programs, telling lawmakers that the state's plans to prop up its reserve accounts have come at the expense of programs that provide additional teacher training and expand programs for students.

Closing his testimony, Lueders asked lawmakers to provide local school boards with some measure of consistency.

“Over the past several years, there has been a wave of temporary funding,” he said, citing examples of programs created one year then cut the next. “A vote for this bill takes away the only confidence that our public system has in a consistent funding stream.”

Jim Hutmacher, a lobbyist for the state's small and mid-sized schools, also opposed the legislation. He asked lawmakers to remember their constitutional obligation to fund schools and railed against the state's history of providing one-time money.

Hutmacher also took time to comment on other pieces of legislation filed to take resources away from schools.

“I believe there are a lot of school districts that can survive this year on zero percent,” Hutmacher said before telling lawmakers that may not be the case if other pieces of legislation are passed.

The House is scheduled to hear the legislation on Feb. 9.

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

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

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

• The committee took testimony only on HB 1150, the bill to trim the small school adjustment money for students who are open enrolled. A long line of opponents testified against the bill, including the Department of Education and the lobbyist representing Rapid City and Sioux Falls school districts.
• The committee unanimously endorsed HB 1108, the fund balance legislation. It was amended to ensure fund balances can't grow after July 1, 2011.
• The committee killed legislation that would allow for the posting of school board minutes on a school web site.
  

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

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

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

The Senate Education committee unanimously endorsed an amended SB 63 Thursday, paving the way for the state to make its application for federal Race to the Top funds.

Lawmakers stripped the provisions to allow local school boards to apply for charter schools, leaving only the portions that allow the State Board of Education to charter a single pilot school. As drafted, the state's chartering authority is conditional upon receiving the Race to the Top grant.

Education Secretary Tom Oster introduced the legislation, providing a brief overview of the state's plans to develop a residential secondary school offering instruction in grades 9-12 and two years of college. The school - which will focus on science, technology, engineering and mathematics instruction - would give enrollment preference to American Indian students, but would be open to all students.

The secretary told lawmakers that the state has a economic and moral imperative to improve educational outcomes for South Dakota's American Indian students, who have historically not performed as well on state assessments and are less likely to graduate from high school or college.

Keith Moore, chief diversity officer for the University of South Dakota, and Stacy Phelps, a member of the State Board of Education and Indian education pioneer, joined Oster in pitching the legislation.

"It's going to be a school of hope, a school of promise," said Keith Moore, the state's former Indian Education director, after assuring lawmakers that the non-traditional residential school would not conjure up images of boarding schools that have strained relationships with the state's tribal entities.

Phelps said the school would be based on the successes of South Dakota’s GEAR UP initiative, a state Indian education initiative that has proven to improve high school graduation rates and dramatically improved the number of American Indian students who have completed college.

Legislators were impressed by the application and gave it their full support.

Sen. Bob Gray, R-Pierre, briefly summed up his endorsement of the legislation.

“This could be the most significant thing we do this session,” he said.

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 challenging budget situation may have just gotten a lot worse.

Concerns about the governor's plan to freeze per-student funding may fade into the background now that the state's budget builders have cast doubt on whether they will provide funding for an unplanned increase in the state's K-12 enrollment.

The revelation came Tuesday during an unusually tense Department of Education budget briefing before the Joint Appropriations Committee.

Tami Darnall, the department's finance director, made news by telling lawmakers that there are 623 more students in the state's public schools than education department officials anticipated. Gov. Rounds built his budget assuming a 500-student increase, but enrollment jumped by 1,123 students this year. The spike in fall enrollment will require $3.7 million in addition to the governor's recommended budget, Darnall said.

Appropriators, some probing for answers and some looking to assign blame, demanded to know why the state's enrollment estimates were off. Lawmakers seemed vexed at the increase and irked that the sudden increase would further challenge the state's budget.

Rep. Jim Putnam, R-Armour, hinted that lawmakers may be hesitant to fund the increase. He said the figures disrupted the budget process and would set a precedent for other agencies to bring updated information to lawmakers to ask for additional funds.

“What's happened is we're jamming something into the process ... within a very short period of time,” Rep. Putnam said. “We have decisions to be made with amendments to the general bill and this is one that will probably be talked about.”

Education officials offered several explanations, attributing a part of the increase to the state's increase in the compulsory attendance age. They also tried to help lawmakers understand the potential for inaccuracy within the reporting system.

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

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

A group of lawmakers are aiming to give school districts greater flexibility to manage general fund reserves, according to legislation filed in the House of Representatives

Under HB 1108, which is being offered by Rep. Bill Van Gerpen, R-Tyndall, the maximum allowable fund balance will be 40 percent through 2014. Under current law, the cap is set to drop to 25 percent in 2012.

Rep. Van Gerpen, a former school board member who now serves as Vice-Chair of the House Education Committee, has been an outspoken critic of fund balance restrictions and often criticized the state's policy that requires schools to spend down reserves. In a School Administrators of South Dakota podcast prior to session, he suggested he was bringing the measure to give school boards more flexibility during the difficult economy.

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

Lawmakers have given initial approval to sweeping changes to South Dakota law that allows public employees to return to work after being retired.

Members of the Senate Retirement Laws Committee voted 3-2 Thursday evening to pass SB 18, legislation that will likely dramatically reduce a practice referred to “retire-rehire” by deterring public employers from hiring retirees and penalizing individuals who return to work following retirement.

Rob Wylie, executive director of the South Dakota Retirement System, asked lawmakers to adopt the changes. He told lawmakers that the proposal is designed to compensate for the costs associated with current return to work laws – a sum he estimated at $5 million annually. The changes are designed to prevent possible investigation by the IRS, Wylie said.

If the legislation passes, there would be a mandatory three-month waiting period before a retired employee can return to work. Individuals returning to work after three months would lose 15 percent of their anticipated benefit and future employer contributions – both would be paid to the South Dakota Retirement System.

ASBSD Chief Financial Officer Bill Lynch testified in opposition to the measure, arguing that the proposal infringes on a local school boards' ability to make hiring decisions. Lynch told lawmakers that current and future teacher shortages will challenge school districts, adding that school boards need all the tools available to keep qualified educators.

Joining in opposition were Jim Holbeck and Wayne Semmler, two superintendents who questioned the motives of the legislation. Both administrators argued that the changes were brought about under false pretenses and would drive educators out of state.

Two members of the committee – Gene Abdullah, R-Brandon, and Sandy Jerstad, D-Sioux Falls – were swayed by opponent testimony. But Tom Nelson, R-Spearfish Lead, Corey Brown, R-Gettysburg, and Kathy Miles, D-Sioux Falls, jointed to move the measure along. No legislators took time to explain their position on the vote.

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

It took a little time for lawmakers to get their messaging straight, but members of House Education gave unanimous approval Wednesday to a proposal that would allow federal special education dollars to be used for capital purchases related to special education.

With the flexibility provided by HB 1021, schools will be able to use federal IDEA funds to make capital purchases – computers, interactive SMART boards and other equipment – as long as the purchase goes to support special education.

Tami Darnall, the education department's finance director, told lawmakers that federal law already gives schools the option, but state laws restrict the practice.

Committee members weren't opposed to legislation; they were just trying to fend off concerns raised Tuesday as the House debated HB 1020, a measure that would allow schools the opportunity to transfer some stimulus special education dollars to other funds.

During floor discussion Tuesday, lawmakers raised concerns that the legislation would set a dangerous precedent.

Rep. Nick Moser, R-Yankton, feared that schools may rely more on special education dollars to pay general fund expenses.

“I hope it's not a situation that we're doing that at the expense of some of our special education students,” Moser said.

Moser and other concerned lawmakers advocated for a sunset clause on HB 1020, similar to the language added to legislation adopted last year that granted additional capital outlay flexibility. That option wasn't supported, and the House passed HB 1020 Tuesday with only eight dissenting votes.

But Tuesday's debate obviously impacted education committee members during Wednesday's discussion on HB 1021.

Darnall had to assure lawmakers that appropriate checks are in place to protect special education students. She said expenses would be reviewed by special education and finance officials at the state level and that the department will consider how schools have used the new authority in the event a school applies to the special education extraordinary cost fund.

Once satisfied that the bill didn't divert dollars from special education, lawmakers added language to make the law effective once the governor signs the bill and then endorsed the measure.

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

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

The plan, found in SB 24, was proposed by the South Dakota Department of Education.

Melody Schopp, state director of teacher quality, told lawmakers that creation of teaching performance standards would provide a pathway for teachers to improve throughout their career. Establishing the standards would provide teachers a way to evaluate their own performance and help provide administrators some guidance, Schopp said.

The teaching standards, including suggestions for mentoring new teachers, would be developed by a 17-member work group and eventually adopted by the state board of education. The same group will later develop a model teacher evaluation that districts may use, but aren't required to implement.

As drafted, the legislation mandated teacher evaluations each year.

ASBSD Executive Director Wayne Lueders asked lawmakers to modify the bill, providing districts with flexibility to provide more frequent evaluations during the first three years of employment. Lueders also asked that districts have more flexibility for more experienced teachers that may not need to be evaluated annually.

Lawmakers endorsed the changes, and then voted to support the measure.

The bill will eventually lead to a three-step teacher licensing procedure, Schopp said. The teaching standards would be used to create categories of teachers – beginning teachers, professional teachers and instructional leaders – and identify how teachers would move from one level to the next.

Unlike legislation in previous years, the bill does not tie the tiered licensure system to teacher compensation – something the Lueders said would be hard for the school board association to support.

“If you're going to mandate funding with the tiered licensure system, then we have some concerns about how that's going to work,” Lueders said.

When asked, Schopp offered little details about how the three-step licensing system would work, telling lawmakers that the outcome of the work group would determine how the professional pathway will work.

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

The House Education committee on Friday unanimously endorsed legislation to allow school districts to transfer some federal special education funding to other funds. The bill (HB 1020) is being pitched by the Department of Education.

If the flexibility passes the state house, districts can transfer local SPED funds in an amount not greater than 50 percent of its annual increase in federal IDEA dollars to any other fund. The funds could be used to carry out any activities allowable under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. Districts that use the flexibility lose the safety net of applying to the extraordinary cost fund.

Tami Darnall, finance director for the education department, told lawmakers the spending flexibility would be useful for districts who are tying to spend special education funds authorized by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. The funds have a 2011 use-it-or-lose it clause, she said.

The Department of Education talked last summer about making the change via administrative rule, but that plan was panned after critics said the Legislature should weigh-in on the matter.

The idea met little resistance Friday. After asking a few clarification questions, members of House Education passed the legislation on a 14-0 vote.

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

It's South Dakota School Board Recognition Week, and that means we can take a moment to say thanks to the men and women who serve on locally elected school boards.

Turns out, lawmakers took note as well.

At the start of Thursday's Senate Education meeting, Chair Cooper Garnos, R-Presho, took a minute to show its appreciation.

“This week is school board recognition week. I think we, as legislators, know how hard [school board members] work for what very little pay they have. They are extremely important to the process of education and if it weren't for the people who serve on school boards we wouldn't have as good a system as we do,” Sen. Garnos said. “You're very important and we certainly appreciate you.”

On top of that, Lt. Gov. Dennis Daugaard, who serves as the presiding officer over the South Dakota Senate, took time to thank school board members. He read a portion of the executive proclamation at the beginning of Thursday's Senate floor debate.

If you've celebrated School Board Recognition Week, drop ASBSD a note and let us know how it worked out.

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

The Senate Retirement Laws Committee has scheduled a hearing for Jan. 21 to consider a collection of legislative proposals that will reshape return-to-work rules, limit the cost-of-living adjustments for retirees and eliminate the optional spouse protection provision.

The package – found in SB 18, SB 19 and SB 20 – was endorsed last November by the South Dakota Retirement System (SDRS) Board of Directors. According to SDRS, the changes are necessary to improve the long-term stability of the system.

Changes to the return-to-work provisions, also known as retire-rehire, are certain to draw the most attention.

The return-to-work changes (SB 18), create a mandatory three-month break in service for anyone who retires and then is rehired into any employer that pays into SDRS. The bill also contains several punitive provisions related to retire-rehire, including an SDRS surcharge to employers for allowing a retire-rehire.

SDRS officials have said the limitations to retire-rehire will make the system IRS audit-proof and save money. ASBSD supports the employment decisions of local school boards and opposes the changes to retire-rehire policies.

The package (SB 20) also includes revisions to the cost-of-living adjustment for retirees. Currently, benefit payments increase at 3.1 percent annually due to the adjustment, also referred to as COLA. If the legislation passes, COLA increases will be 2.1 to 3.1 percent each year, depending on CPI-W.

The final piece (SB 19) prohibits new enrollments in a program that allows SDRS members to purchase an optional spouse protection plan. For individuals who currently buy into the program, the contribution will increase to 1.5 percent.

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

Gov. Rounds' proposal to freeze per-student funding won't change the “3 percent or less” law that governs annual per-student increases.

The legislation that aims to enact the governor's proposal – filed as HB 1050 – instead changes the number by which the index factor is applied. The measure simply sets the per-student allocation at $4,804.60 for FY11, the same amount as the current year.

Under currently law, the per-student allocation would be $4,862.26, which would be an increase of $57.66. The governor has said the state can't afford the $3.8 million necessary to provide the increase required by law.

Though he's pushing the freeze, the governor won't seek to permanently eliminate the “3 percent or less” index factor language, a law that he has historically championed as evidence that the state considers education funding a top priority.

In the past, the governor has characterized the law as the only guaranteed funding increase contained in state law. This year, the governor has not made reference to the law as a guarantee.

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

Legislative leadership took to the airwaves Thursday night to lay claim to their positions on Gov. Rounds' proposal to freeze K-12 education funding.

The early-session hand-tipping came during a legislative preview that aired on South Dakota Public Broadcasting. While much of the conversation centered on the state's budgetary issues, four influential lawmakers gave some insight into how the education funding debate will develop this session.

Speaker of the House Tim Rave, R-Baltic, represented the “share the pain” perspective, offering modest support for the governor's proposal.

“I think that is on the table, and I think, personally, that needs to be on the table,” said Rep. Rave.

He fell short of offering a full-throated endorsement of the funding freeze, but did say he has talked to some superintendents who admit that K-12 education should shoulder its share of the state's budget woes.

Senate Majority Leader Dave Knudson, R-Sioux Falls, laid claim to the “brighter day” platform. He supports freezing per-student state aid, but plans to tether that to a change in the state's index factor that will offer increased education aid when the state's economy rebounds.

“As we share this pain of this deep recession, I think we need to give schools promise of a brighter day,” he said.

Democratic leaders Bernie Hunhoff, D-Yankton, and Scott Heidepriem, D-Sioux Falls, resisted the governor's proposal. As they articulated their “safety net” stance, the minority party leaders said their aim is to find the $3.8 million needed to provide the mandatory inflationary increase to K-12 education.

“I think it's affordable,” Rep. Hunhoff said of the 1.2 percent per-student increase. “We have never over-funded education, but at least we've given the school boards some kind of predictability.”

Sen. Scott Heidepriem criticized the governor's plan, which he said has provided schools with a “safety net” by establishing a minimum per-student increase. He also left the door open to supporting Sen. Knudson's index factor legislation. The worse scenario, he said, would be freezing funding without the promise of a “brighter day.”

“That, to me, would be a double-whammy for education,” Sen. Heidepriem said.

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

Education Secretary Tom Oster told lawmakers Wednesday that education service agencies are important to the state's education system and cautioned lawmakers against further cuts to the program.

His comments came during a 90-minute briefing before the House Education committee. The overview, which is a standard first-day fare in the education committee, allows the state's top education official a chance to bring lawmakers up to speed about new or innovative programs and preview any forthcoming legislation.

During the wide-ranging discussion, Oster praised the state's education service agencies and the teacher preparation services they provide. The support comes a year after lawmakers stripped more than $1.7 million in state funding for the program.

“It is a vital service. ” Oster said. “If that program goes away, the chances of it coming back are slim.”

He told lawmakers that school districts chipped-in to keep ESAs afloat following the budget cut. According to Oster, local schools used $900,000 in stimulus funds to displace lost state funding.

According to state budget documents, the Department of Education requested $1 million in state funds to help pay for the ESAs in FY11. That's twice the amount legislators were willing to give last year, but still $1.2 million less than the $2.2 million that lawmakers guaranteed when they officially created the agencies in 2007.

The governor didn't support the secretary's full request, opting instead to carry forward the $500,000 authorized for the current 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

Gov. Rounds briefly mentioned the possibility during his state of the state address that a second federal stimulus package may ease the state's budget woes.

The governor said an amendment to pending federal health care legislation may provide states with more cash to fulfill the state's Medicare and Medicaid obligations. The passing mention didn't include any estimated numbers, but Gov. Rounds did say that the state can't count on relief from Congress.

In December, the U.S. House of Representatives passed a $174 billion measure, titled the Jobs for Main Street Act, which features several streams of aid to local and state governments, including $23 billion to prevent cuts to K-12 and higher education. The money would come as an extension to the State Fiscal Stabilization Fund created under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. The U.S. Senate is expected to consider the legislation in the coming weeks.

Gov. Rounds didn't mention the Jobs for Main Street Act specifically, but referred to Congress' efforts to create “Stimulus II.”

Much like he did last year, the governor cautioned lawmakers on relying on federal stimulus dollars to balance the state's budget. Instead, he called on legislators to “maximize the recovery” by passing a balanced budget with little reliance on the state's two reserve accounts.

If federal relief did come, Gov. Rounds said, the state would likely use the money instead of spending down the state's reserves.

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

In his final state of the state address, Gov. Mike Rounds opted for less controversy and more harmony.

His hour-long message generally steered clear of the budgetary issues the state is facing and concentrated instead on the two-term governor's accomplishments in his eight years in office. Most of his points centered around one of the governor's often-referenced goals: creating more opportunities for young South Dakotans to stay and make a living in their home state.

Gov. Rounds touched on a number of the state's most high profile wins – the Sanford Lab, the Lewis and Clark Pipeline, saving Ellsworth Air Force Base – as he marched through successes stemming from the far-reaching 2010 initiative he developed during the early years of his administration.

When he mentioned K-12 education, he struck a positive tone.

Using assessment scores and other evidence as the backdrop, the governor spoke highly of the progress the state's students and public schools are making. He also mentioned a number of policy shifts – compulsory attendance, mandatory kindergarten, virtual education, improved technology and stronger graduation requirements – as evidence of the attention he's given the state's public schools.

The governor didn't mention the success of his 2010 Education Initiative, a plan that contains a host of unaccomplished goals. He credited the state's universities and technical schools for their advancements in workforce development, but was silent on the role K-12 has in driving the state's economic engine.

When it was time to talk school funding, the governor didn't wade into troubled waters. Instead, he said the state devoted “extra money” to K-12 when it was available.

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

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

Citing a slowly recovering economy and increased expenses from federally subsidized healthcare programs, Gov. Mike Rounds told lawmakers during his FY11 budget address that this year the state can’t afford to provide K-12 education with the legally required 1.2 percent per-student increase.

By forgoing the increase, which amounts to $57 per student, the state can save $4 million next year. The governor also plans to freeze property tax levies for FY11, a maneuver that will shift an additional $4 million from state expenses onto local property tax payers, bringing the state’s total cost-savings to $8 million.

The governor issued warnings regarding the health of the state in recent weeks, reportedly telling various groups that the state’s budget hole was as large as $170 million. During his budget address to lawmakers on Dec. 8, Gov. Rounds fleshed out the state’s economic picture.

According to Gov. Rounds, the state has a $16 million deficit in the current fiscal year (the year that ends June 30, 2010). The gap, created by a drop in state revenue, will be closed using money from a variety of cash accounts without using the state’s two reserves accounts.

Looking forward, the governor forecasts a slight economic recovery. State revenues are projected to increase $34 million in FY11, a 3 percent increase above FY10. Revenues will be bolstered next year by stronger sales tax projections and a rebound in contributions on interest earned from the state’s trust funds.

While revenues are believed to rebound next year, the governor’s budget still paints a bleak financial picture for the state. According to Gov. Rounds, “mandatory” expenses will grow more than $50 million next year and the state will have to use $32 million in reserves to balance the FY11 budget.

In his address to legislators, the governor also urged cautious spending in FY11 in order to lessen the impact of budgetary shortfalls in FY12; the year stimulus money is set to expire. According to his budget numbers, the state will have a $107 million budget gap in two years. The large gap will only exist, however, if the state’s economy does not recover further and lawmakers do not enact spending cuts.