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

School board meeting information packets must be made available to the public prior to school board meetings, according to a proposed law endorsed Tuesday by the South Dakota Senate.

The change is a part of SB 104, a measure that tweaks several transparency laws that govern open meetings and public records. In addition to new rules regarding board packets, the bill clarifies that gatherings of groups that advise school boards do not fall under the scope of the state’s open meeting laws.

The Senate-passed legislation, a scaled back from the version originally introduced, is the result of weeks of negotiations between the South Dakota Newspaper Association, the state’s most active advocate for media access, and officials representing state and local governments.

Senate Majority Leader Dave Knudson, R-Sioux Falls, who led last year’s effort to enact sweeping revisions to South Dakota’s public records laws, told fellow lawmakers Tuesday he felt the legislation struck an “appropriate balance” between competing interests.

In cooperation with our member districts, ASBSD worked to completely rewrite the measure. The final product, amended for the last time Tuesday on the Senate floor, allows for transparency while affording schools room to govern.

The bill’s requirement to make board meeting packets available comes in the form of a change to chapter 1-27 of South Dakota Codified Law, the section of law that outlines public records.

According to the proposed law, “any printed material relating to an agenda item of the meeting” that is distributed to the entire school board must be posted on a school website or made available in the business office at least 24 hours in advance of the meeting.

The bill's call for “any printed material” to be made public also contains exceptions, protecting information related to executive sessions. In addition, public records currently exempted from disclosure, including correspondence authored by employees, may also remain private. 

Senate Bill 104 was also designed to clarify whether board subcommittees and advisory groups that report to the board need to meet in open session, a legal gray-area that has been the subject of several legal complaints by the state’s newspapers.

As drafted, the bill contained the Newspaper Association’s attempt to clarify the gray area, which sought to require open meetings for any meeting of any group that could possibly discuss or provide a recommendation to a governing board.

ASBSD opposed the first version of the proposed law, citing concerns that the starter bill contained an overly broad interpretation of public meetings that the association felt would have quelled citizen input, limited the free exchange of ideas and ultimately hamper the quality of the recommendations governing boards receive from advisory groups. 

The Senate-passed version contains a balanced definition of what constitutes an open meeting, reserving the public meeting requirement for only those entities “vested with the authority to exercise any sovereign power derived from state law.”

While board subcommittee meetings and task forces won’t be subject to the open meetings laws, SB 104 does require that final recommendations or reports of advisory groups need to be presented during a regular school board meeting. The bill also creates time to provide public discourse on subcommittee recommendations, requiring that governing boards wait until the next regular meeting to take action on input received from advisory groups.

The bill now moves to the House.

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

We’ll break quickly from our regularly scheduled legislative coverage to offer a shout out to education advocate Dr. Fred Deutsch, a school board member from Watertown.

Fred is one of many school board members who devote their personal time to communicating with legislators about state education policy, and he’s been particularly active lately.

As the Watertown Public Opinion reports, he’s leading the charge against taking a step backwards by lowering the compulsory attendance age to 16.

From the Public Opinion:

District 5 legislators took grief Saturday morning from school officials agitated over a proposed law that would allow the mandatory school attendance age to drop to 16.

House Bill 1168, which would repeal a law passed two years ago that raised the age to 18, is sponsored by Watertown Reps. Bob Faehn and Roger Solum, both Republicans.

Watertown School Board member Dr. Fred Deutsch described the repeal "as a bill for South Dakotans to fail" at the first legislative crackerbarrel, held at the Watertown Regional Library.

Citing the fact that high school dropouts are more likely to earn less money or end up in prison than graduates, Deutsch said the bill would lower state standards.

"We're working hard to have every single child excel and every single child graduate, and you're trying to pull out the rug from under us," Deutsch said. "It's a bad bill all around."

And Fred doesn’t just speak up at the local level. He recently made a trip to Washington, D.C. to learn about developments in federal education policy and to visit with South Dakota’s Congressional delegation about the future of education.

The National School Boards Association captured a shot of Fred in his exchange with Education Secretary Arne Duncan.

So…Open Forum sends a shout-out to Dr. Fred Deutsch, author of the School-of-Thought blog. Keep up the good work, Fred.

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

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