An article was just posted this morning from the Dakota Scout which should be on everyone’s reading list, as it lays out the playing field for the big battle of the next legislative session, where $4 million is being proposed to go to those who seek to place their children in private schools, or to not provide a formal education at all, instead providing homeschool instruction. Why should it be of concern? Because of the open hostility being displayed by some towards teachers and administrators:
“As educators, we will never compromise our commitment to doing everything we can to educate every student who enters our school buildings and classrooms,” SDEA Public Affairs Director Sandra Waltman told The Dakota Scout, confirming that attempts to dialogue with the state and lawmakers working most closely with the Governor’s Office on the proposal have been unsuccessful. “That is why we need lawmakers to listen to our concerns about how voucher programs will hurt public schools and, more importantly, the students who attend them.”
and..
South Dakota House Majority Leader Scott Odenbach, who’s working closely with DOE to draft legislation for his colleagues to consider, dismissed the notion that public educators aren’t being consulted.
“They do have a seat at the table given all the lobbying they do during session, and I know their positions, so it wouldn’t be productive because they’re not willing to compromise,” the Spearfish Republican said.
Odenbach said that while work on a bill is still under way, it’s likely the proposal could call for incremental expansion – both in funding and eligibility – over a number of years.
Am I reading House Majority Leader Scott Odenbach being snippy with educators because they have associations that represent them in Pierre, and declaring that he won’t meet with teacher groups, “because he knows their positions, so it wouldn’t be productive because they’re not willing to compromise?”
How would he know what their position is if he won’t meet with them in the process of crafting the legislation? If Scott is leading the charge on a plan to gut and strip mine the public resources that would go to Spearfish High School for purposes of diverting them to private schools and homeschoolers, it would seem that as one of their representatives in Pierre he could make the time to sit down with teachers to hear their concerns, whether he agrees with them or not.
Which makes this headline kind of ironic..
Refusing to talk with teachers is an odd kind of advocacy.
It has been a number of years since South Dakota teachers got fired up to get involved in the political process en masse, but the attitudes displayed by those such as Rep. Odenbach in refusing to even hear the concerns of his educator constituents may rouse those groups to fight back.
I remember going to Pierre Football Games many years ago, and you could not get through a ticket line without a gaggle of teachers with clipboards looking for signatures on ballot petitions. Kicking a sleeping bear might not be in Scott’s best interest. They do know how to organize and fight.
This might be the opening salvos we’re hearing in the battle that will become 2026 Referred Law 22.
Public Ed lobby is getting exactly what they asked for by refusing to acknowledge the movement in public sentiment towards private and home schooling due to their policies on age inappropriate material and gender identity
What districts have had any of the issues you claim though? Surely you must have proof and not anecdotal crap from Facebook?
It’s this stance that proves why you weren’t re-elected. Everyone has a right to place their students in a school that they feel is appropriate. HOWEVER, we as citizens of South Dakota don’t have to pay for your choice. If you want to exit the public school system, go ahead. It’s at your expense. If you want money from the state, you will have to abide by the rules of the state. Simple as that!!
Doug has been trying to get taxpayer dollars to support his private school for years.
Of course we know where odenbach is on this. He’s not a consensus builder and I expect the house to be nothing but infighting amongst the conservatives over who is more virtuous.
The real watch is the leadership of Carl Perry in the senate. His smooth and understated style would have kept the house together and on task. Too bad he had to move over.
Good point Carl!
Someone’s tongue is firmly in cheek.
What Ted Kennedy was to the Democrats and being the lion of the United States Senate Senator Carl Perry will be the lion of our South Dakota state senate. His leadership will create a pathway.
Government hostility toward education is a given in SD.
For a party that extols local control and “less government” it certainly looks the opposite. The House will become exactly what Pat has stated, a race to see who is the most conservative while promoting garbage social/moral control bills. The SD Legislature has lost its way and we will be paying the price for the next 2 years. Focus on what matters to all of us, not dumb bills that cater to the ultra right wing of the party.
Hate to burst your bubble, but if you read the South Dakota State Constitution, it says exactly that:
ARTICLE VIII
EDUCATION AND SCHOOL LANDS
§ 1. Uniform system of free public schools. The stability of a republican form of government depending on the morality and intelligence of the people, it shall be the duty of the Legislature to establish and maintain a general and uniform system of public schools wherein tuition shall be without charge, and equally open to all; and to adopt all suitable means to secure to the people the advantages and opportunities of education.
https://sdlegislature.gov/Constitution/8
I’d bet a dollar this statement came from Katie from Belle Fourche or maybe braithwaite. Reading and comprehension are not strong suits. And you really shouldn’t bother bringing facts into the discussion. It’s rude.
We all have the option of school choice in South Dakota. We have free public education for everyone! If you wish to send children to private schools or home school that is the responsibility of the parents to pay. Public money public schools. Private money private schools.
So parents choosing a school to meet their needs is only the prerogative of the rich?
Maybe public schools and the effort to fund alternative educational choices would be in this position if public school administration and teachers listened more to parents instead of not only ignoring parents but trying to undermine parents.
Problems don’t occur in a vacuum and when problems arise, taxpayer parents should be able to expect the people in charge to listen and deal with the problem instead of pretending there is no problem.
wouldn’t be in this position
Did you visit with public school teachers?
Volunteer in the classroom?
Get active within the public school system?
Attend public school board meetings?
Run for a public school board?
Yeah, but we’re already spending $600k for private school curriculum, so we gave up on that separation long ago.
The timing of this proposal is unfortunate. Why wasn’t this done when the coffers were full and state aid was getting huge increases? The message has always been we do what we can when we can. Focus on how large the increases have been and now it’s time to adjust. We can’t deficit spend. 4 million isn’t going to save public education but the precedent is the issue. SD can’t afford this program with the tax revenue we have. Public education can’t afford to lose the revenue it has with the current taxes. We are losing our sh@t about property taxes being too high already. When times are tough, you put new spending in the drawer. The end!
We are talking about State-aid which is allocated on number of students in each school district.
Diverting the state aid to go to the alternative educational choices will neither increase or decrease spending in Pierre. The end!!!!!!!!
Private schools should be funded privately. They have no business receiving public funds. The end!!!!!!
Considering the poor job our public schools are doing and ignoring parents, your attitude will destroy the consensus regarding school funding.* Clearly you care more about the institutions than the students because you refuse to allow the funds to follow the student outside the public school cabal.**
You people’s arrogance will get you what you sow.
* Currently, private schools in the Sioux Falls area have been encouraged to support bond issues for local public schools. If that encouragement goes the other way, good luck getting another bond issue approved in Harrisburg, Sioux Falls, etc. Once the consensus is destroyed, it is on you.
**if a student moves from Sioux Falls to Sturgis, the state aid dollars will move to Sturgis with the student. So, in essence your interest isn’t the student but the institution.
4 million that could have gone to public education is a diversion. They are getting a 1.25 increase this year and that number would be higher if not for the 4 million siphoned from the coffers for vouchers. And as I stated, it’s not the 4 million that’s the problem, it’s the beginning of another expenditure that would compete with other public education money. We only have so much money to split up.
A side note overlooked in these discussions. If all the private, charter, and homeschooling kids were all suddenly enrolled in the public schools, how much more would it cost the state? The local taxes portion of school funding would not change as that is set and not affected by student numbers.
It costs approximately $10,200 to educate a student in SD. 41% of that is paid by the state, or 4,200 per student.
In 2021–22 SD had approximately 162,500 students. 141,000 of those were in public schools. Of the 21,500 students left, 4.6% were homeschooled and 8.6% were in private schools. If these 21,500 were suddenly enrolled in public schools, it would cost the state an additional 90,000,000 yearly.
So, in essence these homeschooled and private students are saving the state $90,000,000 yearly. Not to mention the additional costs of of new buildings and staff.
Just food for thought.
Every argument made against charter schools as a drain on the system, apply to any mandate to peel off funding and send it to pay for private schooling alternatives.
If Odenbach and the legislature passes this this could be a great opportunity to defeat not only this scam via ballot measure but finally rid ourselves of these extremists at the ballot box. Bring it on!
I don’t know why the teachers don’t just hire themselves out as private tutors to wealthy families.
When covid shut down the schools in Massachusetts, my DIL, a former 3rd grade teacher turned college-professor, started home- schooling. I suggested she could start a private academy right there in their neighborhood. She said she would definitely have takers if she did.
The shift to private education could be profitable for teachers, and they could have just a few parents and no school boards or administrators to deal with.
If I were a private school administration, I would NOT take state money for students in my school.
Once you get state money, state rules must be followed. So much for the LOCAL CONTROL.
Plus the fact that Private schools do not have to take the disruptive kids.
Churches affiliated with these church schools that gain public tax dollars as proposed by this legislation should lose their tax exempt status.
Instead of celebrating and supporting churches willing to bear privately a substantial cost to educate students, public school advocates want to take away tax exempt status.
Private school families and those who oppose bond issues and more money for public education should just organize opposition to every bond issue to accommodate the needs in all the growing school districts. It’s clear the public school interests aren’t interested in families and students who want an alternative so why should private school families support tax increases for their children?
When they are out of room, the public schools might have a sense of appreciation for all those families who have supported public schools but didn’t use school taxes they paid. Then, maybe it will be possible to have a respectful conversation where some families and parents concerns and needs can be heard and satisfied.
I dont want my tax dollars supporting any religion. I dont pay taxes for you to proselytize. I could have sworn I read something about church and state somewhere….
We would like to thank Leader Scott Odenbach for doing the Devil’s work by opening up an opportunities for rapid expansion into South Dakota!
The Mission Of The Satanic Temple Is To Encourage Benevolence And Empathy, Reject Tyrannical Authority, Advocate Practical Common Sense, Oppose Injustice, And Undertake Noble Pursuits.
A Baphomet statue display would compliment the interior of the South Dakota state capitol in 2025.
https://thesatanictemple.com
Sweet. Odenbach can add Satanic Temple of South Dakota to his list of supporters. I hope he doesn’t forget their endorsement the next campaign season.
Somehow, I think that was someone’s attempt at sarcasm, and not a real thing.
I’m sure it was. But the thought of Satanists supporting Odenbach gave me a good chuckle.
Public money for public schools. Private money for private schools. We have school choice. Make your choice. I don’t want our public tax dollars going to pay for private schools or homeschooling.
You do know that all “public money” is taken from private citizens right? And, you know these private citizens can vote to be generous to public schools or not, right?
So, when you tell people “to make choice” for their children that they have no choice to have their tax dollars go to for the education of their choice, your statement is rather disingenuous and shows a wholesale lack of regard for their family and their children.
Our state needs revenue. Let’s start by taxing churches.
Churches in South Dakota pay sales tax on purchases and the contractors excise tax on construction. They are exempt from property tax because of a clause in a SD Constitution specifically exempts churches and most charitable entities from property tax (we don’t have an income tax), a clause common in all states because of a federal Supreme Court ruling on 1st Amendment freedom of religion extends an exemption of tax on their donations and property under the principle the power to tax can be the power to destroy (concept is the government can’t stop people from having demonstrations but they can set a fee to do so at $1 million which has the same effect).
So, if you want to be seen as clever, you have know what you are talking about.
Oh there are some opportunities there with violations and especially if this school voucher scheme takes effect using public tax dollars.
I have no idea what opportunities you see. But, maybe we should just mobilize the 15% of students that are already not using public schools and start voting down everything public education wants. We’ll save lots of taxes.
Or we could dump all those students on you, requiring you to spend over $100 million in buildings and over $30 million in operating costs. Yes, our taxes will go up but we’ll save more money in tuition.
And, we’ll vote in school board elections with values you aren’t gonna like.
Be careful what you wish for.
You people just dont have the leverage you think you do.
Good luck, go for it. 15% isn’t the leverage you think it is.
Is that a dare? Most bond issues don’t pass but by a few % points.
I don’t have a choice to have my tax dollars go to the road of my choice. I would have to pay for a private road in my development, yet my taxes are used for roads I don’t use. I understand that public money will be used for public roads even if i don’t use them. I expect my neighbors and I will have to pay for a private road.
You have a choice. Public or private. If private, you pay out of pocket.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/petergreene/2022/05/17/in-new-hampshire-libertarians-budget-cuts-and-a-small-town-battle-to-save-public-education/
When pissed off, the general public in other states has rallied to save their schools from small minded tyrants concerned only about their taxes and not about the welfare of their town and neighbors.