Press Release: Americans For Prosperity SD supporting HB 1273
In a press release issued this morning, the "Americans for Prosperity" group noted that it's going to be supporting Hal Wick's bill HB 1273 up for a vote in House Ed.
In a nutshell, the measure mandates that $.65 of every dollar be spent in the classroom:
In a nutshell, the measure mandates that $.65 of every dollar be spent in the classroom:
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE – February 12, 2006You can visit the South Dakota AFP Chapter website here.
Contact: Craig Dewey (605) 261-3842
Americans for Prosperity Supports Legislation to Help Solve Education Funding Problem
HB1273 would direct an additional $59 million for students and teachers without raising taxes
SIOUX FALLS – Last Friday the House Education Committee of the South Dakota Legislature held hearings regarding HB 1273 which would increase funding for in the classroom expenditures in South Dakota schools that will directly impact students and teachers. Action will be taken tomorrow in committee. Americans for Prosperity (AFP) is pleased to help lead discussion on issue.
“During the Taxpayer Trust Tour AFP traveled the state to get taxpayer input into the legislative process. The groundwork for HB 1273 was suggested by taxpayers,” said State Director of Americans for Prosperity Duane Sand. “AFP is pleased to help advance the discussion of critical importance to taxpayers during the legislative session with grassroots support. HB 1273 is a companion bill to any education funding bills that are passed.”
Currently school districts in South Dakota spend an average of 58.6 cents on classroom instruction expenditures. HB 1273 would require that 65 cents of education expenditures be allocated for classroom instructional expenses such as teacher salaries, students, books, and general supplies. The bill would inject an additional $59 million dollars into the classroom without raising taxes or force counties to op-out of local property taxes limits to fund education.”
Americans for Prosperity South Dakota Director Duane Sand indicated “this bill is a compromise between the current lawsuit pending against the state for $110 million additional dollars and doing nothing to solve the education funding issue. Schools should use the same best practices model that has made American businesses the most competitive in the world.”
During the committee hearing last Friday primary sponsor Rep. Hal Wick District 12 offered amendments to include libraries and librarians and allow an additional year for implementation.
Sand also said, “the intent of the bill is to find efficiencies in school district operations and direct that savings into the classroom. HB 1273 is an issue that unites teachers, students, parents, and taxpayers. This bill maintains local control over school districts, but demands statewide accountability. HB 1273 will help improve students’ education while simultaneously protecting taxpayers.”
Action will be taken on HB 1273 on Tuesday morning during the next meeting of the House Education Committee.
Comments
Minnesota's classroom funding is at 65% and many people in SOuth Dakota hold MN's system as a model.
I hope the House Education Committee gives this serious thought and passes the bill.
My wife is a teacher and she spends out of pocket to provide supplies in the classroom.
When was the last time an admiinistrator spent out of his own pocket for school supplies?
Last week some administrator was on KELO crying because he didn't have enough money for extra teachers and then in the next sentence he said that they would maintain a full football and basketball team and not cut out any long trips.
WTF? cut the miles on the school bus and the extra gas so you can fulfill your primary mission of teaching kids!
Isn't it sad when maintaining a full sports schedule and the attendant expensive trips trumps academics? And now they have added more sports so more expense there.
And in our district they want a new gym, which they are calling an events center in an effort to make it more appealing, but it is a school gym. And that on top of a recent opt out and a brand new elemetary school which ties up capital outlay funds for the foreseeable future.
what's cracked pot about AFP?
standing for lower taxes...
a more efficient school system...
taxpayer funded lobbying...
standing up against crazy amendment D...
sounds to me like your a rino another jealous republican who doesn't like grassroots orgs.
There is nothing outrageous about that.
HB 1273 is a reasonable approach to education funding. The bill will directly benefit students and teachers. They are what are education system are all about, educating our kids.
Table 5
SD is 35th in spending per child.
51st in teacher pay.
If more money is being spent on education then why aren't teacher salaries going up?
Of course HB 1273 allows for local control of school districts. Local administrators and school boards will still have the authority to control which efficiencies to find so more money can go in the classroom.
the old saw of local control is just too much for me tonight.
Under your logic you should also be required to fund your localy controlled school with locally earned taxpayer dollars.
That means if you don't like what the state wants to give you: opt out!
Also under your logic: what if a school only wanted to spend 30 cents of every dollar on education and the rest on administration...would that be ok? Under your logic it would.
Apparently, the state is spending more on education and our schools yet it is not trickling down to the classroom, as evidenced by the stats from the NEA.
At least this group has the balls to stand up to the education establishment in this state.
I think this would help solve some of Rounds' problems. However, he continuously advocates local control, which this takes away. I'll be interested to see what happens.
Anything that stops forcing schools to allocate to and use their capital outlay funds would be another start. I hope this bill takes some of that money and puts it in the existing classrooms.
As for sports the feds took care of that with emmm was it title 9 or what we lay say one sport for each sex. Sports have such high value on them for college monies "scholarships" that parents push and push and fight and fight. Setting up bad examples for our youth. Sports seem to over take the main reason we send kids to school.
SD does not have the tax base to keep maintaining all the schools and all the fed guidelines and state guidelines. If a school has even 1 child tht meets certain medical needs then a school must provide a school nurse. Schols serve breakfast, lunch an before long you wait supper will be coming along. Schools are for education not babysitting.
Let's face it there will never be enough money for schools there is always something else and now they want to put 3 and 4 year olds in school?????
Okay i will tie the fingers ups now and stop ranting....
please forgive many typos..just a brain storm post.
These afp boys are anything but grassroots. They're a shell organization out of Washington D.C. funded with federal tax dollars. They're using the same model the environmental groups use - Get congress to give them money, use it to open "state chapters, hire a couple of local political whores...oh, I mean lobbyists and claim to be "grassroots."
They do have an agenda and it isn't looking out for you or me. Don't take my word for it, check them out for yourself at guidestar.org. You can find the goods on them there.
What is the average spent "in the classroom" in South Dakota today ?
Who is higher?, Lower? Who will be affected and why?
what are the acceptable reasons for being less than 65% "in the classroom"
Here we go again "one size fits all"
Lets print a list of the current schools that are in "violation" of this "new benchmark"
I'm just playing devil's advocate, this might be a good thing, but, I havent heard enough.
Do all of you folks have the above info?, share it please.
I don't know about individual schrools because they either don't have or won't release that data.
I called SF district yesterday and they thought I was asking for an alien baby when I asked them.
They said they would call me back. Probably after this bill debate goes away. Then they don't have to answer any questions about it.
More misinformation from either the left NEA types, which in that case it would the pot calling the kettle black.
OR; some squishy jealous Republicans in this state who can't stand a grassroots organization coming in and advocating for sensible fiscal discipline at the state level.
And now they claim we need a new gym to the tune of $6, calling it an events center to make it go down better with the people who have to pay for it. Just shows the value put on sports. School board passed it last night and now it goes to the voters. Their spin on it is that they aren't deciding the school needs it, the people will. Give me a break, if they didn't approve it, we wouldn't need the vote.
As long as the entire school board and most of the people pushing this thing live in town and pay little taxes compared to farmers, they could care less how much it costs land owners. One of the board members I called about this had no idea it would cost farmers that much money. One board member seemed upset that I bothered him, and one was condescending that I would have the nerve to question the merits of this. Lovely.
Thanks for the info.
So we are talking about a 10% shift of current spending, to the class room, as a State average, ie 60% to 65%
What is the expected effect in this shift of funding? what will be improved ?
This bill would require that 54 cents on the dollar be spend on in the classroom expenditures (i.e. students, teacher salaries, supplies)
Each school district would decide what the money would be spent on.
The end result is that more money will be going to directly benefit students and help increase teacher salaries.