House committee approves bill requiring teacher salary boost

PIERRE, S.D. (AP) — A South Dakota House committee on Monday approved a proposal to prod school districts to use most of their boost in state funding for teachers’ salaries.

The Republican-dominated committee approved the bill on an eight to six vote, sending it to debate on the House floor. Lawmakers were also considering whether to approve a historic 6% boost in state funding for schools to keep up with inflation.

In recent years, South Dakota has been trying to climb up the rankings of states with the lowest average teacher pay in the country. But even as a 2016 sales tax hike channeled more money to school districts, South Dakota’s average teacher pay has remained among the lowest in the nation.

Republican Rep. Hugh Bartels is championing the bill, which would extend for three years a requirement that came with the 2016 tax plan. It would require school districts to use at least 85% of their funding increase for teachers’ salaries and benefits. School districts would risk losing funding if they don’t at least match average teacher compensation from 2017, but they could also apply for a waiver if they fail to.

“This is a way to collect some data to make sure that we raise teacher salaries so we don’t fall behind,” Bartels told the committee.

The teacher’s union, South Dakota Education Association, is pushing the bill, while the organization that represents school districts, Associated School Boards of South Dakota, has not joined a side in the debate.

However, one district superintendent, Kimberly Kludt of the Deubrook Area School District, spoke against it, arguing that it would create “unintended and significant consequences” as school boards see year-to-year fluctuations in teacher compensation.

As teachers retire or change their health care plans, districts may see a drop in average teacher compensation, even if they are raising salaries across the board. Kludt said the requirement forces school boards “to give raises to teachers that they weren’t planning and may not be able to sustain.”