[{"_1":2,"_88":-5,"_89":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6525022,"mediaKeyId","3799180-79965f9f648d6c1e72c1103001d30a0f","parentId",3799180,"title","Rapid City Area Schools presents year‑end strategic plan report; facilities score jumps, student survey top‑box responses rise","audioSeconds",7327,"startMs",4599000,"endMs",11926000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3799180-79965f9f648d6c1e72c1103001d30a0f&start=4599&end=11926","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3799180-79965f9f648d6c1e72c1103001d30a0f/thumbnail_4599000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6525022/South-Dakota/Rapid-City-Area-Schools-presents-yearend-strategic-plan-report-facilities-score-jumps-student-survey-topbox-responses-rise","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6525022-18b57255b7c9f119a8e7dba0692148be/orig.mp4?Expires=1771154222&Signature=oWEkDWsDvFzZ5TMxNExIGxska~ymuLnjDg-p-udkDalDhoghPL7Ad0DVrEfX7W-ZHp7GlxTKbMuF-jLiYePldIUKR5cb2OWuKmdAyh4cV3XkqI3E7T-RKUGelAbXTuGM-~Fggody9tCl6YPCJy3DSnSSIcUtm-e0hzuObaYo6sWdMiMN3Y6Fu1HyDmGt6ldLEq7oy4rifLBtu7505tsw2M7iNPK6bf3DrGVkTBB4~E45fayGM1ytA9iwOtBgguqsWL2ChBKKCLH-dgjEcc2FE6XmDuqgi5flFtoUAtZgRA5aoNpuoCi6qKkoIp9yBfEcjIITkcOrCtDq9qb4UUXP-Q__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Rapid City Area Schools","date","2025-06-11T10:19:33.617Z","article","The Rapid City Area School District 51-4 presented its end-of-year strategic plan update at a board study session, highlighting mixed progress across five pillars—communication, community, staff, facilities and students—and outlining next steps for metrics and implementation.

District leaders said the year focused on system alignment and establishing repeatable feedback loops. Superintendent Dr. Strasser framed the presentation as a multi-year effort and said the district is \"about progress, we're about learning, adjusting, and continuing to move forward.\" The report summarized scorecard metrics, short-cycle actions, bright spots, barriers and planned follow-up steps for each pillar.

Key takeaways

Facilities: The district reported a notable gain on its facilities performance index—moving from a baseline of about 53 to a current average in the high 50s (reported as about 58.5–59.5). Staff said the district concentrated on high-impact, lower-cost ‘‘low-hanging fruit’’ projects this year and completed an impact project plan tied to the facilities master plan. District staff cautioned that construction-market volatility and urban-growth patterns could affect future timelines and costs.

Students: The student pillar included academics, behavior, attendance and special services. Two student-survey measures—students who say \"I like going to school\" and \"I feel like I belong\"—rose 5.18% and 7.25%, respectively, measured as top-box responses. Attendance (the state report-card attendance rate) held near the baseline (listed at roughly 81%) and was marked yellow, in part because the district said it had redesigned attendance tracking and would use this year as a new operational baseline after implementing an OCR-related voluntary agreement. Behavior incident reporting rose year over year; district leaders said the increase reflected more consistent and standardized reporting across buildings rather than a clear jump in underlying misconduct, and they described new \"behavior academies\" and an MTSS approach to address student needs.

Academics: The district reported mixed interim-assessment results. Kindergarten and grade K–1 achievement (Acuity/Acadience measures) showed high year-over-year gains from low starting baselines but did not meet an originally set proficiency target because the cohort started lower. NWEA MAP results for grades 2–8 showed growth that exceeded the prior year in math and ELA (about +3% math, +2% ELA) though short of the district's goal. PreACT participation and results met or exceeded the year target; ACT results slipped slightly. The district also reported increased Advanced Placement activity (a 17% year-over-year increase in AP tests administered) and 615 industry/occupational certifications earned by students.

Staffing and human resources: The staff pillar showed an 82% retention rate (goal 83%). Officials said the raw number of job applicants was a problematic metric (it can fall as retention increases) and will be replaced with more meaningful measures such as number of open positions and time to fill them. The district also rolled out a staff transfer portal and began a regular \"rounding\" practice—brief, frequent check-ins between managers and staff—as part of retention and engagement efforts.

Communication and community: District communications launched a new website and a staff/parent newsletter; staff reported nearly 1,444 app downloads for the district mobile app and increased social‑media followers (from roughly 17,643 to about 19,406). A parent-survey question about pride in their child's school met its goal (baseline 3.96, goal 4.06). Officials said volunteer tracking and outreach processes still need refinement: the district has a database of volunteers but lacks a consistent mechanism to match volunteers with building-level opportunities or to measure volunteer frequency and hours.

Next steps and board discussion

District staff said they will refine metrics in places where measurement no longer fits the work (for example, replacing an applicant-count goal with time-to-fill and unfilled-positions metrics) and continue to build committees—parent, staff and community—to solicit targeted feedback. Several board members praised the work and asked for more detail at follow-up meetings on items such as the behavior academies and the transfer portal. Superintendent Strasser and the pillar leads emphasized the district will continue short-cycle improvement work, re-examine metrics over the summer and return with recommendations to the board.

Ending

Board members thanked staff for the review and noted the plan will be used as an accountability roadmap. Staff reiterated the district's intent to keep adjusting metrics and to run additional short-cycle reviews as the new school year approaches.

","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","June 10, 2025 Board of Education Meeting","oneSentenceSummary","District staff delivered an end-of-year strategic plan update at a board study session, reporting gains on facility measures and student-survey top‑box items while noting areas—attendance, volunteer tracking and some academic measures—where next-year metric and operational changes are planned.","taxTitle","Rapid City Area School District 51-4, School Districts, South Dakota","taxId",12939,"location","South Dakota","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6525026,"Rapid City Area School district board certifies Area 3 and Area 6 results after public complaints about Mead County voting",3683,573000,4256000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3799180-79965f9f648d6c1e72c1103001d30a0f&start=573&end=4256","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3799180-79965f9f648d6c1e72c1103001d30a0f/thumbnail_573000.jpg","/articles/6525026/South-Dakota/Rapid-City-Area-School-district-board-certifies-Area-3-and-Area-6-results-after-public-complaints-about-Mead-County-voting","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6525026-eb152f4c0efee10f2033f6c85c76a528/orig.mp4?Expires=1771154222&Signature=lBDhipd2T0xqsJekkw7xeO5kiRpJs-YbpwZ0ijZ4uoMk~kgmV7jAxZ1D6~yfaY4JAtDgpZpqrwDjlcnC4Tp7VNwPglVgHRmNVQqGawu-MOH3Qq-MaTNmuUihxudL0QWSFHuoDA7ZlSCtJVllc3LRqpoM1n0VKlWCQmpxGAb2hncntFqBVnPt8rKCFydX7UgyGaQwnCj2awqLcKDhaac82EBqIPYQyslyUA9ktVzh~fs~rLIOONJ1ka2xmuBI4CeArjMBoIMA1WVbwFX-y1f9htf4HuBA9qOhelrVWziNQ2p1CaG1W8weQ904r-WDl8Om~ERrCe2suUEdQCYSBbquRA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Rapid City Area School District 51-4 Board of Education voted to certify the results of the recent school board elections for Area 3 and Area 6 following a public forum in which residents raised concerns about polling notices and ballot handling in Mead County.

The board completed a ministerial canvass of poll books and county summary reports and then voted to declare the winners: Area 3, Mrs. Rafferty; Area 6, Mrs. Clapham. The motion to certify passed, with the board recording that the motion \"passes 5 with 2 abstaining.\" The board did not change the tabulated results; South Dakota statutes give candidates five days after the canvas to request a recount and a longer period to file an election contest.

Why it matters: Public commenters urged the board to pause the canvass and investigate alleged statutory violations in Mead County. Board members and counsel repeatedly described the canvass as a ministerial step that makes available statutory remedies (recount, contest) but does not itself adjudicate the legality of how ballots were handled.

What public commenters told the board

Several people used the meeting's open-forum time to press the board on the Mead County polling procedures. Florence Thompson, who identified herself as president of South Dakota Parents Involved in Education, told the board she believed some Mead County voters were disenfranchised and said, \"I believe that there is definitely a need for a new election for the Mead County voters who were may have been disenfranchised due to a number of irregularities.\"

Another speaker, identified in the record as Mrs. Weaver, cited specific state election provisions and described what she said were failures to comply with South Dakota law. Weaver told the board that ballots cast at the single Mead County polling location were all stamped only with \"Official ballot, Rapid City School District, Area 6\" and said, \"Area 6 is not a precinct. Every single Lehi County ballot says Area 6. So, you have no way to report the results in Rural Blackhawk 15 or Blackhawk 14 or Somerset 10. We have no idea. They've all been thrown in one big pot.\"

Candidate and community reaction

Candidate Brian Johnson (identified in comments) urged the board to recess the canvass to review the evidence. He told the board he believed the district's chief financial officer oversaw the Mead County polling operation and said the board should \"take a couple days. Let's look over the evidence. Let's get this right.\" Johnson said he might request a recount if the results stood.

Board response and legal guidance

Board counsel and staff described the canvass procedure and the board's duties under South Dakota law. Counsel explained the board's role as canvassers is ministerial: it is to open the precinct returns, verify the returns are genuine, tabulate the totals, declare winners and make the abstract of results. Counsel told the board that \"the process is not intended to individually assess the validity of ballots or make findings or determinations about the election process itself,\" and pointed to other remedies—recount and contest—if parties seek further review.

Canvass process and facts recorded on the public record

Board members unsealed poll-book envelopes and compared precinct reports from Pennington County and the single polling-location summary from Mead County. Pennington County precinct-by-precinct reports were read aloud and matched the county's unofficial summary for those precincts.

For Mead County, where voters from four precincts were consolidated at a single polling location, board staff handed the board the Mead County summary tabulation. The record notes 133 signatures on one Mead County poll record and lists Mead County unofficial tallies in the summary: Johnson 136, Clapham 145 (summary figures reported to the board by county staff at the meeting). Board staff told the board that because Mead County used one polling site, some precinct-level separation of returns was not included in the district summary materials provided to the board.

Outcome and next steps

The board proceeded to vote to certify the results. The certification does not prevent a candidate from requesting a recount under South Dakota codified law 13-7-19 (a recount may be requested within five days of the canvas) or from later contesting the election within the statutory period. Board counsel reiterated that canvassers are not the fact-finding forum for claims of irregularities.

The meeting record contains the public commenters' allegations and the board's canvass activities; any candidate who seeks a recount or files an election contest must follow the timelines and procedures in state law.

Ending

Board members said they would complete the ministerial duties of the canvas and that statutory remedies remained available to candidates. The board moved on to its scheduled agenda after the certification vote.

","After public comments alleging irregularities in Mead County polling and ballot stamping, the Rapid City Area School District 51-4 Board of Education conducted a ministerial canvass and voted to certify Area 3 and Area 6 winners; candidates retain the statutory right to request a recount or contest the election.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Rapid City Area Schools presents year‑end strategic plan report; facilities score jumps, student survey top‑box responses rise

Rapid City Area School district board certifies Area 3 and Area 6 results after public complaints about Mead County voting