Sioux Falls lays out 2026 legislative priorities and raises concerns about property‑tax proposals

Sioux Falls School District 49-5 Board of Education · November 11, 2025

Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts

Subscribe
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Sioux Falls School District presented its 2026 legislative priorities — including pushing for a state‑aid increase indexed to inflation or 3% and protecting local control — while warning that several statewide property‑tax proposals could reduce school revenue or restrict local funding tools.

Todd, district legislative lead, presented the Sioux Falls School District’s four top 2026 legislative priorities and reviewed recommendations from a statewide comprehensive property‑tax task force and the governor’s property‑tax proposal.

The four top priorities are: (1) change the state aid formula to increase annually by 3% or inflation (whichever is greater), (2) support a capital‑outlay funding formula addressing new growth and inflationary costs, (3) strengthen and provide consistency in property assessment to protect a sound revenue stream for K–12, and (4) oppose legislation that removes local control from school districts.

Todd reviewed press‑release figures attributed to the comprehensive task force (a $120,000,000 immediate tax rebate from unspent funds; a proposed 5% state spending reduction estimated to free about $123,000,000; and directing $105,000,000 of sales‑tax revenue — totaling roughly $348,000,000 in the summary press‑release math) and warned "the devil is in the details," noting six of 19 task‑force recommendations could negatively affect schools. He identified specific concerns: subjecting school funds to the same state limits as counties/municipalities; removing transfers from capital outlay to general fund; changes to petition thresholds and election requirements for opt‑outs and capital projects; and raising required approval thresholds.

Board members asked whether property‑tax relief must come with cuts to school budgets; Todd and Dr. Knowles said changes could be structured to reduce homeowner tax burdens without cutting school funding (for example, reallocating a portion of sales‑tax growth), but warned many details remain unresolved and district staff are meeting with legislators and offering school tours to inform discussions. The board voted to acknowledge the district’s legislative priority report and directed continued outreach to state lawmakers.