SB 187 creates a statutory definition of “nonpublic school” for South Dakota education law. The bill defines such a school as an institution or entity controlled by a governing body other than a publicly elected board and operated to instruct compulsory-school-age children in at least basic mathematics and English language fundamentals. It also specifies that English instruction must be provided in a way that leads to mastery of the language.
The bill clarifies what nonpublic schools may do and what they are not entitled to receive. Nonpublic schools may limit enrollment, charge tuition, and receive certain federal or state grants, subsidies, special appropriations, or district services. At the same time, they are not assigned a public-tax-revenue territory and are not eligible for state aid to education under chapter 13-13. The bill also states that nonpublic schools may be accredited, but accreditation is not required, and teachers at nonaccredited nonpublic schools are not required to hold state certification.
Impact
SB 187 would add a new definition to chapter 13-1 and affect how South Dakota distinguishes nonpublic schools from public schools for purposes of education law. It would not create a new funding stream, but it would codify that nonpublic schools are outside the public school territorial and state-aid system, while also confirming their ability to operate independently, charge tuition, and potentially receive limited public or private support. The bill would also reduce regulatory requirements for teachers at nonaccredited nonpublic schools by exempting them from state certification requirements.
Sentiment
The available voting history suggests mixed to negative sentiment overall. The bill received a narrow 4-3 do-pass recommendation in one committee vote, but then failed in a later vote by a wide margin of 11-23. That pattern indicates some support for clarifying the legal status of nonpublic schools, but substantially more opposition at a later stage.
Contention
The likely points of contention are the bill’s treatment of nonpublic schools in relation to public education funding and regulation. Supporters may view the measure as a straightforward clarification that recognizes private and other nonpublic schools as distinct from public schools and preserves their autonomy. Opponents may be concerned that the definition could be used to expand or legitimize nonpublic school access to public resources while exempting them from requirements such as teacher certification and state aid rules. The sharp reversal in voting suggests disagreement over whether the bill merely clarifies existing law or changes the balance between public oversight and private-school independence.