Rookie Senator Amber Hulse (R-30/Hot Springs) is proposing Senate Joint Resolution 507 to have voters say this November whether they want to semi-replace property tax on homes by raising the state sales tax to 5%. Rookie Representative and Rhoden appointee Tim Czmowski (R/6-?) offers the Legislature a chance to enact that tax swap itself with House Bill 1308. The problem is that Czmowski’s swap is more of a steal from schools.
Like Senator Hulse, Rep. Czmowski proposes zeroing the property tax levy on owner-occupied single-family dwellings. But while Hulse’s SJR 507 would have to wait for voter approval to raise sales tax from 4.2% to 5.0% on January 1, 2027, Czmowski’s HB 1308 would start raking in additional sales tax this July 1 with a hike to 4.7%, followed by a bump to 5.0% one year later.
Czmowski distinguishes HB 1308 from SJR 507 with a declaration of Legislative intent:
Section 1. It is the intention of the Legislature that the proceeds of the tax rate increases in sections 3 to 18, inclusive, and section 24 of this Act, are used for the following purposes:
(1) State aid to replace property tax revenues forgone from a mill levy of zero applied to owner-occupied single-family dwellings for school district general funds and school district special education funds; and
(2) Ongoing expenditures for the payroll and rate increases of state employees, school employees, and medicaid providers.
It is the intention of the Legislature that these levies for owner-occupied single-family dwellings do not affect the maximum mill levies for the other classifications of real property, and do not adversely affect the total amount of moneys available to school districts through the school district funding formulas for general funds and special education funds [2026 HB 1308, Section 1, as introduced by Rep. Tim Czmowski 2026.02.04].
Legislative intent is not binding: enact either SJR 507 or HB 1308, and future Legislatures could do whatever they want with the additional sales tax revenue. But Czmowski says explicitly that he’s not proposing to make school districts whole after the loss of homeowner property taxes, which provided over 44% of all property tax revenues in 2024. I already figure that the $278 million we’d get from the additional 0.8 percentage points that both proposals eventually set would generate less than two thirds of the revenue schools will lose from eliminating homeowner property taxes. Czmowski intends to divide that smaller pie into smaller slices served out to schools, state employee salaries, and medical providers.
In short, Hulse’s SJR 507 shorts schools, but Czmowski shorts them more, robbing school districts to fund state budget priorities besides education. Public school advocates should rally Tuesday morning to kill HB 1308 in House Taxation, then keep an eye on when SJR 507 makes Senate State Affairs’ agenda to oppose putting that less bad swap before voters.
The voters already decided they would rather pay more for Medicaid than Education, when they voted for Medicaid expansion.
So that’s what they are doing. South Dakota is now spending more money on Medicaid than Education.
Most people know their property taxes pay for education and they are complaining. After years of listening to educators wailing that their pay is too low, they don’t get no respect, nobody else ever went to college, and nobody else has to work as hard as they do, the taxpayers, who also went to college, and work outdoors 50 weeks a year, nights, weekends and holidays, have had enough. They are saying they don’t want to pay for education any more. They aren’t impressed with the quality of the education their kids are receiving, they are tired of the teachers’ complaining, and they aren’t going to take it anymore.
They are also appalled by the way their local school boards are blowing capital outlay funds.
Just last week, February 9, 2026, the superintendent of the Oldham-Ramona-Rutland district, which is held together with duct tape and is running on WD-40, resigned. It was reported that When somebody at that school board meeting asked who would be willing to take the job, another person answered it would be attractive to someone who wants a six-figure salary with very little work required.
Somebody said that out loud?
This is where we are now.
Jeez Algebra, what is South Dakota ranked in teacher pay. I’m sure it’s about 50th. So what-a-you whining about? Oh that’s right, you don’t have a position, your speaking for the majority.
About South Dakota spending more on Medicaid than education you really shouldn’t lie either.
“nobody else ever went to college, and nobody else has to work as hard as they do, the taxpayers, who also went to college, and work outdoors 50 weeks a year, nights, weekends and holidays”
What exactly are you blathering about here?
Algebra, your comments don’t add up. Go back a few grades for an easier math class.
Algebra, I have to say, your reporting of what people are saying sounds far more like personal anti-education projecting.
Article 8 of the SD constitution mandates public education. It is a promise: guarantee to the people of SD. Although the legislature has proven itself capable of undermining that promise with underfunding, I would argue that is a breech of their oath to uphold the Constitution.
Let’s bring one receipts here: SD students receive an excellent public education. ACT and other standardized scores perpetually put SD above the national average scores. I would also dare anyone who feels schools are not doing enough to look at the curriculum required by students now; far more is being asked than decades ago.
Schools are not the only entities who fund through property taxes. Property taxes also do not fully fund schools: the state must also fund individual districts up to the legislative setting for the per teacher (pupil) allocation.
The school funding formula as structured in the 1990s and which continues on today (with some modifications over the years) serves as a property tax reduction measure. The more state money legislators funnel through that formula, the more property tax relief results. When they shortchanged the funding formular they create pressure to increase property taxes. If they really wanted to solve two problems (education funding and property tax reduction) legislators might want to put more money through the education funding formula. But, they won’t, because legislators seem to fund a lot of fluff rather than taking care of their constitutional duties.