How much could education savings accounts (ESAs), if approved by South Dakota state legislators this year, harm public school districts by diverting much-needed state funding?
The Associated School Boards of South Dakota (ASBSD) right now is rallying opposition to House Bill 1020, which would establish ESA’s for families across the state — and they are calling on local school leaders to join them.
For those unfamiliar with the term, ESAs would allow parents to use state per-pupil funding for private school tuition or homeschooling materials.
HB 1020 is the first school-choice bill introduced this session and is supported by Speaker-elect Jon Hansen, who represents Moody County.
Outgoing Governor Kristi Noem has made passing an ESA program a cornerstone of her legacy as she prepares to leave office. And state-funded ESA programs are growing nationwide, with nearly half of all U.S. states now offering some form of the accounts.
However, education experts warn that public schools in these states often lose critical resources needed to support students. Critics, including the National Coalition for Public Education, argue that voucher systems do not work well in rural areas where families have few alternatives to public schools.

Adding to concerns, South Dakota legislators are proposing only a 1.25% increase in public school funding this spring.
“That doesn’t leave us with much money for increases for everything,” said Flandreau School Board President Kari Ramsdell during the board’s January meeting.
The conversation in South Dakota mirrors broader national debates. Last November, several states rejected ESA or voucher programs outright, and others reversed earlier decisions to implement them.
Locally, the Flandreau School Board discussed HB 1020 at its most recent meeting. While no formal vote was taken, board member Kari Burggraff encouraged her colleagues to contact state legislators and share their thoughts.
The Colman-Egan School Board reviewed the ASBSD resolution opposing ESAs but postponed a decision.
The ASBSD resolution reads in part:
“WHEREAS we, as School Board members, insist our legislators oppose the proposed school voucher program because of the foreseeable detrimental impact it will have on South Dakota’s public school system at the expense of our students.”
Interestingly, even the Homeschool Legal Defense Association (HSLDA) has voiced opposition to HB 1020, recently issuing a legislative alert to its members. The HSLDA outlined several concerns:
1. “We oppose the idea that alternative instruction is a qualifying school for purposes of government funding.”
2. HB 1020 defines curriculum as “a course of study…approved by the Department of Education,” which the HSLDA argues represents increased government control over education.
3. The bill includes alternative instruction within the definition of a microschool, a move the HSLDA sees as inappropriate and incompatible with the fundamental differences between homeschooling and formal school enrollment.
As the debate unfolds, the potential impact on South Dakota’s public education system remains a critical concern and it is one the Moody County Enterprise will continue to follow.