The nation is celebrating Sunshine Week March 15 through 21. It’s a time to shine a light on the importance of open records and open government. Too often in South Dakota, Sunshine Week is a time for complaining about the cloudy nature of this state’s government openness. 

Many of our public records that should be open to the public are closed. Our local governments operate in secret when they want to, knowing that no one in South Dakota has ever been prosecuted for breaking the state’s executive session law. The Republican super-majorities in the state’s House and Senate meet in closed caucuses every day during the legislative session, essentially deciding the fate of South Dakota in secret.

There are, however, some bright spots breaking through the clouds: 

• When the GOP super-majorities aren’t conferring in secret, they’re operating in a Legislature that requires all bills to get a public hearing. For their part, the public has multiple chances to follow the action from Pierre through South Dakota Public Broadcasting. 
• Attorney General Marty Jackley has consistently been a proponent of laws that help open local governments to public scrutiny. He also resurrected the Open Meetings Commission to help shed a light on those boards and commissions that break the law. 
• In the just-concluded legislative session, lawmakers overwhelmingly approved a bill that would allow for the quick dismissal of meritless, intimidating lawsuits — known as Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation or SLAPP. Those lawsuits are designed specifically to silence free speech and a free press.

The sunshine could break through even more if local governments would rethink the way that they use closed-door meetings, known as executive sessions. Executive session laws in this state are written in such a way that certain matters — personnel, student discipline, consulting with legal counsel or employee contract negotiations — may be held in executive session. They may be held in executive session, but they don’t have to be.

One of the subjects that could use a dose of sunshine is the negotiations that go on between school boards and teachers. Often the start of those negotiations are a one-line item in local news coverage and another one-line item in the school board minutes. The board and negotiators for the teachers often meet multiple times to hammer out the new contract. At the end of negotiations, both sides offer a short news release about how happy they are with the outcome. 

In the meantime, the public is left in the dark about how the board and the teachers arrived at decisions that will result in the single largest line item in the school district budget — teacher salaries.

This may be the perfect time for school boards and teachers to shed some light on negotiations. The tug of war between school district budgets and skyrocketing property tax bills isn’t going to end any time soon. 

In the recently completed legislative session, property tax reform seemed to be a constant topic of discussion. Lawmakers considered almost 50 property tax bills as well as three failed attempts at joint resolutions that would have had citizens voting to change the state Constitution as it applies to property taxes. 

During debates about how to cut property taxes, some lawmakers have tried to place the blame for the rising tax bills on the spendthrift ways of county commissions and school boards. The best way for school districts to combat those arguments is through greater transparency about how budget decisions are made during negotiations.

By opening negotiations to the public, school boards will let their constituents know just how their tax dollars are being spent. More transparency will give the public insight into the funding challenges faced by school boards and the things that teachers believe they need in order to do their jobs. 

At a time when there is so much emphasis on property tax reform, school districts have to throw back the curtains to let the light in and show how they manage their money. One of the best ways to do that would be to conduct teacher negotiations in public. If the public, and lawmakers, got a better understanding of the funding challenges that schools face, it may be more likely that any meaningful property tax reform would include a path to keeping education funding intact.