South Dakota's school funding law made an independent school district ineligible for general support foundation funds if it operated a one-teacher rural school with an average daily membership (ADM) of five or fewer pupils, when there was another elementary school within five miles. What is the minimum enrollment a one-teacher rural school could have without putting the district's foundation funding at risk?
Plain-English summary
By 1971, South Dakota's school district reorganization had absorbed most of the old common school districts into independent districts, but some independent districts still operated small one-teacher rural elementary schools that had been preserved under the 1967 Chapter 38 "continue to operate" rule. The state had carved out a limit on this preservation: if a school's continued operation would make the district ineligible for state foundation aid under SDCL 13-13-10 to 13-13-41, the close-by-local-vote protection did not apply, and the district could close the school.
The specific aid threshold sat in SDCL 13-13-15: a district was ineligible for general support foundation funds if it operated a one-teacher rural school "with an average daily membership of five or less pupils" that was within five miles by publicly traveled roads of any other elementary school in operation during the previous school fiscal year.
Dr. Diedtrich, the State Superintendent, asked the AG: what was the least number of students a one-teacher rural school could have enrolled before it put the district's foundation funding at risk?
The AG's answer turned on the difference between "enrollment" and "average daily membership" (ADM). The South Dakota Department of Public Instruction's Dictionary of Educational Terms defined ADM as the sum of the aggregate days of membership across all terms, divided by the number of days in the regular school term. Enrollment, in contrast, was the total number of original entries in the school.
If a one-teacher school had exactly five enrolled students, the ADM would equal five only if every student was present every day. Any single absence by any student on any day would push ADM below five, triggering the ineligibility threshold. So a five-student school was at the edge, with no margin for normal absences.
The safer line was six students. At six enrolled, the school could absorb typical absence patterns and still keep ADM above five. The AG concluded that the least number of students "before such school would place the school district in jeopardy of not receiving general support foundation funds is six."
This answer mattered for school boards making operational decisions. A school with five students faced an unforgiving compliance situation. A school with six gave the board more confidence the district's broader foundation funding would not be jeopardized.
Currency note
This opinion was issued in 1971. Subsequent statutory amendments, court decisions, or later AG opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current legal advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or remedy mentioned here. South Dakota's school funding formula has been overhauled multiple times since 1971. The general support foundation aid program has been replaced by various state aid formulas under SDCL Title 13, with different eligibility criteria and threshold rules. The continued-operation requirement for pre-1968 elementary schools has also been refined. Modern questions about rural school minimum enrollment and state aid should be addressed under current statute and Department of Education rules.
What the opinion meant at the time
For superintendents and school boards operating small rural elementary schools, the opinion drew a clear line. Schools with six or more enrolled students could be defended as foundation-aid-compatible; schools with five or fewer were at constant risk. Schools at the line might need to consolidate, share teachers with neighboring schools, or close to protect the district's broader funding.
For the State Superintendent, the opinion provided a workable rule for advising districts. The Department could tell a school board with a five-student school: you are at risk; consider closure. With a six-student school: you have a margin.
For parents of rural elementary students, the opinion meant the practical threshold for keeping their local school open was likely six enrolled children. A school could ride out occasional absences from a six-student class but not from a five-student class.
For the state education funding system, the opinion enforced the policy intent of consolidating small underutilized schools. The five-or-less ADM threshold was a real constraint, not a soft preference.
Common questions
Q: What if a student transferred mid-year, was the school's ADM measured from the transfer date or from the start of the year?
A: ADM is the sum of aggregate days of membership divided by total days in the term. A student who transferred in (becoming a member) would add days of membership from the transfer date forward; a student who transferred out would stop adding days from that date. So a single-year transfer could change a school's ADM significantly.
Q: What counted as "publicly traveled" roads for the five-mile distance test?
A: The statute used "publicly traveled roads," which generally meant any road open to the public, paved or not, maintained by a public entity or kept open through public use. The opinion did not parse the term further. In practice, county and township roads counted; private easements and seasonal access roads might not.
Q: What if the nearest elementary school was just barely over five miles by road?
A: The school would not trigger the ineligibility threshold. The five-mile rule was a bright line: more than five miles meant no trigger, regardless of how close the school was as the crow flies. Some isolated one-teacher schools survived because the closest alternative was more than five miles via maintained roads.
Q: What about a school with only one teacher but more than one classroom or grade?
A: A "one-teacher" school under the statute was determined by staffing (one teacher), not by the number of grades or classrooms taught. A teacher running multiple grades in a one-room schoolhouse was still teaching at a one-teacher school for this purpose.
Q: Could a school avoid the trigger by adding a second teacher for part of the year?
A: The statute referred to a school's status during a school fiscal year. A school that operated with one teacher all year was a one-teacher school. A school that hired a second teacher for any meaningful portion of the year arguably became a "two-teacher" school outside the ineligibility threshold, but a one-day staff change would likely not change classification. The opinion did not address borderline staffing patterns.
Q: What if a school had six enrolled students at the start of the year but lost one to a family move mid-year?
A: ADM is averaged across the year. Losing one student mid-year would lower ADM but not necessarily below five. A six-student school that lost one student halfway through the year would have an effective ADM somewhere between five and six (depending on the exact timing). Whether it triggered the threshold would depend on the precise math.
Background and statutory framework
By 1971, South Dakota's school finance system rested on a "foundation program" that distributed state aid to districts based on student counts and certain quality measures. To qualify, districts had to meet operational standards including minimum class sizes, teacher certification, and (for districts with rural schools) the SDCL 13-13-15 five-ADM threshold.
SDCL 13-13-15 represented a compromise between the state's interest in school consolidation (efficiency, equality of educational opportunity) and the local interest in preserving community schools. Counties wanting to keep tiny rural elementary schools could do so, but if they kept them too small, the state withheld funding from the entire district, not just from the small school.
SDCL 13-23-1 gave independent school district boards the exclusive power to establish and discontinue elementary schools, "except as limited by law." The 1967 Chapter 38 amendment had limited that power: boards could not close elementary schools without local voter approval, unless continued operation jeopardized state aid.
The interaction of these provisions created a tension that played out across hundreds of small South Dakota communities. The AG's 71-01 opinion clarified one of the operational metrics (six-student floor) that mattered in practice.
Citations and references
Statutes:
- SDCL 13-13-15 (continued operation of elementary schools; state aid override)
- SDCL 13-13-10 to 13-13-41 (general support foundation aid)
- SDCL 13-23-1 (school board power to establish and discontinue schools)
Department references:
- South Dakota Dictionary of Educational Terms for Elementary and Secondary Education (Bulletin 10-4-(1970)), South Dakota Department of Public Instruction (definitions of "Average Daily Membership" and "Enrollment")
Source
Original opinion text
Minimum number of students enrolled in an elementary school which would prevent the school district from receiving general support foundation funds.
Dear Dr. Diedtrich:
You have cited the following statutes:
In order to be eligible to receive general support foundation funds as herein provided, a school district must not have operated a one-teacher rural school with an average daily membership of five or less pupils within five miles by publicly traveled roads of any other public elementary school in operation during the previous school fiscal year. (Emphasis supplied)
SDCL 13-13-15 reads as follows:
The school board of an independent school district shall continue to operate any elementary school in operation as of December 5, 1968 until such time as only the resident voters of the area which operated said elementary school shall vote to cease operating said school or schools. Such election shall be called by the school board of the independent school district by resolution or upon a petition by twenty per cent of the electors residing in such area and shall be conducted in accordance with the laws governing elections in independent school district, provided, however, that the provisions of this section shall not apply to any elementary school which by its continued operation would make the district ineligible for state aid under the provisions of sections 13-13-10 to 13-13-41, inclusive.
SDCL 13-23-1 reads as follows:
The school board of an independent school district shall have the power to establish and discontinue high schools and the exclusive power to establish and discontinue elementary schools except as limited by law.
You have requested an official opinion on the following question:
What is the least number of students a one-teacher rural school may have enrolled before such a school would place the school district in jeopardy of not receiving general support foundation funds?
The South Dakota Dictionary of Educational Terms for Elementary and Secondary Education issued by the South Dakota Department of Public Instruction as Bulletin 10-4-(1970) defines "Average Daily Membership" as follows:
In a given school fiscal year, the average daily membership is the sum of the aggregate days of membership for the regular and all special terms divided by the number of days in the regular school term.
The term "Enrollment" is defined in part as follows:
The total number of original entries in a given school unit ...
It is my opinion that if a one-teacher rural school has an enrollment of only five students, then all five students would have to be a member every day the school was in session in order to have an average daily membership of five. Such a one-teacher rural school would cause the district to be ineligible for general support foundation funds, if such school was within five miles of publicly traveled roads of any other elementary school in operation during the previous school fiscal year.
In answer to your specific question, it is my opinion that the least number of students a one-teacher rural school may have enrolled before such school would place the school district in jeopardy of not receiving general support foundation funds is six.
Respectfully submitted,
Gordon Mydland
Attorney General