Opinion ID: 2134925
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Department failed to give the proper deference to Board's decision in determining whether the District inequitably applied the term teaching experience in crediting past experience for salary placement.

Text: As the majority recognizes, whether the District inequitably applied the term `teaching experience' is a question of fact. Therefore, Board's decision may be reversed only if it was arbitrary, capricious or an abuse of discretion. The majority clearly acknowledges there was conflicting testimony concerning District's prior application of `teaching experience.' Where there was conflicting testimony, Department and majority must defer to Board's decision that District applied the term teaching experience equitably. Dr. Pam Sessler, the current assistant superintendent of personnel, testified it was not District practice to give personnel credit for prior work experience outside of dealing with children in the K-12 age group. Dr. Gushwa testified the District practice was to give credit for work experience serving K-12 students, not experience related to adults. Moreover, she testified that although she could no longer recall specific names, there were librarians in the District who had library experience at the college level and had not received credit for that prior experience. Dr. John Harris, District's superintendent, testified that District policy was to give credit only for prior work with children in K-12 age range. Moreover, the burden of proof in cases such as this is on the party who is alleging the violation. Rininger, 468 N.W.2d at 425. The burden of proof is not sustained when the probabilities are equal. Mehlum v. Nunda Cooperative Ass'n, 74 S.D. 545, 551, 56 N.W.2d 282, 285 (1952). The balanced evidence presented in this record simply does not sustain Cox' and Adler's burdens of showing District inequitably applied credit for prior experience. I dissent, as Department failed to show Board's decision as to whether District had inequitably applied the term teaching experience in crediting past experience was arbitrary, capricious or an abuse of discretion. Clearly there is substantial support for Board's refusal to give Cox no prior teaching experience credit for her time as library director at Citibank; and, similarly, Board had good reason to limit Adler's credit to ten of her seventeen years with DSS. See City of Winner v. Bechtold Inv., Inc., 488 N.W.2d 416, 418 (S.D.1992) (stating we will not seek reasons to reverse trial court's findings). It appears to me that Department and the majority are improperly searching for reasons to reverse the Board.