
As expected, Speaker Philip Gunn, R-Clinton, filed a school funding rewrite bill late Thursday after more than a year of conversations about overhauling the Mississippi Adequate Education Program, the formula that currently dictates school funding.
The bill includes much of the what New Jersey-based nonprofit EdBuild CEO Rebecca Sibilia described to House Democratic Caucus members on Tuesday, including retaining a provision that allows property-wealthy districts across the state to keep $120 million they would have otherwise had to raise in local taxes.
Gunn’s formula includes some of the suggestions in the EdBuild report. Missing, however, is additional funding for kindergarten through 3rd grade students and the removal of the provision benefiting property-wealthy districts such as Madison, Rankin and Lowndes counties, which Sibilia described Tuesday as “inequitable, illogical” and “not good for kids.”
The crux of the formula is a $4,800 base cost for every kindergartner through 12th grader, plus weights — or additional money — added depending on students’ individual characteristics.
These characteristics include special education diagnosis, low-income status, gifted students and even age, with high schoolers receiving a weight of 1.3, or a total of $6,240.
The weights for students receiving special education services vary from 60 percent ($7,680) to 170 percent ($8,160) depending on the diagnosis.
In addition, students in “sparse,” or rural, districts will receive an additional 10 percent each from the state.
Unlike under the current formula, the total number of students in the district — and thus how much money the district gets — will be based on enrollment numbers.
The bill must still go through the committee process and be voted on by both chambers. If passed, the new formula, called the Mississippi Uniform Per Student Funding Formula Act of 2018, would begin in the next school year.
Any increases or decreases in funding a school district experiences as a result of the rewrite would be phased in over 7 years, the bill says.
View the bill here.
Republish this article
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
- Look for the "Republish This Story" button underneath each story. To republish online, simply click the button, copy the html code and paste into your Content Management System (CMS).
- Editorial cartoons and photo essays are not included under the Creative Commons license and therefore do not have the "Republish This Story" button option. To learn more about our cartoon syndication services, click here.
- You can’t edit our stories, except to reflect relative changes in time, location and editorial style.
- You can’t sell or syndicate our stories.
- Any web site our stories appear on must include a contact for your organization.
- If you share our stories on social media, please tag us in your posts using @MSTODAYnews on Facebook and @MSTODAYnews on Twitter.
- You have to credit Mississippi Today. We prefer “Author Name, Mississippi Today” in the byline. If you’re not able to add the byline, please include a line at the top of the story that reads: “This story was originally published by Mississippi Today” and include our website, mississippitoday.org.
- You can’t edit our stories, except to reflect relative changes in time, location and editorial style.
- You cannot republish our editorial cartoons, photographs, illustrations or graphics without specific permission (contact our managing editor Kayleigh Skinner for more information). To learn more about our cartoon syndication services, click here.
- Our stories may appear on pages with ads, but not ads specifically sold against our stories.
- You can’t sell or syndicate our stories.
- You can only publish select stories individually — not as a collection.
- Any web site our stories appear on must include a contact for your organization.
- If you share our stories on social media, please tag us in your posts using @MSTODAYnews on Facebook and @MSTODAYnews on Twitter.
The legislature isn’t interested in funding quality, public, education. That’s why they are ignoring the foundation of the EdBuild proposal. That’s why they ignored the previous Ed funding law.