Schools First Initiative
by Roger Kurtz
August 04, 2008
The Schools First Initiative will be on the November ballot and many school districts are being asked to support this issue. Yes, if approved by voters, this proposal will generate additional dollars for the public schools, however, this issue was not developed to increase funding for the public schools, it was developed to remove the loss limits on gaming boats. If approved, Missouri law would be amended to:
* repeal the current individual maximum loss limit for gambling;
* prohibit any future loss limits;
* require identification to enter the gambling area only if necessary to establish that an
individual is at least 21 years old;
* restrict the number of casinos to those already built or being built;
* increase the casino gambling tax from 20% to 21%;
* create a new specific education fund from gambling tax proceeds generated as a result of this measure called the “Schools First Elementary and Secondary Education Improvement Fund”. Distribution of the money from this fund will be through the foundation formula as follows:
(18) "State adequacy target", the sum of the current operating expenditures of every performance district that falls entirely above the bottom five percent and entirely below the top five percent of average daily attendance, when such districts are rank-ordered based on their current operating expenditures per average daily attendance, divided by the total average daily attendance of all included performance districts plus the total amount of funds placed in the schools first elementary and secondary education improvement fund in the preceding fiscal year divided by the total average daily attendance of all school districts for the preceding fiscal year. The department of elementary and secondary education shall first calculate the state adequacy target for fiscal year 2007 and recalculate the state adequacy target every two years using the most current available data; provided that the state adequacy target shall be recalculated every year to reflect the per pupil amount of funds placed in the schools first elementary and secondary education improvement fund in the preceding fiscal year. The recalculation shall never result in a decrease from the previous state adequacy target amount. Should a recalculation result in an increase in the state adequacy target amount, fifty percent of that increase shall be included in the state adequacy target amount in the year of recalculation, and fifty percent of that increase shall be included in the state adequacy target amount in the subsequent year. The state adequacy target may be adjusted to accommodate available appropriations;
(Click on the link below for a simulation that DESE has prepared to demonstrate how the Proposition A money would be distributed. The DESE simulation assumes $118 million to be distributed, but the total distributed as shown on the last page is only $54.8 million. The distribution process as outlined by the proposal will not distribute all of the money in the fund until the formula is fully implemented. When the formula is fully implemented, there may not be enough money in the fund to finance this additional calculation. Third, hold harmless districts will not receive any funds from this source.)
The gaming industry has estimated that state governmental entities will receive an estimated $105.1 to $130.0 million annually for elementary and secondary education, and $5.0 to $7.0 million annually for higher education, early childhood development, veterans, and other programs. Local governmental entities receiving gambling boat tax and fee revenues will receive an estimated $18.1 to $19.0 million annually.
Leave your comments
| Date | Subject | Posted by: |
|---|---|---|
| 10/28/2008 | The very last sentence of the "Fact Sheet" states ". . . the proposal would generate over $442 million annually for casino owners in the state of Nevada." Is this really for the benefit of Nevada casino owners or Missouri casino owners? |
Kerri
|
| 10/28/2008 | I have removed the reference to Nevada to avoid any confusion. |
Roger Kurtz
|
| 10/29/2008 | Not sure if this is the proper place, but how do I get a definition of what a "Hold Harmless District" is? Thanks, |
Chuck
|
