Investing in Missouri: Creating a Better Future for Our Families

Similar documents
Price Sensitivity Analysis

2/3 9.8% 38% $0.78. The Status of Women in Missouri: 2016 ARE WOMEN 51% 22% A Comprehensive Report of Leading Indicators and Findings.

Vast Inequality in Wealth Means Poor School Districts Are Less Able to Rely on Local Property Taxes

Financing Education In Minnesota

An Introduction to School Finance in Texas

Charter School Performance Comparable to Other Public Schools; Stronger Accountability Needed

TRENDS IN. College Pricing

Michigan and Ohio K-12 Educational Financing Systems: Equality and Efficiency. Michael Conlin Michigan State University

Higher Education. Pennsylvania State System of Higher Education. November 3, 2017

CHAPTER 4: REIMBURSEMENT STRATEGIES 24

Trends in Tuition at Idaho s Public Colleges and Universities: Critical Context for the State s Education Goals

1.0 INTRODUCTION. The purpose of the Florida school district performance review is to identify ways that a designated school district can:

Invest in CUNY Community Colleges

OREGON TECH ECONOMIC IMPACT ANALYSIS

STATE CAPITAL SPENDING ON PK 12 SCHOOL FACILITIES NORTH CAROLINA

Estimating the Cost of Meeting Student Performance Standards in the St. Louis Public Schools

CLASS EXODUS. The alumni giving rate has dropped 50 percent over the last 20 years. How can you rethink your value to graduates?

Keystone Opportunity Zone

Educational Attainment

FY STATE AID ALLOCATIONS AND BUDGET POLICIES

Proficiency Illusion

Trends in College Pricing

Trends in Higher Education Series. Trends in College Pricing 2016

Draft Budget : Higher Education

The Relationship Between Tuition and Enrollment in WELS Lutheran Elementary Schools. Jason T. Gibson. Thesis

About the College Board. College Board Advocacy & Policy Center

How Business-Friendly Are Tennessee s Cities?

The Ohio State University Library System Improvement Request,

Milton Public Schools Fiscal Year 2018 Budget Presentation

San Francisco County Weekly Wages

In 2010, the Teach Plus-Indianapolis Teaching Policy Fellows, a cohort of early career educators teaching

PENNSYLVANIA. A review of the. for the school year. Department of Education

Capitalism and Higher Education: A Failed Relationship

FY Matching Scholarship Grant Allocations by County Based on Free and Reduced Lunch (FRL) Population 1

UNCF ICB Enrollment Management Institute Session Descriptions

21 st Century Community Learning Centers (CCLC) Program Information (Revised 9/15/16)

Cooper Upper Elementary School

Higher Education Six-Year Plans

The number of involuntary part-time workers,

Transportation Equity Analysis

SUMMARY REPORT MONROE COUNTY, OH OFFICIAL RESULTS PRIMARY ELECTION MARCH 6, 2012 RUN DATE:03/20/12 11:03 AM STATISTICS REPORT-EL45 PAGE 001

THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL IMPACT OF APPRENTICESHIP PROGRAMS

State Budget Update February 2016

Republican and Democratic Nominations are to be made for the following Federal, State, County and Municipal Offices:

THE VISION OF THE BOARD OF SCHOOL TRUSTEES

Availability of Grants Largely Offset Tuition Increases for Low-Income Students, U.S. Report Says

EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT

U VA THE CHANGING FACE OF UVA STUDENTS: SSESSMENT. About The Study

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES AS REVISED BY THE COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION APPROPRIATIONS ANALYSIS

The University of Michigan-Flint. The Committee on the Economic Status of the Faculty. Annual Report to the Regents. June 2007

DFL School Board Bio. Claudia Swanson

Program budget Budget FY 2013

Two Million K-12 Teachers Are Now Corralled Into Unions. And 1.3 Million Are Forced to Pay Union Dues, as Well as Accept Union Monopoly Bargaining

Review of Student Assessment Data

Update Peer and Aspirant Institutions

Understanding University Funding

For the Ohio Board of Regents Second Report on the Condition of Higher Education in Ohio

Professor Christina Romer. LECTURE 24 INFLATION AND THE RETURN OF OUTPUT TO POTENTIAL April 20, 2017

STT 231 Test 1. Fill in the Letter of Your Choice to Each Question in the Scantron. Each question is worth 2 point.

BUILDING CAPACITY FOR COLLEGE AND CAREER READINESS: LESSONS LEARNED FROM NAEP ITEM ANALYSES. Council of the Great City Schools

Financial Plan. Operating and Capital. May2010

Course Catalog. State Fair Community College. Where are you going? Course Catalog. We ll help get you there.

Cooper Upper Elementary School

READY OR NOT? CALIFORNIA'S EARLY ASSESSMENT PROGRAM AND THE TRANSITION TO COLLEGE

UPPER ARLINGTON SCHOOLS

Russell M. Rhine. Education

Value of Athletics in Higher Education March Prepared by Edward J. Ray, President Oregon State University

SCICU Legislative Strategic Plan 2018

State of New Jersey

NEBRASKA TRUANCY AND ABSENTEEISM PROGRAMS

MINNESOTA SCHOOL BOARDS ASSOCIATION

Name Class Date. Graphing Proportional Relationships

For Your Future. For Our Future. ULS Strategic Framework

Executive Summary. Walker County Board of Education. Dr. Jason Adkins, Superintendent 1710 Alabama Avenue Jasper, AL 35501

BENCHMARK TREND COMPARISON REPORT:

DRAFT VERSION 2, 02/24/12

Executive Summary. Curry High School

TENNESSEE S ECONOMY: Implications for Economic Development

OFFICE OF ENROLLMENT MANAGEMENT. Annual Report

2017 Polk County City Election Polling Locations

Going Broke by Degree: A Review Essay

NATIONAL CENTER FOR EDUCATION STATISTICS

Running head: LISTENING COMPREHENSION OF UNIVERSITY REGISTERS 1

Developing Effective Teachers of Mathematics: Factors Contributing to Development in Mathematics Education for Primary School Teachers

Unequal Opportunity in Environmental Education: Environmental Education Programs and Funding at Contra Costa Secondary Schools.

Columbia County School System Preliminary Rezoning Proposal

Testimony in front of the Assembly Committee on Jobs and the Economy Special Session Assembly Bill 1 Ray Cross, UW System President August 3, 2017

Tale of Two Tollands

THE PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY SCHREYER HONORS COLLEGE DEPARTMENT OF MATHEMATICS ASSESSING THE EFFECTIVENESS OF MULTIPLE CHOICE MATH TESTS

Teacher Supply and Demand in the State of Wyoming

FRANK J. UNDERWOOD 1st Vice President

TCC Jim Bolen Math Competition Rules and Facts. Rules:

The mission of the Grants Office is to secure external funding for college priorities via local, state, and federal funding sources.

Paying for. Cosmetology School S C H O O L B E AU T Y. Financing your new life. beautyschoolnetwork.com pg 1

Kansas Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Revised Guidance

Differential Tuition Budget Proposal FY

TITLE I TOPICS: ELA. Above information adapted from -child-read

ATHLETIC ENDOWMENT FUND MOUNTAINEER ATHLETIC CLUB

High School Equivalency Diploma Task Force Report & Recommendation

Book Reviews. Michael K. Shaub, Editor

Transcription:

Investing in Our Students Futures OCTOBER 2015 Investing in Missouri: Creating a Better Future for Our Families Missourians want to give our children the best possible chance at success. We want our children to have quality public schools that start them off right towards pursuing their dreams. Unfortunately, the state of Missouri is failing to meet its obligation to more than 820,000 K-12 students by shortchanging school funding. As a result, the burden for ensuring school funding is increasingly shifting to localities, setting the stage for enhanced funding disparities between school districts. In the current school year, the amount of funding provided through Missouri s Foundation Formula, which distributes state support to local schools, remains $400 million under the statutorily required level. 1 Had state funding increased at the same rate as inflation between the 2001 and 2014 school years, state funding would have been $361 million greater in FY 2014. 2 That s the equivalent of our local schools having an additional $554 per student to enhance educational opportunities. Local governments have tried to make up the difference, resulting in property tax rate increases in 92 percent of counties in Missouri. Rates have risen an average 11.5%.

INVESTING IN OUR STUDENTS But not every local government can or will make up for the state s lack of funding. In one of four Missouri counties, total funding per student has failed to keep pace with the increased cost of providing education since 2000. In the 2013-2014 school year, total funding per student already varied significantly with St. Louis County averaging 75 percent more in total funding per student compared to St. Francois County. All of Missouri s children deserve an opportunity to thrive. A solid education is a fundamental building block to a better future. We can and must do better by fully funding our local schools. The Value of State Funding is Declining Although the combined amount of the Foundation Formula and Proposition C revenue for local schools has increased over time, it has failed to keep pace with inflation and the growing costs of funding education. How Missouri Funds K-12 Education Our local schools receive funding through several sources, which can be aggregated into three major categories: local, state, and federal level. Federal funding: Makes up the smallest portion of funding, is generally earmarked for specific purposes, like school lunches or special education. Local funding: Is primarily provided through local property taxes. State funding: Is provided primarily through two major categories: the Foundation Formula and Proposition C. Foundation Formula: In 2005, lawmakers approved the Foundation Formula in order to provide some measure of base funding for school districts, thereby promoting equity for students across Missouri. However, the formula has not been fully funded since 2010. Proposition C: Missouri also distributes earmarked state sales tax revenue to local schools. In 1982, Missouri voters approved a one cent sales tax for education called Proposition C. For the purposes of this paper, data is aggregated by county rather than individual school districts. County data is the sum of data for school districts headquartered in that county. School district and county boundaries do not correlate perfectly in all instances. Although the combined amount of the Foundation Formula and Proposition C revenue for local schools has increased over time, it has failed to keep pace with inflation and the growing costs of funding education. Between the 2000-2001 and 2013-2014 school years, state funding for local schools increased by 22.7 percent. However, that growth rate fell well below the inflation rate over the same period of 34 percent. As a result, the real value of state funding has declined. Had state funding increased at the same pace as the inflation rate (as measured by the Consumer Price Index), state funding would have been $361 million greater in FY 2014.

INVESTING IN OUR STUDENTS State Funding Failing to Meet Inflationary Needs The school population increased by nearly 18,000 students over this same period, making the decline in the value of state funding more pronounced. 3 While state funds increased an average of $799 per student, when that amount is adjusted for inflation, the purchasing power in 2013-2014 was $554 per student below the level provided in 2000-2001. 4 In five out of every six counties, the amount of state funding provided per student failed to meet inflationary cost increases. Moreover, in four counties (St. Louis City, Knox, Morgan, and Chariton), the amount of state funding actually decreased in nominal dollars over this period. In only 18 of 115 counties did state funding meet or exceed inflationary needs on a per-student basis. Passing the Buck As the value of state funding has declined, local governments have shouldered an increased burden for funding education. While Missouri provided 48 percent of total funding for its schools in the 2000-2001 school year, by 2013-2014, its contribution had declined to 41 percent. Conversely, local revenue as a portion of funding increased from 45 to 50 percent over this same period. In 84% of Missouri Counties, State Funding Per Student Has Failed to Keep Up with Inflation Combined with Local & Federal Funding, Total Funds Fall Behind in Many Areas Atchison Holt Nodaway Andrew Buchanan Platte Worth Gentry DeKalb Clinton Clay Jackson Cass Bates Vernon Barton Jasper Newton McDonald Harrison Daviess Caldwell Ray Lafayette Johnson Henry St. Clair Cedar Dade Lawrence Barry Mercer Grundy Livingston Carroll Polk School Year 2000-2001 Putnam Sullivan Linn Saline Pettis Benton Hickory Greene Stone Chariton Dallas Christian Taney Schuyler 7% 9% 45% 50% 48% 41% Adair Macon Howard Cooper Morgan Randolph Moniteau Camden Webster Laclede Boone Boone Miller Wright Douglas Ozark Scotland Cole Knox Pulaski Shelby Monroe School Year 2013-2014 Proportion State Funding Proportion Local Funding Proportion Federal Funding Clark Lewis Audrain Callaway Callaway Osage Maries Texas Phelps Howell Marion Ralls Montgomery Gasconade Dent Pike Warren Crawford Shannon Oregon Lincoln Franklin Reynolds Carter St. Charles Washington Ripley Total Funding Per Student, All Sources State & Total Revenue Did Not Keep Up with Inflation State Funding Did Not Keep Up with Inflation St. Louis Jefferson Ste. Genevieve St. Francois Iron Madison Wayne Butler State and Total Met Inflationary Increases Bollinger Dunklin Perry Stoddard Girardeau Scott New Madrid State Funding for Education Has Declined as a Portion of Total Funding; State Passes the Buck to Localities Pemiscot Mississippi

INVESTING IN OUR STUDENTS Increased Property Taxes and Disparities in Funding for Education To compensate for the decline in the value of state funding, Missouri schools have shifted to a greater reliance on local property tax revenues to fund education. As a result, over thirteen years, local property tax rates to fund schools increased in 92 percent of counties, rising by an average of 11.5 percent. Only six counties decreased their property taxes during this time, and three maintained their rates. 5 Unfortunately, while some school districts have been able to address decreasing state funding by leveraging increased property values, districts with low property values including many rural school districts struggle to adequately fund local schools. In fact, even with property tax levy increases in most counties, the total amount of state, local, and federal funding combined per student failed to keep pace with inflation in 31 counties over the time period examined. In other words, in one out of every four Missouri counties, total funding per student failed to keep pace with the cost of providing education. The shifting burden of funding education could result in increasing a troubling disparity in education funding among school districts. In the 2013-2014 school year, the combined per student revenue available varied significantly among school districts from a low of $8,968 in St. Shifting the Burden Toward Local Funding May Enhance Troubling Disparities Total Funding Per Student Varies Greatly Statewide Atchison Holt Nodaway Andrew Buchanan Platte Worth Gentry DeKalb Clinton Clay Jackson Cass Bates Vernon Barton Jasper Newton McDonald Harrison Daviess Caldwell Ray Lafayette Johnson Henry St. Clair Cedar Dade Lawrence Barry Mercer Grundy Livingston Carroll Polk Putnam Sullivan Linn Saline Pettis Benton Hickory Greene Stone Chariton Dallas Christian Taney Schuyler Adair Macon Howard Cooper Morgan Randolph Moniteau Camden Webster Laclede Boone Miller Wright Douglas Ozark County Property Tax Rate Changes Between 2000-2001 and 2013-2014 School Years County Names & Rates Included in Appendix -15% -10% -5% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% Francois County to a high of $15,778 in St. Louis County. Significant disparity in funding exists within each county as well, which is not addressed in this analysis. Scotland Cole Knox Pulaski Shelby Monroe Clark Lewis Audrain Callaway Osage Maries Texas Phelps Howell Marion Ralls Montgomery Gasconade Dent Pike Warren Crawford Shannon Oregon Lincoln Franklin Reynolds Carter St. Charles Washington Ripley Total Funding Per Student, All Sources Under $10,000 $10,001 - $11,000 $11,001 - $12,000 $12,001 - $13,000 $13,001 - $15,000 > $15,000 St. Louis Jefferson St. Louis City Ste. Genevieve St. Francois Iron Madison Wayne Butler Bollinger Perry Stoddard Cape Girardeau Scott New Madrid 92% of Missouri Counties Have Raised Property Taxes Average Increase of 11.5% Since 2000 Missouri must do better and fulfill its responsibility to students across the state. Mississippi

APPENDIX A: CHANGES IN STATE PER STUDENT FUNDING 2000/2001 COMPARED TO 2013/2014 SCHOOL YEARS County State Funding 2000/2001 Students 2000/2001 (ADA) State Funding Per Student 2000/2001 State Funding (ADA) 2013/2014 Students 2013/2014 (ADA) State Funding Per Student 2013/2014 (ADA) % Change in State Funding Per Student 2000/2001 vs. 2013/2014 Adair 11611827 2784 4170 15742084 2752 5720 37.170 Andrew 12026932 2717 4426 14263685 2808 5079 14.754 Atchison 4975963 983 5062 4114607 738 5575 10.134 Audrain 12849961 3338 3849 15139559 3098 4886 26.942 Barry 25285793 5942 4255 36889517 6177 5972 40.353 Barton 8067443 2007 4019 9656027 1936 4987 24.086 Bates 11212343 2775 4040 14794789 2536 5833 44.381 Benton 9473463 2449 3868 11564445 2405 4808 24.302 Bollinger 8877691 1947 4559 10236893 1776 5764 26.431 Boone 78242819 19009 4116 97239478 21753 4470 8.601 Buchanan 49499884 12709 3894 65570291 12847 5103 31.048 Butler 23477707 5940 3952 33247333 5926 5610 41.953 Caldwell 9335674 1615 5780 9805582 1554 6309 9.152 Callaway 19150113 4947 3871 19503686 4478 4355 12.503 Camden 13983226 4782 2924 14943986 4890 3056 4.514 Cape Girardeau 29135927 8991 3240 38684839 9258 4178 28.951 Carroll 7633483 1672 4565 7394871 1402 5274 15.531 Carter 6796981 1215 5594 7258263 1168 6214 11.083 Cass 59003941 14261 4137 92229665 17026 5416 30.916 Cedar 9177471 2277 4030 10893651 2168 5024 24.665 Chariton 5277674 1211 4358 4078986 937 4353-0.115 Christian 39338236 9261 4247 76184044 13834 5507 29.668 Clark 4187897 1185 3534 4588930 1012 4534 28.297 Clay 89811037 28067 3199 183565267 38439 4775 49.265 Clinton 14263576 3076 4637 18623337 3300 5643 21.695 Cole 26221218 9401 2789 38955096 10654 3656 31.086 Cooper 10136496 2315 4378 11494033 2311 4973 13.591 Crawford 12237260 3118 3924 17574228 3325 5285 34.684 Dade 5749250 1211 4747 5724061 1034 5535 16.600

APPENDIX A: CHANGES IN STATE PER STUDENT FUNDING 2000/2001 COMPARED TO 2013/2014 SCHOOL YEARS (continued) Dallas 8548399 2046 4178 9128844 1658 5505 31.762 Daviess 6846118 1248 5485 7224918 1189 6076 10.775 DeKalb 6253893 1371 4561 5707016 957 5963 30.739 Dent 10159241 1958 5188 11482132 2035 5642 8.751 Douglas 8334994 1616 5157 8332988 1471 5664 9.831 Dunklin 23892382 5506 4339 31727568 5367 5911 36.230 Franklin 51738194 14955 3459 71447525 15475 4616 33.449 Gasconade 10501487 2945 3565 11101526 2639 4206 17.980 Gentry 6472497 1258 5145 6018259 1061 5672 10.243 Greene 105889237 32607 3247 151114709 37071 4076 25.531 Grundy 7298756 1496 4878 8659978 1462 5923 21.423 Harrison 6492567 1315 4937 7508205 1333 5632 14.077 Henry 12199157 2949 4136 13288433 2779 4781 15.595 Hickory 8057963 1707 4720 7992319 1526 5237 10.953 Holt 2923769 820 3565 2609496 542 4814 35.035 Howard 6538869 1413 4627 6393937 1271 5030 8.710 Howell 32003236 5987 5345 35747048 6397 5588 4.546 Iron 8827355 2090 4223 8836340 1838 4807 13.829 Jackson 401474470 91198 4402 432550877 89075 4856 10.313 Jasper 64308417 17056 3770 101374002 20293 4995 32.493 Jefferson 123942566 31894 3886 177109880 33766 5245 34.972 Johnson 30509387 7214 4229 35923391 6960 5161 22.038 Knox 2854170 602 4741 1719962 457 3763-20.629 Laclede 21493184 4995 4302 30752296 5552 5538 28.731 Lafayette 25083237 5398 4646 25840976 4925 5246 12.914 Lawrence 24283394 5421 4479 30768738 5475 5619 25.452 Lewis 6828840 1580 4322 7479557 1466 5102 18.047 Lincoln 24357939 6777 3594 47094164 8231 5721 59.182 Linn 14177559 2579 5497 12393419 2186 5669 3.129 Livingston 10763998 2224 4839 10964393 2020 5427 12.151 Macon 10257959 2280 4499 12297993 2225 5527 22.850 Madison 8407673 1951 4309 10483756 1964 5337 23.857 Maries 5280786 1309 4034 5866717 1225 4789 18.716 Marion 18338675 4763 3850 23386732 4728 4946 28.468

APPENDIX A: CHANGES IN STATE PER STUDENT FUNDING 2000/2001 COMPARED TO 2013/2014 SCHOOL YEARS (continued) McDonald 12526004 3035 4127 21810542 3700 5894 42.816 Mercer 3267305 592 5519 3062540 540 5671 2.754 Miller 16056551 4631 3467 18058235 4656 3878 11.855 Mississippi 10395596 2291 4537 10137997 1495 6781 49.460 Moniteau 9338425 2177 4289 12283075 2251 5456 27.209 Monroe 6736216 1649 4085 6521809 1355 4813 17.821 Montgomery 7560509 1770 4271 6922698 1549 4469 4.636 Morgan 6302453 2046 3080 5559914 1837 3026-1.753 New Madrid 11967222 3102 3857 11059815 2487 4447 15.297 Newton 31149493 7735 4027 46899042 8119 5776 43.432 Nodaway 12795518 2857 4478 11754050 2523 4658 4.020 Oregon 9045561 1742 5192 10013615 1592 6289 21.129 Osage 6857465 1620 4233 6726372 1579 4259 0.614 Ozark 8512707 1481 5747 8363690 1418 5898 2.627 Pemiscot 22491611 4136 5438 21471114 3232 6643 22.159 Perry 7582898 2151 3525 9142355 2312 3954 12.170 Pettis 21211780 5635 3764 33504850 6155 5443 44.607 Phelps 27753240 5940 4672 32614808 6206 5255 12.479 Pike 10526952 2734 3850 10845383 2317 4680 21.558 Platte 30199958 11488 2628 59659424 14848 4018 52.892 Polk 22083100 4604 4796 28952982 4904 5903 23.082 Pulaski 34962711 7738 4518 53869643 8513 6327 40.040 Putnam 3362285 760 4424 3169782 715 4433 0.203 Ralls 3224964 858 3758 2789476 710 3928 4.524 Randolph 14457830 3443 4199 17394873 3530 4927 17.337 Ray 15233616 3602 4229 17262032 3229 5345 26.389 Reynolds 4753042 1087 4372 5691776 985 5778 32.159 Ripley 10276273 2025 5074 13132085 2085 6298 24.123 Saline 17616373 3539 4977 18314947 3332 5496 10.428 Schuyler 3510795 714 4917 3263831 578 5646 14.826 Scotland 3153777 697 4524 2903197 555 5230 15.606 Scott 29879785 6889 4337 32269602 6285 5134 18.377 Shannon 4660891 832 5602 4260461 748 5695 1.660 Shelby 4928461 1135 4342 5070721 969 5232 20.497

APPENDIX A: CHANGES IN STATE PER STUDENT FUNDING 2000/2001 COMPARED TO 2013/2014 SCHOOL YEARS (continued) St. Charles 145354176 44536 3263 230674630 53196 4336 32.884 St. Clair 6502884 1385 4695 6314086 1205 5239 11.587 St. Francois 43077690 9362 4601 54537379 10285 5302 15.236 St. Louis 419581466 134439 3120 519738267 127596 4073 30.545 St. Louis City 241164224 36764 6559 89790531 23317 3850-41.302 Ste. Genevieve 5234566 2028 2581 5221122 1717 3040 17.784 Stoddard 21173664 5076 4171 24174290 4864 4970 19.156 Stone 16048110 3828 4192 17912478 3760 4763 13.621 Sullivan 4846027 1055 4593 6643353 984 6751 46.985 Taney 18797603 5286 3556 32250348 7435 4337 21.963 Texas 18744931 3675 5100 21146193 3585 5898 15.647 Vernon 14548360 3121 4661 15586110 2972 5244 12.508 Warren 11447385 3567 3209 23318655 4460 5228 62.917 Washington 17907055 3523 5082 23098046 3524 6554 28.965 Wayne 8694016 1880 4624 9393401 1744 5386 16.479 Webster 19113515 4246 4501 24169312 4378 5520 22.639 Worth 2027089 399 5080 1792155 302 5934 16.811 Wright 18770230 3421 5486 18796675 3187 5897 7.492 State Funding Per Student, 2000/2001: $3,982 State Funding Per Student, 2013/2014: $4,781 2000/2001 Funding Adjusted for Inflation: $ $5,335 Amount Less Per Student if 2000 Funding Had Kept Pace With Inflation: $554.88

APPENDIX B: COUNTY PROPERTY TAX RATES FOR SCHOOLS, 2001 vs. 2014 County 2001 School Property Tax Levy 2014 School Property Tax Levy Change in Property Tax Rate Percent Change in Property Tax Rate Adair 3.270 3.591 0.321 9.804 Andrew 3.610 3.343-0.267-7.388 Atchison 3.320 4.008 0.688 20.723 Audrain 3.167 3.586 0.419 13.238 Barry 2.750 3.045 0.295 10.742 Barton 2.923 3.459 0.536 18.331 Bates 3.323 3.916 0.593 17.858 Benton 2.723 2.750 0.027 0.980 Bollinger 2.750 2.800 0.050 1.818 Boone 3.172 3.628 0.456 14.374 Buchanan 3.273 4.141 0.869 26.545 Butler 2.857 2.977 0.120 4.211 Caldwell 3.676 3.825 0.148 4.034 Callaway 2.605 3.053 0.448 17.205 Camden 2.580 2.783 0.203 7.857 Cape 2.872 3.233 0.361 12.552 Girardeau Carroll 3.546 4.060 0.514 14.492 Carter 2.750 2.940 0.190 6.92 Cass 3.525 4.122 0.597 16.942 Cedar 2.635 3.025 0.390 14.808 Chariton 3.485 3.780 0.295 8.471 Christian 2.976 3.408 0.433 14.541 Clark 3.990 3.497-0.493-12.363 Clay 3.448 4.312 0.863 25.036 Clinton 3.210 3.654 0.444 13.816 Cole 2.835 3.116 0.281 9.901 Cooper 3.607 3.885 0.278 7.719 Crawford 2.937 3.032 0.095 3.242 Dade 3.118 3.412 0.294 9.440 Dallas 2.750 3.350 0.600 21.818 Daviess 4.098 4.130 0.032 0.781

APPENDIX B: COUNTY PROPERTY TAX RATES FOR SCHOOLS, 2001 vs. 2014 DeKalb 3.458 4.408 0.950 27.485 Dent 2.662 2.812 0.150 5.627 Douglas 2.740 2.886 0.146 5.339 Dunklin 2.940 3.277 0.337 11.466 Franklin 2.980 3.354 0.374 12.537 Gasconade 2.865 3.113 0.248 8.667 Gentry 3.540 4.258 0.718 20.288 Greene 2.814 3.186 0.372 13.228 Grundy 3.820 4.802 0.982 25.694 Harrison 4.112 5.025 0.913 22.211 Henry 3.323 3.718 0.395 11.882 Hickory 2.800 2.584-0.216-7.729 Holt 3.427 4.076 0.649 18.943 Howard 3.227 3.633 0.406 12.583 Howell 2.801 3.156 0.355 12.662 Iron 2.755 2.838 0.083 2.995 Jackson 3.818 4.724 0.906 23.738 Jasper 2.817 2.970 0.153 5.424 Jefferson 3.035 3.597 0.562 18.526 Johnson 3.086 3.981 0.896 29.027 Knox 2.750 3.605 0.855 31.073 Laclede 2.700 3.011 0.311 11.507 Lafayette 3.328 3.940 0.611 18.366 Lawrence 2.738 2.904 0.166 6.044 Lewis 2.840 3.273 0.433 15.239 Lincoln 2.878 3.265 0.388 13.477 Linn 3.222 4.031 0.809 25.109 Livingston 3.530 3.970 0.440 12.459 Macon 3.378 3.775 0.397 11.751 Madison 2.895 3.605 0.710 24.508 Maries 2.840 3.241 0.401 14.123 Marion 3.000 3.361 0.361 12.043 McDonald 2.750 2.750 0.000 0 Mercer 4.320 4.619 0.299 6.912 Miller 2.744 3.281 0.537 19.552

APPENDIX B: COUNTY PROPERTY TAX RATES FOR SCHOOLS, 2001 vs. 2014 Mississippi 2.750 2.788 0.038 1.378 Moniteau 3.138 3.480 0.342 10.898 Monroe 3.124 3.981 0.857 27.430 Montgomery 3.130 3.117-0.013-0.428 Morgan 2.615 2.704 0.089 3.403 New Madrid 3.083 3.596 0.514 16.659 Newton 2.738 2.750 0.012 0.438 Nodaway 3.991 4.591 0.599 15.015 Oregon 2.740 3.133 0.393 14.339 Osage 2.940 3.474 0.534 18.173 Ozark 3.064 3.348 0.284 9.259 Pemiscot 2.605 3.043 0.438 16.825 Perry 2.770 3.390 0.620 22.365 Pettis 2.853 3.228 0.375 13.143 Phelps 2.790 2.805 0.015 0.534 Pike 3.300 3.575 0.275 8.327 Platte 3.893 3.835-0.058-1.493 Polk 2.827 3.088 0.262 9.255 Pulaski 2.735 2.863 0.128 4.691 Putnam 3.150 3.328 0.178 5.641 Ralls 2.750 2.750 0.000 0 Randolph 3.324 3.555 0.231 6.958 Ray 3.618 3.883 0.265 7.333 Reynolds 2.898 3.269 0.372 12.825 Ripley 2.750 2.890 0.140 5.084 Saline 3.619 4.159 0.540 14.917 Schuyler 2.750 3.430 0.680 24.727 Scotland 3.735 3.855 0.120 3.213 Scott 2.811 3.164 0.352 12.528 Shannon 2.750 3.080 0.330 11.996 Shelby 3.385 3.615 0.230 6.798 St. Charles 3.592 4.169 0.577 16.072 St. Clair 2.913 3.360 0.448 15.365 St. Francois 2.964 3.100 0.136 4.575 St. Louis 3.435 4.121 0.687 19.997

APPENDIX B: COUNTY PROPERTY TAX RATES FOR SCHOOLS, 2001 vs. 2014 St. Louis City 3.730 3.750 0.020 0.536 Ste. Genevieve 2.900 3.052 0.152 5.228 Stoddard 2.791 3.065 0.274 9.802 Stone 3.024 3.526 0.502 16.587 Sullivan 3.827 4.633 0.806 21.065 Taney 2.900 3.495 0.595 20.531 Texas 2.814 2.968 0.154 5.465 Vernon 3.055 3.822 0.767 25.119 Warren 3.015 3.269 0.254 8.421 Washington 2.888 3.000 0.112 3.875 Wayne 2.750 2.750 0.000 0 Webster 2.655 2.895 0.240 9.021 Worth 3.390 3.370-0.020-0.581 Wright 2.856 3.135 0.279 9.783 Statewide Average 3.111 3.479 0.368 11.777

ENDNOTES 1 Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education 2 Missouri Budget Project analysis using the Consumer Price Index as a meaure for inflation. 3 The student population rose from 806,059 in the 2000-2001 school year to 823,981 students in 2013-2014. 4 State funding averaged $3,982 per student in 2000-2001 and $4,781 in 2013-2014. 5 Clark, Hickory, Andrew, Platte, Worth, and Montgomery counties decreased their property tax rates. McDonald, Ralls, and Wayne counties maintained their rates between 2000 and 2014.

ENDNOTES 1 Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education 2 Missouri Budget Project analysis using the Consumer Price Index as a meaure for inflation. 3 The student population rose from 806,059 in the 2000-2001 school year to 823,981 students in 2013-2014. 4 State funding averaged $3,982 per student in 2000-2001 and $4,781 in 2013-2014. 5 Clark, Hickory, Andrew, Platte, Worth, and Montgomery counties decreased their property tax rates. McDonald, Ralls, and Wayne counties maintained their rates between 2000 and 2014.