Jackson Free Press

The issue of school consolidation is popping up in anticipation of another cash-strapped legislative session. Calls for merging some of the state's 152 public-school districts aren't new in lean budget years, despite a lack of evidence of its value.

Rep. George Flaggs, D-Vicksburg, catalyzed the recent round of speculation Oct. 21, in a speech at the Mississippi Economic Council's annual Hobnob event.

"If we're going to balance the budget, not only for this year but for the next two years, everything needs to be on the table," Flaggs told the Jackson Free Press.

Flaggs is adamant that the state budget is paying administrators and not reaching students. "The money is not getting to the classroom, to the student, to the teacher," Flaggs said. "It's being absorbed at the administrative level. It is costing us too much to administer education in this state."

Flaggs' call for consolidation is typical in that it focuses on financial benefits. By merging the administrative offices of two school districts, the thinking goes, the state can trim waste and reduce costs.

Cecil Brown, D-Jackson, questions that claim. Brown, who chairs the House Education Committee, points out that district-level administration only makes up around 5 percent of the state's total education budget. Even eliminating every school district superintendent in the state would only save $15 million, Brown says, hardly a bonanza for a state with a $2.2 billion education budget.

Moreover, because local governments provide 40 percent of their school district's funding through property taxes, only 60 percent of any consolidation savings would end up in the state's coffers. Most of the state's education spending goes to teacher salaries, which no politician wants to suggest cutting.

"If you're really going to save money, you actually have to close down schools," Brown said. "If all you do is combine districts, you'd save a little administrative cost, but you've still got all the teachers, all the classrooms, all the transportation issues."

Education researchers have not found clear evidence that school consolidation improves students' academic performance, according to Gail Gaines, a vice president with the Southern Regional Education Board.

"Larger (districts) ... can offer a wider range of curricular and extracurricular activities, but they show lower attendance, lower GPAs, more problems with violence, drug abuse and discipline, and higher dropout rates," Gaines said.

Evidence that consolidation saves money is similarly muddled. A 2001 Syracuse University study, which examined consolidation in rural New York from 1985 to 1997, found that cost savings decreased as the size of the districts increased. While two 300-student districts could save nearly 22 percent of their operating costs by merging, two 1,500-student districts would save only 8 percent. Districts larger than 1,500 students saved almost nothing on their operating costs by merging.

Large, consolidated school districts run into a number of logistical hurdles. Longer or more numerous bus routes can raise the cost. Residents of adjacent school districts can also pay different property tax rates to support their schools. If two such districts merge, residents will find their property taxes equalizing, which in some cases could mean higher taxes, sure to raise taxpayer ire. Similarly, the added cost of equalizing teacher salaries could erase any savings from reducing the number of superintendents serving a particular area.

Consolidation can also carry powerful racial implications. The last major round of consolidation in the state took place in the 1950s, under then-Gov. Hugh White, when the state reduced roughly 400 districts into the current 152. According to local author and political historian Jere Nash, that effort was largely motivated by a desire among the state's white leaders to fend off criticism of the state's segregated school system. By the 1950s, it was apparent to state leaders that the U.S. Supreme Court would rule—as it ultimately did in 1954's Brown v. Board of Education—that segregation was unconstitutional.

"They were all in a snort over what they thought the Supreme Court was going to do over education," Nash said. Consolidation offered the possibility of minor, superficial reform that could take some of the political heat off segregation, Nash explained.

In areas where a county school district is predominantly white and a city school district is predominantly black, or vice versa, merging two districts raises the specter of school integration. Flaggs, who advocated for the 1988 merger of Vicksburg's city school district with the Warren County school district, says that such mergers may prove unpopular at first, as the Vicksburg-Warren merger did, but strong political leaders can see them through.

Flaggs and Brown expect Gov. Barbour to include school district consolidation in his budget recommendation for the 2011 fiscal year. Still, Brown said that the chance of legislators actually passing any school consolidation this session remain slim.

The messy political implications of merging schools may loom larger for many lawmakers because 2011 is an election year. If legislators manage to skirt the thorny issue in the upcoming session, Flaggs hopes that it becomes an issue in the 2011 campaigns.

"I pray to God that this discussion will be a part of the next gubernatorial and statewide elections," Flaggs said.

Previous Commentsshow

Okay, when Rep. Flaggs talks about money getting to administrators but not to teachers and students, I'm pretty sure he's not just talking about district-level funding. So the comment about only 5% of the budget going to district-level funding, while fair, is not a direct rebuttal to Flaggs' argument re: administrators. I'm not sure every district in the state needs to be consolidated, but has there been talk of consolidating the Madison and Canton districts? It seems obscene to me that the district with the state's highest graduation rate, one of the whitest districts, is redlined so neatly from the district with the state's lowest graduation rate, which also happens to be one of the blackest districts. I compared the two districts' mission statements back when I was blogging about Parents v. Seattle in 2007, and the differences between the stated goals of the districts--Canton prepares students to "enter the workplace" and become "responsible citizens" (which sounds to me like a gentle way of saying "hold down a job and don't get arrested"), but Madison prepares them to "contribute to an ever-changing global society" because "the Madison County School District is one of the best in the state." That kind of difference in objectives and standards--to the point where the rich, white district can openly gloat about how much it offers relative to other districts--tells me that we haven't really moved all that much beyond Brown v. Board of Education; it's still the nasty old joke we call "separate but equal," even in adjacent districts that occupy the same county. I'd want to hear what Rep. Brown's solution to this problem is. I'm not saying he doesn't have one; I have tremendous respect for the man. But this is a problem, and consolidation is one approach. What's another? What's his strategy? What are we going to do towards addressing racial disparities in educational opportunities if we don't consolidate? (Note: The answer may not include the word "wait.")

Tom Head

Nov 12 2009

Tom- Don't you think another problem that needs addressing is why does the Canton school district have such a low graduation rate and such low objectives and goals for their students? Why doesn't the Canton school district do a better job of educating their students? Bad leadership? Bad teachers? Lack of funding? What's the difference between the 2 school districts beside the race of the students? I am not disagreeing with your comments, just don't see how consolidating the administrators of the two districts, which would probably be the only consolidating that would happen, would improve the Canton school district's low performance if everything else stays the same.

BubbaT

Nov 12 2009

Well, it would consolidate district-level funding, for starters. And it would establish equal district-level services. And it would require common goals for schools in the district. These would be positive steps forward. They would not be enough on their own, but they would be something, and we have to do something. If you've got a better idea that stands any real chance of being implemented, please do speak up. But--again--it may not include the word "wait."

Tom Head

Nov 12 2009

Nope no better idea, don't think consolidating is a bad one either. Was just wondering why does the Canton school district have such a low graduation rate and set low goals for themselves and what the Madison school district is doing different from Canton to have one of the highest.

BubbaT

Nov 12 2009

Tom, As you may know, Senator Videt Carmichael and I co-chair a working group that is looking at school consolidation among other education issues. We have both made it clear that we are willing to look at consolidation but that we need to do it carefully and with specific education objectives in mind. While it seems intuitive that we could save money with school consolidation, as Gale Gaines of SREB said, that has not always been the experience in other states. In addition, there are serious issues of governance (appointed vs. elected boards and superintendents), equalization of tax rates and combinations of physical facilities. We also have some districts that have outstanding bonded indebtedness. Should the taxpayers of another district be required to shoulder a portion of the repayment? In addition to all of that, some of our highest achieving districts are some of our smallest. We do not want to destroy their good work with the sledge hammer of consolidation into larger districts. The working group is carefully considering the issue and has made not recommendations at this time. But, again, we are not knee-jerk opposed to consolidation, but a lot of thought needs to be given to the long-range effects of any proposal on our students and our taxpayers. Cecil

Cecilb

Nov 12 2009

latimes.com Bacteria in intestines play role key role in weight gain, study finds A high-fat, high-sugar diet alters the composition of bacteria in the gut, making it easier to gain weight and harder to lose it. By Thomas H. Maugh II November 12, 2009 A high-fat, high-sugar diet does more than pump calories into your body. It also alters the composition of bacteria in your intestines, making it easier to gain weight and harder to lose it, research in mice suggests. And the changeover can happen in as little as 24 hours, according to a report Wednesday in the new journal Science Translational Medicine. Many factors play a role in the propensity to gain weight, including genetics, physical activity and the environment, as well as food choices. But a growing body of evidence, much of it accumulated by Dr. Jeffrey I. Gordon of Washington University in St. Louis, shows that bacteria in the gut also play a key role. Humans need such bacteria to help convert otherwise indigestible foods into digestible form. Ninety percent of the bacteria fall into two major divisions, or phyla: the Firmicutes and the Bacteroidetes. Previous research had shown that obese mice had higher levels of Firmicutes, and lean ones had more Bacteroidetes. Analyzing the genomes of the bacteria, Gordon and graduate student Peter Turnbaugh concluded that the Firmicutes were more efficient at digesting food that the body can't. Animals that have a higher proportion of Firmicutes convert a higher proportion of food into calories that can be absorbed by the body, making it easier to gain weight. When the researchers transferred bacteria from obese mice into so-called gnotobiotic mice, which were raised in a sterile environment and had no bacteria in their guts, the mice gained more weight than did those receiving a similar amount of bacteria from lean mice, even though they were fed the same diet. Gordon and Turnbaugh found that they could transfer bacteria from human intestines into gnotobiotic mice, which were fed a low-fat, plant-rich diet in the weeks before the bacteria were transplanted and for a month afterward. After the bacteria were transplanted from a lean human donor, the colonies in the mice had a high proportion of Bacteroidetes and a low proportion of Firmicutes. But within 24 hours after the mice were switched to a high-sugar, high-fat diet, the proportions of the two phyla were reversed. With time, the mice also grew fatter than their littermates who did not receive the human bacteria. thomas.maugh@latimes.com

Cecilb

Nov 12 2009

Woah! Spam on the JFP. Are we getting popular or what? Consolidation is kind of like Voter ID in my book: reasonable answer really looking for a big problem at this point.

Ironghost

Nov 12 2009

I don't actually know how that just happened. The first post by Cecilb is by Rep. Brown. The second, spam. Let me get iTodd to look at it. And then, of course, we'll delete. And Iron, you wouldn't believe the spam that doesn't get through. We've ejected many, many more spammers over the years than trolls. ;-)

DonnaLadd

Nov 12 2009

MY BAD on the 2nd post. Intended for someone else, although it is interesting and related to our recent healthy schools initiative.

Cecilb

Nov 12 2009

I, too, believe that there should be some school district consolidation. However, I am willing to listening to well-reasoned arguments both for and against to make an informed decision on whether consolidation is the best option. Longer bus routes and travel times to and from school and higher taxes are legitimate concerns that need to be addressed. The overall main concern is whether it enhances or hinders a quality education for the students and are the cost savings (if any) is beneficial.

golden eagle

Nov 13 2009

I think school consolidation is definitely worth it for smaller districts and areas where 2-3 separate districts exist as obvious legacies of segregation. It's ridiculous to continue fighting to sustain 152 districts over 82 counties! I would love to see a serious initiative towards consolidating a number of these districts.

Jeff Lucas

Nov 15 2009

My beef has been about Bolivar County having 8 districts within its borders, though it has somewhere between 30-35K people living there. With the Delta losing population like it has been for years, it's going to be very hard to sustain so many districts.

golden eagle

Nov 16 2009