The hottest topics across
Mississippi on news outlets, social media
and in the coffee shops in recent months have been the public school funding Initiatives 42 and 42A that will appear on the November 3 ballot. As with any political issue of this nature, there is much opinion, conjecture, misinformation and propaganda dispersed with the intent to persuade, dissuade or confuse the potential voter.
We at WinstonWebNews have no intent to pursue any of the above activities but to provide the public with clear and adequate information on these ballot issues without bias or opinion. We will present the initiatives as written with a basic explanation, the most reasoned arguments against and for each initiative and the manner in which these will appear on the ballot.
and in the coffee shops in recent months have been the public school funding Initiatives 42 and 42A that will appear on the November 3 ballot. As with any political issue of this nature, there is much opinion, conjecture, misinformation and propaganda dispersed with the intent to persuade, dissuade or confuse the potential voter.
We at WinstonWebNews have no intent to pursue any of the above activities but to provide the public with clear and adequate information on these ballot issues without bias or opinion. We will present the initiatives as written with a basic explanation, the most reasoned arguments against and for each initiative and the manner in which these will appear on the ballot.
Both initiatives will appear at the
end of the General Election ballot (in Winston County, this is page 5 of 5) on
November 3 and passage of either will amend the Constitution of the State of
Mississippi. For either initiative to pass, it must receive a simple majority
of the total votes cast for that particular initiative but it must also receive
more than 40% of the total votes cast in that election. The inclusion of two
initiatives on the same issue complicates the voting process.
Either initiative would change the
wording of the current Section 201 of the Constitution. The current law reads
as follows:
CURRENT LAW
Section 201. Free Public
Schools. “The Legislature shall, by general law, provide for the establishment,
maintenance and support of free public schools upon such conditions and limitations
as the Legislature may prescribe.”
Passage of initiative 42 would
change Section 201 to read as follows:
Section 201. Educational
opportunity for public school children “To protect each child’s fundamental
right to educational opportunity, the State shall provide for the
establishment, maintenance and support of an adequate and efficient system of
free public schools. The chancery courts of this State shall have the power to
enforce this section with appropriate injunctive relief.”
Passage of initiative 42A would
change Section 201 to read as follows:
Section 201. “The Legislature
shall, by general law, provide for the establishment, maintenance and support
of an effective system of free public schools.
********
SOURCE INFORMATION
INITIATIVE 42:
42 was placed on the ballot by
petition when signature requirements were met. The petition was sponsored by
Luther T. Munford, a resident of Jackson and an attorney with the firm of
Butler Snow. The original filing was in February of 2014.
INITIATIVE 42A:
42A was placed on the ballot by the
action and vote of the Mississippi Legislature.
**********
The Ballot Titles, Summaries and
the indicated change to Section 201 are listed below. This is how they will
appear on the ballot along with a fiscal review by the Legislative Budget
Office:
Initiative Measure #42
BALLOT TITLE: Should the State be
required to provide for the support of an adequate and efficient system of free
public schools?
BALLOT SUMMARY: Initiative Measure
#42 would protect each child’s fundamental right to educational opportunity
through the 12th grade by amending Section 201 of the Mississippi Constitution
to require that the State must provide and the legislature must fund an
adequate and efficient system of free public schools. This initiative would
also authorize the chancery courts of this State to enforce this section with
appropriate injunctive relief.
Section 201. Educational
opportunity for public school children “To protect each child’s fundamental
right to educational opportunity, the State shall provide for the
establishment, maintenance and support of an adequate and efficient system of
free public schools. The chancery courts of this State shall have the power to
enforce this section with appropriate injunctive relief.”
Alternative Measure #42A
BALLOT TITLE: Should
the Legislature provide for the establishment and support of effective free
public schools without judicial enforcement?
BALLOT SUMMARY: This constitutional
amendment is proposed as a legislative alternative measure to Initiative
Measure No. 42 and would require the Legislature to provide, by general law,
for the establishment, maintenance and support of an effective system of free
public schools.
Section 201. “The Legislature
shall, by general law, provide for the establishment, maintenance and support
of an effective system of free public schools.
**********
FISCAL ANALYSIS
The Mississippi Legislative
Budget Office reviewed the estimated fiscal impact to the state for each
initiative:
Fiscal Analysis for Initiative
42: Because this proposed amendment shifts funding decisions from the
Legislature to the court system, it is impossible to provide a specific fiscal
impact of Initiative 42. If the court system, acting under the new authority
granted by Initiative 42, required K-12 Public Education be funded at the
amount called for by the statutory Mississippi Adequate Education Program, the
Legislature would need to appropriate an additional $201,031,129 above the
Fiscal Year 2016 budgeted amount. Fiscal Year 2016 revenues are not adequate to
support this funding increase without the Legislature having to cut agency
budgets or identify new sources of revenue (such as fees or tax increase) to comply
with the court’s dictate.
Fiscal Analysis for Initiative
42A: There is no determinable cost or revenue impact associated with this
initiative.
PROS & CONS
The pros and cons of each
initiative have been debated over the past months. We will list the primary
issues and clarify as best as possible:
INITIATIVE 42
PRO: Proponents contend that 42 is
necessary because the legislature has failed to provide adequate funding as
1997 legislation (MAEP) provided. Proponents define adequate in terms of
expenditures of average school districts. The change in the constitution would
provide a specific legal remedy if the Legislature fails to provide funding.
CON: Opponents of 42 contend that
education funding like other state funding appropriation is within the function
of the legislature and should be conducted by elected representation rather
than through judicial order. Opponents also contend that a court is not bound
by the Initiative 42 supporters’ interpretation of “adequate or average”.
PRO: Proponents contend that 42
gives the Courts the ability to hold the legislature accountable for adequate
funding. School districts individually could bring suit in chancery court
against the State if they are not properly funded. The ultimate decision based
upon appeal level could lie with the Mississippi Supreme Court.
CON: Opponents contend that any
cases would likely be brought before a Hinds County Court.
PRO: Proponents contend that any
additional funding achieved thru 42 would make the State’s educational system
more competitive with surrounding states.
CON: Opponents contend that simply
adding funding does nothing to guarantee improvement in the quality of
education in the State.
PRO: Proponents of 42 indicate that
“adequate” funding would be phased in over a seven year period based upon a
projected growth of State revenue over that time. 25% of that revenue growth
would be dedicated to schools. This would achieve full “adequate” funding by
2022. This approach would have no negative effect on currently funded state
budgets.
CON: Opponents contend that there
is no “phase-in” requirement to Initiative 42 and that revenue growth cannot be
assumed at the levels projected. They also contend that if full funding is
required based upon MAEP (the 1997 legislation), other state agencies,
community colleges and universities would see significant budget cuts and/or
taxes would be raised. Opponents also believe that the wording of the initiative
does not limit the judiciary’s involvement just to funding and opens the door
for the courts’ involvement in curriculum, programs and facilities.
INITIATIVE 42A
PRO: Proponents contend that 42A
provides an alternative to 42 with full authority in an elected legislature to
provide an “effective” education system.
CON: Opponents contend that 42A was
only submitted to confuse and divide voters to prevent passage of 42 and that the
term “effective” has no legal definition and therefore no manner in which to
gauge the legislature’s compliance with the amendment.
VOTING CONFUSION
As stated earlier, both initiatives
will be on the last page of the November 3rd ballot. There is much confusion across
the state concerning the wording and layout of the vote. A recent explanation
from the Secretary of State’s Office has provided some clarity but the
appearance of two initiatives has complicated the process. The best explanation
we can provide is to view the two step process as two completely different
votes. After the initiatives are stated, there are two separate steps in the
voting process: The voter must first vote:
For Approval of Either
Initiative or - Against Both Initiatives
In effect the voter is voting to
either change the Constitution (Approval of Either Initiative) or to not change the Constitution
(Against Both Initiatives)
Regardless of your vote in the
previous step, the Secretary of State’s Office is recommending that voters
choose an option in the 2nd step - There is no requirement to do so but the voter
may wish to view the option in this
manner: Even if you voted against both
initiatives (No change to Constitution), which initiative would you support if
the overall vote supported a change to the Constitution?
Examples:
·
You are in
support of one of the initiatives and wish to change the Constitution- Vote for approval of either
initiative on top section and vote for your initiative in the bottom section.
·
You do not
wish to change the Constitution and do not support either initiative – Vote against
both initiatives in the top section and choose the initiative in the 2nd part that you could
support if you had to do so.
The Mississippi Secretary of
State’s website has much more information on these ballot measures. Click here to
see the 2015 Initiative Ballot page with links to each Initiative, information
on the Initiative Process and records of public hearings conducted throughout
the State.
The Secretary of State has also
published a brochure on these Initiatives and the voting process that is
available by clicking here. Depending on demand, these brochures
are also available in the Circuit Clerk’s Office.
William McCully