We’ve been writing about myths lately, and it’s impossible to keep up all the ones that have been advanced as part of the rush to judgment in support of municipal school districts.
More than anything, the municipal school districts pursuit has been driven by fear, fictions, and suburban politics (with a strong dose of anti-Memphis venom) more than a passion for better student classroom performance or a plan to move these schools to a level where they perform at levels more commensurate with other schools where students have similar socio-economic profiles.
What’s really unseemly about the municipal schools movement is the way that suburban legislators are willing to tilt the scales away from fairness and compromise with legislation that injects state government into affairs that should be decided locally.
Myth Upon Myth
The latest threat came from a reliable source of these fictions, Tennessee Republican Representative Ron Lollar of Bartlett, who once again repeated a popular myth among suburban politicians: that the new Shelby County School District should just give the suburban municipalities the schools within their borders because Memphis never had to pay for schools in an annexation.
He said in The Commercial Appeal: “I agree with the (suburban) mayors totally. We should not have to pay for the buildings twice. When Memphis annexed areas where county schools were located, they never paid anything for the buildings.”
First and foremost, he doesn’t know what he’s talking about.
Financial Considerations
There were torturous negotiations between Shelby County Government and Memphis City Schools when Memphis annexed areas with county schools in them and county government received financial considerations as a result in the way of waivers of ADA (Average Daily Attendance) funding requirements, with offsetting financial credits, or through joint design of other schools by city and county school districts.
And secondly, taxpayers in these towns wouldn’t be paying twice for the cost of the buildings.
They didn’t pay for them the first time, because the majority of the schools’ costs were paid by Memphians. As we have previously said, the fairest thing to do with these schools is for the new county school district to discount them by the percentage of the total property taxes produced by that specific city and then send them a bill for the balance.
For example, if Bartlett pays 10% of the total Shelby County property taxes (which was the source of funding that paid for these schools to be built), the cost of the schools in Bartlett should be discounted by 10% and the municipality should pay 90% of the sales price because that’s how much of the schools’ costs were paid for by taxpayers other than those who live in Bartlett. (Memphians paid significantly more than half of the costs of these schools.)
Fictions
This same myth has been repeated often by suburban legislators, including mayors, state senators, state representatives, school board members, and county commissioners. As City Councilman Shea Flinn tweeted when it was repeated by county commissioners in early 2012: the statement that the schools were given to Memphis by Shelby County Government “is false. It was done by agreement and other consideration was given.” “It’s how you understand a contract – consideration is more than just cash,” he added later.
For example, ADA rules in Tennessee required for Shelby County Government to treat all public students in its borders equally, which meant that there had to be proportional per pupil spending. This was pretty easy to do when it came to classroom costs. Every student in either the Memphis or Shelby County school districts received exactly the same amount from Shelby County Government.
Where it became problematic was when a county school was built. If a county school cost $10 million and 30 percent of the students were in the county district, Shelby County Government was required by the ADA law to give Memphis City Schools roughly $25 million, a proportional share of 70 percent because 70 percent of the students were in that district – and all students had to be treated the same.
Same As Cash
It may not sound like cash to some people, but if someone forgives the debt you owe them, it sure feels like money in your pocket to us. Because Memphis City Schools waived the ADA requirements, it saved county government millions of dollars – which was the same as cash to the debt-strapped government.
The Commercial Appeal explained it this way:
“Memphis ultimately agreed to allow Shelby County a $12 million waiver on ADA funds as “credit” for Memphis taking schools in annexations from the late 60s and early 70s. (Note: We remember similar considerations much later, and Mr. Lollar was a member of the county mayor’s staff during some of those years.) To Memphis at the time, $12 million spent on suburban school capital improvements meant, because of the then $5.7-to-$1 ADA split, it stood to see $68.4 million flow into its coffers from county government. That $68.4 million equates to $229 million in purchasing power in the 2010 economy, and the website MeasuringWorth.com calculates that $68.4 million in projects in the 1978 economy equates to $433 million in projects in the 2010 economy.
“For the suburban school system, the $12 million credit – equivalent to $76 million in projects today — allowed for construction or renovation of some of the very buildings municipalities want to receive for free. A Jan. 27, 1978, article from longtime Commercial Appeal education reporter Jimmie Covington points out: ‘For several years, the county has not had to share school construction funds with the city because of credits received from the city system for county schools which were annexed. However, about $4 million in county school building projects approved for this year have about exhausted the credits.’ In an April 28, 1978, article, Covington wrote that ‘the city system has paid the county for annexed schools by waiving’ the ADA share.”
“It was never a straight policy that they give the schools, ever,” Mercuro said. “The county always got something out of it, one way or the other.”
Switching Sides
Former deputy director of the Division of Planning and Development for Memphis and Shelby County, Louise Mercuro, said: “”It was never a straight policy that they give the schools, ever. The county always got something out of it, one way or the other.”
Another ironic twist in the current debate is that political opinion depends on whose ox is being gored. In those days, when schools were annexed into the City of Memphis, it was suburban politicians who opposed the gift of the schools to Memphis and demanded that Shelby County Government get some financial consideration for them.
I expect that those knowing nothing about this will soon be saying it is just your opinion.
Simply put, if the legislature arranges for these buildings to be GIVEN to the muni districts, that is a THEFT from the taxpayers of this county who paid for those buildings to be used by the ENTIRE county. That makes the legislators who would vote for this THEFT, THIEVES.
Period.
I really have never understood why people in the counties think they are entitled to so many freebies. I’ve never lived outside the city limits, but if the people out there are like that, they wouldn’t likely be good neighbors anyway. Big fences.
The fact that you are you are quoting the Commercial appeal makes this article not worth reading. The CA spews venom and does not do their research. You obviously have not done yours either or you would be quoting reputable resources, not citing a newspaper article as your source. This article is nothing more than the CA’s sloppy seconds.
Seriously?!!! This is ridiculous drivel….
For a blog that aims to set the record straight about Memphis, you do a fine job of reinforcing what so many think about Memphis. And not in a good way.
This article is just one more example of that.
Your math is the most mythical thing about this story. Your myth begins on the premise that Bartlett’s 10% of taxes only counts toward the buildings under consideration, but Memphis’s 50% counts toward all buildings including those outside Memphis. You can’t have it both ways. If you take that angle, then Bartlett’s 10% equity in all of the schools in the county would more than cover the cost of the 9-11 buildings needed in Bartlett’s municipal district.
The other issues that I take with your ‘story’ is that you use the word “Memphis”, when you should be using “former Memphis City Schools.” I agree that there have been financial concessions concerning the acquisition of some school buildings throughout MCS/SCS history, but please don’t try to come with the argument that each building transferred was ‘paid’ for 100% by the acquiring district. There very well may be financial concessions made in this process, but any discussions that are happening now are merely conjecture and fear mongering.
What about the schools that have been annexed within the past 20 years? Where are those figures?
Note: With the exception of Arlington High School, almost every school built in Shelby County (including MCS buildings) has been constructed using the same funding source that is split amongst every property tax payer in the county.
Not a fan: We know the reporter at the CA who wrote the story you discount, and before we mentioned that research, we told you our opinion which was based on being there when the financial considerations were agreed upon.
For the childish, silly ad hominem attacks, thanks for commenting, but the fact that you have nothing to add tells us that you have no facts on your side.
As for Talk About Myths, we’re willing to take the deal you’re offering. Bartlett will still have to pay some money though. Thanks for the thoughtful response.
As for the personal attacks, which we delete, whether they are directed at us or other commenters, we can only say: grow up.
SCM:
It’s always interesting to watch these ya-hoos with so many smart things to say but they never want to use their names. It’s the same kind of courage we’ve come to expect from the burbs.
As for your negotiating with Talk About Myths, we disagree. It doesn’t matter how much Bartlett taxpayers paid in the past. That’s not the issue. It’s the simple sale of the schools in Bartlett to their school district. Pure and simple. They want their independence. They need to pay the whole cost for the schools they want.
Suburban tax dollars funded every building in both the Memphis and Shelby County School Districts. That is not a myth. As was stated above, there is suburban equity in each building in Memphis, so don’t play that game. Schools aren’t normal real estate.
There should be no discussion about schools with boundaries that are 100% in the boundaries of a municipality. In Germantown, Farmington and Dogwood Elementaries are examples of this. There are examples like this in most of the cities. There probably does need to discussion on schools like Germantown HS and Houston HS.
It would be a really good idea for the County Commission and the new Shelby County School District to negotiate in good faith on this and get this over with. The next step will be for the Republican supermajority legislature to get involved and I can assure you that will not end well for those 2 parties. If you think otherwise, look at the legislation that has passed so far.
“What’s really unseemly about the municipal schools movement is the way that suburban legislators are willing to tilt the scales away from fairness and compromise with legislation that injects state government into affairs that should be decided locally.”
I agree…and Memphis voted to surrender their charter…which they have. The suburbs voted for their own schools. Those were all handled locally. Let everyone have what they voted on. Local control…it’s a beautiful thing…it works for everyone. You cannot be a proponent of letting it be controlled locally, without allowing the same fate for the suburbs…now that just wouldn’t be fair. As far as I’m concerned, everything you said after that sentence was a moot point, because you state the importance of local control. You should have just stopped there.
Actually, schools are normal real estate just like everything else owned by any government in this community. Schools are the property of the entity who holds title to them, and that entity has the power to control their future.
Suburban tax dollars did fund every school (except for the $100M contribution made by City of Memphis when Herenton was mayor), and that total from non-Memphis taxpayers was probably about 65% of the total. But as we mentioned, what is interesting is that county politicians had just the opposite point of view when Memphis was in the position that the towns find themselves in now. But irony aside, if the towns want school districts, they can either build the schools they want (the new district may still need some of them for students they educate outside of those town borders) or they can buy the schools. If the shoe was on the other foot, there is no way they would be saying that Memphis should be given these schools. There is a fair place for negotiations to arrive at, but suburban mayors et al have to first admit that it’s only fair that they pay something for the schools they need. If they don’t like that, they should build new ones. Local control is fine, but with it goes responsibility. Taxes in the towns are going to keep climbing beyond any projections given by the mayors and consultants when they were trying to feed the frenzy and a few pennies to pay for schools shouldn’t be too much for towns with such ambition to be independent.
Prescott vs. Lennox said that the schools are indeed, not normal real estate. Memphis used this case when annexing Hickory Hill. Now, this is different than annexation, so who knows how it’s going to turn out. Lennox has stood since 1898.
Again, Memphis has equity in the schools in the municipalities, just as the municipalities have equity in all of the schools in the city of Memphis. How do you resolve this? Should the municipalities demand their equity from all of the schools in Memphis?
It’s going to cost everyone a lot more if this gets tied up in lawsuits. There will be schools that can and should be transferred for free, as there have never been students from outside the city limits zoned for those. Others, probably require some conversation. The other option is to get Nashville involved. They could all be free, if it comes to that. Memphis has made many enemies over the years. There is nothing that indicates the state won’t pass a law to transfer the buildings for free.
The MSD’s are a reality and they are going to happen. The leadership needs to accept that reality and let the area move forward.
It’s fine if the districts are going ahead, but the people pushing them need to understand the full costs of doing it. They’ve not gotten the facts so far because of the political agenda pretending to be an education agenda. The schools have a price and the towns need to pay it. And if they go to Nashville to get their right wing helpers to charge in like the cavalry, they’re just admitting that it’s all a sham.
bjc123:
We understand the towns’ affinity for Prescott vs.Town of Lennox but we think that it’s not a direct precedent, considering the role of the trustee and that turning over the school was based on annexation. Maybe a court has to make that call, but as for us, it seems that it will be worth the legal fees to get definitive rulings on some key issues so that the framework for moving ahead is clearer and grounded.
Previously, Kelli Gauthier, a spokesman for the Tennessee Department of Education, said: “The property and the buildings belong to Shelby County School District. A municipality would have to either buy, lease or come up with their own school buildings.” adding that the buildings “don’t automatically fall to them because it is in their cities.”
Time will tell, but in the end, either the towns are prepared for the potential costs of their district or they are not, and if they are looking for bargains as they begin, it doesn’t portend well for that world-class education that they suggest they will deliver.
The buildings should be the least of their worries. This quote from Cooper vs. Aaron (1958) suggests that the municipal school law may be unconstitutional with regards to Shelby County. ” In short, the constitutional rights of children not to be discriminated against in school admission on grounds of race or color declared by this Court in the Brown case can neither be nullified openly and directly by state legislators or state executive or judicial officers, nor nullified indirectly by them through evasive schemes for segregation whether attempted “ingeniously or ingenuously.” Smith v. Texas, 311 U.S. 128, 132 .” Inasmuch as the formation of municipal districts in the overwhelmingly white suburbs will leave the remaining Shelby County Schools almost entirely Black and Hispanic, and inasmuch as the municipal nature of the new districts will occasion the removal of many non-white students who currently attend school in the suburbs but do not reside within the municipal boundaries of them, it could be logically argued in court that the municipal schools law, at least in Shelby County, is an “evasive scheme for segregation, attempted ingeniously or ingenuously.” I am hoping that the Federal courts agree.
John: That’s saying it awfully well…and accurately. Thanks.
John,
The municipalities have proposed keeping the existing boundaries as they are. There has not been any iota of intent to lock down the borders. I’m not sure where this keeps coming from?
At the end of the day, Memphis needs to look inward at the racial imbalance of their schools. The schools in the suburbs are much more diverse than most of those in the city. In fact, the black percentage at most of the schools in the old MCS is above 80% with many in the 98-100% range. Nothing in the suburbs is causing that. The white citizens of Memphis gave up on the schools in the city a long time ago and caused a de facto segregation. That is a Memphis problem and not a suburbs issue. Why isn’t the White Station zone busted up to desegregate the surrounding schools? Nobody in Memphis has the stones to do what could be done, yet point fingers at the suburbs.
Look at the areas where there are high concentrations of white people in Memphis (South Bluffs, Mud Island, Chickasaw Gardens/MCC area) and then look at the schools that those areas are zoned for and look at how disproportional the numbers are. But, it’s the suburbs fault? Give me a break.
bjc123:
Now Memphis City Schools should feel guilty for being majority African-American because of white flight? It feels so much like blaming the victim.
We could commend SCS for its diversity if it hadn’t been so intentional in making sure that some schools were overwhelmingly black while making equally sure that others were overwhelmingly white. Any diversity in SCS is a result of demographic trends in this community, not by a sensitivity the old school board to racial diversity.
The threat to lock down the borders is being posted by Arlington municipal school activists on many different public forums, including that of the Memphis Flyer. One of them stated openly, “If the CC8 gives us trouble about the buildings, we’ll restrict our district to Arlington residents only, which we have a perfect right to do, with no 14th Amendment jeopardy attached.” Frankly, I believe they intend to restrict the districts to residents inside of the municipal boundaries regardless, since the real motive for this maneuver is not merely to avoid the merger, but also to reduce the percentage of Black students in certain suburban schools, which was already a complaint of white parents prior to the charter surrender in Memphis. Senator James Eastland said in the 1950’s that white Southerners would never submit to integrated schools, and sadly, history has proven him right. And without integrated schools, Memphis will never make progress in breaking down racial confrontation and suspicion.
bjc123, Memphis tried the only method of integrating its schools that it had left, when it opened the enrollment and allowed at least secondary students to choose any high school in the district. But because the mentality of white people in Shelby County has never changed and never will, the net effect of that was to run off the last batches of white students. Even Cordova, Central, White Station and Ridgeway are almost entirely Black, if you didn’t know. If you’ve driven by Cordova High recently, you will also notice that more homes near the school are for sale than are not. Not only do neighborhood residents not send their children to Cordova High, they are actively trying to flee the neighborhood. So I will respectively submit that there is nothing that Memphis CIty Schools or the successor Shelby County District can do to integrate the schools in Memphis, as white parents are unwilling to allow their children to be integrated with Blacks. Yet white parents are also annoyed at the by-products of their decision, including a high degree of racial division and hostility, and a high crime rate, high drop-out rate, and the constant loss of Memphis’ brightest and best graduates to other cities, never to return. The black politicians that so annoy white people in the Memphis area are the way they are after 12 years of segregated public schooling, in many cases another 4 years of segregated schooling at Tennessee State or LeMoyne-Owen, and then years of living under segregation as practiced in this community. The Black politicians of the future will be little different, as they too have been segregated most of their lives. And they are actually likely to be more bitter and less patient than the current officials. The one solution to the problem is the one that white people will never accept, so the problem is insoluble.
It’s obvious to all that the issue of school buildings will be resolved in one of two ways, and it likely won’t be through negotiations between the munis and SCS. The two sides have diametrically opposed viewpoints, with potentially hundreds of millions of dollars at stake. I believe that what is acceptable to A will not be acceptable to B, so there will be no amiable resolution. A lawsuit would be next, but a protracted court fight benefits no constituent groups save the lawyers, and we’ve already paid for several beach condos and lake houses, thank you very much. So instead of watching that drag out over 3 or 4 years, the TN legislature will step in and decide it for us. Based on their recent history, it’s not likely to go well for SCS. See the future, SCS. Keep Martavius out of the negotiations. Demand little, and you might receive it. Demand a lot, and you’ll likely get nothing.