School Districts Look to Legislature For Help in Unaccredited Schools Ruling

Local school districts, including the Mehlville School District, hope state lawmakers will provide a fix to a recent Missouri Supreme Court ruling that could result in a rapid influx of students from unaccredited districts transferring to neighboring districts.

That possibility is the result of the court's July opinion in the Jane Turner vs. School District of Clayton case saying that school districts are mandated to accept any student from an unaccredited district without say in the matter. There are several bills currently proposed in the General Assembly addressing the topic.

In the St. Louis area, both the St. Louis Public Schools (SLPS) and Riverview Gardens School Districts are unaccredited. Under current law, students from these districts can choose to attend an accredited district in the same or an adjoining county. 

Mehlville School District Superintendent Terry Noble said that he is not certain what impact this will have on the district.

“It depends on how many students apply, as well as any established perimeters to guide districts in the acceptance of transfer students from unaccredited districts,” he said in an email to Patch. “Potentially this could be a serious concern if perimeters are not established, providing our district the ability to limit the number who may transfer based on availability of classroom spaces.”

Shortly after the St. Louis School District lost its accreditation in 2007, Jane Turner and three other parents, representing six students attending the Clayton School District, sued the Clayton and St. Louis districts and the City of St. Louis Board of Education. The students, who live in the SLPS district, were attending Clayton schools based on personal tuition agreements.

The plaintiffs claimed that because the SLPS district became unaccredited, it should pay their children’s tuition and that the Clayton district should send the tuition bills to the transitional district. The parents pointed to a state statute that requires unaccredited districts to pay the tuition costs of its students who choose to attend an accredited school in an adjoining district. 

The St. Louis County Circuit Court ruled in favor of both school districts, finding that the statute was inapplicable to the SLPS district. After several appeals, the case ended up going to the Missouri Supreme Court. In July, it issued its opinion and subsequently, sent the case back to the lower courts to decide.

Noble explained that the ruling applies not only to students currently attending an unaccredited district, but any students who reside within these districts who are attending private and parochial schools. Also, it has yet to be determined who will be responsible for the tuition cost. 

“Currently, 50 students have indicated a desire to transfer to our district,” Noble said. Districts such as Brentwood and Maplewood-Richmond Heights anticipate a larger impact due to their proximity to the unaccredited districts. This explains why they have been more active at this point and are demonstrating a greater sense of urgency with regard to this issue.

Chris Tennill, a spokesman for the Clayton School District, said the St. Louis County Circuit Court has stayed the case until May 31. That’s when state lawmakers end their current legislative session. He said the Supreme Court weighed in on three key issues. In a nutshell, they include:

1. The state law the plaintiffs cited does apply to the SLPS district. Contrary to the lower court's judgment, the Supreme Court maintains that unaccredited districts should pay the tuition for students who choose to attend accredited districts. Its ruling stated that: "It is clear that (state law) applies to the transitional school district, that it requires the Clayton school district to admit the students and that it mandates the transitional school district pay the students' tuition." 
2. Tuition agreements supercede the plaintiffs' rights for restitution. The Supreme Court decided that the parents are not entitled to restitution for tuition paid to Clayton because the St. Louis public schools became unaccredited because of existing tuition agreements. Court documents state: "By arguing that the Clayton School District is now required to seek payment from the transitional school district and that the parents are entitled to restitution for tuition previously paid to the Clayton School District, the parents are attempting to bind the district beyond the terms of their tuition agreements."
3. School districts are required to accept any student from an unaccredited district. On a 4-to-3 vote, the court concluded that other state laws giving districts discretion in deciding whether or not to admit students from unaccredited districts do not apply under existing state law. Furthermore, it noted that legislators in 1993 removed a section of the statute that read: "but no school shall be required to admit any pupil." The court's interpretation states: "The plain and ordinary meaning of the language in (the statute) that 'each pupil shall be free to attend the public school of his or her choice' gives a student the choice of an accredited school to attend, so long as that school is in another district in the same or an adjoining county, and requires the chosen school to accept the pupil." 

Noble said that the Mehlville School District has a consisting of parents and patrons who work to advocate with legislators for the students. However, this organization is in its infancy stage.

“It is my understanding they have been in contact with our local legislators concerning this issue,” Noble said. “I’ve shared information with staff through emails and memos.”

The Mehlville School District’s Jefferson City representation comes in the form of lobbyists who work for various education associations for which the district is a member. 

“This includes CSD (Cooperating School Districts), MSBA (Missouri School Boards' Association) and MASA (Missouri Association of School Administrators),” Noble said. “We remain in contact with our local legislators to express our opinions on this issue. We do not employ our own lobbyists.”

Tennill said the third issue is what's causing all of the concern on the part of local school districts. He said the interpretation affects all but five Missouri school districts.

"It's a major local control issue and school capacity is at stake," he said, noting the Clayton district currently has an enrollment of about 2,500 students. "All districts want to be able to manage that. It's why people buy houses and move."

And at least one Supreme Court judge agrees. In a dissenting statement, Supreme Court Justice Patricia Breckenridge said the majority's interpretation of the statute avoids the "absurd consequences" that could occur if the opinion prevails.

"To interpret (existing law) as placing a mandatory obligation on the Clayton School District to accept all pupils from the City of St. Louis who apply for admission would mean there is no limit to the potential influx of pupils that Clayton or any other school district in St. Louis County could face," she said in the statement.

Additionally, Breckenridge stated: "Under the majority’s interpretation of the relevant statutory provisions, school districts in St. Louis County would be required to accept pupils from the transitional school district even if the number of pupils seeking admittance exceeded their capacity or if St. Louis County school districts have difficulty collecting tuition payments from the transitional school district."