The Mississippi Attorney General’s office has weighed in on the Montgomery County School District’s recent appeal of actions taken by the Winona Montgomery Consolidated School Board, as well as the injunction filed by the district questioning the constitutionality of the Mississippi Legislature’s consolidation statute which is currently awaiting action in federal court.
Both House Speaker Phillip Gunn and Lt. Governor Tate Reeves, as well as the members of the state board of education, were named plaintiffs in the initial injunction.
According to Attorney General Jim Hood’s Motion for Leave to Intervene, the attorney general’s office believes that “the Montgomery County School District’s appeal fails on all fronts. So, too, does the School District’s attempted constitutional challenge to Mississippi Code 37-7-104.4.” The motion calls for the appeal to be dismissed.
In its appeal filed in Montgomery County Circuit Court on February 28, the Montgomery County School District’s claims that the consolidated school board is usurping its authority by adopting policies and appointing a superintendent of education to govern the future consolidated district prior to the consolidated district’s effective date of July 1, 2018. Hood refuted that claim, saying that while the effective date isn’t until July 1 “the consolidated board exists and has duties prior to that time….the consolidation of two school districts is not an event that materializes overnight.”
Hood rejects Montgomery County School District’s claims that the recent action by the interim board of the Winona Montgomery Consolidated School Board, made of the existing appointed members of the Winona Separate School District school board, is a violation of the “one person, one vote” clause of the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. Hood maintains that the “one person, one vote” doctrine only applies to elected governing bodies, and that it does not apply to the appointed interim school board, as well as the future school board of the Winona Montgomery Consolidated School District which will be made up of a majority-appointed members.
In addition, Hood contents that the school district is an administrative, not legislative, body, and its members do not have to be elected.
In an injunction filed in the North District of Mississippi Federal Court, Montgomery County School District claimed that the consolidation statute is unconstitutional based on protection of the 14th Amendment. However, Hood rejects this claim because “public entities which are political subdivisions of the states do not possess constitutional rights.” He also maintains that the claim does not apply in appointed systems, and the consolidated school board “is a majority-appointed board.”
Hood also defends the consolidation statute saying the Mississippi Legislature had a rational reason for passing the consolidation statute based on its purpose of efficient and effective governance of taxpayers’ dollars.
“It is a legitimate governmental purpose to see that public funds committed to public schools are spent in an efficient and effective manner. That is, it is rational to conclude the school districts (each of which has its own school superintendent, central office, and school board) – and especially in smaller school districts such as Montgomery County, which serves less than 300 students – may more efficiently spend scarce funds if those districts are consolidated into larger administrative units. This is especially true where, as here, the Montgomery County School District serves a small number of students and falls in the bottom ten performing school districts in the state….”
