Yet per-pupil allocation coupled with school of choice has done no favors to low-income neighborhoods. Not only does losing students mean losing money for those students, you also have the problem of economies of scale. Sexton has to pay for it’s building regardless of how many students are there which means less money to supplies and textbooks.

The other part not accounted for is the money parents provide to schools. Parents in richer school districts are more able to pay for activity fees, support booster clubs, and donate money. This is especially important for the arts and other areas that aren’t school funding priorities but critical to a child’s development.

Finally, I’m worried that merit based funding initiatives supported currently by both federal and state administrations will further this problem. As mentioned before it’s harder for schools to compete when faced with all the above inequities.

So as a lengthy addition to this discussion. Michigan funding isn’t tied to property values like other states but Proposal A does not effectively close the funding gap and still contributes to the decline of schools in low income neighborhoods.