Rural school districts — already beset with financial struggles — are furiously scrambling to save a century-old funding source that Republican lawmakers last month eliminated from the federal budget. 

The Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act, which has been approved almost continuously since 1908, is intended to compensate rural counties that have large swaths of non-taxable national forest land. Last year, the bill brought nearly $40 million to 39 California counties, funding everything from after-school programs to school roof repairs. 

The  that, because of lower enrollment, receive less money from the state than their urban and suburban counterparts yet tend to have large numbers of high-needs students and higher costs, such as providing bus service to remote areas.

In December, amid the flurry of last-minute budget negotiations, the bill died in the House after House Speaker Mike Johnson did not put it forward for a vote. The bill’s original sponsors hope to reintroduce it in the next few weeks in a last-ditch effort to get it passed before the final budget deadline in March.

It’s a longshot, but school officials are renewing their fight because the loss of those funds could have deep repercussions for rural school districts.

“It might not seem like much, but it’s real money for us,” said Allan Carver, superintendent of schools for Siskiyou County, which last year received $4.3 million from Secure Rural Schools. “If it was to go away, there would be a hole in our budget that would have an undeniable impact on children.”

GOP promises to cut federal spending

Republican Congressional leaders did not respond to interview requests from CalMatters. But , they have vowed to reduce government spending, including . President-elect Donald Trump has also proposed eliminating the U.S. Department of Education and making other cuts to schools. His advisor, Elon Musk — whom Trump recently named head of a yet-to-be-created Department of Government Efficiency — has been outspoken in his desire to cut federal programs.

That’s been frustrating for rural residents, many of whom supported Trump in November and feel Secure Rural Schools is neither a partisan issue nor a government handout. 

“This is not a ‘gift’ of Congress,” said Lonnie Hunt, a retired judge from rural Texas who’s head of the National Forest Counties and Schools Coalition. “It’s a pact made more than 100 years ago between the government and local communities. If the federal government had not made this deal, they’d never have been able to create the National Forest Service.”  

“Yet somehow it’s been lost in the politics,” Hunt added. “It’s a shame that rural America is being victimized here. And I’m pointing fingers in all directions, not just one side.”

Mold and layoffs in Trinity County

Secure Rural Schools dates from the creation of the National Forest Service in the early 20th century, when the federal government set aside millions of acres of land for logging. Because that land was removed from the local tax rolls, nearby communities were left with budget shortfalls — and few options to make up the cash. To compensate, the federal government agreed to share a portion of timber profits with those areas. When the logging industry started to decline in the 1990s, the government started augmenting the payments through the modern version of Secure Rural Schools.

Congress gave these counties $35.8 million for rural schools last year — but no more is coming

In 2024, these 39 California counties received money through the Secure Rural Schools program because they have National Forest Service land.

The money goes to counties that have National Forest Service land, where it’s divided between schools and public works. California, with nearly 21 million acres of national forest, receives far more than any other state. And within California, Trinity County receives the second-highest amount – $3.5 million last year. 

Located in the mountains of northwest California, Trinity County spans 3,208 square miles and is more than twice the size of Rhode Island. About 80% of it is owned by the federal government, which means it has limited ability to raise money through local tax measures. Due in part to the decline in logging, it’s also one of the poorest counties in the state, with a , compared to 12% statewide.

Trinity Alps Unified, the largest district in the county, received about $600,000 from Secure Rural Schools last year, about 5% of its overall budget. That money was crucial for paying for things like teachers’ aides, art and music programs, field trips and after-school programs, Superintendent Jaime Green said. 

Local residents know all too well what could happen without Secure Rural Schools. In 2016, the only other time in recent memory the bill didn’t pass, Trinity County school districts didn’t have money to make basic repairs to school buildings, leading to dangerous outbreaks of toxic mold at numerous campuses. Students’ and teachers’ lives were disrupted by school closures, and the state had to spend more than $50 million to help districts rebuild. 

This time, Green is warning that the district may have to eliminate seven jobs, leading to bigger class sizes and fewer enrichment programs. He worries that the students who need the most help will suffer the worst impacts.

“We’re an impoverished county, and the only way to reverse that pattern of poverty is through education,” Green said. “Cutting funding hurts kids. We have to be realistic about that.”

Keeping the pressure on

Green and other rural superintendents have traveled to Washington, D.C. almost a dozen times in the past year or so to lobby for Secure Rural Schools. Their work paid off, at least in the Senate, where the bill passed unanimously.

Green and his colleagues plan to keep the pressure on through emails and phone calls to Republican leadership, in hopes of convincing them to support rural schools even as they face pressure from Musk and Trump to slash federal spending.

Sonoma County Supervisor James Gore, president of the National Association of Counties, has also been persistently lobbying for Secure Rural Schools. He said there’s usually some last-minute wrangling before the bill passes, but this year “was vastly different.”

“Every time it comes up, all the cowboy hats show up” to advocate for the bill in Washington, D.C., he said. “This year we had a lot of momentum and we thought we’d get it over the hump. It was a gut punch when it didn’t go through. We were shocked, to be honest.”

Rural areas’ lack of population and money often means that politicians overlook residents’ needs in those areas, Gore said. Likewise, few people outside of rural areas would hear about the impact if programs are cut, he said. None of the House Republican leaders, including Johnson, party leader Rep. Steve Scalise and House Majority Whip Rep. Tom Emmer, represents areas that receive Secure Rural Schools funding. None of the three responded to requests for comment.

“It’s a catastrophe that no one knows about,” said Gore, referring to the bill’s failure. “But we have an absolute responsibility to these small towns, who are the stewards of these largely unmanned federal lands.”

The last Secure Rural Schools payment was in April. Even if Congress returns to funding the bill next year, even one missed year of payments may leave an impact, superintendents said. Children will have fallen behind academically and teachers will have lost their jobs. In small communities where jobs are scarce, layoffs can have a disproportionate impact, sometimes leading to families moving out of the area entirely.

“In the past, we’d go through the motions but we always got it solved by the buzzer,” Hunt said. “This year we’re past the buzzer and we’re in OT. But we won’t quit.”

This was originally published on .

With more Missouri school districts switching to four-day weeks — including some of the largest — education leaders and state legislators are raising concerns.

Four-day weeks have been an option for Missouri schools since 2011, and now over 30% of the state’s districts have adopted this shortened week — serving around 11% of the state’s students. Many of the districts are in rural parts of the state.

Some state lawmakers, concerned with the shortened schedule, are pushing bills to reign in the practice. And on Tuesday, the State Board of Education was originally scheduled to review a study on the four-day school week, though that has been delayed due to possible inclement weather.

The study concludes that, overall, the four-day schedule had “no statistically significant effect on either academic achievement or building growth.” Academic achievement looks at one year of scores whereas building growth compares students scores over time.

Schools that adopted a four-day school week both before and after the pandemic were included in the study. Data is limited on recent adopters like the Independence School District, , but the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education is seeing trends.

Districts that switched before the pandemic were more likely to be rural, whereas districts embracing four-day weeks now are likely to be in towns, have multiracial populations and have more foster students, according to the report.

Jon Turner, an associate professor at Missouri State University who researches the four-day school week, was not surprised that the department found little to no effect on academic achievement.

“It is pretty consistent nationwide,” he told The Independent. “As you protect instructional hours, there is a minimal if any negative academic impact.”

The research he has studied has shown that the four-day week does not diminish academics so long as the instructional hours remain constant. Currently, state law requires 1,044 hours in school.

Legislation

Three bills have already been filed this legislative session that focus on the length of school weeks, coming from both sides of the aisle.

Sen. Doug Beck, an Affton Democrat, got an amendment approved in the Senate last year that would have required a local vote to authorize a four-day school week. This year, Beck has a bill that would allow towns with fewer than 30,000 residents to adopt a four-day school week by a vote of the school board, as is law now, but larger cities would have to seek voter approval.

“I’ve talked to my colleagues, and they said in the rural area, they didn’t want to have the five-day part,” Beck told The Independent. “This would still allow them to do that. But if you’re in (larger areas), you still could go four days. You just have to get the vote of the people.”

Republican Rep. Aaron McMullen and Democratic Rep. Robert Sauls — both from Independence, where the school district — filed similar bills.

McMullen is worried for the families in his city coordinating daycare and other services with an extra day off.

“My main concern is the economic impact that it has on the city,” he told The Independent. “Essentially, we’re giving less services but still charging the same amount of tax.”

Turner said that while there is not a negative academic outcome, the effect on families varies situationally. Schools providing special education are required to keep the hours of intervention specified in students’ individualized learning plan, which is a document that outlines accommodations and goals. But some students receiving these services may miss the fifth day.

“I do believe that we should get involved,” McMullen said. “But we should be able to give the ability for people to actually have the final say on it. We’re trying to empower the people that live in the school district to have the final say on whether or not they should go to four days.”

McMullen’s bill mirrors Beck’s by only requiring a public vote in larger localities.

But Beck’s and Sauls’ bills would provide incentives for districts that choose a five-day week. Districts with at least 175 school days can choose their school year’s start date, an option not available since the 2020-21 school year.

Their legislation also calls for the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education to pay districts with at least 169 school days a two percent bonus, calculated by the previous year’s state aid, to go toward boosting teacher salaries.

Beck said this provision gets to the heart of the issue: Recruiting and retaining teachers.

“The main reason why we have school districts going four days is not because of children learning better or any study that they’ve done,” he said. “The original thing was they couldn’t keep teachers, and this was to bring teachers in.”

When the Independence School District announced its switch, Superintendent Dale Herl said in an introductory video that the four-day week was to maintain a workforce.

The cause

Turner, who also serves on the board of the Missouri Association of Rural Education, told The Independent the four-day week is born from the educator hiring struggles Missouri districts are facing, particularly in rural areas.

“Never when I met any of those superintendents when I said, ‘Why did you do this?’ Not one said we wanted to do this. This was a part of a bigger vision,” he said. “This is a symptom of what schools are having to do to keep educators in classrooms teaching.”

In December, the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education told the state board that are the teacher of record for their classroom — meaning the class doesn’t have a certified teacher overseeing that student.

Turner said salaries for experienced teachers can vary greatly within a 30-mile radius, incentivizing educators to drive out of their rural town of residence and teach where they are better compensated.

To compete, the rural districts can utilize a four-day school week as an incentive for their workforce to stay.

“You’ve got wealthier, typically suburban, larger school districts that are able to out-compete in the job marketplace for your applicants, so you have this constant turnover in the small rural schools,” Turner said. “That’s what this four-day week is showing is that it is really the only arrow that rural school districts have in their quiver to fight the higher paying salaries.”

School districts on Missouri’s border face competition across state lines, Turner said. Arkansas increased its minimum teacher salary to $50,000 beginning last July.

Missouri lawmakers have proposed hikes to teacher wages , though last year.

McMullen, though he didn’t include the teacher-wage incentive in his bill, said he is in favor of increasing teacher pay.

“​​We need to allocate more money to public schools but have that actually go to teacher salaries and not to administration,” he said.

Beck hopes the legislature will discuss issues like teacher wages, like a bill that would increase the base teacher salary. He thinks there is enough interest to get the legislation through, though it may have to be an amendment to a larger bill.

“I truly have some really good bipartisan support on this bill, maybe more on the Republican side,” he said.

McMullen feels similarly, saying it is difficult to pass a standalone bill through the Senate.

“We have a very, very good chance of getting this bill and some aspects passed this year.”

is part of States Newsroom, a network of news bureaus supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Missouri Independent maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Jason Hancock for questions: info@missouriindependent.com. Follow Missouri Independent on and .