AN ACT TO AMEND SECTION 37-28-37, MISSISSIPPI CODE OF 1972, TO CHANGE THE REPORT REQUIRED BY PEER ON ASSESSING THE SUFFICIENCY OF FUNDING AND RECOMMENDED STATUTORY CHANGES TO LAWS RELATING TO CHARTER SCHOOLS FROM ANNUALLY TO BIENNIALLY; AND FOR RELATED PURPOSES.
Summary
House Bill 1107 amends Section 37-28-37 of the Mississippi Code to change one of the required charter school oversight reports from annual to biennial. Specifically, it revises the requirement for the Joint Legislative Committee on Performance Evaluation and Expenditure Review (PEER) so that PEER would prepare its report every two years instead of every year. The report still must assess the sufficiency of funding for charter schools, the effectiveness of the state formula for authorizer funding, and any recommended changes in state law or policy to strengthen charter schools.
The bill does not alter the Mississippi Charter School Authorizer Board’s separate annual reporting duties. That board would still be required to submit an annual report on charter school performance, demand, and related issues to the Governor, Legislature, State Board of Education, and the public. HB1107 is a narrow administrative change focused on reducing the frequency of PEER’s charter-school funding analysis while leaving the underlying subject matter of the report intact.
Impact
HB1107 would amend Mississippi’s charter school reporting statute by changing PEER’s funding and policy review from an annual report to a biennial report, effective July 1, 2026. This would reduce the reporting burden on PEER and potentially lower administrative workload, while still preserving periodic legislative review of charter school funding sufficiency, authorizer funding formulas, and possible statutory or policy changes. The bill does not change charter school operations, funding levels, admissions rules, or the Authorizer Board’s annual reporting requirements.
Sentiment
The available context suggests the bill is procedural and likely low-conflict, with no recorded committee debate or votes indicating opposition. Its caption and text frame it as a reporting-frequency adjustment rather than a substantive policy change, which typically draws limited controversy. Overall sentiment appears neutral to mildly supportive, especially from a workload-reduction or efficiency perspective.
Contention
The main point of possible contention is whether reducing PEER’s report from annual to biennial weakens legislative oversight of charter school funding and policy. Supporters would likely view the change as a reasonable administrative streamlining because the Authorizer Board still produces annual charter school reports. Critics, if any, may argue that annual PEER analysis is important for monitoring charter school finance, demand, and statutory needs in a rapidly evolving sector. No specific individuals or groups are identified in the provided materials as opposing or supporting the bill.