Missouri House advances bill to remove deed restrictions that bar charter schools from buying or leasing unused public school buildings

Representative (Saint Louis), the bill sponsor, told the House that the measure would "permanently remove and prevent deed restrictions on public school buildings that prohibit their sale, transfer, or lease to charter schools for educational purposes." He said he had toured charter facilities and found vacant public-school buildings in St. Louis and Kansas City that could be reused instead of letting them sit unused and costly to maintain.

The bill targets deed language — including so-called 99-year deed restrictions — that sponsors said have been written into titles to keep some properties from being sold or leased to charter schools. Representative (Saint Louis) said school districts could save money on maintenance and repurpose revenue toward classrooms if they could sell or lease such buildings.

Opponents and questioners expressed concerns about local control and safety standards. Representative (Boone) asked whether charters must meet the same building and fire-safety codes as public schools; Representative (Saint Louis), an opponent in floor debate, said St. Louis already has a real-estate and community-driven process to repurpose closed school buildings and warned the measure would preempt local decision-making. Representative (Jackson) and other members described local processes that have repurposed school buildings for housing, nonprofits and senior centers.

The House heard repeated assurances from the sponsor that the bill is permissive: it would remove deed restrictions but would not require a district to sell or lease to charter schools. The sponsor pointed to language in the substitute that requires any transferee to maintain and keep up the property.

Procedural actions: the House moved the House Committee substitute for the bill through perfection and printing and agreed to the title. A procedural vote on a motion to move to final consideration (previous question) passed 99 Yea, 46 Nay. The clerk later recorded that the House had "perfected and printed house committee substitute for house bill" numbers including this substitute.

Why it matters: Sponsors framed the bill as a way to return vacant public assets to productive use in distressed areas; opponents framed it as a state-level override of local property and redevelopment decisions.

Ending: The committee substitute was perfected and printed and will continue through the House process. Further action (third read, concurrence or conference) was not recorded in this transcript.