School board authority in Missouri

• Education policy portal
• Featured content and analysis
  • School choice in the United States
  • School choice glossary
  • Donald Trump's executive orders on education, 2025
  • State policies on cellphone use in K-12 public schools
  • Trends in curriculum development
  • Local school board authority across the 50 states

Missouri state law makes school boards responsible for governing and managing public school districts in the state. This article details the powers and duties Missouri law grants to school boards for governing school districts and the constraints on that authority with regard to certain topics.

HIGHLIGHTS

Missouri school boards are given broad authority to make policies for the functioning of their districts, rather than specific powers and duties.

Missouri state law requires school boards to adopt evidence-based reading instruction as part of their curriculum.

Missouri school boards are authorized to remove library books from their school libraries. Districts must make all instructional materials available for public inspection.

Missouri is one of 36 states that grant school boards at least some authority over whether charter schools are issued in their district.

The Missouri Constitution affords public employees the right to engage in collective bargaining, which can constrain Missouri school boards' authority over certain policies.

Types of legal and contractual constraints on school board authority

See also: Local school board authority across the 50 states

This page presents the results from Ballotpedia research on school board authority and constraints on that authority in all 50 states as of 2024. School board authority comes from state constitutions and state statutes and can be interpreted or specified by state regulations or court decisions. In addition to authority over district budgets, the selection of a superintendent, and administrative responsibilities, school boards have varying levels of authority over district policy on other topics depending on the state and district.

There are several sources of legal and contractual constraints on school board policy-making authority which also vary by state or by district.

• State laws commonly restrict or mandate school board policies on certain topics.
  • Parents' Bills of Rights, which at least 26 states have in statute to some degree, limit the policies school boards are allowed to pass.
• State rules, guidance, and funding incentives can constrain, mandate, or influence school board policies. These include regulation from state education commissions and superintendents, executive orders from governors, or grant conditions.
• Federal and state court rulings can dictate whether or not school district policies are compatible with state law or federal law.
• The federal government, largely through its Department of Education, can promulgate regulations or guidance that influence district policy or make funding contingent on certain policies.
• Collective bargaining agreements between school districts and teacher unions can create contractual constraints on the policies school boards can pass.
• State school board associations can influence school board policy or, in some cases. enter into contracts with school boards that can limit school board policy.

This page features the following sections:

• Missouri law on school boards' authority over district policy. This section features the statutes in Missouri law that establish, enable, or define local school district boards.
• Constraints on Missouri school boards' authority. This section provides an overview of constraints on the school boards' authority in Missouri. It contains information on the constraints by the following topics:
  • Curriculum requirements
  • Curriculum restrictions
  • Book bans, removals, and restrictions
  • Parental notification
  • Discipline
  • School board elections
  • Public school choice and open enrollment
  • Charter schools
  • Cellphone bans
• Collective bargaining agreements
• Parents' bill of rights
• How does Missouri compare to other states?
• Noteworthy Events. This section tracks noteworthy events related to school boards' authority in Missouri.

School board authority over district policy in Missouri

Enabling or authorizing statute for the boards of school districts in Missouri

See also: Enabling statute

Missouri Statutes § 160.011 defines a school board as having general control over the administration of its school district:

“ (8) "School board", the board of education having general control of the property and affairs of any school district; ”

Missouri school boards' powers and duties

Missouri public school boards of directors are given broad authority to administer the public schools in Missouri. Missouri Statutes § 171.011 authorizes school boards to make all regulations necessary to administer their districts:

“ School board may adopt rules and regulations. — The school board of each school district in the state may make all needful rules and regulations for the organization, grading and government in the school district. The rules shall take effect when a copy of the rules, duly signed by order of the board, is deposited with the district clerk. The district clerk shall transmit forthwith a copy of the rules to the teachers employed in the schools. The rules may be amended or repealed in like manner. ”

Discretionary duties

In addition to broad authority over policy for their districts, Iowa school boards are afforded discretionary duties throughout state education law. They are authorized, but not required, to exercise the following powers:

• permitting the use of its buildings and grounds for adult education purposes
• prohibiting pupils in their district from joining school fraternities or sororities
• authorizing the sale of any product or item made as a class project or activity from materials purchased with district funds to any pupil

Constraints on Missouri school boards' authority

This section tracks constraints on school boards specific to Missouri as of September 2024. It features constraints on school boards' authority from state law, collective bargaining agreements, and Parents' Bills of Rights.

Constraint on Missouri school boards' authority by topic

This section features constraints on Missouri school boards' authority on policies related to the following topics:

• Curriculum requirements
• Curriculum restrictions
• Book bans, removals, and restrictions
• Parental notification
• Discipline
• School board elections
• Public school choice and open enrollment
• Charter schools
• Cellphone bans

Curriculum requirements

Missouri requires the following specific topics to be included in each district's curriculum, among other topics:

• mental health awareness for grades 9-12
• trauma-informed sexual abuse training for grades 6-12
• evidence-based reading instruction

Curriculum restrictions

Ballotpedia could not identify any curricular content prohibited by state statutes, regulations, case law, or collective bargaining agreements.

Federal law and guidance

Federal executive orders:

President Donald Trump (R) issued an executive order (E.O.) on January 29, 2025, entitled Ending Radical Indoctrination in K-12 Schooling, prohibiting federal funding that directly or indirectly facilitates K-12 instruction regarding what the bill calls gender or equity ideology. It directs federal executive agencies, including the U.S. Department of Education, to create a plan to relinquish federal funds from school or teacher certification programs that include what the E.O. called gender ideology or discriminatory equity ideology. The order defined discriminatory equity ideology as ideology that treats individuals as members of preferred or disfavored groups rather than as individuals and minimizes agency, merit, and capability in favor of immoral generalizations.

Book bans, removals, and restrictions

Missouri school boards are given authority over instructional materials, including library books, and have the authority to remove books from school libraries. State law requires school boards to make all instructional material available for inspection by any person.

Case law:
The U.S. Supreme Court affirmed local school boards' authority to remove school books in Island Trees Sch. Dist. v. Pico by Pico in 1982 but held that school library books are distinct from curricular books, which school boards have more authority to regulate. The ruling held that school boards are charged with inculcating community values and may make curricular decisions accordingly. In Zykan v. Warsaw Community School Corp. in 1980, the Supreme Court held that school boards had discretionary power over curriculum, textbooks, and other educational matters but could not impose religious creeds or "permanently the student’s ability to investigate matters that arise in the natural course of intellectual inquiry,” according to the opinion.

Federal guidance

The U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights rescinded all guidance against the removal of books and no longer employed a coordinator to investigate local district book removals as of January 24, 2025. The Department said they believed removing books from school libraries was a question of parental and community judgment, not civil rights, and that the office had no role as it related to book removal.

Parental notification

Missouri requires parental notification in the following circumstances:

• If their student is attending a school receiving Title I.A. federal funds, parents must be notified that they can request information regarding the qualifications of their student's teacher.
• If their student is enrolled in a persistently dangerous school or has been the victim of a violent criminal offense on school property.

Case law: The United States Supreme Court ruled in Mahmoud v. Taylor on June 27, 2025, that Montgomery County Board of Education's introduction of LGBTQ+ related storybooks, along with its decision to withhold opt outs, placed an unconstitutional burden on the parents’ rights to the free exercise of their religion.

Discipline

See also: How does Missouri compare to other states on school board authority over disciplinary policy?

Missouri is one of 47 states that gives school boards authority over district disciplinary policy.

However, they are prohibited from adopting or enforcing zero-tolerance disciplinary policies. The text of Missouri Statutes § 160.261 is as follows:

“ The local board of education of each school district shall clearly establish a written policy of discipline, including the district's determination on the use of corporal punishment and the procedures in which punishment will be applied. A written copy of the district's discipline policy and corporal punishment procedures, if applicable, shall be provided to the pupil and parent or legal guardian of every pupil enrolled in the district at the beginning of each school year and also made available in the office of the superintendent of such district, during normal business hours, for public inspection. No pupil shall be subject to corporal punishment procedures outlined in the discipline and corporal punishment policy without a parent or guardian being notified and providing written permission for the corporal punishment. All employees of the district shall annually receive instruction related to the specific contents of the policy of discipline and any interpretations necessary to implement the provisions of the policy in the course of their duties, including but not limited to approved methods of dealing with acts of school violence, disciplining students with disabilities and instruction in the necessity and requirements for confidentiality. ”

“ ZERO-TOLERANCE DISCIPLINARY POLICIES This act requires school districts to prohibit, in name and practice, any zero-tolerance disciplinary policy that results in an automatic consequence against a pupil without the discretion to modify such disciplinary consequence on a case-by-case basis. ”

Federal guidance

President Donald Trump (R) issued an Executive Order (E.O.) titled Reinstating Common Sense School Discipline Policies on April 23, 2025, that required the Secretary of Education, in consultation with the Attorney General, to issue guidance local educational agencies (LEAs) and State educational agencies (SEAs) regarding "school discipline and their obligations not to engage in racial discrimination under Title VI in all contexts, including school discipline," according to the order. The first Trump administration rescinded guidance issued in 2014 under the Obama administration that suggested that higher rates of discipline for racial minorities could be evidence of discrimination and could cause schools to lose federal funding. Trump's 2025 E.O. argued that the guidance "effectively required schools to discriminate on the basis of race by imposing discipline based on racial characteristics, rather than on objective behavior alone." Though the guidance was rescinded in 2018, the U.S. Department of Education continued to collect data regarding the racial breakdown of disciplinary actions taken across the country. Trump's 2025 E.O. prohibits schools from engaging in what it called racial discrimination in the application of school discipline.

School board elections

See also: Rules governing school board election dates and timing in Missouri, How does Missouri compare to other states on school board authority over election timing?

Missouri is one of 42 states in which school boards do not have authority over the timing of school board elections because state or municipal laws determine school board election dates.

Click here to read about the laws governing school board elections in Missouri.

Public school choice and open enrollment

See also: School choice in Missouri

Missouri school boards are authorized to develop policies facilitating inter- and intradistrict open enrollment in their districts, though they are required to implement policies permitting open enrollment if a district does not offer any of the grade levels up to 12th grade. Missouri Statutes § 162.1045 authorizes districts to develop open enrollment plans and § 162.1047 gives school boards discretion over accepting and rejecting open enrollment applications, though requiring boards to provide their reasoning upon rejecting an application:

“

162.1045. State board of education to develop guidelines for enrollment option plan. — 1. The state board of education shall direct the department to develop guidelines for the establishment of enrollment option plans by pilot local school districts that will be sending or receiving students. The guidelines shall be completed no later than August 1, 1995. The guidelines shall include the following items: (1) Application procedures, including recommended deadlines for application and for notification of students and principals in enrollment option districts whenever a student's application is accepted; (2) Procedures to include in enrollment options agreements for admitting pupils, including but not limited to: (a) The establishment of district capacity limits by grade level, school building and education program; (b) A requirement that resident students enrolled in a school district be given preference over any nonresident pupil in the selection of a school to attend; (c) Limits on the number and frequency of changes of enrollment in enrollment option districts. 2. No enrollment option plan may be designed to include or exclude a nonresident pupil solely based on any of the following reasons: (1) Academic ability, or any level of athletic, artistic, or other extracurricular skills; (2) Handicapping conditions; (3) The degree of proficiency of the English language; (4) The fact that the student has been the subject of disciplinary proceedings, except that if an applicant has been suspended or expelled for ten consecutive days or more in the term for which admission is sought or in the term immediately preceding the term for which admission is sought, the procedures may include a provision denying admission of such applicant as a nonresident student. 162.1047. Enrollment option plan standards for acceptance or rejection — notice of rejection, content. — The enrollment option plan shall include specific standards for the acceptance or rejection of student applications. If an application is rejected, the district shall state in the notification the reason for the rejection.

”

Charter schools

See also: Charter schools in Missouri, How does Missouri compare to other states on school board authority over charter schools?

Missouri is one of 36 states that grant school boards at least some authority over whether charter schools are issued in their district.

Missouri local school boards are among several charter school authorizers listed in state law. Others include public four-year colleges and universities, community colleges, and the Missouri Charter Public School Commission.

“ 3. Except as further provided in subsection 4 of this section, the following entities are eligible to sponsor charter schools: (1) The school board of the district in any district which is sponsoring a charter school as of August 27, 2012, as permitted under subdivision (1) or (2) of subsection 2 of this section, the special administrative board of a metropolitan school district during any time in which powers granted to the district's board of education are vested in a special administrative board, or if the state board of education appoints a special administrative board to retain the authority granted to the board of education of an urban school district containing most or all of a city with a population greater than three hundred fifty thousand inhabitants, the special administrative board of such school district; (2) A public four-year college or university with an approved teacher education program that meets regional or national standards of accreditation; (3) A community college, the service area of which encompasses some portion of the district; (4) Any private four-year college or university with an enrollment of at least one thousand students, with its primary campus in Missouri, and with an approved teacher preparation program; (5) Any two-year private vocational or technical school designated as a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, and accredited by the Higher Learning Commission, with its primary campus in Missouri; (6) The Missouri charter public school commission created in section 160.425. ”

If the local school board governing the area where a proposed charter school is to be located is not a sponsor of the proposed charter school, the applicant must submit their application to the local and state boards of education. The school board may file objections to the charter with the proposed sponsor and the Missouri State Board of Education:

“

160.405. Proposed charter, how submitted, requirements, submission to state board, powers and duties — approval, revocation, termination — definitions — lease of public school facilities, when — unlawful reprisal, defined, prohibited — performance report. — 1. A person, group or organization seeking to establish a charter school shall submit the proposed charter, as provided in this section, to a sponsor. If the sponsor is not a school board, the applicant shall give a copy of its application to the school board of the district in which the charter school is to be located and to the state board of education, within five business days of the date the application is filed with the proposed sponsor. The school board may file objections with the proposed sponsor, and, if a charter is granted, the school board may file objections with the state board of education. The charter shall include a legally binding performance contract that describes the obligations and responsibilities of the school and the sponsor as outlined in sections 160.400 to 160.425 and section 167.349 and shall address the following: (1) A mission and vision statement for the charter school; (2) A description of the charter school's organizational structure and bylaws of the governing body, which will be responsible for the policy, financial management, and operational decisions of the charter school, including the nature and extent of parental, professional educator, and community involvement in the governance and operation of the charter school; (3) A financial plan for the first three years of operation of the charter school including provisions for annual audits; (4) A description of the charter school's policy for securing personnel services, its personnel policies, personnel qualifications, and professional development plan; (5) A description of the grades or ages of students being served; (6) The school's calendar of operation, which shall include at least the equivalent of a full school term as defined in section 160.011; (7) A description of the charter school's pupil performance standards and academic program performance standards, which shall meet the requirements of subdivision (6) of subsection 4 of this section. The charter school program shall be designed to enable each pupil to achieve such standards and shall contain a complete set of indicators, measures, metrics, and targets for academic program performance, including specific goals on graduation rates and standardized test performance and academic growth; (8) A description of the charter school's educational program and curriculum; (9) The term of the charter, which shall be five years and may be renewed; (10) Procedures, consistent with the Missouri financial accounting manual, for monitoring the financial accountability of the charter, which shall meet the requirements of subdivision (4) of subsection 4 of this section; (11) Preopening requirements for applications that require that charter schools meet all health, safety, and other legal requirements prior to opening; (12) A description of the charter school's policies on student discipline and student admission, which shall include a statement, where applicable, of the validity of attendance of students who do not reside in the district but who may be eligible to attend under the terms of judicial settlements and procedures that ensure admission of students with disabilities in a nondiscriminatory manner; (13) A description of the charter school's grievance procedure for parents or guardians; (14) A description of the agreement and time frame for implementation between the charter school and the sponsor as to when a sponsor shall intervene in a charter school, when a sponsor shall revoke a charter for failure to comply with subsection 8 of this section, and when a sponsor will not renew a charter under subsection 9 of this section; (15) Procedures to be implemented if the charter school should close, as provided in subdivision (6) of subsection 16 of section 160.400 including: (a) Orderly transition of student records to new schools and archival of student records; (b) Archival of business operation and transfer or repository of personnel records; (c) Submission of final financial reports; (d) Resolution of any remaining financial obligations; (e) Disposition of the charter school's assets upon closure; and (f) A notification plan to inform parents or guardians of students, the local school district, the retirement system in which the charter school's employees participate, and the state board of education within thirty days of the decision to close; (16) A description of the special education and related services that shall be available to meet the needs of students with disabilities; and (17) For all new or revised charters, procedures to be used upon closure of the charter school requiring that unobligated assets of the charter school be returned to the department of elementary and secondary education for their disposition, which upon receipt of such assets shall return them to the local school district in which the school was located, the state, or any other entity to which they would belong. ­­Charter schools operating on August 27, 2012, shall have until August 28, 2015, to meet the requirements of this subsection. 2. Proposed charters shall be subject to the following requirements: (1) A charter shall be submitted to the sponsor, and follow the sponsor's policies and procedures for review and granting of a charter approval, and be approved by the state board of education by January thirty-first prior to the school year of the proposed opening date of the charter school; (2) A charter may be approved when the sponsor determines that the requirements of this section are met, determines that the applicant is sufficiently qualified to operate a charter school, and that the proposed charter is consistent with the sponsor's charter sponsorship goals and capacity. The sponsor's decision of approval or denial shall be made within ninety days of the filing of the proposed charter; (3) If the charter is denied, the proposed sponsor shall notify the applicant in writing as to the reasons for its denial and forward a copy to the state board of education within five business days following the denial; (4) If a proposed charter is denied by a sponsor, the proposed charter may be submitted to the state board of education, along with the sponsor's written reasons for its denial. If the state board determines that the applicant meets the requirements of this section, that the applicant is sufficiently qualified to operate the charter school, and that granting a charter to the applicant would be likely to provide educational benefit to the children of the district, the state board may grant a charter and act as sponsor of the charter school. The state board shall review the proposed charter and make a determination of whether to deny or grant the proposed charter within sixty days of receipt of the proposed charter, provided that any charter to be considered by the state board of education under this subdivision shall be submitted no later than March first prior to the school year in which the charter school intends to begin operations. The state board of education shall notify the applicant in writing as the reasons for its denial, if applicable; and (5) The sponsor of a charter school shall give priority to charter school applicants that propose a school oriented to high-risk students and to the reentry of dropouts into the school system. If a sponsor grants three or more charters, at least one-third of the charters granted by the sponsor shall be to schools that actively recruit dropouts or high-risk students as their student body and address the needs of dropouts or high-risk students through their proposed mission, curriculum, teaching methods, and services. For purposes of this subsection, a "high-risk" student is one who is at least one year behind in satisfactory completion of course work or obtaining high school credits for graduation, has dropped out of school, is at risk of dropping out of school, needs drug and alcohol treatment, has severe behavioral problems, has been suspended from school three or more times, has a history of severe truancy, is a pregnant or parenting teen, has been referred for enrollment by the judicial system, is exiting incarceration, is a refugee, is homeless or has been homeless sometime within the preceding six months, has been referred by an area school district for enrollment in an alternative program, or qualifies as high risk under department of elementary and secondary education guidelines. Dropout shall be defined through the guidelines of the school core data report. The provisions of this subsection do not apply to charters sponsored by the state board of education. 3. If a charter is approved by a sponsor, the charter application shall be submitted to the state board of education, along with a statement of finding by the sponsor that the application meets the requirements of sections 160.400 to 160.425 and section 167.349 and a monitoring plan under which the charter sponsor shall evaluate the academic performance, including annual performance reports, of students enrolled in the charter school. The state board of education shall approve or deny a charter application within sixty days of receipt of the application. The state board of education may deny a charter on grounds that the application fails to meet the requirements of sections 160.400 to 160.425 and section 167.349 or that a charter sponsor previously failed to meet the statutory responsibilities of a charter sponsor. Any denial of a charter application made by the state board of education shall be in writing and shall identify the specific failures of the application to meet the requirements of sections 160.400 to 160.425 and section 167.349, and the written denial shall be provided within ten business days to the sponsor.

”

Cellphone bans

See also: How does Missouri compare to other states on cellphone laws?

Missouri is one of 26 states with state laws or executive orders prohibiting or limiting cell phones in classrooms and/or schools, including through requiring school boards to pass certain policies. Missouri Governor Mike Kehoe (R) signed Senate bill (SB) 68 on July 9, 2025, which included the requirement for school boards to establish a policy prohibiting student cellphone use from the beginning until the end of the school day. The policies must include exceptions for students who need devices due to specific educational or health needs, such as individualized education plans or 504 plans under federal law. Exceptions may allow device use in emergencies. The provision requiring school boards to establish cellphone policies will expire on August 28, 2032.

Collective bargaining agreements

Teacher union collective bargaining agreements (CBAs) can constrain school board authority. Teacher CBAs are agreements between a school district and a teachers’ union to establish rights and other contract details for public school employees. CBAs do not have the force of law, but are contractually binding for a set period of time. Within the time set out in the agreement, the school board must comply with the stipulations that were agreed to in the contract. In this way, CBAs can constrain school board authority by giving teachers authority over curriculum, prohibiting school boards from banning books, and establishing certain student or parental rights. They can also determine rights and protections for educators, and conditions for students (such as required recess periods or the amount of standardized testing), among other provisions.

CBAs vary greatly within and across states in size, topics covered, and constraints they put on school boards. Not all states allow teachers to bargain collectively. As of January 2022, 35 states and the District of Columbia guaranteed K-12 teachers some right to bargain collectively, and six states prohibited public-sector employee collective bargaining by law, which includes public school teachers. The other nine states have no statewide bargaining framework, but local jurisdictions within these states can grant bargaining rights if they choose.

Missouri school boards are authorized to engage in collective bargaining agreements with school employees, which can constrain their authority over certain district policies.

For example, though Missouri school boards are authorized to create all policy for the district, the collective bargaining agreement between the Wentzville National Education Association and Wentzville R-IV School District creates a committee composed of teachers, other school staff, and parents to recommend to the board of education a school calendar for the following year.

“ Calendar Committee A committee composed of teachers, support staff, administration, and parents will jointly develop the student calendar. At least one teacher representative from each building will be appointed by the WNEA. The Calendar Committee shall be convened no later than December 1 and shall remain in effect for the duration of the school year. The Calendar Committee members will regularly inform staff members in their building and/or department of progress. The Calendar Committee may survey staff on calendar matters before making a final recommendation to the Board of Education for adoption. The District will direct the Calendar Committee to build in snow days to be forgiven, up to six (6), as long as the District continues to meet the required number of hours of 1,044. Any unused snow days (of the 6 forgivable days) that would fall prior to Memorial Day are excused and/or are repurposed at the Superintendent's discretion. Any unused snow days (of the 6 forgivable days) that fall after Memorial Day will be forgiven. AMI (Alternative Methods of Learning) will be utilized after the first 6 days or in emergency situations. The Calendar Committee will be reconvened prior to any modifications after the Board of Education has approved the calendar. ”

Parents' bill of rights

See also: How does Missouri compare to other states on Parents' Bills of Rights?

Missouri is one of 24 states that does not have a statewide Parents' Bill of Rights.

How does Missouri compare to other states?

This section compares Missouri's school board authority and constraints with those of other states on select topics. These topics include authority over discipline policy, school board election timing, charter schools, cellphone use policy, as well as constraints on school boards' authority from Parents' Bills of Rights.

Book bans, removals, and restrictions

Twenty-four (24) states have no laws regulating the curation of school library books. Twenty-six (26) states, however, have passed laws restricting school board authority over school library book curation. These laws typically fall into one of the following categories:

• Ten states require school boards to develop a policy for the removal of books, including creating a way for the public to challenge school library books.
• Eight states prohibit school boards from removing books on the grounds that they represent specific ideologies or perspectives.
• Six states prohibit books if they contain specific material, including sexual content or anything deemed harmful to minors.
• Five states require school boards to establish local boards to review challenges to library books.
• Two states require school boards to allow parents to view a catalogue of books.

Some states have adopted multiple types of these policies.

Discipline

• School boards in 47 states have authority over disciplinary policy in their district.
• School boards in two states have authority over disciplinary policy for specific circumstances, such as suspension, expulsion, or bullying.
• Individual schools in one state create their own disciplinary policy.