Something similar was done here in VT. The libs and of course the teachers union wanted the "Gold Towns" (their term) to pay to educate the kids in the poorer "receiving towns". There were just a few towns that were gold towns so it was supported. Of course now most towns are gold towns and spending has skyrocketed.
Here is the result, from wikipedia:
According to one study, enrollment in kindergarten through 12th grade has declined by nearly 10 percent during the 1990s. During the same period total staff numbers have increased by more than 20 percent. Per pupil spending grew from $6,073 in 1990 to $13,664 in 2006.[19] A study by the Census Bureau lists Vermont with the fourth highest expenditure per pupil in the country at $11,835 for 2005.[20] There are several ways to compute per student spending. An alternate computation gives $15,575 per pupil in the 2008-9 school year, third highest in the country.[21] The average effective spending per pupil in Vermont was $11,548 in 2008.[22]
Ohio University years ago studied the effect of spending per student in Ohio. What they found was an INVERSE relationsip between per caita expenditures and student outcomes. The less a school system spent, the better the students did.
Of course, you can figure out thst the rural school systems did much better than the urban ones AT A BETTER PRICE. oTHER FACTORS ARE MORE IMPORTANT THAN THE MONEY SPENT.