From the Statehouse- February 21, 2011
Under the Dome – Senator Jeff King
School funding is always a large topic in the Kansas Legislature; especially when money is as tight as it is now. This session, however, discussion of school funding has been dominated by one word: “suitable.” In Governor Brownback’s office, the Capitol halls, Kansas courtrooms, local schools, and newspapers, a debate is raging about how to define a “suitable education” for Kansas kids.
This effort to define “suitable” is a direct response to the Gannon v. State of Kansas lawsuit, scheduled for trial next year. According to Governor Brownback, “for years we have faced repeated legal action against the state because no one knows what a suitable education actually means. Let the Legislature resolve school finance, not the courts.” By defining this term, Governor Brownback hopes that the Legislature will have “a definition of what we need to undertake reform of our school finance formula and provide schools with stable, sustainable funding for the future” without further costly litigation.
While this is a noble goal, the difficult question remains: how does one define a suitable education? In today’s world, a suitable education must include more than reading, writing, and arithmetic. As the son and brother of five Kansas public school teachers, I know that our students have diverse educational needs as they prepare to compete and win in the global 21st century economy. At the same time, state funding is limited. A “suitable” education cannot include everything. These challenges (and many others) have kept Kansas from properly defining a “suitable” education for many decades.
I believe that part of this dilemma exists because we are asking the wrong question. The Kansas Constitution does not use the words (nor ask us to define) a “suitable education.” Rather, it mandates that “the Legislature shall make suitable provision for finance of the educational interests of the state.” Under our own Constitution, therefore, the only question is whether the way the Legislature funds education is fair or suitable.
In southeast Kansas, fair education funding raises one question: does the school finance system ensure that all school districts (regardless of their wealth or location) have the same resources to provide a quality education for their kids. This requirement is currently under attack. Two proposals in the Kansas Senate would dramatically increase the power of school districts to raise money through local option budgets (known as “LOBs”).
Increased LOB authority hurts southeast Kansas because it allows property-rich school districts to raise money for their schools with minimal property tax increases. Property-poor school districts like many in southeast Kansas would require large property tax hikes to raise similar funds per pupil for their schools.
In theory, the state of Kansas is supposed to equalize these LOB funds so that a one-mill tax increase raises the same revenue for every student in the state. Unfortunately, that does not happen in practice. Without full equalization, increased LOB authority would force most southeast Kansas schools to raise local property taxes far more than other districts to provide the same per-student funding. That, in my opinion, would be a great failure of the Kansas Legislature to “make suitable provision for finance of” education and would fund Kansas schools disproportionately on the backs of southeast Kansas property taxpayers.
This effort to define “suitable” is a direct response to the Gannon v. State of Kansas lawsuit, scheduled for trial next year. According to Governor Brownback, “for years we have faced repeated legal action against the state because no one knows what a suitable education actually means. Let the Legislature resolve school finance, not the courts.” By defining this term, Governor Brownback hopes that the Legislature will have “a definition of what we need to undertake reform of our school finance formula and provide schools with stable, sustainable funding for the future” without further costly litigation.
While this is a noble goal, the difficult question remains: how does one define a suitable education? In today’s world, a suitable education must include more than reading, writing, and arithmetic. As the son and brother of five Kansas public school teachers, I know that our students have diverse educational needs as they prepare to compete and win in the global 21st century economy. At the same time, state funding is limited. A “suitable” education cannot include everything. These challenges (and many others) have kept Kansas from properly defining a “suitable” education for many decades.
I believe that part of this dilemma exists because we are asking the wrong question. The Kansas Constitution does not use the words (nor ask us to define) a “suitable education.” Rather, it mandates that “the Legislature shall make suitable provision for finance of the educational interests of the state.” Under our own Constitution, therefore, the only question is whether the way the Legislature funds education is fair or suitable.
In southeast Kansas, fair education funding raises one question: does the school finance system ensure that all school districts (regardless of their wealth or location) have the same resources to provide a quality education for their kids. This requirement is currently under attack. Two proposals in the Kansas Senate would dramatically increase the power of school districts to raise money through local option budgets (known as “LOBs”).
Increased LOB authority hurts southeast Kansas because it allows property-rich school districts to raise money for their schools with minimal property tax increases. Property-poor school districts like many in southeast Kansas would require large property tax hikes to raise similar funds per pupil for their schools.
In theory, the state of Kansas is supposed to equalize these LOB funds so that a one-mill tax increase raises the same revenue for every student in the state. Unfortunately, that does not happen in practice. Without full equalization, increased LOB authority would force most southeast Kansas schools to raise local property taxes far more than other districts to provide the same per-student funding. That, in my opinion, would be a great failure of the Kansas Legislature to “make suitable provision for finance of” education and would fund Kansas schools disproportionately on the backs of southeast Kansas property taxpayers.
