As some Kansas school districts prepare for another possible legal battle against the state over education funding, district administrators here ponder whether or not a new lawsuit would be at all effective.
“I have mixed emotions about that,” said USD 250 Superintendent Destry Brown. “School districts have benefited greatly from the last lawsuit, but everybody is hurting for money right now.”
According to the Associated Press, the 57 school districts that make up the Schools For Fair Funding coalition are considering suing the state to get education funding back to the level it was at before revenue shortfalls caused significant aid per pupil reductions. The same group successfully challenged the state earlier this decade, and more than $600 million has been pumped into K-12 education since 2005.
But as the state works to balance its budget in the face of serious revenue shortfalls, more than $135 million in education funding has been cut from this year’s budget. State aid per pupil, which peaked at $4,433 last year, is down to $4,218 and falling. Gov. Mark Parkinson is expected to announce further cuts before the end of the year, and even more could come after the Legislature reconvenes in January. If future cuts are significant enough, local district administrators have said that staff reductions could take place, which could also lead to larger class sizes.
The Wichita Eagle reported over the weekend that the SFFF member schools, according to the group’s attorney John Robb, believe a lawsuit is a better alternative than simply accepting the continuous cuts to their budget. Tony White, director of the local branch of the Kansas National Education Association, agrees, saying that districts have “no real recourse than to file another lawsuit.”
But local district administrators, who along with school boards, have to make the tough financial decisions, say they aren’t quite ready to throw their full support behind another legal battle.
“Frontenac is not a party to this, and we were not a party to the first lawsuit,” said USD 249 Superintendent Dale Slagle. “I don’t think anyone can deny that the state’s in a bit of pickle, (but) a lawsuit should be a last resort between people to resolve a dispute.”
Gary Snawder, Girard USD 248 superintendent, said he’s not sure if his district would participate in a new lawsuit, but added that “it is something that we should consider.”
“Our legislators need to consider what they’re doing to our students and what they could do to all future generations of students,” Snawder said.
Brown points to the success of the previous lawsuit to show that legal action has had a positive effect on school funding. But times are different, he added. In 2005, the state had money it could give to schools. That’s not the case now.
“You can’t get blood out of a turnip,” he said.
Rep. Julie Menghini, D-Pittsburg, said Monday that she understands why schools are frustrated, but added that education is not the only entity that has had its budget slashed.
“I don’t blame them for being upset,” she said. “They are taking some pretty big cuts. But now is the time for folks to take a step back and understand that tough decisions have to be made.”
Rep. Doug Gatewood, D-Columbus, also said school districts need to see the “big picture.”
“it’s been rough on all agencies,” he said. “I understand their concern, but I urge them to try to see the budget as a whole. We need to understand that we’re all in this together.”
Rep. Bob Grant, D-Cherokee, said fully funding public education despite the revenue shortfalls would “probably hurt us pretty damn bad.”
“I don’t want to have to pull a lot of funding from some other needy areas to satisfy schools,” Grant said.
Because the state is required to operate under a balanced budget, cuts are necessary. But the constant reductions have many asking why the state isn’t doing more to increase revenue at the same time.
“All I ever hear is cut, cut, cut,” Brown said. “No one ever brings ideas to the table on how to enhance revenue.”
Menghini said she plans to change that when the Legislature reconvenes by introducing a bill that would revoke many of the state’s sales tax exemptions. She said her proposal would remove roughly $200 million in sales tax exemptions, but added that it’s likely the bill would be “picked apart” and some exemptions would remain. If that didn’t do the job, Menghini said she would not be completely opposed to some type of tax increase to help increase revenue.
“These are tough times,” she said, “and there is no easy way out.”
Menghini is not alone in feeling that recent tax cuts and exemptions are partly to blame for the state’s economic problems. Grant said the state has “given away a lot of sales tax revenue” in recent years.
“We’ve been hurting ourselves and we’ve been doing it piecemeal,” he said.
The Lawrence Journal World reported earlier this month that a memo from the Kansas Legislative Research Department “shows that tax cuts supported by business interests over the past four years will cumulatively total $1.135 billion through 2013.”
“Lawmakers were even more generous between 1995 and 2005, with tax cuts totaling $5.8 billion, which included sizable tax cuts for individuals, too,” the paper reported.
Grant describes it as “cutting off our nose to spite our face.” Sen. Bob Marshall, R-Fort Scott, said however that tax cuts and sales tax exemptions are vital to the state economy, as they serve as incentives for many businesses to set up shop in Kansas. While he said he’d support a review of the state’s tax exemptions — “I think we should review everything,” he said. — he stopped short of saying he’d support revocation of those exemptions.
“I feel our answer is economic development,” Marshall said. “We should not do things to make things more difficult to attract business. So while I would support a review process, I am not saying I support eliminating sales tax exemptions. If we have a sales tax exemption that’s helping businesses be where they want to be, we have to maintain them so we can get the jobs. Otherwise, we have the same problem every year.”
White said Monday that he understands the multiple sides to the education funding debate. That doesn’t mean he has to accept them. He claims the state has known for years — far before the economic downturn — that they’d be running at a deficit by 2009. Because of that, White said he believes the state never intended to fully comply with the ruling in the first lawsuit.
“They knew five years ago that they’d be short,” he said. “They did nothing but continue to allow exemptions and tax elimination and abatements. They created this situation, and I have to believe they did it on purpose.”
White said a “penny or two” tax increase would bring enough revenue into the state’s budget so that drastic cuts would not be necessary.
“Unfortunately, they don’t have the political courage to fix what they broke,” he said. “It’s universally accepted that you can’t possibly raise taxes in a depressed time. Well, says who? There’s always a choice. It just takes courage.”
|
|
|
As some Kansas school districts prepare for another possible legal battle against the state over education funding, district administrators here ponder whether or not a new lawsuit would be at all effective.
“I have mixed emotions about that,” said USD 250 Superintendent Destry Brown. “School districts have benefited greatly from the last lawsuit, but everybody is hurting for money right now.”
According to the Associated Press, the 57 school districts that make up the Schools For Fair Funding coalition are considering suing the state to get education funding back to the level it was at before revenue shortfalls caused significant aid per pupil reductions. The same group successfully challenged the state earlier this decade, and more than $600 million has been pumped into K-12 education since 2005.
But as the state works to balance its budget in the face of serious revenue shortfalls, more than $135 million in education funding has been cut from this year’s budget. State aid per pupil, which peaked at $4,433 last year, is down to $4,218 and falling. Gov. Mark Parkinson is expected to announce further cuts before the end of the year, and even more could come after the Legislature reconvenes in January. If future cuts are significant enough, local district administrators have said that staff reductions could take place, which could also lead to larger class sizes.
The Wichita Eagle reported over the weekend that the SFFF member schools, according to the group’s attorney John Robb, believe a lawsuit is a better alternative than simply accepting the continuous cuts to their budget. Tony White, director of the local branch of the Kansas National Education Association, agrees, saying that districts have “no real recourse than to file another lawsuit.”
But local district administrators, who along with school boards, have to make the tough financial decisions, say they aren’t quite ready to throw their full support behind another legal battle.
“Frontenac is not a party to this, and we were not a party to the first lawsuit,” said USD 249 Superintendent Dale Slagle. “I don’t think anyone can deny that the state’s in a bit of pickle, (but) a lawsuit should be a last resort between people to resolve a dispute.”
Gary Snawder, Girard USD 248 superintendent, said he’s not sure if his district would participate in a new lawsuit, but added that “it is something that we should consider.”
“Our legislators need to consider what they’re doing to our students and what they could do to all future generations of students,” Snawder said.
Brown points to the success of the previous lawsuit to show that legal action has had a positive effect on school funding. But times are different, he added. In 2005, the state had money it could give to schools. That’s not the case now.
“You can’t get blood out of a turnip,” he said.
Rep. Julie Menghini, D-Pittsburg, said Monday that she understands why schools are frustrated, but added that education is not the only entity that has had its budget slashed.
“I don’t blame them for being upset,” she said. “They are taking some pretty big cuts. But now is the time for folks to take a step back and understand that tough decisions have to be made.”
Rep. Doug Gatewood, D-Columbus, also said school districts need to see the “big picture.”
“it’s been rough on all agencies,” he said. “I understand their concern, but I urge them to try to see the budget as a whole. We need to understand that we’re all in this together.”
Rep. Bob Grant, D-Cherokee, said fully funding public education despite the revenue shortfalls would “probably hurt us pretty damn bad.”
“I don’t want to have to pull a lot of funding from some other needy areas to satisfy schools,” Grant said.
Because the state is required to operate under a balanced budget, cuts are necessary. But the constant reductions have many asking why the state isn’t doing more to increase revenue at the same time.
“All I ever hear is cut, cut, cut,” Brown said. “No one ever brings ideas to the table on how to enhance revenue.”
Menghini said she plans to change that when the Legislature reconvenes by introducing a bill that would revoke many of the state’s sales tax exemptions. She said her proposal would remove roughly $200 million in sales tax exemptions, but added that it’s likely the bill would be “picked apart” and some exemptions would remain. If that didn’t do the job, Menghini said she would not be completely opposed to some type of tax increase to help increase revenue.
“These are tough times,” she said, “and there is no easy way out.”
Menghini is not alone in feeling that recent tax cuts and exemptions are partly to blame for the state’s economic problems. Grant said the state has “given away a lot of sales tax revenue” in recent years.
“We’ve been hurting ourselves and we’ve been doing it piecemeal,” he said.
The Lawrence Journal World reported earlier this month that a memo from the Kansas Legislative Research Department “shows that tax cuts supported by business interests over the past four years will cumulatively total $1.135 billion through 2013.”
“Lawmakers were even more generous between 1995 and 2005, with tax cuts totaling $5.8 billion, which included sizable tax cuts for individuals, too,” the paper reported.
Grant describes it as “cutting off our nose to spite our face.” Sen. Bob Marshall, R-Fort Scott, said however that tax cuts and sales tax exemptions are vital to the state economy, as they serve as incentives for many businesses to set up shop in Kansas. While he said he’d support a review of the state’s tax exemptions — “I think we should review everything,” he said. — he stopped short of saying he’d support revocation of those exemptions.
“I feel our answer is economic development,” Marshall said. “We should not do things to make things more difficult to attract business. So while I would support a review process, I am not saying I support eliminating sales tax exemptions. If we have a sales tax exemption that’s helping businesses be where they want to be, we have to maintain them so we can get the jobs. Otherwise, we have the same problem every year.”
White said Monday that he understands the multiple sides to the education funding debate. That doesn’t mean he has to accept them. He claims the state has known for years — far before the economic downturn — that they’d be running at a deficit by 2009. Because of that, White said he believes the state never intended to fully comply with the ruling in the first lawsuit.
“They knew five years ago that they’d be short,” he said. “They did nothing but continue to allow exemptions and tax elimination and abatements. They created this situation, and I have to believe they did it on purpose.”
White said a “penny or two” tax increase would bring enough revenue into the state’s budget so that drastic cuts would not be necessary.
“Unfortunately, they don’t have the political courage to fix what they broke,” he said. “It’s universally accepted that you can’t possibly raise taxes in a depressed time. Well, says who? There’s always a choice. It just takes courage.”
