Disappointing surprise:
Supreme Court dismisses school finance lawsuit
In a 4-2 decision, the state Supreme Court dismissed the school finance lawsuit that has been the No. 1 political issue before the Legislature for the last two years. At issue was the fate of the school finance bill passed by lawmakers in the 2006 session. The decision was released just in time for the primary elections.
"This decision makes the outcome of the 2006 primary and general elections more important than ever," said KNEA President Blake West. “We simply must do our best to send to Topeka legislators who put quality public schools for every Kansas child ahead of parochial interests.”
A high court decision last year resulted in a special legislative session. This year's decision effectively ended the lawsuit filed in 1999 by Dodge City and other school districts and made Senate Bill 549 the solution to the challenge of establishing a suitable level of funding for public schools. With this decision, the Kansas Legislature is out from under the gun in providing additional funding for our schools – at least temporarily.
The Court ruled that the school finance bills passed in 2005 and 2006 “substantially complied with the court's prior orders to correct flaws in the school finance act that was in place when two school districts filed suit challenging the act's adequacy and equity.” The Court did put pressure on the Legislature to fund the out-years in SB 549 because their conclusion is based on the full amount of funding through the 2008-09 school year.
What the Court did not do is rule on the constitutionality of SB 549. In the ruling the Court said, "The sole issue now before the court is whether the legislation passed in 2005 and SB 549 (passed in 2006) comply with the previous orders of this court. If they do then our inquiry ends and this case must be dismissed. A constitutional challenge of SB 549 must wait for another day."
The wording of the decision sets Kansas up for yet another lengthy lawsuit while Legislators battle for their turf – rural versus urban, property wealthy versus property poor, high at-risk populations versus low at-risk populations, etc.
Probably the most controversial part of the decision is the lifting of the stay on the “cost of living weighting.” This weighting, which was passed in 2005 and stayed by the Court, allows for the 17 school districts with the greatest property wealth to raise substantial amounts of local funds. Taken to its extreme, it would be expected to dramatically increase disparities between those districts and others. This provision could likely be the driver in a new challenge to the constitutionality of the new finance formula.
The school finance lawsuit has been the hot political issue before the Legislature the last two years. At stake: the $3.1 billion funding method that supports the 450,000-student public school system.
In 2005, the state high court declared the system unconstitutional because it shortchanged all students, especially those in districts with high proportions of low-income students, based on the lawsuit filed in 1999.
The court accepted the $290 million spending increase that resulted from last summer’s contentious special session, considering it a down payment pending outcome of a study showing the actual costs of an adequate education. That study done by the Legislative Division of Post Audit recommended a $400 million increase for the next school year.
In May, the Legislature approved a $466 million increase but stretched that over three years, with the first-year increase totaling $194.5 million. That measure, called Senate Bill 549, was argued before the court in June.
|
Archives
Printer friendly
E-mail
Subscribe