No tax increase for Kansas schools, GOP leaders say

Kansas lawmakers will not support raising taxes to increase money for schools, the Legislature’s two most-powerful Republicans say.

Senate President Susan Wagle and House Speaker Ron Ryckman have effectively ruled out tax increases as a response to the Kansas Supreme Court’s decision that current school funding is inadequate and unconstitutional.

“My senators are dead set against increasing any taxes to comply with the court,” Wagle, R-Wichita, said in an interview with The Eagle.

Ryckman, R-Olathe, sounded a similar note: “There’s not an appetite to raise taxes.”

If their reading of the political landscape is correct, the Legislature may not approve a significant funding boost for schools. Although Wagle and Ryckman are not necessarily the last word on a tax increase, they wield substantial influence over legislation.

Without tax increases, large increases in school funding would require deep cuts to other parts of government – like transportation, prisons and social services. Not adding funding or asking voters to approve a constitutional amendment to reset litigation over schools are gambles. Some lawmakers fear the courts could close schools if the Legislature’s response is found inadequate.

The Legislature has until the end of April to show what it will do.

Attorneys for the school districts – including Wichita – that have sued for more money say an additional $600 million is needed. That would come on top of an additional $485 million over two years that lawmakers approved earlier this year.

The Kansas Constitution’s requirement that the Legislature make “suitable provision” to finance education doesn’t apply only if the Legislature can afford it, said school attorney Alan Rupe. Unless lawmakers provide schools with additional resources, they’re “not going to get where the court needs you to go,” he said.

For the first time in several years, Kansas has extra money to inject into state programs, after lawmakers raised income taxes last spring when they rolled back Gov. Sam Brownback’s 2012 tax cuts.

That move is expected to raise about $1.2 billion in new revenue over two years.

But a $600 million increase for schools would take all of that extra revenue, leaving none for additional spending in other areas.

“If one wants to put in $600 million next year, somebody’s going to have to come up with a list of how do you raise $600 million,” Senate Majority Leader Jim Denning, R-Overland Park, said.

“If they want to put in $200 million a year – which is $600 million at the end of three years – they’re still going to have to come up with a way to pay for it.”

Talk of amendment

During the past several years when the state has been in court over school funding, lawmakers have put any “extra dime we’ve received ... plus more” toward education, Wagle said.

“Putting all our resources in one government-funded organization has hurt transportation, it’s hurt our prison system, it’s hurt our mental health system, it’s hurt DCF,” Wagle said, referring to the Department for Children and Families.

Ryckman said the Legislature must look at mental health, early childhood funding and foster care. “Those are things we’re going to address this year,” he said.

Rupe said education may have to be prioritized at the expense of non-education programs because Kansas children have a constitutional right to adequate and equitable education funding.

“It may be that some of those other areas you mention which are terribly important but don’t have constitutional protections may have to suffer,” Rupe said.

Some Republican lawmakers are pushing for a constitutional amendment to change the requirement in some way. Specific language has not yet emerged, but Sen. Dennis Pyle, R-Hiawatha, has said he will propose an amendment that would stop the courts from ever closing schools.

Parents deserve to have decisions affecting their children and schools “made by their elected school boards not unelected judges,” Pyle has said.

Ryckman said he supports a conversation over a potential constitutional amendment, though he wasn’t ready to endorse specific language.

“As far as the terminology, the wording, we have committees to help us make that decision,” Ryckman said, referring in part to a special committee that will meet next week on how to respond to the court’s decision.

A constitutional amendment would have to pass with the support of two-thirds of lawmakers in both the House and Senate. It could not be vetoed by the governor, and would go to a statewide vote.

Pyle has said he believes it may be possible to put an amendment before voters in a special election in April before the April 30 deadline the court has given the Legislature.

So far, only more-conservative Republicans have spoken publicly of a constitutional amendment. Moderate Republicans and Democrats have stayed silent or opposed the idea.

“There was a reason education was put in the constitution. It’s an important part and I don’t think our citizens want to see that cheapened,” said Sen. Lynn Rogers, D-Wichita.

The Legislature could also try to present a better case that current funding levels for schools are appropriate, in the hope that the court would be persuaded this time.

Legislative leaders have approved up to $400,000 to hire attorneys and an outside expert in school finance to help develop a response to the court. A search is under way.

“We’re focused on finding experts who can help show the court that funding is adequate,” Wagle said.

Senate Minority Leader Anthony Hensley, D-Topeka, said the Legislature should use a 2006 study done by legislative auditors, which found the state was underfunding education.

The study played a large role in the Legislature’s approval of changes to the school funding formula later that year. That formula ramped up school funding over three years by more than $460 million.

One potential solution under discussion in response to the most recent court decision would involve a similar multi-year increase in funding.

“I’ve always said you don’t have to do another study,” Hensley said.

The final word

Ryckman and Wagle hold significant sway over legislation, but they do not always have the final word.

The Senate overrode Brownback’s veto of tax increases last spring even though Wagle voted no. The House passed Medicaid expansion in February despite Ryckman’s opposition (the bill didn’t become law because it was vetoed by Brownback).

A large coalition of lawmakers could bypass Ryckman and Wagle to pass legislation. Some have already said that additional funding will be needed.

What lawmakers do may depend on what a special committee examining school finance recommends.

The committee will meet for two days next week. It’s made up of lawmakers with expertise in the budget, taxes and judicial issues.

The committee is scheduled to discuss the consequences of different responses and what budget and revenue adjustments would be needed. It will also explore ways to avoid school finance litigation in the future, according to a committee schedule. That’s expected to include talk of potential constitutional amendments.

Sen. John Skubal, one of a number of more-moderate Republicans voted into office in 2016, said he wished he had a better idea of what will be needed to satisfy the court. He wants to attend the committee’s meetings next week, which he hopes will provide lawmakers with a “guiding light” for where things are headed.

The Supreme Court did its job and now the Legislature needs to do its job, he said.

“I’m not going to defy the Supreme Court,” Skubal said. “And somehow, someway, we’re going to come up with some money.”

This story was originally published December 15, 2017 at 6:55 AM with the headline "No tax increase for Kansas schools, GOP leaders say."