Attorneys for school districts accuse state of trying to deceive courts, public

Lawyers for Wichita and other school districts have filed new court documents accusing Kansas lawmakers of performing a “sleight of hand” by treating pension money as an increase in education funding.

Attorneys for both the state and school districts seeking more money filed briefs with the Kansas Supreme Court this week. The court is revisiting part of a case on school funding after the Legislature replaced the state’s school finance formula with flexible block grants earlier this year.

Gov. Sam Brownback and others say schools are receiving record funding under the block grants. Schools say they are seeing a cut in operational funding.

“The State’s willingness to mislead the courts in its attempts to avoid its constitutional responsibilities is paired with a similar willingness to mislead the public with regards to education spending,” says the school districts’ brief, which was filed Tuesday. “For example, the State continues to trumpet alleged ‘record level’ spending on education to the public, without telling the public that those increases, if they exist, provide no additional educational opportunities for students.”

The brief quotes a ruling from a three-judge panel, which said in June that “any increase in general state aid only come[s] by way of adding in, under the guise of operational funds, Kansas Public Employee Retirement System (KPERS) employer contributions.”

An opposing brief filed by Attorney General Derek Schmidt’s office Wednesday argued the block grant bill “does not change the fact that districts have ‘reasonably equal access to substantially similar educational opportunity through similar tax effort.’”

The state’s brief also says that the standard for equitable funding, which was solidified in a 2014 Supreme Court ruling, “does not require the legislature to provide equal funding for each student or school district” and says that the question before the court is instead whether “wealth-based disparities are ‘unreasonable.’ ”

Schmidt’s brief calls the block grant bill, which reduced state aid meant to close gaps between districts, a reasonable adjustment. It contends that the three-judge panel overstepped its constitutional authority in ruling against it.

The Supreme Court will hear oral arguments on whether schools are equitably funded across the state, as required by law, in November. It will review whether schools are adequately funded in spring 2016. A verdict in the school districts’ favor in either portion of the case could result in millions more in funding for school districts across the state.

The four plaintiff districts in the suit are Wichita, Hutchinson, Dodge City and Kansas City. Their brief argues that the way the block grant bill requires districts to report their funding is deceptive by counting money for pensions and capital improvements as general aid.

“Because of this, the districts appear to have outlandishly high budgeted general funds compared to previous years’ actual spending,” the brief states. “With this sleight of hand, this ‘increase’ is simply a deceptive mirage generated by the misleading reporting requirements imposed on the districts by the Legislature. This continued public deception is sanctionable conduct.”

This story was originally published September 3, 2015 at 5:28 PM with the headline "Attorneys for school districts accuse state of trying to deceive courts, public."