TOPEKA
Kansas Democratic leaders unveiled a list of budget cuts Friday that they said would pay for a school finance fix and prevent school closures next month.
The proposal would take money from a job creation program and direct it to school funding. It was criticized by Republicans, who have yet to release their own plan.
It came during a hectic day in which lawmakers weighed a proposed amendment to the state’s constitution; talked about how schools would have been funded under the state’s original, pre-Civil War Wyandotte constitution; and debated whether a request by Johnson County school districts would be constitutional.
The vice president of the Kansas Senate also suggested that $25 million could be diverted from highway projects in southeastern Kansas to help pay for a school finance fix, an idea which drew immediate opposition from Gov. Sam Brownback.
Lawmakers are set to return to Topeka for a special session Thursday. They face a June 30 deadline from the court to fix inequities in school funding or risk a shutdown of the state’s school districts.
Democratic cuts
Democrats say they’ve identified more than $39 million to cover the cost of restoring the state’s old school funding equalization formula, an option the court has said would satisfy its order.
“We knew if we put out the plan, the first question that would be asked is ‘Where are you going to get the money?’” said Senate Minority Leader Anthony Hensley, D-Topeka. “So what we’re doing is presenting a plan that shows where we’re going to get the money.”
The state faces a budget hole for the current year, which has made Republicans reluctant to embrace new spending.
The Democrats’ plan would take $13 million from a job creation program run by the Kansas Department of Commerce and tap $3 million from Temporary Assistance to Needy Families, more commonly known as welfare.
The rest of the money would come from within the state’s education system, freezing virtual school funding at the 2014-15 level to save $7.3 million and tapping all $15.2 million in the state’s K-12 extraordinary needs fund, a pool of money meant to help districts cope with unexpected financial crises.
The Democrats also would repeal a program that gives tax breaks to corporations that donate to private school scholarship funds, freeing up another $750,000.
Sen. Laura Kelly, D-Topeka, the ranking Democrat on the budget committee, said that because of the “management of the budget in the past few years, we had very few options.”
The governor’s office and House Republicans attacked the plan almost immediately on social media and in e-mails to reporters, saying it would put jobs at risk.
“The Governor does not support the Democrats’ proposal as it would endanger several thousand Kansas jobs by taking aim at the Job Creation Fund, money with existing binding obligations to businesses that have created or retained jobs like Amazon, Goodyear and an aviation company in Wichita,” said Eileen Hawley, the governor’s spokeswoman. “The proposed action would also negatively impact an upcoming announcement creating a large number of new jobs.”
Brownback has endorsed spending $38 million to fix school finance, but has not yet said where he wants to find the money.
House Speaker Ray Merrick’s office mocked the Democrats’ proposal in a statement.
“While it’s nice that the Democrats finally came up with an idea other than voting no, their plan would force the state of Kansas to break binding commitments already made with job creators, which is at odds with their claims of support for working Kansans,” the statement said.
“Republicans are putting together a solution that releases Kansas children from their judicial hostage takers and makes sure students will be back in classrooms this fall without killing the jobs they need after graduation.”
Merrick’s office did not specify what that solution would be.
Looking at highways
During a Friday hearing, Senate Vice President Jeff King, R-Independence, said lawmakers could divert $25 million set aside for an upgrade of U.S. 69 in southeast Kansas to provide the equalization aid for poor school districts.
Brownback’s administration had delayed the highway project, but announced recently it would go forward, a move Democrats claim was intended to boost Sen. Jacob LaTurner, R-Pittsburg, in a competitive Senate race. LaTurner disputes the Democrats’ assertion.
King called the highway project “the most prominent piece of new spending” authorized since the court decision was released May 27 and said that right now the school finance fix should be the state’s “highest spending priority.”
Sen. Julia Lynn, R-Olathe, endorsed the idea, saying that kids are more important than roads.
Brownback’s office quickly came out against it, saying the governor “believes that funding for Highway 69, which has been funded from KDOT operational savings and efficiencies, should remain intact.”
LaTurner also panned the idea. “Highway 69 and the people of southeast Kansas are not the enemy,” he said. “…This is a terrible idea.”
Ann Williamson, a spokeswoman for the Kansas Department of Transportation, said in an e-mail that only sales tax revenue can be transferred out of the highway fund and all of that has already been used for 2016 and 2017.
“There isn’t $25 million currently available to transfer,” she said. “The U.S. 69 project is moving forward because the cost will be paid out over several years using multiple revenue sources.”
LaTurner said he supports spending the full $38 million, but he did not say where the money should come from.
Hold harmless
A significant portion of the meeting of the House and Senate judiciary committees centered on whether to prevent any district from losing funding in a school finance fix — in other words, to hold all schools harmless.
Although 144 school districts would see gains if the state returns to the old equalization formula, another 96 districts, including several in Johnson County, the state’s most populous county, would lose money.
Passing a bill without support of the 34-member Johnson County delegation, the biggest in the Legislature, would be difficult. Superintendents from five districts in that county have asked lawmakers to include a “hold harmless” provision in any solution.
The court rejected a bill passed by the Legislature in March that included such a provision, saying that it helped increase gaps between school districts by allowing the rich districts to also increase their local property tax revenue.
Rep. Erin Davis, R-Olathe, asked an attorney for the state if would be possible to craft a hold harmless provision that could pass court muster. He declined to give a definitive answer.
Rep. James Todd, R-Overland Park, recommended that a “hold harmless” provision could be paired with a severability clause. That would allow the court to scrap it if necessary without rejecting the entire bill.
Several lawmakers said this still posed too great a risk because the court ultimately decides whether provisions are severable and could still reject a bill with a hold harmless provision.
“We do not have the luxury of having a Plan B,” said Rep. Steve Becker, R-Buhler, a retired judge. “What we submit to the court must pass constitutional muster.”
Constitutional amendment
Lawmakers also weighed whether to amend the constitution to prohibit courts from issuing decisions that would threaten to close schools in the future.
Supporters say this would protect schoolchildren from being adversely impacted by litigation. Opponents say it would eliminate the court’s ability to enforce the state’s constitutional requirement for suitable education funding.
The Senate Judiciary Committee passed a recommendation that the committee take that up in the special session. The House Judiciary Committee voted to make no recommendation.
An amendment would go on the November ballot if it received approval from two-thirds of each chamber of the Legislature. It would be enacted if a majority of voters approved it.
Bryan Lowry: 785-296-3006, @BryanLowry3
This story was originally published June 17, 2016 12:48 PM.