| Manhattan & Riley County Constituents: It is a pleasure to be writing this from sunny Manhattan while the legislature is on a brief break. It has already been a busy break as I have been attending community events, including the April 12 K-State Alumni Fellows awards ceremony. I am humbled to be honored as a Fellow and look forward to sharing how my K-State experience impacted my life since college. I was nominated by the College of Architecture, Planning and Design. Here’s the profile from the event.
| |
| Education Update, Regular Session Concludes
| |
| The first week of April, the House debated and passed HB 2445, an update to the school finance formula. We did this in response to the Kansas Supreme Court’s October finding in Gannon v State that the formula passed last year did not provide suitable funding for schools based on the language of the Kansas Constitution. The Court split the Gannon case into two parts – equity of funding across districts so similar effort would raise similar funding (property valuations and therefore tax revenue to districts vary widely) and adequacy of funding to achieve expected outcomes.
| |
| Over the years, the legislature has commissioned a handful of studies to determine the costs, investigate efficiencies, and analyze consolidation concepts. In December, another study was commissioned to determine the actual cost of providing an education based on the Rose Capacities and the inputs/outcomes work done by the Kansas Department of Education under the Kansas Can initiative. That most recent study showed Kansas education funding was hundreds of millions less than it would have been had we kept up with payments from the last lawsuit which was settled in 2005 (Montoy).
| |
| In short, the bill addresses both the equity challenge with policy measures and the adequacy component with additional funding on top of that already passed under last year’s plan. The bill had days of hearings in the House, where dozens of amendments were offered, debated, and voted on. We then spent two days debating the bill on the House floor where again, many amendments were offered, debated, and voted on. If you click the link above, you can see the paper trail of discussion on the House floor. Finally, the bill passed the House 71-53, I voted yes. Equity changes: - Repeals the 10% minimum floor for at-risk funding
- Repeals the expanded use of capital outlay funds for utilities & hazard insurance
- Adjusts the LOB calculation to use current year data rather than the prior year
Other policy provisions: - Reworks the transportation weighting to address concerns raised by the Legislative Post Audit study released in December
- Removes sunset on Career & Tech Ed weighting
- Expands the 4-year old at-risk program to allow 3-year olds as well
- Repeals the cap on bonding authority that conflicted with previous limitations put in statute in 2016
Adequacy provisions: - Increases Base State Aid Per Pupil (BSAPP) over 5 years as follows:
- 2019 increase to $4170 per pupil
- 2020 increase to $4307 per pupil
- 2021 increase to $4444 per pupil
- 2022 increase to $4581 per pupil
- 2023 increase to $4781 per pupil
- Increases Special Education funding by $74.4 million total over 5 years, and
- Adds $10 million for a pilot partnership with community mental health centers to improve student behavioral health.
Here is a snapshot of the total year-over-year new spending on K-12 provided by both SB 19 last year and HB 2445 this year:
| |
| The Senate also passed a funding plan with substantially less money (about $280 million) but some good ideas on the policy side. A conference committee was created to allow the House and Senate negotiators to find a compromise between the two bills. However, instead of working with the House to draft a compromise, the Senate rejected the House plan in the conference committee. Governor Colyer entered the debate by saying he supported the House plan. It was clear to House leadership the Senate had dug their heels into the ground and would not move from their position. With the Senate obstructing progress, the House used the often-maligned “gut-and-go” procedure to remove the contents of Sub SB 423, which was under consideration by the House, and replace it with a compromise education plan with a little of what both the House and Senate wanted. With this action, the Senate could only agree or disagree with the House’s changes to their bill (concur or nonconcur). This move passed the House 63-56, I voted yes. The bill was then sent to the Senate to concur or nonconcur. The Senate began working on a tax cut bill to avoid working on the K-12 education funding plan! We’ve only just begun to recover from the 2012 tax cuts, and only because we were able to pass a tax reform package just a year ago. They filibustered any action until seconds before adjournment, and finally concurred with House amendments on a vote of 21-19. The governor has indicated he will sign it and the Attorney General’s office is preparing their defense of the bill due to the Kansas Supreme Court on April 30. The House got what it wanted while the Senate bickered, but we also gave up something. To give the Senate a little more time to get to the right solution, the House agreed to an adjournment resolution that gives up a lot of power. Typically, the official last day of session (Sine Die) is about 20 days after the end of veto session. This allows legislative staff to complete paperwork and for the governor to consider, sign, or veto legislation – he has 10 days to do so. When we come back for the Sine Die session, we can decide whether to vote to override his vetoes. This year’s adjournment agreement sets Sine Die for May 4th, forcing an extremely shortened veto session. Any bill passed during the veto session could be held by the governor beyond Sine Die, when it could then be vetoed. In order to attempt an override, a special session would have to be called. This places a great deal of power in the governor’s hands, with no recourse by the legislature. The tradeoff is we sent not only a good faith effort, but a solid financial plan to the Supreme Court for consideration.
| |
| Monday morning the State Department of Education identified an error in Sub Senate Bill 423. The error was caused by an amendment added requiring at least 15% of the Local Option Budget (LOB) be counted toward the total foundation aid of school districts. These lower LOB percentages would be applied to calculating the total state aid to schools. The result was an impact on figuring special education dollars. There is optimism when the Legislature reconvenes on April 26th a technical amendment can correct the error and resolve any legal concerns potentially hurting the state’s case in front of the Supreme Court.
| |
| HCR 5029 - Constitutional Amendment
| |
| The House Judiciary Committee passed HCR 5029 on a vote of 12-10 to advance a constitutional amendment to debate on the House floor. The intent of the new amendment would be to clarify the legislature is responsible for determining the adequate funding of public schools and the courts are responsible for interpreting if schools are being funded in an equitable manner. The constitution was amended in 1966 by adding the following words: “The legislature shall make suitable provision for finance of the educational interests of the state.” This passage is the crux of every school finance lawsuit in the last 30 years, so many want to remove that portion or add language to clarify that the legislature is the only body that can determine what is suitable or adequate funding of our schools. A constitutional amendment would require 84 of 125 votes in the House and 27 of 40 votes in the Senate. The reality is, the votes just aren’t there – they aren’t anywhere close. This effort has waned substantially over the last week or so since it started.
As of early Sunday morning, the legislature is adjourned until April 26 when we begin the Veto Session. I will be home visiting schools and businesses, as well as meeting with constituents. I hope to see you at home!
| |
| It is an honor to represent you in Topeka. Please do not hesitate to contact me regarding these or other legislative matters.
Sincerely,
Tom Phillips
State Representative, District 67
Kansas House of Representatives
| |
|
| Tom Phillips serves the 67th District, which includes Manhattan and part of Riley County. He has lived in the district for more than 20 years.
| |
| Privacy Statement: Providing your personal or professional email address is a measure of your trust in me. This information will remain in my database and will not be sold or provided to any other user.
Paid for by Tom Phillips for State Representative, Richard Hayter, Treasurer
| |
|
