Kansas Supreme Court: Lawmakers have until June 30 to approve constitutional school-funding formula
The Kansas Supreme Court on Thursday ruled a temporary school funding law violated the state constitution because it did not cure inequities between school districts.
The court gave lawmakers until June 30 to approve a new formula, report the Wichita Eagle, the Associated Press and the Kansas City Star.
The decision rests with lawmakers, the court said, who “will ultimately determine whether Kansas students will be treated fairly and the schoolhouse doors will be open to them in August.”
The court ruled in 2014 that the constitutional provision requiring “suitable provision” for education requires both adequacy and equity in funding. On remand, a lower court found that lawmakers complied with the equity directive when appropriating money in 2014, but not in 2015 when the legislature changed formulas, leading to a $54 million shortfall.
The state supreme court affirmed the finding on inequity, but disagreed with the lower court’s requirement for the state to pay an additional $54 million to cure the problem. Instead, the court said, the legislature “should be given another, albeit shortened, opportunity to develop a constitutional school funding system.”
Still remaining before the state supreme court is an appeal that claims overall school funding is inadequate.
Justices in Kansas are selected under a merit selection system that gives the public a chance to oust justices in retention elections, the New Yorker reports. Friction between the state supreme court and lawmakers has led to bills to change the selection process through partisan elections or gubernatorial appointments that are confirmed by the state Senate.
The friction was also apparent when the legislature passed a law that took away the Kansas Supreme Court’s power to appoint chief judges in districts around the state, and then passed another law that defunded the courts if the chief-judges law was overturned.
The Kansas Supreme Court struck down the appointments law in December, but court funding remained intact because the legislature “blinked, passing a bill that would reverse the defunding law,” according to the New Yorker article.
