The governor's plan to increase school funding isn't perfect, but the "t" word is now on the table.
It took awhile, but someone finally said the "t" word. Gov. Bill Graves wouldn't say it in his State of the State address in January. Republicans and Democrats in the Kansas Legislature have been looking at each other wondering who would say it first. Everyone said they wanted public schools to get more money, but they all seemed clueless as to where that money might come from.
On Tuesday, Graves finally stepped forward. He talked about the need to increase funding for public schools and the need to increases taxes to provide that funding. His $112 million proposal includes a sales tax increase of 0.2 of a cent and a 2-cent-per-gallon increase in the state's motor fuels tax. That money would be used to raise per-pupil spending by $110, phase in full-day kindergarten, offer more bonuses for teachers and cover more of the cost of special education.
Predictably, many of the state legislators who have been sidestepping school funding issues don't like the governor's plan. They are saying they just can't consider the tax increases he is proposing or are ducking the issue by saying it's too late in the session to deal with his plan.
It's true that Graves could have, and maybe should have, acted sooner, but it's not too late to deal with this issue if the Legislature agrees there is a need. The governor's plan has weaknesses, but those who are quick to point to those deficiencies should accept the challenge of offering better alternatives.
Raising the sales tax is never a popular option. As long as the state continues to collect sales tax on food purchases, that tax will continue to fall disproportionately on the poorest Kansans. The governor's plan includes more funding for a food sales tax rebate program but not all people who could benefit from that program take advantage of it. The fuels tax also raises questions because such increases hit equally at everyone who drives and the revenue usually is reserved for state highway projects.
Using the sales tax and fuels tax for this purpose also represents a fundamental shift in how the state funds public schools. A look at the history also might be a good idea for legislators who were so proud of the huge tax cuts they approved in 1997 and 1998.
In 1997, the state approved a $91.7 million reduction in property taxes. Much of that reduction came as a result of lowering the statewide property tax levy for schools from 35 mills to 27 mills. In 1998, that levy was reduced again, to 20 mills. In both years, lawmakers insisted that strong state revenues in other areas could make up for the loss of property tax money.
The property tax reduction in 1998 was part of a $250 million tax relief package pushed through by state legislators. The package was well above the $170 million in tax reduction recommended in the governor's budget proposal that year.
Legislators need to take responsibility for their part in creating the current crunch in public school funding. They took away property tax revenue and limited the money that could be added through local option budgets. If they would like to revisit the issue of raising more money through property taxes rather than shifting more of the tax burden to the sales and fuel taxes, they should put that option on the table. If not, perhaps they should consider working with the governor.
It can be argued that the state should take a closer look at its educational goals and school funding formula before approving increased spending. How state funding is distributed and what the state considers to be a "suitable" education are both issues that need to be reviewed.
But Lawrence School Supt. Randy Weseman has a point when he says this is an important year for school funding. Next year, legislators facing elections will be even more reluctant to consider tax increases. The sagging economy and the prospect of a new governor in two years also increase the likelihood that a significant boost in school funding won't be back on the table soon. Kansas public schools can't wait.
Time is short, but not too short. A plan is on the table. It's time for legislators to step up to the plate.
No comments
Commenting is turned off for this story.