The question of how to provide adequate funding for K-12 education in Kansas soon may come to a head.

While children were heading back to school last week, Gov. Kathleen Sebelius was touring the state drumming up support to increase school funding to improve early childhood education and provide additional help for students who need it. At the same time some Kansas school districts, weary of waiting for the state to beef up its financial support, say they now are willing to investigate other funding sources, notably a sales tax levied through the city or county but dedicated to funding school district budgets. Lawrence is one of those districts.

A quarter-cent sales tax that already has been approved in Johnson County is expected to generate $45 million a year for public schools if it survives a court challenges. That challenge is coming from neighboring Wyandotte County, which argues it will have inferior schools because it can’t match Johnson County’s sales tax effort.

Lawrence School Supt. Randy Weseman has long expressed sympathy with Wyandotte County’s equity concern. But he now says that he’s willing to put that concern aside to fight on behalf of Lawrence children and consider seeking a local sales tax.

Communities that use sales taxes to supplement their school budgets may be in a collision course with the state, which has a legal responsibility to provide equitable educational opportunities for students across Kansas. A complicated school finance formula is used to distribute state funding to schools and restrictions are placed on how much school districts can raise their budgets each year. There is no provision for sales tax revenue, which will turn the whole school funding formula on its head.

Here are some possible scenarios. Driven by pressure from sales tax initiatives, state lawmakers may recognize Kansans’ desire to provide more funding for public schools and pass legislation that makes that possible. Or, recognizing that local sales tax initiatives widen the gap between rich and poor districts, the state might seek to restore the balance by reducing state funding to districts that receive local sales tax money. Or, the state could allow the matter to be settled in court.

Proponents of sales tax initiatives believe that if local voters want to raise more revenue to make their schools better, they should be allowed to do that. But if the state’s mandate is to provide a strong educational opportunity for all Kansas students, it makes sense to collect taxes on a state level and distribute it equitably among districts (perhaps with some strings attached to encourage consolidation of districts with dwindling enrollments).

If Sebelius is successful in selling a plan for increased school funding, which probably would have to be accompanied by increased state taxes, local districts may be willing to drop their local sales tax initiatives. If legislators aren’t buying what Sebelius is selling, the state and local districts may be on a collision course when it comes to education equity issues.

It would be unfortunate for Kansas school finance to end up in court once again, but unless state lawmakers recognize the need to provide additional school funding, that may be where this issue is headed.