Topeka ? Public school advocates have their fingers crossed that Gov. Kathleen Sebelius will call for significant new spending on education when the Legislature convenes in January.

“I feel hopeful that she is going to come out with a proposal to increase base state aid,” said Kathy Cook, co-founder of Kansas Families United for Public Education and a member of Sebelius’ education task force.

But while Sebelius’ rhetoric has been pro-public schools, she has been vague on school funding — even during a sworn deposition in school finance litigation.

Still, Cook says Sebelius has a plan in the works that the governor will push regardless of the outcome of the case now before a district court judge in Topeka.

Recommendations due

“She’s taking a lead, and we will actually have a plan rather than waiting for a court ruling to come down, and then the Legislature slaps something together, which would be about saving their political hide right before the election,” Cook said.

Earlier this month, Sebelius’ education task force wrapped up a series of public hearings. It will meet Oct. 9 to start putting together its final report for the governor’s consideration. The task force’s initial findings called for more money for public schools, although a price tag wasn’t set.

Sebelius has said that a tax increase might be necessary to raise school funding in 2004, after having refused to consider a tax increase in the 2003 legislative session.

And she has announced that she plans to recommend changes in the school finance formula for the next legislative session.

¢Kansas Families United for Public Education¢ State witness defends school-finance formula¢ Attorneys optimistic after first week of school finance suit (9-27-03)¢ School finance lawsuit argument focuses on lack of state spending (9-26-03)¢ School finance lawsuit trial begins (9-23-03)¢ Superintendent outlines school finance (3-29-03)

Meanwhile, the school finance law is on trial before Judge Terry Bullock.

Changing position

In the case, minority students allege the state has failed to adequately fund public schools and its method of distributing school funds discriminates against minorities because upward adjustments of school funding go to predominantly white school districts.

On the subject of school funding, though, Sebelius avoided being cornered, according to a deposition obtained by the Journal-World. She also distanced herself from the 2002 Augenblick & Myers report on school funding. The report, which called for increased spending, was embraced by Sebelius during her successful campaign for governor.

In a May 12 meeting in her office, attorneys representing minority plaintiffs questioned Sebelius for about 2 1/2 hours. The attorneys were seeking her opinions about school finance in preparation for a federal lawsuit on the matter. The federal suit is similar to the state suit now being tried.

During the deposition, plaintiffs’ lead attorney Alan Rupe of Wichita asked Sebelius whether she thought base state aid per pupil was adequate. Base state aid per pupil is the foundation of state financial aid.

Questions on aid

Sebelius would only say that increases in the base state aid, which were instituted in 1992, haven’t kept up with inflation. She added that she didn’t know whether base state aid started at the correct level in 1992.

“But again, I would say that whether or not that base was or was not where we should have started and how adequate the overall dollars are right now to fund education in Kansas, I think is an issue that I’m not sure I can adequately address,” she said.

Sebelius, who voted for the 1992 school funding system as a member of the Kansas House, said in her deposition that the original level of base state aid was based on political considerations. “I know that the original base aid per pupil was not arrived at through much of a scientific exercise. It was a political exercise,” she said.

Rupe said one of the main points of the Augenblick & Myers study was that the state wasn’t providing enough funds for schools and districts were having to use their local option budgets for necessities, even though the 1992 law said local option funding was to be used for enhancements to schools.

“What is your observation as far as the usefulness of the local option budget as a supplement these days?” Rupe asked.

“I don’t really have any direct information about how district budgets break down their sources of income,” Sebelius replied.

No opinions

Rupe also questioned Sebelius about the study’s allegations of flaws with many of the “weights,” or adjustments, used by the state to add funding for certain students.

In each instance, Sebelius said she didn’t know enough about the study’s recommendations to form an opinion.

In an October 2001 deposition on school finance, then-Gov. Bill Graves said there were inequities in school funding but that the state was making a good-faith effort to correct them. And, he said, the major problem with the funding formula was the lack of money.

“The best formula in the world is not going to survive if you don’t put some money into it,” Graves said. “This formula has got to be funded and there’s got to be an enhancement each and every year to keep up with what it costs to do business.”

In the deposition, Graves said he was going to ask the Legislature “to step up and put some substantial new money into public education.”

But by the end of his administration, the recession had plunged the state budget into red ink, and Graves cut school spending by $17.4 million, reducing base state aid per pupil by $27 from $3,890 per student to $3,863 per student, which remains the current level.