The question of how to properly fund Kansas elementary and secondary education will be a major, if not the most difficult, issue facing members of the current Kansas legislative session.

A recent report by the Legislative Division of Post Audit indicated that between $300 million and $400 million more is needed to bring Kansas K-12 school funding up to a level that is fair and balanced for the state’s 300 unified school districts, fair to the students in these districts and at a level designed to provide Kansas students a first-class educational experience.

It is a timely and worthy project, but one that is extremely difficult to resolve. There is no perfect, 100-percent-correct answer to this puzzle. If there was some kind of a magic, one-size-fits-all answer to this funding question, Kansas should patent the process and sell it to every state in the nation because proper, equitable school funding is a giant question facing lawmakers in every state. There is no simple answer.

Members of the Legislative Division of Post Audit and the Post Audit Committee deserve the thanks and appreciation of Kansas citizens. The committee, which directs what audits will be performed, is a bipartisan group of five state senators and five state representatives. These are appointive positions, with the selections made by the president of the Senate and Senate minority leader, and by the speaker of the House and the House minority leader.

In 1999, two school districts filed suit in Shawnee County District Court claiming the state’s formula for funding K-12 schools failed to make suitable provisions as required by Article 6 of the Kansas Constitution.

In January 2005, the state Supreme Court ruled the Legislature had failed to meet its responsibility to “make suitable provision for finance” of public schools.

In the 2005 legislative session lawmakers OK’d $141.1 million in additional funding for the schools and called for a legislative post audit to conduct a “professional cost study analysis to determine the cost of delivering the kindergarten and grades one through 12 curriculum, related services, and other programs mandated by state statute in accredited schools.”

In June 2005, the Kansas Supreme Court ordered the Legislature to come up with another $285 million for the schools by July 2005. Their decision was based on a 2002 analysis by a firm called Augenblick & Myers. Adding in the inflation factor, the price tag in that study shot up to $853 million, with the court order accounting for $285 million of that total.

This resulted in a special session of the Legislature. Lawmakers added some money to their already adjusted figures and called for the Legislative Post Audit cost study.

Now we have the report, which says the cost to get funding to where it should be will be an additional $300 million to $400 million.

The Legislative Division of Post Audit, along with those they called on for expert advice, did their best to analyze and judge every facet of the funding problem. The report is long and detailed and is supported by student performance reports in reading and math, matters such as class size, the costs of regular education versus the educational needs of “at risk” students. Add in the cost of serving students who don’t speak English, special education students and vocational education students, the cost of transportation, teacher salaries in various parts of the state, local and state funding possibilities and everything else that could be a factor in trying to determine the proper funding level.

It was an exhaustive study and members of the Legislative Post Audit Committee are to be thanked.

However – and perhaps this is unfair – the $300 million to $400 million is a “best guess” estimate. As noted earlier, there is no perfect, 100-percent-correct formula.

The Post Audit men and women tried their very best. Now, it is up to the lawmakers to try to figure out what they can do to come up with another $300 million to $400 million.

Kansans want good schools and good teachers for their students and even though some say the K-12 school system is insufficiently funded, it should be remembered that Kansas students do quite well in a number of national testing programs. Granted, they can always do better, but at the same time, various tests show Kansas students substantially above the national averages.

So what will the lawmakers do? Will they raise taxes? Will they try to spread increased funding over a period of years to lessen the immediate tax impact? Can costs be reduced in other state programs in order to minimize tax increases, and can some state-funded programs be eliminated? How will the K-12 funding question affect funding for higher education?

There are no easy answers and, yet, some way or another lawmakers need to find between $300 million and $400 million for K-12 education. Higher taxes probably are inevitable, but how such taxes will be collected and how fast such taxes will be collected is a big question. The cost of all education continues to climb as university officials continue to increase tuition by double-digit figures every year.

Here in Lawrence, well-meaning citizens are calling for a large sports complex costing many millions of dollars. Who is to pay for this? Is this an “education” responsibility?

The list of projects goes on and on, and there is no question but that it would be great to have a good percentage of these programs and facilities. But is there a ceiling on what taxpayers are expected to pay? Will taxes just get higher and higher every year and/or will private money be expected to provide the so-called “frosting on the cake”?

Has there ever been a superintendent of schools or chancellor who said, “We don’t need any more money. We have all we need and everything is great”? There never seems to be enough. Education’s fiscal appetite is never satisfied.

It is good to have school administrators and citizens eager to provide as good a school system as possible, whether at the K-12 level or at our colleges and universities. Most everyone agrees that a good education is essential if an individual is to have any chance of carving out a career in today’s society and to be a meaningful member of the community.

Again, Kansas lawmakers have a giant task on their hands. They want to do what is right, but dollars are tight. It is hoped Kansas residents appreciate the difficulty the legislators face in coming up with a funding solution and that residents will take the time to convey their thoughts and ideas to their elected representatives. This issue calls for the input of as many thoughtful Kansans as possible.