Topeka ? For the first time in seven years, Kansas schools are clear of the litigation that boiled state politics, brought constitutional showdowns and threatened to shutter classrooms.

The state Supreme Court, in a 4-2 decision Friday, dismissed the school finance lawsuit first filed in 1999.

In an unprecedented move, Chief Justice Kay McFarland delivered the opinion and, while standing next to a table weighed down by legal briefs in the case, issued a statement.

“This case is not about winners and losers – it is about the children of Kansas,” McFarland said. “They will be better educated and better prepared to meet the challenges of our rapidly changing society. Kansas will be the ultimate beneficiary.”

Leading policymakers were euphoric to learn the school finance system had passed court muster, eliminating the possibility of a repeat from last summer when political tempers exploded during a special legislative session.

“This ruling is good news for Kansas and a welcome resolution to this case,” said Gov. Kathleen Sebelius, who promised to veto any attempt in future legislative sessions to scale back the new three-year school funding plan approved Friday by the court.

After the decision was announced, House Speaker Doug Mays, R-Topeka, a frequent critic of the court about previous rulings in the case, said, “I’m relieved; somewhat surprised.”

Issue No. 1

The school finance lawsuit has been the No. 1 political issue before the Legislature the last two years.

At stake in the case was the $3.1 billion funding method that supports the 450,000-student public school system.

In 2005, the state Supreme Court declared the system unconstitutional because it shortchanged all students, especially those in districts with high proportions of low-income students. Some of those districts brought the lawsuit in 1999.

The court accepted the $290 million spending increase that resulted from last summer’s contentious special session, considering it a down payment pending outcome of a study showing the actual costs of an adequate education.

That study done by the Legislative Division of Post Audit recommended a $400 million increase for the next school year.

In May, the Legislature approved a $466 million increase but stretched that over three years, with the first-year increase totaling $194.5 million. That measure, called Senate Bill 549, was argued before the court in June.

Court overlooks bill

The court’s decision sidestepped questions about the constitutionality of SB 549.

The 4-2 majority said the $756 million in additional funds over the last two years constituted “substantial compliance with our prior orders.”

The majority added: “A constitutional challenge of SB 549 must wait for another day.”

Justices Carol Beier and Marla Luckert, who dissented from the majority, said they would have allowed the new school finance law to take effect for this school year but would have ordered that the education cost study done for the Legislature be analyzed by a state district court.

Beier said she was “unwilling to graft a ‘good enough for government work’ phrase” onto the provision in the Kansas Constitution that requires the Legislature to provide adequate school funding.

Advocates angered

Supporters of more funding for schools were upset by the court’s decision. They said the Legislature should have provided the funds called for by the cost study.

“It’s like the court decided to evade making a decision instead of making one,” said John Martellaro, with Kansas Families United for Public Education. “By not ruling on the constitutionality of (SB) 549, they have invited the parties to drag this all the way through the courts again, which is disappointing. I had hoped for greater resolution than what we got.”

Alan Rupe, an attorney representing the plaintiff school districts, said he had to speak with his clients before deciding what the next move would be.

But Rupe said he respected the court’s decision and that “it’s hard to be disappointed in looking back in what we accomplished.”

He said significant money had been directed toward “the kids that need the most to educate.”

Fight may continue

Dan Biles, an attorney representing the Kansas State Board of Education, noted that the fight about equitable funding for public education may not be over.

Rupe has filed a similar lawsuit with a federal court in Wichita before U.S. District Court Judge Monti Belot. Action in that case has been held back pending outcome of the state lawsuit.

“I think the focus will turn to Wichita and the federal court there to see what the parties and what Judge Belot wants to do with the claims in that case,” Biles said. Rupe declined to say what, if anything, would happen with the federal lawsuit.

Biles added: “All you can say is that for right now with this bill in this situation, we’re done.”

Lawrence squeezed

For Lawrence Supt. Randy Weseman, conclusion of the lawsuit was bittersweet.

“There are a lot of school districts that will receive substantial benefits, and I’m happy for them,” Weseman said.

But, he said, Lawrence is not one of those because of its unique characteristics.

Lawrence will receive approximately $2.8 million more in state aid, about a 3 percent increase in its general funding. It also has authority to increase its local property taxes to add more revenue, though those decisions haven’t been made yet.

But Lawrence lacks the large numbers of at-risk students to qualify for a massive infusion of funds, and its property tax base is not growing at the rate of districts in Johnson County.

“We are sandwiched between those extremes,” Weseman said.

State Rep. Barbara Ballard, D-Lawrence, said the school plan was the best that could be accomplished from a Legislature that refused to increase taxes for schools.

“We tried to get more money, and we did pass more money,” Ballard said. “It wasn’t as much as we really wanted, but we did address some of the areas that were crucial.”