Back when Kansas legislators were handing the last major revision of the state’s school funding formula over to Gov. Joan Finney, George H.W. Bush looked like a shoo-in for a second White House term and Americans were bemused, but not overly concerned, by the splintering of Yugoslavia. Things have changed a lot since 1992.

But the state’s funding formula hasn’t, beyond a few tweaks and patches.

Now Gov. Sam Brownback is right to consider a wholesale revision. The way Kansas distributes its diminished slice of education money will have a great deal to do with the future success of the state and its citizens.

But while the governor’s general plans for revision have merit, it is important to wade into this issue carefully.

Under the existing formula, Kansas per-pupil funding this year is $3,780. But nobody gets exactly that amount. Large districts are assumed to have economies of scale, so their per-pupil funding is lower than very small districts, which have outsized expenses. Underprivileged children have needs that wealthier children do not.

This is why the Shawnee Mission School District gets $4,305 per pupil from the state, while the tiny West Oak School district in western Kansas gets $11,499.

A district with a dozen kids in an entire grade level has very different staffing and building needs than a district with more than a dozen elementary schools. The transportation costs of sprawling districts with few students can be enormous.

Yet it is essential that all students have access to a good education, or what Kansas courts have termed “an adequate” education.

While the governor’s plan is for districts to retain the funding they currently have, his policy director added a caveat: Schools with declining enrollments could get less money. While this is expected and often appropriate in normal circumstances, the challenges of rural or urban schools can often mean that even with declining enrollments, costs remain the same or even increase.

Still, Brownback should be applauded for taking on a long-overdue revision and for a guiding principle that once all schools are adequately funded, local populations should have the right to increase their own taxes to pay for education that goes beyond adequate.

As Jean Schodorf, a Wichita Republican and chair of the Kansas Legislative Educational Planning Committee said recently, regarding the proposal, “The devil’s in the dollars.”

The challenge is ensuring Kansas education doesn’t simply limp by, but thrives in the years to come — and does so in an equitable fashion. Clearly, the time is right to address the funding formula.