The results of a new study show Kansas lawmakers face a more monumental task than they could have imagined in coming up with enough money to adequately fund the state’s public schools.

The findings of a study into school financing, which was commissioned by conservatives in the Legislature, were presented to lawmakers Friday. The study offered two scenarios, ranging from $1.8 billion to $2.1 billion in new funding, for the Legislature to consider.

The numbers came as somewhat of a shock to lawmakers, especially considering that the lead consultant — Texas A & M University professor Lori Taylor — was chosen specifically by conservatives who question the correlation between spending and educational outcomes.

“I’ll admit, I’m surprised,” House Democratic Leader Jim Ward, of Wichita, one of the early skeptics of the study, said after hearing a summary of the report. “But I’m really happy that it really validated what happened in (earlier) studies, which is, money matters. For better outcomes, you’ve got to spend money.”

There were questions about the enrollment figures in the study, and Taylor is expected to provide a revised report to legislators today. But the numbers are not expected to change significantly. Suffice to say, the previous plan to work up to $600 million per year in new funding won’t cut it.

The Kansas Supreme Court has ruled that state funding for education is inadequate and has given the state until June 30 to implement a plan that increases funding to adequate levels and distributes the funding equitably to all districts. A court hearing to review the initial plan is scheduled for April 30, just six weeks away.

The researchers laid out two scenarios for meeting the court’s standard, based on how the Kansas State Department of Education groups scores on state tests into performance levels.

Both scenarios call for attaining a 95 percent graduation rate within five years, up from the current 87 percent.

The first calls for 90 percent of all students to perform at “Level 2” or better, which indicates that they are at grade level but not necessarily on track to be ready for college by the time they graduate. That cost was estimated at nearly $1.8 billion in additional funding per year.

The second scenario calls for having at least 60 percent of all students score at “Level 3” or better on those tests, indicating they are on track for college readiness. The cost of the second scenario was estimated at just less than $2.1 billion in additional funding.

There is still much to be debated on the school funding front and not much time to do it in. But one thing is clear: There is no way to fund schools on the cheap. The bill from decades of underfunding schools has come due, and surely even the state’s most conservative members understand that now.