Dave_Trabert (Dave Trabert)

Follow

Comment history

Kansas governor signs bill overhauling civil service system

Actually, Governing magazine says they didn't include all government employment in the report. "The following table shows, for select job classification types, the number of full-time equivalent state and local government workers per 10,000 residents in 2012. Data for other smaller functions of government are not shown."

I added up the job categories they list; the total is 300 which is very close to their total of non-educational employees of 294...probably rounding. Governing uses the same sources as KPI; the difference is that we count all employees. http://www2.census.gov/govs/apes/12st...

192,890 fulltime equivalent state and local government employees translates to 668.5 employees per 10,000 residents for 2012. Kansas has 22% more state government employees on that basis and 32% more local government employees.

May 15, 2015 at 4:07 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Kansas governor signs bill overhauling civil service system

First, income taxes were reduced on everyone, not just the wealthy. KPI has opposed sales tax and other tax increases because Kansas has a spending problem, not a revenue problem. Tax revenue is still ahead of the ten-year inflation trend and the gap is expected to widen in the next two years.

Second, we did not make the kind of promises or predictions you cite. We told the Legislature that they would have to reduce the cost of government from the very beginning.

May 15, 2015 at 2:08 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Kansas governor signs bill overhauling civil service system

Layoffs aren't necessary. Gradual reductions can occur naturally through attrition and retirement.

May 15, 2015 at 11:14 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Kansas governor signs bill overhauling civil service system

FYI, Kansas has 22% more state government employees than the national average as measured by employees per 10,000 residents. See page 16 here http://www.kansaspolicy.org/ResearchC...

May 15, 2015 at 8:52 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

KCK superintendent tells court new funding mechanism is ineffective and is costing schools millions of dollars

That isn't efficient...it is getting more money than needed.

May 9, 2015 at 8 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

KCK superintendent tells court new funding mechanism is ineffective and is costing schools millions of dollars

Your math is off by a factor of 10. It is $30.2 million...3.02 million.

May 8, 2015 at 9:29 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

KCK superintendent tells court new funding mechanism is ineffective and is costing schools millions of dollars

First, I was answering a question posted by someone else. But for the record, the data shows that taxpayers gave the Lawrence district $30.2 million more than it spent between 2005 and 2014.

May 8, 2015 at 3:14 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

KCK superintendent tells court new funding mechanism is ineffective and is costing schools millions of dollars

Not twisting the truth at all. Schools are getting what the Legislature promised. The law does not automatically give schools more money; that has to be approved by the Legislature.

The Supreme Court did NOT order the state to spend more. it said doing so would resolve the equity issue but it also said the state could change the way equalization was calculated and NOT have to spend more. The Legislature CHOSE to spend more.

May 8, 2015 at 3:12 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

KCK superintendent tells court new funding mechanism is ineffective and is costing schools millions of dollars

No, the Supreme Court did NOT order the state to spend more. it said doing so would resolve the equity issue but it also said the state could change the way equalization was calculated and NOT have to spend more. The Legislature CHOSE to spend more.

May 8, 2015 at 3:09 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

KCK superintendent tells court new funding mechanism is ineffective and is costing schools millions of dollars

The Legislature promised $134 million more...$109 million in LOB in $25 million in Capital Outlay...and that is what schools were given.

To use your analogy, schools were making $50,000 and thought they deserved $59,000 so they planned to spend what they wanted instead of the $53,000 they were told they would receive.

May 8, 2015 at 1:37 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Previous