Williams defends bill forming new K-12 school task force controlled by legislators
BY: TIM CARPENTER
Kansas Reflector
TOPEKA — Opposition emerged from Kansas educators to a bill terminating a controversial special education task force and replacing it with a new task force dominated by state legislators who would be responsible for a lengthy study of changes to the state’s multibillion-dollar K-12 school finance formula.
House Republicans, who have registered frustration with the taxpayer cost and academic effectiveness of the state’s current school aid formula, proposed formation of the replacement task force. The bill tied to the plan would grant GOP lawmakers power to appoint six of 11 voting members of the task force and control selection of the panel’s chairman. In addition to selecting four legislators for the task force, two members chosen by the Senate president and House speaker must be parents of students in K-12 schools.
House and Senate Democrats would hold two seats on the task force. One member of would be drawn from the Kansas State Board of Education. Two school district superintendents — one from a rural district, one from an urban district — would be appointed by the state Board of Education.
Stakes are high given the state’s K-12 public schools educate nearly 500,000 students and receive $4.6 billion annually in funding from the state treasury.
Olathe schools superintendent Brent Yeager, a member of the special education task force targeted for elimination, told House members Monday that dissolving the special education panel would be a mistake. He is superintendent of the state’s second-largest district with 29,000 students, including 6,000 who take part in special education programs.
“Special education is exceptionally complex and nuanced,” Yeager said. “I fear that if this issue becomes just a part of what another task force is charged to do, we will not allocate an appropriate amount of time to study this issue.”
GOP Rep. Kristey Williams of Augusta, who serves as chairwoman of the House K-12 Budget Committee, said she had the bill drafted in a way that guaranteed termination of the special education task force. She said the existing task force’s responsibilities would be assumed by the new task force with a much broader mandate to recalibrate the entire public education funding formula scheduled to sunset July 1, 2027.
The current school funding formula was a consequence of lawsuits filed by school districts against the state. Those cases were ultimately resolved by the Kansas Supreme Court, which repeatedly found the Legislature’s spending on schools in violation of Article 6 of the Kansas Constitution.
Williams said she was justified in introducing a version of House Bill 2594 that guaranteed legislators held a majority of seats on the new education task force.
“We’re responsible,” said Williams, referring to House and Senate members. “We take the votes. We’re the ones that the school districts sue when they say they haven’t gotten enough money. And, it is the Kansas Supreme Court that put the responsibility on us.”
‘Do what’s best’
Ann Mah, a Topeka representative on the state Board of Education, said experts in school finance, special education, English as a second language and the education of at-risk students should be at the table with legislators as they worked to reshape the school funding formula.
Mah said it was Williams who sold the 2023 Legislature on the value of a task force devoting to finding answers for financing special education in public schools. It was allowed to meet one time in January, when members declined to elect Williams as chairwoman. Task force members voted to recommend the 2024 Legislature approve a four-year plan adding $82 million annually to school district appropriations for gifted and disabled students.
In response, Williams introduced the bill to kill the special education task force.
“At one point, madame chair, it was your contention that the special education task force was the answer to figuring out that future funding,” Mah said. “You can eliminate the special education task force in favor of a less-qualified team or you can do what’s best for Kansas kids and keep the special education task force in place.”
Tim Graham, representing the Kansas National Education Association, said the organization opposed the bill because it was impossible to endorse Williams’ preference for excluding classroom teachers to the new task force.
“KNEA has been very vocal about our disappointment with not being included in discussions regarding issues that impact public education,” Graham said. “This consistent exclusion creates unnecessary hard feelings and disillusionment with the process.”
Potential changes to the Kansas school finance formula would have to be considered by the task force, which would be appointed by September. The Legislature and governor would need to come to agreement on the financial package no later than the 2027 legislative session.
‘Court is not blind’
Mike O’Neal, a former Republican speaker of the Kansas House and a lobbyist with Kansas Policy Institute, said expiration of the current school finance formula was an opportunity to deal with frailties in the state education system. Historic increases in state expenditures on K-12 schools hadn’t solved the Kansas Supreme Court’s concern that too many students were left behind academically.
O’Neal said standardized testing of students in Kansas demonstrated an overall academic decline in public schools despite hundreds of millions in new spending.
“The goal of 75% proficiency remains with virtually no hope of attainment without major adjustments in the direction of education delivery,” he said. “We now know, and we’re certain that the court is not blind to this fact, that simply ordering additional funding was not the solution.”
O’Neal said effective allocation of state aid eluded many school districts. He said at-risk aid was handled poorly and districts adopted debunked reading instructional methods. He said Kansas Policy Institute supported adding teachers to the new task force, but didn’t see a need to continue the special education panel.
“We are experiencing a sad phenomenon of having the quality of a child’s education depend in large part on their zip code,” O’Neal said. “We have predominate or high-density minority districts that are near the bottom in student performance and those students do not have the financial or legal ability to escape their educational plight. This, too, must change.”