Location: Halstead, Kansas, United States

This is my seventh year at Halstead which is also where I live with my wife and my soon to be two year old daughter.

Monday, January 03, 2005


The Kansas Supreme Courtt ruled that the current system of financing schools is flawed and needs to be overhauled. It said while there was no intentional discrimination, large schools with large immigrant, minority and special ed populations are not funded adequately based on current accreditation system.

What does this mean?

It is clear increased funding will be required; however, increased funding may not in and of itself make the financing formula constitutionally suitable. The equity with which the funds are distributed and the actual costs of education, including appropriate levels of administrative costs, are critical factors for the legislature to consider in achieving a suitable formula for financing education. By contrast, the present financing formula increases disparities in funding, not based on a cost analysis, but rather on political and other factors not relevant to education.

The court made a wise decision in keeping jurisdiction and allowing the 2005 legislature time to act in this matter before handing the case back to District Court Judge Bullock. This will give the legislature time to make suitable changes.

What is the legislature does nothing?

Its failure to act in the face of this opinion would require this court to direct action to be taken to carry out that responsibility.

FOR DISCUSSION: How do you think the legislature will respond to increase funding?


Post a Comment

<< Home

Free Web Counter
Web Site Counter