By Paul Soutar
January 5, 2010

(KansasWatchdog) WICHITA, Kan. - In its first meeting of the New Year the Wichita School Board voted to support the effort by Schools for Fair Funding, “to reopen the Montoy litigation and/or initiate new litigation against the State of Kansas…”

The vote Monday evening by board members of Unified School District 259, the state’s largest district, was unanimous and will cost as much as $250,000, $5 per pupil, for fiscal year 2010.

Former Wichita School Board member Karl Peterjohn was one of eight people who spoke against the resolution. He asked the board if the fee to join the lawsuit was a one-time or annual cost. “I believe that the total cost of school lawsuits that sue for higher taxes needs to be included in the record. I would appreciate an answer to this question,” he said.

The text of the resolution says the district, “shall pay its annual assessments to Schools for Fair Funding, Inc., as they come due, in an amount not to exceed $5 per FTE (full time equivalent) pupil for fiscal year 2010.” Board member Lynn Rogers said he doubted the cost would be that high.

“There is never enough money for the classrooms but there always seems to be plenty of money for lobbying, and sadly, lawsuits,” Peterjohn said in his prepared statement before the board.

Peterjohn, who said he was speaking to the board as a citizen, taxpayer and parent, not as a member of the Sedgwick County Commission, referenced data from the district’s approved 2010 budget.

“Four years ago the Wichita public schools spent almost $477 million, or about $10,535 in local, state and federal tax funds per FTE pupil. Last year the district spent almost $574 million or about $12,590 million per pupil. This board passed a budget of over $620 million that would grow this figure to over $13,000 per pupil — these figures are all taken from your 2010 adopted budget. That is an increase over last year’s spending of over 8 percent,” he said.

Peterjohn said the Wichita public schools’ $620 million budget is being reduced by $34 million, according to news reports of state budget cuts. “If the district loses $34 million that will reduce the budget to $586 million. The last time I checked, $586 million is still more than $574 million. That is still a 2 percent increase over last year’s spending,” he said.

“Let’s not use part of this spending growth on more lawsuits and litigation. We are a democratic republic but these lawsuits are in the process of turning Kansas into a judicial oligarchy. This is not a governmental legacy that I want to leave for my children, my family or my community,” Peterjohn concluded.

Rogers called Peterjohn back to the lectern and asked if there is ever an appropriate time for government to sue government and specifically if the Sedgwick County Commission, on which Peterjohn serves, is involved in any litigation. Peterjohn replied that the county is often sued and that litigation is occasionally appropriate, but, “the devil is in the details.” He also said it was his opinion that the Kansas Supreme Court’s decision in Montoy was a “disgrace.”

The only person to address the board in favor of the resolution was United Teachers of Wichita President Larry Landwehr. He signed up to speak to the board shortly before the meeting started and was penciled in as the last speaker.

Landwehr said the board would be making a bold step for students in asking the state Legislature to fulfill their constitutional requirement under Montoy to adequately fund schools. He blamed the Legislature for not restoring revenue lost in the recession by stopping tax cuts. Landwehr said the decision to join the lawsuit was a necessary step.

Bob Weeks was one of eight people to speak against the resolution. He told board members the suit would lead to a legislative battle between schools and state services agencies, a battle on Kansas taxpayers.

“Many Kansans are without jobs or are suffering economic hardship. To ask them to pay more simply because schools are facing a 3.4 percent cut seems like the schools are not willing to bear their share of the burden we are all asked to accept,” he said.

The resolution’s text says the statewide Base State Aid Per Pupil was cut by 9.5 percent. Weeks reminded the board that BSAPP represents less than one-third of Wichita school funding. When all funding sources are considered the cut statewide is about 3.4 percent. “This focus on base state aid per pupil alone is misleading,” Weeks said.

Weeks cited reporting by the Kansas Policy Institute -- the parent organization for KansasReporter and KansasWatchdog -- that unencumbered cash balances statewide have grown by 53 percent over the last four years. “For the Wichita school district, these balances have grown from $74 million to $94 million over the last four years,” Weeks said.

Weeks asked the board to consider alternatives, including suggestions offered by State Board of Education member Walt Chappell and the Kansas Policy Institute, before entering into a lawsuit that would lead to a corrosive environment in Kansas politics.

Several speakers opposed to the resolution asked board members to consider other options. John Lay said his own business is being hit hard by the recession and he’s sympathetic to the funding issue but, “the last thing I would consider is suing a customer over canceled orders.”

Greg Dye said he walked to school in Wichita and asked why the district spends $24 million annually on bus service. “The kids need exercise. There’s no reason why they can’t walk… Buses don’t teach anything,” he said, adding that the board’s citation of constitutional requirements for funding made the constitution something for convenience and, “not looked at unless something like this comes up.”

“You’re suing me,” said Dye, who is retired. “You’re suing the citizens that voted for you to be in office. I’m going to go broke if you keep suing me.”

Dianna Connor said she sent a daughter to private school for about one third of the per-pupil spending for a public education today. She asked the board, “Is this money you already have or are you going to ask for more?”

The printed agenda for the board meeting indicates funding for the resolution will come from the district’s local option budget, a property tax set by the school board that is in addition to the statewide property tax collected to fund education.

Bennie Bowman, who said he’s lived in the district for over 50 years, said, he found it very offensive that that the district, as a member of SFFF, was bringing a lawsuit against him and everyone in this district and the state.

Bowman reminded the board members of the sovereignty of the people. “They have the power through their legislators.They’re sent to Topeka with our powers to make laws. They have the exclusive authority.”

Bowman said the very basis of an elected government is that only the legislature, not the courts, has power to collect taxes and distribute money. Bowman referenced the separation of powers doctrine found in both the Kansas Constitution and U.S. Constitution.

The state Legislature bowed to the state Supreme Court’s order setting school funding levels in 2005.

John Todd, a Wichita resident and a local volunteer coordinator for Americans for Prosperity  agreed with Bowman’s assessment and told the board, “The use of taxpayer money by a local governmental body to threaten or to initiate litigation against state taxpayers – us -- is an inappropriate use of public funds,” Todd said.

Rogers, the only board member to comment after public comments closed, said what the district is facing isn’t a small cut. “When we talk about the base state aid per pupil it’s because that’s what affects our general fund. That’s what we have control over and what pays our bills,” he said, adding that the district is seeking redress in the judicial branch because the state Legislature did not plan for proper funding while districts face additional unfunded mandates. “We can’t keep adding requirements and expect to do that for the same funding,” he said.

In response to public sentiment that the district shouldn’t sue, Rogers said his grandmother used to say, “What’s good for the goose is good for the gander.” He said the state Legislature has sued the federal government, the governor and even themselves. “It’s part of the legislative and judicial process,” he said.

Rogers said there are no simple decisions in the current situation, “if there were, we would have done it long ago.”