WWW arkcity.net

By DAVE SEATON
Staff Writer

Kansans face a major question about the future of their public schools, an official of the Kansas Association of School Boards said here last week.

Mark Tallman, the association's lobbyist, raised the question: "What do we want our schools to do, and are we willing to pay for it?"

Tallman spoke to a group of about 20 at Winfield High School last Friday evening. His program was titled, "What Every Candidate Should Know About Public Education."

He was introduced by Tim Aiken, a member of the Derby school board and the association's representative for this area. Aiken was an unsuccessful candidate for the State Board of Education in 2004.

State board members are elected from 10 districts and set education policy statewide. Steve Abrams of Arkansas City chairs the state board.

The association that employs Tallman is made up of local boards of education.

Several candidates for the Legislature showed up Friday, including Rep. Ed Trimmer of Winfield, Vince Wetta of Wellington and Jeff Boone of Derby, all Democrats.

Republican Rep. Kasha Kelley of Arkansas City was there, as was Sen. Greta Goodwin, D-Winfield. Carmen Gonzales represented GOP House candidate Ryan Rising of Winfield.

Tallman took his audience back to the state Constitution. Article 6 of that document says the Legislature "shall make suitable provision for finance of the educational interests of the state," Tallman pointed out, and it calls for the "educational, vocational and scientific improvement" of Kansas children.

This is the crux of the current school finance lawsuit, Tallman implied. The Supreme Court looked at the state's own standards and found the 2005 Legislature's funding actions inadequate when it came to meeting them.

The court then directed lawmakers to try again, and they came up with more money this year.

Attorneys argued before the high court last week over the 2006 law, which authorizes $466 million in new state school aid. The question was whether the law met the standards of equity and adequacy adopted by the Legislature itself, Tallman said.

There was also the question whether the law was based on estimated costs or political logrolling, he added. Tallman did not speculate on the outcome.

But he pointed to several items the law did not include. The law is not indexed to inflation, he said, and makes no provision for increased performance standards, although state policy calls for them. So does the federal "No Child Left Behind" law, he pointed out.

The Kansas Constitution calls for "improvement," too, he reminded his audience. The $466 million law also relies heavily on local option budgets (LOBs), Tallman said, which can be unfair, since they are difficult or impossible for poorer districts to use fully.

The court has criticized LOBs as inequitable. Tallman also said $466 million was not enough to cover the bill's three-year term.

As a court-watcher, Tallman, whose title is Assistant Executive Director for Advocacy, said time would tell.

"The longer it takes to get an answer," he said, "the less likely it is the court will reject what the Legislature has done."