WWW arkcity.net

By JOHN MILBURN
Associated Press Writer

TOPEKA -- The Kansas Supreme Court on Friday approved lawmakers' plan to boost school funding by $541 million over three years and dismissed the lawsuit that had forced dramatic increases spending on public schools.

The court, in a 4-2 decision, concluded that legislators substantially complied with previous orders to increase spending on schools. While it dismissed the lawsuit, the court acknowledged it was leaving for another day the question of whether the new school finance law will continue to fulfill legislators' duty under the state constitution to fund a suitable education for every child.

In the majority opinion, the court said the only issue before it was whether the funding plan complied with its orders. The court also said that it had to be mindful of ''the realities of the legislative process.''

''It is new legislation and, if challenged, it's constitutionality must be litigated in a new action,'' the court's majority wrote in an unsigned opinion.

The decision was a major victory for legislators and Gov. Kathleen Sebelius, who had hoped the justices would see the plan passed this year as a good faith effort and end the lawsuit. The increase, once phased in, would boost public school funding for the state's 296 school districts and 450,000 students to about $3.5 billion.

In a brief statement before the opinion was released, Chief Justice Kay McFarland said that because of the plan children will be better educated, benefiting the state.

''This case is not about winners and losers,'' McFarland said. ''It is about the children of Kansas.''

The lawsuit was filed in 1999 by parents and administrators in Dodge City and Salina, and even with the infusion of the new money into education, they still believed that over the next three years, the state would be almost $1 billion short of meeting schools' needs.

One issue for the court -- and educators, Sebelius and legislators -- was how long the lawsuit should continue. In a separate concurring opinion, Justice Eric Rosen said that if the ''target'' for a constitutionally adequate education kept changing, ''this case could continue into perpetuity.''

''Such a process would extend into an indefinite future, and the children of Kansas need a resolution of this matter now,'' Rosen wrote.

Justices Carol Beier and Marla Luckert dissented. Writing their opinion, Beier said she would prefer to return the case to district court, keeping it alive.

Beier wrote that she was ''unwilling to graft a 'good enough for government work' phrase''' into an interpretation of the Kansas Constitution.

''The appropriate way to respond is not to throw the plaintiffs out of court,'' Beier wrote.

Justice Lawton Nuss did not participate in the decision, having removed himself from the case in April after disclosing that he had discussed school finance issues with two senators.

The court's decision came three weeks before students began returning to their classrooms -- and as local boards of education tried to finish work on budgets for the school year. Also, the ruling was only four days before Democratic and Republican primaries.

Legislators this year did not approve any proposals for raising new revenues, and projections show the new spending would lead to a budget shortfall by 2009.

''Now the Legislature can get on with its other business, as well as education,'' said House Speaker Doug Mays, R-Topeka. ''Just because the suit has been dismissed doesn't mean the Legislature will ignore the issue.''

Education Commissioner Bob Corkins said: ''This decision clearly endorses that the Legislature is putting the money where it's needed. I fully expect the Legislature to fulfill the commitment it's made through this three-year plan.''

The court's actions had led some lawmakers, particularly conservatives Republicans, to discuss reining in the court, which they felt had overstepped its authority.

''I still think there will be some thought given to how we pick our judges, especially those on the appellate court,'' Mays said. ''I don't know if there will be the same fixation as there has been.''

The justices had the power to appoint a special master to oversee such information gathering and make recommendations to the Supreme Court. That's happened in other states, including Arkansas, but Attorney General Phill Kline once decried the idea as creating a ''benevolent dictatorship.''

Last year, the court ruled that the state had spent too little on its schools and had let political considerations dictate how the money was distributed.

The court also said legislators must ensure that the education system continually improves.

Court orders led to a special session last summer and a $290 million increase in school spending for the 2005-06 academic year. However, the court allowed such an increase ''for interim purposes'' and told legislators more money would be required.

The plan approved this year increases aid to all districts, but it also targets those with high percentages of poor students and students who are at risk of failing academically.
------
School finance case is Montoy et al. v. State of Kansas, et al., No. 92,032.
------
On the Net:
Kansas Supreme Court: http://www.kscourts.org
Kansas Legislature: http://www.kslegislature.org