Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the School Finance Gannon topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
KSDE staff walks committee through 14 years of Gannon litigation and where school finance stands today
Summary
Legislative staff and KSDE walked the Committee on K‑12 Education Budget through the history of the Gannon school‑finance litigation, the legislature’s phased funding response and the Supreme Court’s eventual dismissal, and reminded members of the statute and timeline the committee will need to address before the formula sunsets in 2027.
Nick Myers, the Legislature’s revisor who briefed the committee, traced the Gannon litigation from its 2010 start through multiple Supreme Court rulings and the legislature’s multi‑year funding response.
Myers opened by citing the constitutional basis for the suits: “Article 6, section 6(b) requires suitable provision for finance, and it requires the legislature to provide suitable provision for finance,” he told the Committee on K‑12 Education Budget.
The timeline matters because the court repeatedly reviewed whether the state’s school‑finance structure and implementation were reasonably calculated to meet required student outcomes. Myers summarized the court’s sequence: initial equal‑protection and adequacy litigation, the court’s articulation of adequacy tests, review of the two‑year block‑grant approach (rejected in Gannon 4), and later evaluation of the weighted formula enacted by the Legislature. The Legislature used what Myers described as a Montoy “safe harbor” plan — a five‑year phased‑in base‑aid increase combined with targeted funds — to bring funding closer to the courts’ expectations.
John Hess, director of fiscal services and operations for the Kansas State Department of Education (KSDE), and KSDE staff discussed the mechanics: targeted weightings for at‑risk and special education, building‑level calculations, preschool and kindergarten funding, and the CPIU inflation adjustments the statute prescribes after the phase‑in. Myers said the Supreme Court ultimately found the Legislature’s later adjustments sufficient and in Gannon 7 that the state had “substantially complied” with prior mandates; the court retained jurisdiction while the phased funding completed and the case was dismissed on February 6, 2024.
Committee members and staff flagged the next deadline: the current school‑finance statute includes an expiration sunset that requires action by the Legislature before 2027 if a new or modified formula is to be in place. The committee chair said the committee should avoid returning the question to the courts and emphasized the need to finalize a replacement before the sunset. "We've gotta approve a new one before 2027 when it expires," the chair said.
Why it matters: the Gannon litigation and the Legislature’s response shaped the current funding formula, the distribution of targeted dollars, and the procedural expectation that the state track inflation and caseload changes. Committee members were reminded that implementation details (how funds are distributed and counted) were as important to the court as the statutory structure itself.
The committee heard that while the litigation has concluded, its legacy remains in statutory base‑aid schedules, targeted weights and ongoing CPIU adjustments — and in the court’s instruction that legislators “show their work” on how funding is calculated and maintained.
Looking ahead, KSDE staff and revisor staff said the committee will need to monitor caseload estimates, the statutory phase‑in and CPIU adjustments, and the 2027 sunset timeline as the committee begins budget and statutory work this session.
