Revisor briefs Kansas Senate education committee on Article 6 and limits on K‑12 authority

Tamara Lawrence, Revisor of Statutes, told the Kansas Senate Committee on Education that Article 6 of the state Constitution defines separate constitutional roles for the legislature, the State Board of Education and local school boards and that those roles must be harmonized as lawmakers prepare to address school finance.

Lawrence told the committee: "I'm going to provide a broad overview of the constitutional roles and obligations of the legislature, the State Board of Education, and local boards of education with regard to the public education system in this state and how they intersect under their constitution, specifically in Article 6." She said the court and Attorney General opinions inform the application of those provisions.

The Revisor summarized several legal points the committee will need to consider as it works on school finance and related policy. Article 2 vests legislative power in the Legislature to pass, amend and repeal laws; Article 6 requires the Legislature to "provide for intellectual, educational, vocational and scientific improvement by establishing and maintaining public schools, educational institutions and related activities," Lawrence said. She noted Article 6, section 6b requires the Legislature to make "suitable provision for finance of the educational interests of the state," which the Kansas Supreme Court has interpreted to require both adequacy and equity in funding.

Lawrence said the court has described separate legal tests (citing the Gannon litigation) to determine whether school finance satisfies equity (reasonably equal access and substantially similar educational opportunity) and adequacy (reasonably calculated to enable students to meet required learning capacities). She also said the State Board of Education "shall have general supervision of the K‑12 public education system" and that the Kansas Supreme Court has characterized the Board's general supervisory authority as "self‑executing," meaning the Board can exercise some powers without further legislation when acting within its mission.

At the same time, Lawrence said the court has held local boards' constitutional authority is not fully self‑executing the way the State Board's can be, so local boards generally act under statutory and regulatory frameworks enacted by the Legislature. Lawrence cautioned the distinction is not absolute: "The legislature may enact legislation to facilitate or assist in the operation of the self executing provision so long as that legislation is in harmony with and not in derogation of the constitutional provision," she said, quoting court guidance.

Committee members pressed for examples and clarifications. Senator Dinah Sykes asked whether any legislative enactments have been declared unconstitutional under Article 6 sections addressing the State Board or local boards; Lawrence responded she would need to check specifics but later noted that, to date, the committee's materials do not show an enactment declared unconstitutional under those particular sections. Senator Pat Petty asked whether the committee should expect litigation over proposed changes; the chair, Senator Renee Erickson, said the committee's work on school finance will require care and clarity but did not indicate a formal challenge was pending.

Why it matters: the committee heard this briefing as part of preparatory work for a required rewrite of the state school funding formula by July 1, 2027. Lawmakers said they want a shared baseline understanding of constitutional limits and responsibilities before drafting or passing statute that could affect State Board or local board authority.

The committee scheduled follow‑up work and additional briefings on court cases and statutory citations so senators can identify where legislative action must be coordinated with constitutional duties.