School board leaders tell K-12 budget committee special-education shortfalls are forcing districts to cut elsewhere

Leah Fleiter, a representative of the Kansas Association of School Boards, told the Committee on K-12 Education Budget that KASB members spent the day in Topeka advocating a legislative policy adopted by locally elected school board members across the state. "KASB is a 5 0 1 c 4 organization that represents 2 85 school districts in the state of Kansas, and that's about 2,000 locally elected school board members," Fleiter said, noting her organization’s legislative committee sets the association’s priorities.

Board members from a range of districts described how incomplete state special-education funding is affecting other parts of their budgets. "We have nearly 25% of our students in Special Ed," a Topeka Public Schools board representative said, and added that her district was "backfilling nearly $43,000,000 over what we're given by the state." Jason Sullen, a board member from South Brown County USD 430, and Jared Meitler, board president of USD 323 Rock Creek, said rapidly growing districts face added pressure to pay for space and Career and Technical Education (CTE) expansion while covering special-education shortfalls.

Multiple board members and legislators discussed staffing and recruitment problems tied to funding. Jason Sullen said districts are paying more for benefits and trying to retain special-education staff who can earn more in general-education roles or outside education. A USD 373 board member, Ian Long, said his district’s special-education spending is roughly 40% of base state aid and local taxes, and that shortfalls limit districts’ ability to offer competitive pay and training. "If you make a promise to a kid and you break it, what does that child learn? The promises don't mean anything," Long said, imploring legislators to follow through on funding commitments.

Legislators pressed for specifics. Representative Poskin asked for clarification about legal obligations, saying, "we don't have the option not to serve any special ed student who has an IEP in place no matter what it costs. Is that correct?" Board members replied that districts must provide the services demanded by students' IEPs, even when state funding lags, and that districts often hire outside specialists such as speech pathologists at higher cost because those professionals can earn more in the private sector.

Speakers also described curriculum and local-control tensions. Several board members said they support structured literacy professional development (LETRS) and noted the state-funded shift toward science-of-reading materials, but they warned that mandated timing for adopting curricula can disrupt district budget cycles. One board member described the cost of adopting district-wide curricula as "millions" and said that being required to buy or rotate resources on a state timetable can force other purchases to be delayed.

Board members and committee members discussed multiple possible legislative responses, including continued incremental funding increases, changes to pension or retirement rules to ease rehiring retired teachers, and reconsideration of special-education funding formulas for rapidly growing districts. Representative McDonald and others asked what the state could do to aid recruitment and retention; board members repeatedly returned to fully funding special education and addressing KPERS/retirement and salary competitiveness as central needs.

The committee recorded a brief formal action at the meeting's close: a motion to accept the minutes of a prior meeting was moved, seconded by Representative McNorton, and approved on a voice vote. The meeting then adjourned.

The exchange combined an organized KASB advocacy visit with district-level comments that illustrated how funding shortfalls, hiring difficulties and curriculum mandates interact in both large urban districts and small rural districts.