TOPEKA, Kan. (AP) — The Kansas Supreme Court signed off Friday on an increase in spending on public schools that the Democratic governor pushed through the Republican-controlled Legislature, but the justices refused to close the protracted education funding lawsuit that prompted their decision.

Today's KS Supreme Court decision was a victory for Kansas and our kids. Educating our kids is not just one of the best ways to address challenges facing our state, it's also our moral and constitutional obligation. #ksleg pic.twitter.com/Xe0OX8prP0

— Governor Laura Kelly (@GovLauraKelly) June 14, 2019

The new school finance law boosted funding roughly $90 million a year and was enacted in April with bipartisan support. The court ruled that the new money was enough to satisfy the Kansas Constitution but also said it was keeping the underlying lawsuit open to ensure that the state keeps its funding promises.

“The State has substantially complied with our mandate,” the court said in its unsigned opinion, referencing a decision last year that the state wasn’t spending enough.

Gov. Laura Kelly had hoped the Supreme Court would end the lawsuit, which was filed by four local school districts in 2010. The districts’ attorneys argued the new law would not provide enough new money after the 2019-20 school year and wanted the court to order additional increases.

Kansas spends more than $4 billion a year on its public schools — about $1 billion more than it did during the 2013-14 school year — because of the court’s decisions. Some Republican lawmakers, particularly conservatives, have complained that the court has infringed on lawmakers’ power under the state constitution to make spending decisions.

Two justices made comments during a hearing in May that suggested they were looking for a way to end the case. Justice Eric Rosen asked from the bench, “Where does this ever end?”

But Justice Dan Biles, a former State Board of Education attorney, told the state’s solicitor general that the four districts sued after lawmakers “reneged” on funding promises and, “I don’t have a lot of sympathy for the idea of dismissing this lawsuit.”

Keeping the case open makes it easier for the districts to pursue complaints that the state has broken its promises. They would not have to file a new lawsuit and go through a lower-court trial before seeking relief from the state’s highest court.

The school funding decisions made the court a political issue, helping to fuel the rise of unsuccessful campaigns by conservatives in 2014 and 2016 to remove six of the seven justices. Four of those justices were appointed by Democratic Gov. Kathleen Sebelius and the other two, by moderate GOP Gov. Bill Graves. The seventh justice was appointed by conservative Republican Gov. Sam Brownback.

The Supreme Court ruled previously that under the Kansas Constitution, the state must spend enough money and distribute the dollars fairly enough to finance a suitable education for every child. In an order last year, the court said a 2018 law promising future spending increases wasn’t sufficient because it did not properly account for inflation.

This year’s law contained Kelly’s proposal for an inflation adjustment, which was based on recommendations from the Republican-controlled state school board. She and other state officials hoped the broad, bipartisan support for the measure would win over the court.

The four school districts argued that the state botched what was a straightforward math problem. They contend the solution requires increasingly larger amounts of money each year through the 2022-23 school year. Under their calculations, the increase for that year would be about $360 million instead of the roughly $90 million under Kelly’s proposal.

————
TOPEKA, Kan. (AP) — The Kansas Supreme Court is preparing to rule on whether the state is providing enough money to its public schools under a new education funding law.

The high court says it will issue its latest decision at 9:30 a.m. Friday in a lawsuit filed by four local school districts in 2010. The court has ruled six times in less than six years that funding isn’t sufficient under the Kansas Constitution.

A law enacted in April will increase the state’s education funding by roughly $90 million a year. Kansas spends more than $4 billion a year on its public schools, or about $1 billion more than it did during the 2013-14 school year.

The school districts argue that the increase will not be enough after the 2019-20 school year.

HUTCHINSON, Kan. — The Reno County Commission failed to get the supermajority for a wind farm project to proceed. Commissioners did vote 2-1 for the conditional use permit for the proposed NextEra Energy wind farm. But because of the protest petitions, commissioners needed a supermajority for the project. The company will not be granted the permit.

The commission agreed Tuesday that 46% of the petitions received were more than the 20% threshold required to force a unanimous vote on the permit.

Both Commission Chair Bob Bush and Commissioner Ron Sellers voted in favor of the project with Bush calling it the biggest project for Reno County since Siemens announced it wanted to build in Hutchinson. However, Ron Hirst voted against it saying he didn’t feel it fit with the Reno County Comprehensive Plan. He also noted that he’s not against wind energy, but didn’t like the location in the southeast part of Reno County.

The company wants to build as many as 83 wind turbines in that area but needed the conditional use permit for zoned areas of the county.

With the vote, it will now be up to the company to decide what its next move will be. The company could file an appeal through Reno County District Court.

By BRENT MARTIN

St. Joseph Post

A big win for the greater Kansas City area, one which could benefit the entire four-state region.

The United States Department of Agriculture has announced it will move its Economic Research Service and the National Institute of Food and Agriculture from Washington, D.C. to Kansas City.

Agriculture Secretary Sonny Perdue says it’s a natural fit for the two USDA branches.

“The Kansas City region has proven itself to be a hub for all things agriculture and it is a booming city in America’s heartland,” Perdue tells reporters during a conference call. “There’s already a significant presence of USDA and federal government employees in the region, including the Kansas City Ag Bank, Federal Reserve.”

The USDA estimates it will save $300 million over a 15-year period by moving from DC to Kansas City. More than $26 million in incentives have been offered USDA to make the move. The savings will be plowed back into research, according to the USDA.

Perdue says USDA hopes to complete the move by the end of September.

Northern Missouri Congressman Sam Graves is pleased with the decision.

“Oh, I was very happy about it,” Graves tells St. Joseph Post. “This is something that we’ve been working on for some time and then Kansas City was announced as one of three (finalists) and obviously there was a lot more excitement and, now, being picked; it’s a great fit. It’s good for the agency, because it’s going to make it more efficient. It brings those agencies closer to the people that they obviously serve and so I think it’s just a great win for everyone.”

Graves expects Missouri to reap benefits from the decision, but adds Kansas, Nebraska, and Iowa should benefit as well.

“A lot of people commute to Kansas City for work and you can go five and six counties deep outside the Kansas City area and it’s going to have a big impact, because there’s just a lot of jobs and they’re good paying jobs,” Graves says. “To get them out of Washington, D.C. and into the heartland, it’s going to make them a lot more efficient.”

The USDA announced in August it would move the two agencies, the only two of its branches wholly located in Washington, D.C. The Department of Agriculture heard from 136 locations and narrowed those applying to three finalists:  Kansas City, the state of Indiana, and the research triangle in North Carolina.

No specific location has been chosen, yet.