No Movement Today; Back to Work Next Week

May 5, 2017 by

The Legislature wrapped up business early today with no progress on the tax issue which is keeping things in limbo.

There have been several tax bills proposed but all pulled back when it was clear from caucus meetings that the votes were not there to pass them.

This is not necessarily bad news. Remember that we are only five days into the veto session and legislators are working to find the “sweet spot” at which a tax bill will raise enough revenue to stabilize the budget and fund our schools and still get enough votes to override an expected veto from Governor Brownback. This will take some time.

In the meantime, it is important for Kansans to let their Senators and Representatives know that it is time to abandon the failed Brownback tax experiment and that they must hold out until the solution fills in the budget holes, provides for KPERS and KDOT, and funds education at a level acceptable under the Gannon decision. What’s the key? Don’t vote for anything less!

The House K-12 Budget Committee meeting for today was cancelled. We expect they will meet again on Monday to pass out HB 2410, the school finance bill.

There had been rumors that they would stay in session through the weekend but the lack of progress on taxes has apparently made that unnecessary. Both Chambers will be back on Monday, convening at 10:00 am.

read more

It’s All About Keeping Your Word

May 4, 2017 by

Legislative Counsel Advises K-12 Budget Committee

Inside the foyer of the Kansas Supreme Court “within these walls the balance of justice weighs equal”

Former Senator Jeff King has been hired as legislative counsel to advise the Legislature, particularly on the school finance issue. King appeared before the K-12 Budget Committee today to discuss the Gannon decision and HB 2410.

There was some presentation as King shared lessons from the 2005 Montoy decision and subsequent legislative actions and his thoughts on the decision in Gannon.

King was then asked a number of questions but we think there were some important takeaways from the discussion.

First, King told the Committee to make sure they provide the funds that are promised. If you say you’re going to give the schools $150 million new dollars each year for five years, vote for a plan that provides the funding. This was the lesson from the Montoy settlement. The Legislature promised several years of funding and then reversed. The Court will not allow that to happen this time.

Secondly, don’t think that the focus in the Gannon decision on the performance of the lowest quartile of students means the amount provided for the other three quartiles is sufficient. The Court did not say it was sufficient. Don’t plan on taking money from the top three quartiles and redirecting it to the lowest quartile.

Finally, build a legislative record that demonstrates how your decisions were reasonably calculated to address the Court ruling and the needs of Kansas school students. Part of King’s job is to help them assemble that record.

The Committee may meet again tomorrow at which time they will consider any other technical amendments to the bill and possibly pass it out of committee. Depending on what else happens in the House and Senate, this could be delayed until Monday.

Tax Decisions Remain Stalled

The challenge of assembling a tax and revenue package that restores stability to the state revenue stream and provides funding both to meet the state budget as a whole and to adequately fund the K-12 education system must be quite difficult.

We have seen several plans float to the surface only to be pulled and sent back for alterations. We also continue to hear more about different factions working to put together a plan to run up the flagpole.

Part of the discussion is whether it is better to rip off the band-aid and have one vote on a big package that does it all or to take several votes on smaller packages that add up. Politically, we believe that ripping off the band-aid is the way to go. Tax votes are always hard so just do what needs to be done in one big vote. The easiest way to fix the problem is to simply repeal the failed Brownback tax experiment and return to the stable system we had in 2012. But that does not appear to be in any of the legislative discussions.

At a minimum, we believe the plan they pass must repeal the glide path to zero, repeal the LLC loophole, and re-establish a progressive three-bracket structure. The plan must be structured to fully fund KPERS, stop sweeping money from the highway fund, and provide for adequate funding of K-12 education to meet the Gannon ruling.

And while we are all frustrated that this has not already been accomplished, we need to remember that today is day four of a potentially 24-day session. There is still plenty of time for them to meet, debate, and craft the appropriate plan.

NEA Statement Regarding Federal Action to Repeal the Affordable Healthcare Act

American Health Care Act plays Robin Hood in reverse

Students and families stand to lose health care, while the law guts protections for people with pre-existing conditions

WASHINGTON – May 04, 2017 –

The U.S. House of Representatives today approved a controversial and deeply flawed plan to repeal the Affordable Care Act. NEA President Lily Eskelsen García issued the following statement regarding passage of the American Health Care Act.

“The American Health Care Act (AHCA) plays Robin Hood in reverse. It fails to deliver better, cheaper health care for all Americans, instead giving massive tax cuts to the rich while causing 24 million people to lose coverage.

“This bill will slash funding to the Medicaid program that serves millions of students including those with disabilities. Apparently, snatching health care coverage from children and families was not enough for House Republican leaders and the Trump administration. The act also allows states to jettison existing essential health benefit requirements and to remove protections for people with pre-existing conditions.

“Bottom line, this bill is harmful and irresponsible. Families should not have to face the threat of bankruptcy due to unaffordable medical bills.

“We urge the U.S. Senate to stand with American families and reject the harmful and deeply flawed AHCA.”

To learn more about the specific concerns NEA’s nearly three million members have with the legislation, please click here.

Follow us @NEAMedia


The National Education Association is the nation’s largest professional employee organization, representing more than 3 million elementary and secondary teachers, higher education faculty, education support professionals, school administrators, retired educators and students preparing to become teachers. Learn more at

read more

Senate puts out rescission bill after all; no school funding cuts… yet.

Mar 13, 2017 by

The Senate Ways and Means Committee this morning tentatively approved its rescission bill intended to solve the 2017 budget hole. They plan to move the bill out to the full Senate tomorrow. A vote on the floor is expected on Wednesday or more likely Thursday of this week.

The bill does not contain a 2% cut to education as was rumored. However, Senator Jim Denning (R-Overland Park) has indicated in press reports that he fully expects there to be an attempt to amend cuts into the bill once it gets to the floor for debate.

The House plan to get out of the 2017 mess created by the reckless Brownback tax cuts would delay a KPERS payment this year and not repay the lost payment from last year. In addition, it would borrow $317 million from the pooled money investment board (PMIB) and repay that loan over seven years.

The Senate version would repay the KPERS money taken from last year and take another $150 million this year to be paid back over 20 years. It would also borrow about $100 million from the PMIB instead of the full $317 million in the House plan.

Of course, any repayment plans depend on both chambers passing a comprehensive tax reform package that ends the Brownback experiment.

NOW IS THE TIME to tell your Senator to vote NO on any amendment that would cut school funding.


House K-12 Budget Committee Begins Writing a Plan

Today the House education budget committee began to piece together ideas for a new school funding formula. In an interesting twist, Chairman Larry Campbell (R-Olathe) turned over the Committee to Rep. Clay Aurand (R-Belleville) to handle the discussion.

In the early discussions, it would appear that the new formula would be very similar to the old formula and based perhaps on the ideas in HB 2270 (the Rooker bill) and HB 2324 (the Trimmer bill). There was consensus that they would not use the census based at-risk funding proposal but might go with a blend of poverty and “direct certification” (students certified by DCF for services). There was no consensus on a non-proficient at-risk weighting.

Bilingual weighting was discussed and there seemed to be some interest in another blend – basing funding on contact hours with certified bilingual staff and an FTE headcount. On CTE weighting, there is significant interest in looking at actual costs of individual programs and funding them accordingly.

At the end of the meeting today, Aurand brought up one of his old ideas (one that has never passed). Ever since the Montoy decision, Aurand has been proposing that the state “take credit” for more funding by calling a large portion of locally raised LOB money “foundation funding” and requiring it to be levied. Aurand told the committee he wanted this proposal in the bill.

Discussion will continue tomorrow.




read more

Due Process Moves on House Floor

Feb 21, 2017 by

House Takes Preliminary Vote on Due Process and It Passes!

When Rep. Clay Aurand (R-Belleville) cancelled the education committee meeting yesterday, it was done with the intent of ending the possibility that due process rights for Kansas teachers would be restored. Instead, he got the supporters for HB 2179 looking for another way forward. They found that other path this morning.

With the full House on general orders, a bill dealing with dispute arbitration came up for debate, HB 2186. Rep. Jerry Stogsdill (R-Prairie Village) offered an amendment that would restore due process rights for Kansas teachers exactly as it was to be done in HB 2179.

Aurand tried to block the amendment by challenging whether the amendment was germane or related to the underlying bill. The rules committee considered the challenge and ruled that the amendment was indeed germane and that debate could continue.

Much of the debate focused on “local control,” the idea of letting every local school board decide whether or not they would choose to grant due process protections to their teachers. While some school districts have done this, a large majority of school boards simply refuse to even bargain the issue. Teachers in districts that have not bargained due process rights, those teachers may be terminated for any reason or no reason at all, typically aren’t told the reason for the termination, and have no recourse to a hearing to determine if they were treated justly or capriciously.

One freshman legislator, Trevor Jacobs (R-Fort Scott), called upon Stogsdill to give him proof that any teachers have been fired for having a bad day since 2014. Of course, no one can be certain of the answer since school districts don’t give reasons for termination unless that has been bargained into the contract.

After a long floor debate, the amendment was adopted on a vote of 66 to 59 as moderate Republicans joined Democrats in voting AYE.

Voting AYE were Representatives Alcala, Baker, Ballard, Becker, Bishop, Brim, Burroughs, Carlin, Carmichael, Clayton, Concannon, Cox, Crum, Curtis, Deere, Dierks, Dietrich, Elliott, Ellis, Finney, Frownfelter, Gallagher, Gartner, Good, Helgerson, Henderson, Highberger, Hodge, Holscher, Judd-Jenkins, Kessinger, Koesten, Kuether, Lewis, Lusk, Lusker, Markley, Mastroni, Miller, Murnan, Neighbor, Ohaebosim, Orr, Ousley, Parker, Phelps, Pittman, Proehl, Rooker, Ruiz, Sawyer, Schreiber, Sloan, Stogsdill, Swanson, Tarwater, Terrell, Trimmer, Victors, Ward, Weigel, Wheeler, Whipple, Wilson, Winn, and Wolfe Moore. (Republicans are in bold ilatics.)

All other Representatives voted NO. There were no absences.

Following that vote, Rep. Blake Carpenter (R-Derby), decided to get one dig in at teachers and offered an amendment he called “merit pay.” The amendment was not a merit pay amendment but called for the creation of a mandatory state-wide evaluation system for teachers and school administrators. Additionally, it would direct the State Board of Education to set compensation for teachers and administrators.

Rep. Ed Trimmer (D-Winfield) challenged the germaneness of this amendment. The rules committee determined that the amendment was not germane and so it was not debated or voted upon.

The bill was then advanced to final action with 68 votes. That final action vote will likely come tomorrow.

Your call to action tonight!

If your Representative voted AYE on the Stogsdill amendment, take the time to let him/her know that you appreciate the support for Kansas teachers. If your Representative voted NO on the amendment, ask him/her to reconsider and vote AYE on final action on HB 2186.

Find a roster of Representatives with a link to their email addresses by clicking here.

Changes to Working After Retirement (WAR) Get Preliminary OK

HB 2268 passed a preliminary vote in the House today by voice vote.  If the bill passes on Final Action in the House it will then proceed to the Senate.

The bill, as amended makes numerous changes to KPERS in relationship to Working After Retirement.

The current rules for Working After Retirement, as applied to newly retired individuals, caps an individual’s annual earnings at $25,000. Once the cap is reached an individual must either quit working or stop receiving KPERS benefits for the rest of the year.

Also, the current rules for certain groups in KPERS exempt them from the $25,000 cap. This includes nurses at certain state institutions, those in KP&F, those in the Judges Retirement System, local government officials and those employed with a participating KPERS employer prior to May 1, 2015.

Additionally the current rules make an exemption for certain types of licensed school district employees from the $25,000 cap. Importantly participating employers who hire retired licenses school employees are required to contribute to KPERS at rates varying up to 30% of the employee’s salary.

The current exemptions for licensed school district employees include those hired for emergency vacancies, special education teachers, and those who are hired under the hard-to-fill provisions of the current law.

HB 2268 combines all the current special exemptions into a single special working after retirement exemption. The bill also continues the existing provisions of the WAR rules regarding a bona fide separation period, employer assurance protocols, maximum period of employment-three years plus a one year extension-and the current contribution to KPERS rates. Retirees working under the current law would continue to be exempt, subject to the time limits in HB 2268.

Additionally starting on July 1, 2017, those who retire at age 62 or older and who are re-employed by a school district would also be exempt from the earnings cap. The district would be required to contribute to KPERS equal to 30% of the retiree’s compensation.

The bill also exempts those who are re-employed by the Board of Regents and covered by the Regents Retirement Plan from the earnings cap. The Regents Retirement Plan is not administered by KPERS.


read more

Brownback’s Proposal and its Impact on KPERS *Spoiler Alert*: It’s not pretty.

Jan 23, 2017 by

Post Highlights

  • KPERS officials explain the “what ifs” of Brownback’s irresponsible budget.  Short version:  DISASTER for KPERS.
  • Brownback’s Budget proposal would reduce KPERS contributions by a total of $600 million, extend the time to pay down KPERS’ existing unfunded actuarial liability by 10 years, and add $6.5 billion to the State’s contributions over the long term to pay for it.
  • The full breakdown of the effects of Brownback’s proposal on KPERS is included in today’s Under the Dome.
  • Brownback’s plan mortgages the future to pay for the $350 million budget hole which remains through the end of this fiscal year.
  • There are solid and sensible solutions which take a comprehensive approach to dealing with the Governor’s failed experiment.
  • It is important that we all educate ourselves on the nature of the problem and the solutions so that we can encourage our legislators to take the bold steps necessary to achieve long-term results (those solutions are outlined in today’s under the dome and in more detail RIGHT HERE).
  • Governor recommends bills for health benefit consolidation.

KPERS explains the disaster in Brownback’s budget recommendation

The best explanation of the mess that would be created if Governor Brownback’s irresponsible budget recommendations on KPERS were to be enacted was presented to the House Pensions Committee today. We can’t explain it better so here is the document given to the committee this morning:

Governor’s Budget Proposal

$600 Million Shortfall Over Next 3 Years

With the start of the new legislative session, the Governor has announced his budget recommendation for Fiscal Year 17 (current revised), 18 and 19. In short, the proposal would reduce KPERS contributions by a total of $600 million, extend the time to pay down KPERS’ existing unfunded actuarial liability by 10 years, and add $6.5 billion to the State’s contributions over the long term to pay for it. What we don’t pay for now costs more later.

The Breakdown

  1. In FY 2016, the Sate delayed its fourth quarter payment for State/School employer contributions with a promise to pay it in FY2018 with interest.

Governor’s Recommendation: do not pay

  1. Governor’s Recommendation: freeze contributions in FY2017, 2018 and 2019 to the reduced amount paid in FY2016.
  2. Governor’s Recommendation: Pay off the existing unfunded actuarial liability over an additional 10 years.

The Result

  • 4 missing State quarterly payments and a total shortfall of $600 million
  • Eventual State/School employer contribution rate of 12% to 13% through FY 2045*
  • Long-term additional cost of $6.5 billion
  • Funded ration stays in the 60% “cautionary” range for an additional eight years or through 2030
  • Unfunded liability increases by about $1.3 billion, and it will take 20 years to get back to where we are now

*Doesn’t affect Local employer contribution rates.

Most Important

It’s most important to remember that this does not affect benefits for current retirees, or even for those thinking about retiring. KPERS has $17 billion in assets to pay benefits for many years. The funding shortfall is a long-term funding issue. However, underfunding continues to add to the unfunded liability and undermines KPERS’ long-term strength.

The State’s recent $1 billion pension obligation bond was a significant step in the right direction. But it’s consistent and full employer contributions over time that will make the most difference in having a sound and sustainable retirement system.

What’s Next?

We are at the beginning of the session. And budget legislation will wind its way through the usual process. The Governor’s proposal is a starting point for discussion.

We’ll keep you posted as things affecting KPERS develop in the months to come.

So far the Governor’s proposal is getting a cold reception under the dome. As we reported last week, the K-12 Education Budget Committee has recommended to the full Appropriations Committee that they reject the Governor’s KPERS proposal.

Mortgaging the Future; Cutting the Present; Solving the Problem

You might be wondering what the H-E-double hockey sticks is going on up here in Topeka. You know that there’s a big problem facing Kansas and that problem has been caused by the reckless and irresponsible tax policy proposed by Governor Sam Brownback and passed with great joy by his legislative allies.

That’s true. And here, after four years, Kansans learned the lessons of trickle down economics/tax policy and have thrown many of those responsible out of office, replacing them with new moderate Republicans and Democrats. So this should be the right time to put the brakes on the Brownback disaster and reverse course. It should be easy, you’re thinking.

Oh, that it were so simple!

Brownback issued his “balanced” budget and it’s a doozy! Essentially, Brownback achieves “balance” by mortgaging the future. He robs from the highway plan, he sells off our tobacco settlement money turning this long-term asset into long-term debt, and he steals from KPERS reversing all the hard work done by previous legislatures to stabilize and secure the system.

That’s one way to take care of the issue but let’s take a look at the deeper problem.

First, we are dealing wth three years. Problem one is to find about $350 million to fill the hole in the last six months of fiscal year 2017. The next problem is to solve the revenue decline so as to fix the holes in future budgets – notably fiscal years 2018 and 2019.

Then there is the problem of a Governor who continues to believe his plan is working despite all the evidence to the contrary.

Next, we have a legislature with an enormous number of freshmen, many of whom are just getting their feet on the ground and beginning to understand the process. Remember, we are only 10 days into the 2017 session!

And finally, we are faced with two separate and individual committees in each chamber tasked with the hard work – House Appropriations and Senate Ways and Means that craft budgets (spending) and House Taxation and Senate Assessment and Taxation that craft tax policy (revenue). Somehow, we need to get a revenue plan that corresponds with our budget or spending plan. Not so easily done!

So far – 10 days in – we have only ideas. Okay, we have one bill, HB 2023 that repeals the LLC tax exemption; but really, that’s it.

One idea is the Governor’s: Let’s just mortgage the future, increase the state’s debt, and click our heals while repeating “His tax plan will work, his tax plan will work.”

Another idea is to fix the revenue by reversing the Governor’s policies. The LLC repeal is part of that. The Rise Up plan is another way to do that.

And a third idea – if you don’t like mortgaging the future or reversing the tax cuts – is to cut spending. There is no bill out there proposing that we cut spending.

But things do need to be talked about. And some ideas can be floated to get people thinking about other ideas.

No legislator likes to cut spending or raise revenue (aka raise taxes). And right now there is little interest in mortgaging the future. In order to get people to think that raising revenue needs to be on the table, we have to get them to see what happens if we do not raise that revenue.

This is why leaders will ask what spending cuts look like. Legislators are always reluctant to raise taxes and you can be sure that those who support the Governor will all any reversal of his tax policies an increase. Understanding what the alternative looks like – ruined highways, compromised public safety, stripping seniors and those with disabilities of service, and even cutting public school funding – will help legislators understand the importance of passing a revenue plan that supports vital government functions.

So, it’s early. The new leaders in the House and Senate are not showing support for cutting services more. But the discussion is important. Unless all legislators understand the depth of the problem and the ramifications of taking one path or another, they won’t be ready to make the hard decisions that are yet to come.

Don’t panic yet. But do continue to communicate with your legislators. Let them know that you expect them to deal responsibly with the failed tax policy of Governor Brownback. Make sure all Kansans expect the legislature to reverse course on revenue and support quality state services across the board.

Health Benefit Consolidation, Procurement Bills Introduced

Two bills recommended by the Governor have been introduced. One would enact the consolidated health insurance plan for all school districts while the other would establish a centralized procurement program for school districts.

Both bills were introduced as committee bills in the House K-12 Budget Committee in order to have the discussion on these issues.

read more