Kansas House looks to cut tax that funds public schools by $800M over 5 years

TOPEKA — Public school advocates are asking lawmakers to proceed with caution as they consider slashing the statewide property tax that directly funds public education.

Legislation in the House would lower the state rate from 20 to 18.5 mills in the next fiscal year, which starts June 1, and then freeze the annual tax collections at the current level for future years. The Kansas Department of Revenue estimates the impact would be $823.6 million over five years, assuming property values grow by 5% each year from 2026 to 2030.

Debate Wednesday in the House Taxation Committee centered on concerns that the Legislature would return to a familiar pattern of lowering tax collections to the point that lawmakers eventually would cut public school funding and instigate another legal battle.

The Kansas Supreme Court has repeatedly forced the Legislature to abide by a constitutional mandate to adequately and equitably fund public schools. Last year, the Supreme Court released jurisdiction over the most recent case, elevating fears by public schools that the Legislature could again pull the rug out from under them.

Republicans on the House committee said that isn’t the goal of House Bill 2011, but they stopped short of agreeing to include language that would require transfers from the State General Fund to ensure schools would retain full funding. Without the transfer, the base state aid would be lowered by $100 and $169 per pupil in the next two years.

“Seems like the courts have taken over appropriation for schools, and the Legislature surrendered that to them,” said Rep. Francis Awerkamp, R-St. Marys. “So whatever the courts tell the Legislature we need to pay schools, we’re going to pay schools.”

Tim Graham, with the Kansas National Education Association, said public schools have been shorted in the past when the Legislature adopted aggressive tax cuts.

“You know the court has given up jurisdiction to this case, and quite frankly, we have a lot of anxiety of what’s happened in the past 24-25 years with school funding,” Graham told Awerkamp.

After five seconds of silence, Graham asked: “Are were in a staring contest?”

“No, we’re not,” Awerkamp said. “So you made the statement, the Legislature appropriates the dollars, we control the purse strings. Are you saying it’s wrong for the courts to tell the Legislature —”

“I’m not going to get into that,” Graham said.

Graham, school officials and public school advocates identified themselves as neutral on the bill while raising concerns about whether the state could afford such a large property tax cut.

Rep. Adam Smith, a Weskan Republican who chairs the committee, said the property tax relief would “basically” be subsidized by income and sales tax collections that go into the State General Fund, making it more difficult to lower those taxes in the future.

Lobbyists for business and agriculture groups testified in support of the legislation.

Dan Murray, of the National Federation of Independent Business, said the organization had surveyed members and found 88% supported lowering the state property tax rate.

“This is the top priority for our members,” Murray said. “I think you all heard this at the doorstep. Issue one, two and three were property tax relief. This fits in line.”

John Donley, of the Kansas Farm Bureau, said his organization wanted property tax relief last year, when GOP leaders favored income tax cuts instead. He said he was pleased the Legislature is “finally” looking at broad-based property tax relief.

The discussion appeared to confuse Rep. Clarke Sanders, a Salina Republican, because the bill refers to the property tax rate as “the rate of ad valorem tax.”

“You’re calling it property tax relief, which is what it seems to me, but yet, in the bill, it’s talking about ad valorem tax,” Clarke said as Donley appeared before the committee. “So could I get an explanation either from you, Mr. chair, from the conferee, about what the difference between, if any, between property tax and ad valorem tax?”

Donley: “ ’Ad valorem’ equals ‘property,’ I think, is the simplest way to explain it.”

Sanders: “Six to one, half a dozen the other?”

Donley: “Somebody liked Latin at some point in our history.”