Month: June 2015

An investigative committee in Topeka today decided to dismiss complaints that had been filed against Rep. Valdenia Winn, D-34th Dist.

A motion to dismiss the complaints was made by a Republican representative from Wichita, who cited legislators’ First Amendment rights. The legislative hearing room today was overflowing with supporters for Rep. Winn.

“It was quite an outpouring of support; it was quite humbling,” Rep. Winn said after the hearing.

The committee played an audio recording and had a written transcript of Rep. Winn’s comments during the earlier committee meeting in March.

“I felt, of course, relieved, but I knew that I had done the right thing and I felt that I told the truth, and I had a First Amendment right to speak up for the rights of these students,” Rep. Winn said after the hearing. “So I at no time felt I had done anything wrong.”

Rep. Winn had been discussing a bill to repeal in-state tuition for children of undocumented immigrants in committee in March when she referred to the bill as institutionally racist and sexist. Her comments were not aimed at any individuals, she said.

Rep. Winn said she did not apologize, as she felt that she had not made any comments aimed at individuals.

Several groups had announced their support for Rep. Winn, including Women for Kansas and the ACLU. In a statement issued recently, the ACLU said that “Legislators ought to encourage a robust discussion of all issues before them, not be in the business of policing one another’s speech.”

Rep. Winn, who is a history professor, said after the hearing that she wondered if people knew what she meant when she referred to institutional racism. That refers to a system that is in place that discriminates against people.

For example, institutional racism, she said, can happen when redlining takes place and housing is denied on the basis of race or gender. On Thursday, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the Fair Housing Act, allowing people to file lawsuits over housing actions that do not necessarily have discriminatory intent, but turn out to have discriminatory effects.

A three-judge panel in Shawnee County District Court today ruled that the block grant funding law is not constitutional and that the state of Kansas is not in substantial compliance with the Kansas Supreme Court’s ruling on school finance.

In a response today, Gov. Sam Brownback issued a news release that said the state would immediately appeal the decision.

The three-judge panel was expected to give its finding on whether school finance was adequate, and today it added a finding that the present block grants to public schools are not equitable.

The court stated that its December 2014 opinion of substantial compliance on equity was “premature and incorrect” and withdrew them.

The court cited reductions to state aid in House Substitute for Senate Bill 7, which changed the formula for capital outlay state aid, and changed the local option budget state aid formula.

House Substitute for Senate Bill 7 violates the Kansas Constitution, both in adequacy of funding and in inequities in the capital outlay state aid and supplemental general state aid, the court ruled.

The Kansas City, Kan., Public Schools and the Turner Public Schools are among several school districts participating in the Gannon case.

The Kansas City, Kan., school district stated in a news release that the ruling had three key points:
• The court found the block grant bill entirely unconstitutional as to adequacy noting that it “stands, unquestionably and unequivocally, as constitutionally inadequate in its funding.”
• The court found the block grant portions relating to the funding of the equity mechanisms unconstitutional.
• The court avoided striking the entirety of the block grant bill in order to have some funding mechanism in place for the upcoming school year.

“This ruling has profound significance for the future of our students and students throughout the state,” said Superintendent Cynthia Lane, of the Kansas City, Kan., Public Schools. “This decision again reinforces the truth that the legislature has a constitutional obligation to provide adequate and equitable funding for all Kansas children. We are confident that the Kansas legislature will take the necessary steps to fulfill their constitutional obligation.”

The block grant bill was passed by the Legislature in March of this year, cutting an additional $50 million in funding for schools across Kansas, and freezing funding levels for schools for the next two budget years, the school district stated in its news release. These reductions were on top of the cuts that school districts across the state have seen for the past seven years. The court, in its decision, noted that the changes put in place by the block grant bill could cost the district more than $3 million in funding for new students.

District officials are still evaluating the effect of the decision, and will need to wait to see how the state will implement the court’s order, a spokesman said. Nevertheless, the decision is good news for the 22,000 children in KCKPS, the district stated.

Gov. Sam Brownback issued a statement today on the Gannon decision: “The three-judge panel has once again violated its Constitutional authority with this ruling. It has now taken upon itself the powers specifically and clearly assigned to the legislative and executive branches of government. In doing so, it has replaced the judgment of Kansas voters with the judgment of unelected activist judges.

“The state has never invested more in K-12 education. We will appeal this decision immediately to the Kansas Supreme Court,” Gov. Brownback said in the news release.

The Kansas Legislature, meanwhile, adjourned earlier today. There is some speculation that the Legislature may have to have a special session to address this issue, according to one legislator.

The 87-page Gannon ruling is online at http://www.shawneecourt.org/DocumentCenter/View/532.