(Syndicated to Kansas newspapers Sept. 19, 2016)

Martin HawverAll eyes focus this week on the Kansas Supreme Court which hears arguments on the school finance case that will determine whether the Legislature has adequately funded Kansas public schools.

And the two possibilities are, of course, yes or no.

If the court determines that the Legislature has spent enough money on K-12 education that children from border to border have equal access to education, it’s all over except for how to split up that money among 278 school districts with widely different sizes, number of pupils, readiness and abilities of pupils.

But there aren’t many inside the Statehouse who are looking for that result, and are bracing for a decision that orders the Legislature to appropriate more money for schools. That’s where it gets painful for the 40 Senate and 125 House members, many of whom will be new to the Legislature after this November’s elections and likely still will be learning their parking space number when they get the bill.

Most around the Statehouse are looking for a demand that more money be spent.

Who picks up that bigger bill? It will be taxpayers—that’s voters—of course.

That’s where the Legislature is likely to make decisions which will determine whether any of the new members actually vest in the pension system: Who pays.

Most Kansans and those who hang around the Statehouse for a living are figuring that if the state needs more money for that adequacy of funding for public schools, it’s not going to come from a boost in the sales tax. Lawmakers two sessions ago boosted sales tax to 6.5% on everything.

That sales tax boost, which probably most Kansans didn’t loudly question unless they were car-shopping, had its biggest effect on the poor, who saw the sales tax rise on food. That was the hot button in the sales tax debate—making people who can’t afford it pay more for their family’s food.

So, don’t look for sales taxes to rise again unless it can somehow be tied to reducing the sales tax on food. That means money lost to reducing the sales tax on food is money that can’t be spent to boost school funding.

That brings us to income taxes and property taxes levied at the state level, like the 20-mill property tax for schools that is now levied against all property in the state.

For lawmakers, this might be the politically easiest choice, but for illogical reasons. While property taxes are the most hated taxes of Kansans for a variety of reasons, most folks tend to associate property taxes with local government. Not sure why, but most think that it’s the city, county, the improvement district, the drainage district that levy most of their property taxes. And they do.

But an increase in statewide property taxes levied from Topeka—that changes the picture. It becomes the state controlling property taxes, and that little mill or two levy for the park or new parking spaces for city employees tends to diminish in controversy.

Income tax? The logical choice there for lawmakers is that 330,000-person pool of Kansans who own LLCs or other corporate forms that don’t pay state income tax now and haven’t for the past few years. A popular target, but just slapping taxes on those tax-exempt folks probably won’t raise enough money for a court order that demands more than about $250 million.

So, we’re watching what the court says is adequate, now that equity has been addressed, funding for schools. Legislators, and those who want to be, are wondering how welcome they’ll be on doorsteps two years from now. Doorsteps that cost the voters behind the screen door more tax money to live in if property taxes are raised.