Capitol Comments
February 11, 2003
SCHOOL CONSOLIDATION PROPOSALS BACK ON TABLE
The painful subject of the state-mandated school consolidation in the 60's is still a bad memory for some legislators. School consolidation started to be talked about again in 1996 and has been brought up several times over the past seven years. Although some members of the House Education Committee seem enthralled with the idea, I do not see our legislative body as a whole rushing to force school consolidation in the near future, or perhaps ever. With the state's financial condition, the question of school district size is receiving a lot of attention. This is happening all over the country. Arkansas, South Dakota as well as Kansas have legislation before them to reduce the number of school districts. However, some states are introducing legislation to break up large school districts, such as Oregon and California. Such opposite efforts are not surprising. To some it makes sense to consolidate smaller districts to achieve economies of scale. We see businesses do that very thing. The problem I see is that in public education such economies of scale are far from certain. Consolidation, in fact, may produce the opposite effect. School districts today provide many more services for their students than ever before. These services greatly benefit our children's education while at the same time increases costs to our schools. Although it is tempting to legislators here in Topeka to look at our financial problems and conclude that the answer to the problem is consolidation, hopefully, we leave that choice to local school districts. We are seeing movement in that direction in our state. Currently four school districts have plans to consolidate into two if voters approve the move this spring. Two other school districts have plans to consolidate effective July l. Five other school districts are in contact with the Department of Education officials about consolidation, and other districts' boards are discussing it. The state should not try to mandate consolidation. School consolidation should not be left to chance.
KANSAS TAXES OUT OF BALANCE
In the past ten years the balance between the three big sources of state revenue - sales, income, and property taxes - has eroded dramatically. As recently as 1998, sales, income and property taxes each accounted for almost an equal share of state revenues. Last year, however, property taxes made up almost 35% of our tax burden, while income taxes made up only 23%. This lack of balance is leaving our state open to a lengthy downturn, and places too much of a burden on property taxpayers.
In l995, the Governor's Tax Equity Task Force concluded that a balanced tax system would not only help the state avoid a crisis during economic downturns, but would also keep the tax rates across the system down.
Governor Kathleen Sebelius is offering a new plan named FAIR SHARE. This proposal is the first step towards leveling the playing field for taxpayers. The FAIR SHARE plan starts with the premise that everyone needs to pay their fair share of the taxes owed. This will include a tax amnesty proposal to jump start collections, a focus on fair and even-handed tax audits, and an aggressive pursuit of those individuals and businesses who routinely enjoy the services of Kansas and don't pay their FAIR SHARE. I feel it is important we find new ways to level the playing field for Kansas taxpayers. We cannot continue to rely so heavily on property taxes. Other tax proposals being considered by the Legislature this session include helping local Kansas businesses compete with online retailers by collecting sales tax on internet purchases and a review of all of the current sales tax exemptions. The Streamlined Sales Tax Project (SSTP) responds to the concerns of merchants about the difficulties in dealing with different states' sales tax laws, and to state and local government concerns about the loss of revenues from remote retail sales by mail-order, telephone and the Internet. The SSTP seeks to provide incentives for multi-state merchants to voluntarily collect and remit use tax on sales to customers in states where they may not have any physical presence or legal obligation to collect and remit. If the SSTP is successful in demonstrating to Congress significant reform in making sales tax laws more uniform and less administratively burdensome on multi-state retailers, then Congress may decide to authorize those states to impose use tax collection duties upon remote retailers. There are at least ten states with at least 20% of the total population of states imposing sales tax who have adopted the Act. States would collectively lose $7 billion in new sales/use tax revenue from e-commerce retail sales this year. Kansas' estimated loss would be $71.2 million.
PRISON VS. TREATMENT
The Kansas Sentencing Commission proposes placing drug possession offenders with no history of crimes against other people in drug treatment programs rather than prison. First offenses for simple possession usually get probation but no treatment . Even so, of the l,517 simple possession cases last year, 281 drew prison time.
This proposal is being brought forward as a result of a two year study by a Sentencing Commission subcommittee, of which I was a member. Treatment programs cost far less than incarceration - $2500 to $6500 per person for inpatient and outpatient treatment, compared to $20,000 a year for imprisonment. Treatment programs also have the advantage of rehabilitation, which does not happen with probation or imprisonment.
Kansas isn't the only state looking at this. In Wisconsin, where the inmate population has risen 14.5 percent since 1998, a coalition of religious groups is backing a legislative proposal that would require treatment instead of prison for first-time drug offenders.
Kansas' prison system has about 9,000 beds, and they are 98 percent filled right now. Building two new cell houses at the ElDorado Correctional Facility would costs $14.4 million plus an additional $5.2 million to $7.2 million a year to operate. That's money the state doesn't have and money that does little to rehabilitate.
Putting drug offenders in treatment programs would keep them from offending again and at the same time free up their beds for the criminals who pose a bigger threat to public safety. Besides, the get-tough-on-drugs mania of the l980's isn't working. It's time to try something new. Hearings on the legislation, SB 123, commences on Wednesday of this week.
VISITORS
I enjoyed spending an evening with the Area Chamber of Commerce members at the annual KCCI dinner held in Topeka. The close contact in which our chamber members stay with me is greatly appreciated. I also had the pleasure of meeting with students Dan Miller, Craig Pringle, Joel Wesseler and Alex Gottlob of the Winfield High School Agricultural Education Department of FFA and their advisor, Chad Epler. Dan Miller and Craig Pringle hold State FFA offices. Later, I introduced the group in the Senate Chamber where they were warmly welcomed.
IN CONCLUSION
I appreciate the many constituents who have recently contacted me with
opinions and concerns in regard to the legislative session. With my heavy
committee schedule I am not always available to take your calls. Betty Manning, my Office
Administrator, will get your messages to me. You can reach me via e-mail at
ggoodwin@ink.org or Goodwin@senate.state.ks.us. My address is State Capitol,
Room 403-N, Topeka, KS 66612; telephone (785) 296-7381 or 1-800-432-3924.
Copyright © February, 2003 by Jamiebro Publications. All rights reserved.