Legislative session leaves Olathe schools facing tighter budget growth and reduced mental‑health aid, district official says

Dr. Stuart Little, the district’s legislative liaison, told the Olathe Board of Education on March 2 that lawmakers are nearing the end of the session and several proposals could materially affect local schools.

"There’s a tax plan that exempts schools but sets a 3% cap on cities and counties for their growth," Little said, adding that exceeding that cap would trigger petition procedures that could overturn a board decision. He said the provision would not exempt bonds and warned that the cap could constrain local district budgets.

Why it matters: Little said Kansas State Department of Education requested roughly $150 million for special education; the governor proposed $50 million, and the House and Senate proposals were far lower. "We’re statewide 200‑something behind what we need," he said, summarizing the discrepancy and the tight negotiations that lie ahead.

Little outlined specific bills under consideration: a cell‑phone bill that would bar students from keeping phones accessible during school and would extend some accreditation features to non‑public schools; House Bill 2451, which would limit districts’ ability to send nonneutral informational material on ballot measures; and Senate Bill 491, which would create an education inspector general position in the attorney general’s office.

Board members asked for clarification about how cuts to mental‑health funding were made. Little said a floor amendment by Senator Gossage removed $16 million for a mental‑health intervention program and restored $1 million to special education, leaving roughly $6 million added to special‑education allocations as a result of later adjustments. "They had some discussion about it and part of that motion was to add a million to special education," he said.

Trustees also pressed on procedural mechanics. Miss Reagan asked whether the $16 million cut was made on the Senate floor; Little confirmed it was removed via a floor amendment. Board members questioned the compatibility of reverting cut scores to prior levels given a new assessment and flagged potential conflicts with assessment validity and federal case law on student speech when discussing proposed walkout penalties.

The board’s reaction: Trustees voiced frustration that state policymakers were not consulting large districts before proposing changes. Several members urged community engagement and voter contact to influence state lawmakers. "We need to use our voices to the people who sit up in the state house," one trustee said during remarks after the update.

What's next: Little said the tax and budget measures will likely move into conference committees and that additional changes are expected before the session adjourns later in March. He advised the board that the governor retains line‑item veto power for the final bill.

Actions: No board action was taken on the legislative matters at the meeting; the board heard the update and asked clarifying questions.