That school districts in Kansas are feeling the pinch of the economy is without question. As revenues continue to lag behind budget, the 293 districts have lost a collective $130 million this year. Base aid per student has been reduced by $215, or 4.8 percent.

More cuts are on the way. Revised estimates unveiled last week indicate the state will be forced to trim another $235 million in expenditures in order to avoid ending the year with a deficit -- a condition not allowed under the Kansas Constitution.

Gov. Mark Parkinson intends to make the reductions soon.

"In the coming weeks, I will take whatever steps are necessary to balance the 2010 budget before the Legislature returns," Parkinson said in a statement. "That is a promise I have made, and it is a promise I will keep."

As more than half of Kansas' tax revenues -- nearly $3 billion under the current budget -- go to the school districts, it is hard to find anybody who doesn't think the reductions will affect schools. We would anticipate every recipient of such aid to have their respective budgets reduced yet again.

After all, Kansas has not been spared by the national recession. Property values have decreased and unemployment rates have increased ­-- both contributing to the tax collection gap. Compounding the issue is a rise in the number of students enrolled.

According to information being distributed by the Kansas Association of School Boards, communities can look at cutting programs and services; closing schools or consolidation; changing operations, or supporting revenue increases.

The last option appears to be the preferred route. Last week, the Hays USD 489 Board of Education voted to support a lawsuit against the state to force an increase in revenue. The litigation is expected to be filed by Schools for Fair Funding, a nonprofit coalition of public school districts that has successfully gone down this road before.

While we fully comprehend the ramifications of continued reductions in state aid, we do not understand the logic of such a lawsuit. In essence, we will use taxpayer money to wage a court battle to get more taxpayer money. This is on top of using taxpayer money to lobby legislators for more taxpayer money.

Will the lawsuit force property values to rise? Will it create jobs for unemployed individuals? Will it end the recession in Kansas? The answer to all three questions is a resounding "no." There are only two options for the Legislature to pursue if this lawsuit succeeds: Cut funding even more to every other state-funded agency or program, or raise taxes even higher. Neither scenario sounds appealing to us.

What's the alternative? USD 489 Superintendent Fred Kaufman said it best: "Public education as it has existed for years will be dramatically changed if those (reductions) actually come about."

We don't necessarily see that as a bad thing.

Unfunded mandates from the federal level have been crippling schools for decades. No Child Left Behind is but the latest example of that. Efforts to make public education more accountable in certain locations have resulted in the entire country having to follow whatever philosophical whim emanates from Washington. The number of mandatory subjects to be taught have ballooned while the length of a school year remains the same. Mainstreaming everybody has slowed the development of exceptional students.

The way public school districts exist today needs to change dramatically. We would encourage school boards throughout the state to find ways to cut programs or services. Closures and consolidations should be considered. Changes in operations should be pursued. All these can be done with innovative thinking, determined leadership and cooperation from communities that pay the bills and lawmakers who make the rules.

And if revenues need to increase to fulfill necessary education priorities at the local level, support those. Filing lawsuits against the state for money it doesn't have won't solve a thing.

Editorial by Patrick Lowry

plowry@dailynews.net