The Kansas Attorney General’s Office recently made headlines by blocking the release of $4.6 million in school bond funds intended for the Greeley County school district.
This decision has sparked widespread debate over the interpretation of state laws and their impact on small communities like Greeley County, which is the least populous county in Kansas.
Background of the School Bond Issue
In May 2023, voters in Greeley County approved a $4.6 million school bond to fund vital renovations, including a new gymnasium, improvements to the existing gym, and a new accessible playground.
The bond was structured to avoid tax increases for local property owners, making it an attractive solution for upgrading local educational infrastructure.
However, the Kansas Attorney General’s Office determined that the bond funds could not be released due to non-compliance with a 2023 elections law.
This law mandates that county election officials publish election notices on a county election website at least three weeks before an election. Unfortunately, Greeley County lacks a county website, a common issue in rural areas.
The Legal Roadblock
The Attorney General’s Office cited non-compliance with the website notification requirement as the primary reason for blocking the bond funds.
According to state law, this non-compliance renders the election invalid, regardless of voter turnout or outcome.
Danedri Herbert, a spokeswoman for the Attorney General’s Office, clarified that the decision was a matter of verifying compliance, not judging the merits or necessity of the bond.
Key Legal Provisions:
- 2023 Elections Law: Requires election notices to be published online.
- Historical Precedent: Past cases allowed the “will of the people” to override technical irregularities, but this argument was not upheld in Greeley County’s case.
Impact on Greeley County
The blocked funds have left Greeley County in a difficult position. The district had planned to use the bond to enhance school facilities and address community needs.
The bond also included a private donation covering 10% of the total project cost, further highlighting local support for the initiative.
| Planned Projects | Estimated Cost |
|---|---|
| New gymnasium | $1.8 million |
| Renovations to existing gym | $1.2 million |
| Accessible playground | $900,000 |
| Private donation contribution | $470,000 |
| Total | $4.7 million |
Without these funds, the district faces limited options:
- Legal Action: Pursuing a court ruling to overturn the Attorney General’s decision.
- Legislative Remedy: Waiting for the Kansas Legislature to amend the law.
- New Election: Holding another vote, which may not guarantee approval.
Community Reactions
Local officials and residents have expressed frustration over the decision, emphasizing the strong community support for the bond.
- John Niehues, Greeley County Superintendent: “This decision undermines the will of the people who voted for this bond.”
- Jerri Young, Greeley County Clerk: “The law was poorly written and did not account for small counties like ours that lack websites.”
Outgoing state Senator John Doll admitted he did not anticipate the strict interpretation of the law and has since attempted to mediate the issue without success.
What’s Next for Greeley County?
As local officials explore their options, many are pinning their hopes on the 2025 legislative session, which could potentially address the website notification requirement. A new election is also being considered, but there is no guarantee of replicating the previous voter support.
The blocking of Greeley County’s school bond funds has reignited debates over how state laws impact rural communities.
While the Attorney General’s decision was legally grounded, the consequences for Greeley County highlight the need for more inclusive legislative frameworks that address the realities of smaller, resource-limited counties. Local officials remain committed to ensuring the community’s needs are met, but significant hurdles lie ahead.
FAQs
Why was the school bond fund blocked?
The Kansas Attorney General’s Office determined that the election did not comply with a 2023 law requiring election notices to be posted on a county website, which Greeley County does not have.
What were the planned projects for the bond funds?
The funds were allocated for a new gymnasium, renovations to the existing gym, and an accessible playground, totaling over $4.7 million.
Can the decision be reversed?
The district can pursue legal action, await legislative changes, or hold another election to potentially regain access to the funds.