S.B. 388 does the following three things:
School District Food Service Contracts
School district boards of education are authorized to enter into food service contracts with municipalities. Pursuant to these contracts, the school district could provide meals for persons for whom the municipality is responsible for providing meals. The contracting municipality would be required to pay the meal service costs to the school district. These payments would be deposited in the school district's food service fund. ("Municipality" is defined as any county, township, or other political or taxing subdivision of the state, or any agency, authority, institution, or other instrumentality thereof.)
Nonresident Enrollments in School Districts
Under current law, school districts have general discretionary authority to accept nonresident enrollments and, if they so choose, to charge tuition for attendance by such pupils. An amendment retains the discretionary authority of school district boards to accept nonresident enrollments but eliminates the authority of the board to charge tuition therefor.
Payments from the School District
Inservice Education Fund
School districts are authorized to make direct payments from the inservice education fund to certificated personnel for attending staff development programs or activities conducted during times when the person's service under the contract is not required.
S.B. 388, as introduced, was sponsored by Senators Lana Oleen and Janice Hardenburger pursuant to a request made by the Manhattan-Ogden school district (USD 383).
Proponents of the bill included the School Food Service Director of USD 383, a Riley County commissioner, and the Kansas Association of School Boards. There were no opponents.
Ms. Keyser, School Food Service Director for USD 383, explained that the district had been approached by the Riley County Commission about providing meal service for the county's new law enforcement center. It was determined that a statutory change was needed in order to make this possible. Ms. Keyser explained that, because the purpose is to make provision for meal service to persons incarcerated in the law enforcement center, the bill should be amended to refer to "persons for whom the municipality is responsible for providing meals" rather than "officers or employees of the municipality." The Committee adopted the proposed amendment.
The Riley County commissioner explained that the commission believes contracting with the school district would eliminate the expense of duplication of institutional kitchens, and, thus, would be in the best interest of Riley County taxpayers. The Kansas Association of School Boards endorsed the bill as consistent with the broader concept of school district home rule.
The fiscal note on S.B. 388, as introduced, indicated that the bill would have no impact on state operations. The Committee amendment would not alter that analysis.
The House Education Committee added the provisions regarding nonresident enrollments in school districts (FY 1999 fiscal note to state--$200,000) and payments from the school district inservice education fund (no state cost). These provisions had been contained in H.B. 2907 (as passed by the House) which, on March 16, 1998, was reported adversely by the Senate Education Committee. (For more information on these provisions, see the supplemental note on H.B. 2907, as amended by the House Committee of the Whole.)
1. *Supplemental notes are prepared by the Legislative Research Department and do not express legislative intent. The supplemental note and fiscal note for this bill may be accessed on the Internet at http://www.ink.org/public/legislative/fulltext-bill.html.