Rep. Williams responds to Butler's Dr. Krull

Rep. Kristey Williams

Recognizing a problem exists is the first step towards resolution of the problem. Indisputably, Butler County taxpayers are paying $14 million annually in property tax to subsidize 80% of BCC’s enrolled students that do not live in our county. For some, this is not a problem. However, for the vast majority of taxpayers who are not affiliated with BCC, it is a big problem.
Butler Community College (once known as Butler County Community College) President Kim Krull and its Board of Trustees have yet to recognize there is any problem with the current funding disparity. In addition, they have argued the necessity of the high mill levy with no mention of gratitude or thanks to the taxpayers of Butler County who make the college’s mission possible.
My appreciation for BCC is great! My Mother taught college algebra for the college, I took 31 hours back in the 80s before transferring to the University of Kansas, my brother played football for the Grizzlies, my sister ran track, and two of my daughters have taken BCC courses.
I’m a BCC fan!
But being a fan and supporter of BCC does NOT mean that our current funding is fair. Being a supporter does NOT mean we ignore the facts. Being a supporter and a taxpayer DOES mean that it’s important now more than ever to examine BCC’s mission, value to its students and taxpayers, and its growth within and outside our County. The world is changing – we need to be sure our taxpayers and students are receiving the value and fairness they deserve!
Dr. Krull’s comments shared in her recent column included inaccurate statements. In an effort to set the record straight, I’d like to take a look at a few of these.
Dr. Krull: “Williams is encouraging BCC Trustees to seek ways to cut its mill levy resulting in a $10.1 million loss in operating revenue.” And “Williams proposes Butler’s mill levy be decreased from 20.063 to 5.44 mills.”

Response:  My recommendation was to reduce or cut our BCC mill levy by five mills not 2o.063 mills per Krull’s letter.  My proposed 5 mill reduction is approximately $3.5 million NOT $10.1 million.   
And this proposed property tax reduction can easily be paid by increasing out-of-county tuition and fees. Simply increasing out-of-county tuition/fees by $25/credit hour would generate the necessary funds to make up for the property tax decrease. In addition, adding $25 to the current out-of-county rate of $109 would put tuition at $134 – an incredible bargain compared to Wichita State’s rate of $225.90/credit hour (tuition and fees).  Yes, BCC will still be 40% cheaper than WSU… a great deal for a great education.
Krull seems to be confused by the third appendix of the Butler County Resolution which includes a table of all community colleges. This chart includes an example of a funding model that calculates if Butler County taxpayers fund 1/3 of BCC costs of in-county students, the mill levy would only be 5.4 mills based on the number of students from our county currently attending the college. In other words, if we used this table’s funding model, Butler County taxpayers would be paying $3.8 million TOTAL, not $14 million. This model is based on current funding guidelines that establish a basic cost-share formula in which in-county student tuition pays 1/3, State pays 1/3, and home county pays 1/3 of the overall cost of in-county students. This table was included for reference and comparison purposes.
My proposal was not based on the above formula. My proposal suggested a 5 mill levy reduction, NOT a 15 mill levy reduction of $10.1 million that Dr. Krull incorrectly referenced. And to note, the Butler County Resolution did not provide a specific mill levy reduction amount.
Dr. Krull: “Butler Community College’s mill levy did not increase 10 mills as was noted in the information attributed to Williams…” was also found within Krull’s letter.
Response: What I actually said is that County taxpayers experienced a “10% increase” when BCC raised our mill levy from 18 to 20 mills several years ago. There’s a big difference between the 10% increase I actually said and a 10 mill increase Krull inaccurately claimed I said.
But since we’re on the topic of the mill levy, let’s take a moment and consider the changes in property taxes over time to help shed further light. From 2005 to present, the State has given BCC a funding increase of $3m (+25%), simultaneously our local taxes to BCC have increased nearly $7m (+80%).  This $10m increase in taxes is primarily consumed by overhead since BCC enrollment during this time has been basically flat or declining. To summarize, BCC has received more than $10 million in additional funding since 2005.  However, if we focus on just the past couple of years, our last mill levy increase was indeed a 10% increase raising our mill levy from just over 18 mills to over 20 mills.
As taxpayers, we deserve answers to our questions. With the BCC budget planning workshops drawing near and budget hearings in August, it’s important for each of us to have the facts and to know where our tax dollars are being spent – and why.
Here are some questions for President Krull and the Board of Trustees:
1. Why are Butler County taxpayers paying $7,000 in local taxes per year, per student, while each of our full-time students receive only a $350 discount for being “in county?”
Fact:  Butler County Taxpayers pay $7,000 per year for each BCC student that actually lives in Butler County. However, most of these are not full-time students, most are part-time students. If you calculate their actual credit hours – the cost in-county students paid by local taxes goes up to an astounding $10,769 per student per year! That doesn’t sound like a good value to the taxpayer!
Fact:  A Butler County resident student gets an $11 per credit hour discount. A Butler County resident student taking 15 credit hours at BCC will receive a discount of $165.  
Fact:  If that student takes 15 credit hours for two semesters, they will receive a discount of $330 per year. (Note: this is about the same amount as the annual taxes paid to BCC on a $145,000 home)  
Fact:  The Taxpayers of Butler County paid $7,000 to give that Butler County resident student a $330 discount for one year’s education.
2. Why was the burden of providing “major enhancements in Butler’s digital arena” that serve the entire student population placed solely on the Butler County taxpayers in the form of a 10% mill levy increase over 5 years rather than equally applying the burden to all digital users, i.e. all students?
3. Why would asking out-of-county students to pay a more equitable and proportional tuition be expressed in terms of putting revenue cuts “on the backs of students” when currently, there is little concern about placing their expenses on the “backs of taxpayers?”
4. Are there areas, administrative or institutional, that BCC could implement greater efficiencies that would reduce costs for both taxpayers and students? (e.g. reduce duplicative positions: currently BCC has 5 VP positions, 3 Associate VP positions, 1 President, 12 Dean/Assoc. Dean, 40+ Directors/Ass. Directors; expand within Butler County only adding capital investment within other communities within Butler County; use unencumbered funds to reduce our mill levy, etc.)
Krull would like to make this an issue that involves all community colleges. And though many counties with community colleges face the same disparity in funding and stagnant economic growth -- none are uniquely like our college. We are the only community college that lies right next to the largest city in Kansas. Sedgwick County students cross our county line and take courses that are heavily subsidized by Butler County taxpayers. Most of these students commute back and forth for one or two classes a day and add much less to our economy than Krull would like to believe.
Our issue is a local problem – particularly unique because of our proximity to Wichita. Our Board of Trustees have full authority to set tuition and fees and to set our mill levy. There are certainly other support actions that can occur at the State level; however, local control bears the responsibility for equitably funding our college without further delay. There is absolutely no reason to forego doing the right thing because of a need to compare to other community colleges.  Furthermore, Butler County residents have no desire to pay for Cloud County’s Community College and that is exactly what happens when we add more state funding to the mix.
The facts are not complex. Butler County taxpayers are paying $14 million annually for only 20% of the student enrollment coming from our county. Butler County in-county students only receive just over a $400,000 discount for our $14 million investment (20 mills). Butler County’s high property taxes put our county’s property owners at a competitive disadvantage, which stifles economic growth, compared to our western neighbor Sedgwick County (that has no BCC mill levy). In addition, BCC’s enrollment continues to drop, though expenses and taxes continue to rise. Is this fair? Is this equitable?
Considering the facts of enrollment and funding disparity, I’d close with a message and crucial question to President Krull and BCC’s Trustees: Funding cuts aren’t required to implement fair funding. Establishing fair funding ensures Butler County taxpayers are paying proportional taxes for a proportional number of in-county students. This should be a priority, not a fight.
“What’s your plan, BCC?”

Rep. Kristey Williams
Kristey.williams@house.ks.gov