The Kansas City, Kansas, school board narrowly voted June 23 to notify the public that it plans to collect more property tax money next year.

That decision isn’t set in stone, but it allows the board to keep its options open as it prepares to approve a final budget and tax rate later this summer. 

During the sometimes-tense meeting, public commenters weighed in on both sides of the issue and the superintendent and multiple board members spoke against vilifying people who have  different opinions on the budget. 

The board is now required to publicly announce its intention to “exceed revenue neutral,” the technical term for setting a property tax rate that will bring in more revenue than the district collected during the current year. It is also required to publish its proposed budget and hold a public hearing before reaching its final decision. The hearing is scheduled for Aug. 25. 

Property taxes have been a hot-button issue in Wyandotte County. 

In 2025, three Kansas City, Kansas, school board candidates — including current Vice President Wanda Brownlee Paige and member Joycelyn Strickland-Egans — said the district was spending too much on schools at taxpayers’ expense. Only one candidate in the five other school districts The Beacon covered that fall said the same. 

The vote

In 2026, district administration recommended exceeding revenue neutral. Danita Robinson, executive director of business and finance, said that the district faces at least $10 million in increased costs compared with the current year. The district budgeted nearly $470 million for 2025-26, including for instruction, student support, transportation, meals, buildings and debt.

Robinson said some districts that decided not to exceed revenue neutral have ended up closing schools, and that the district should consider building up its reserve funds amid uncertain state and federal funding. At one point, she pleaded with board members to accept the recommendation. 

“We want to meet the need as well as maximize the use of the funds available for our students,” she said. “So I implore you this evening to vote to exceed revenue neutral, and then we will move forward together.”

Despite the recommendation, board members Valdenia Winn, Pamela Penn-Hicks and Paige voted to close off the option to exceed revenue neutral. 

Winn said it should be possible to make cuts to the budget that don’t lay off staff or harm students’ education.

At Winn’s urging, the board established a subcommittee to review expenses related to travel, cellphones, accessories, data plans and AI subscriptions with an eye to savings. Subcommittee members President Randy Lopez, Penn-Hicks and Winn will prepare a report for the board by July 20. 

“I’m not looking to take a sledgehammer (to the budget). I’m not looking to take a butcher knife,” Winn said. “Let me take a scalpel.” 

A slight majority of board members — Yolanda Clark, Robert Milan Jr., Strickland-Egans and Lopez — voted to exceed revenue neutral. Some signaled that they’re not committing to also vote “yes” in August, but want an opportunity to collect more information about expenses and potential cuts. 

“A ‘yes’ allows us more time. A ‘no’ vote cancels the opportunity to look at this even further,” Milan said. “Honestly, right here and now I‘m on a limb with this. In ‘24 I voted no. In ‘25 I voted yes. Right now, I don’t know.”

What does ‘exceed revenue neutral’ mean? 

Exceeding revenue neutral means that a taxing jurisdiction — such as a school district, library, city or county — plans to take in more money than in the previous year. 

A government body does not need to increase the tax rate to exceed revenue neutral. In fact, it might need to lower the tax rate to keep revenue steady. 

That’s because the same tax rate could bring in more money if the total value of taxable property increases, such as if home prices rise or new properties are built. 

Since the costs of competitive salaries and benefits, supplies, construction and other expenses tend to rise with inflation, taxing jurisdictions often need to bring in more money each year to maintain the same levels of staffing and services. 

According to a list on the Wyandotte County Unified Government website, 14 of 17 taxing jurisdictions in Wyandotte County wanted to exceed revenue neutral in 2025, including city and county governments, all four school districts, libraries, the community college, a drainage district and the Turner Recreation Commission. 

Only two drainage districts and a municipal improvement district did not hold hearings because they were not interested in exceeding revenue neutral.  

The debate in KCKPS

Before the board launched into its budget discussion, public commenters weighed in on both sides of the issue. 

“You need to not exceed revenue neutral,” Louise Lynch said. “This community has had it. They are poor, they are frustrated, and they are tired of the lies or ‘We’re working on it.’ I can tell you that those that do not vote for revenue neutral, we are watching. We will start the recall process.”

Dominick DeRosa had the opposite perspective. 

“If we don’t exceed this revenue neutral rate, reductions will have to happen,” he said. “Our staff are being asked to do more with limited resources, and that’s not sustainable. Our students deserve more than simply getting by. They deserve schools that are fully supported, fully staffed and fully capable of helping every student succeed every day.”

According to board documents, the recommendation to exceed revenue neutral was brought by Robinson and Lisa Walker, assistant superintendent of federal programs, and endorsed by Superintendent Anna Stubblefield. 

Robinson, who presented the recommendation to the board, said she wanted to avoid drastic adjustments to the budget. KCKPS enrolls about 20,000 K-12 students.  

“I know people are hurting. I know that everybody in Wyandotte County, KCK, is not extremely affluent,” she said. But “we want to be able to provide our students the best that we can with the funding that is available to them.”

Robinson named various factors that put stress on the budget, such as: 

• Reduced enrollment resulting in lower state funding, plus uncertainty about future changes to the state funding formula. 
• Declining federal funding. 
• Increased expenses related to special education, fixed operational costs and implementing the new state cellphone ban. 
• The board considering a cost of living increase to salaries. 
• The benefits of increased reserve funds for greater stability and a better Moody’s bond rating. She said the district’s lack of reserves has already affected its rating slightly. 

Some board members pushed back, arguing that the district can make cuts and that local property owners shouldn’t be shamed for saying they can’t afford higher taxes. 

“I would love for our kids to have everything and anything, but we have to be realistic,” Paige said. “We are not Johnson County. … At some point it’s like, ‘Hey, we need to slow down,’ and it doesn’t mean that we don’t care.” 

Lopez said those who want to exceed revenue neutral also shouldn’t be accused of not caring about community members’ financial struggles. He said all board members and staff are trying to find reasonable cuts to make while still meeting students’ needs. 

“I hate that folks make you feel like you don’t care by voting a certain way,” he said, “because that’s not fair to anyone.”

After an exchange with Winn about the details of some of the district’s spending on technology, food for staff and travel, Stubblefield also made a plea for less antagonistic approaches to problems in the district. 

Speaking for about five minutes, her voice at times shaking with emotion, Stubblefield said people need to stop treating one another as the enemy and assuming bad intent from administrators. She asked audience members who are “believers” to consider whether they are really being “Christlike” and “giving each other grace, if that is what you claim to do.” 

“We eat one another alive on a regular basis,” she said. 

Stubblefield said administrators are happy to collect any information board members request and to put the board’s ultimate decision into action, “but we have got to quit demonizing … and threatening people, because if we don’t, if you continue to do the same things, you’re going to continue to get the same results.” 

“Our administrators show up and do their very best. Our support staff show up and do their very best. Our kids show up in the best way that they can,” she said. “There is no one who wants to see anybody fail, and we really have to quit leading with creating division.”