Brett White from the Andover School Superintendent spoke at length about a Kansas House Bill that laid the groundwork for new rules to be placed with the accreditation of Kansas public school. All of which had been previously based through the false assumption that districts had been incorrectly stated. The bill that had been shown before, at the request of Kansas Policy Institute, known as a conservative Wichita brain barn, was originally created by the executives at Koch Industries. Of course, the Kansas Legislature interrupted the state law for a decade for not immediately funding special education programs fully in public schools.

Public Schools would serve nearly 500,000 students that had actually been carefully governed by the Kansas State Board of Education, as well as locally elected school board. House Bill 2612 showed an example of politicians and special interests, meant to display the way that the system is actually lacking in their practice.

Their stance in the Kansas Policy Institute had shown renewed harshness on public education, which therefore would defend the House K-12 Budget Committee.

That specifically lets organizations and individuals to formally show allegiance to noncompliance with laws, regulations, and varied rules to given the stage the districts to take accreditation away, all as the bill couldn’t bring private schools towards similar accreditation standards.

In this case, the House committee hadn’t chosen to act on the bill, which in turn, would create opposition testimony from about 79 people and even praise from a sole witness, being the past Kansas House Speaker Mike O’Neal, known for lobbying at the Kansas Policy Institute at the Capitol. The intense reaction to the bill was the intended result that Mike O’Neal had been looking for, all since KPI’s original goal had been heading towards the controversial way of candid discussion regarding public school shortcomings through the district and the state. The accreditation system had been pretty obvious in how petty they’ve handled the state Board of Education’s own denial of taking away the problem districts of the credential.

Should the accreditation have meaning, the districts that had been held accountable had results displaying lack of growth in student academic performance.