[{"_1":2,"_123":-5,"_124":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87,99,111],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6475725,"mediaKeyId","5732123-9abe6c279c9c91a0f93edebf7a655379","parentId",5732123,"title","Board discusses objection to newly purchased library title; administration says book will be reviewed and removed pending policy review","audioSeconds",729,"startMs",5763000,"endMs",6492000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=5732123-9abe6c279c9c91a0f93edebf7a655379&start=5763&end=6492","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5732123-9abe6c279c9c91a0f93edebf7a655379/thumbnail_5763000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6475725/Lansing/School-Boards/Kansas/Board-discusses-objection-to-newly-purchased-library-title-administration-says-book-will-be-reviewed-and-removed-pending-policy-review","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6475725-a11958356e6f11c59185043cf2577684/orig.mp4?Expires=1770430309&Signature=cYC77diMx8rRuy4wY3agJwEuC-bSBRjBIh6irUH4fR3QJhnYjlJjIFCVwcFYhfkbpyQ7tI4k1Y6Z~EWyRNungD3~1-RSA~UL5Su96bzjwrFFIoigJSnY1nBnIZ00aPSDtNn0-wNMHf4ulNNB38hYe-jcA0qxsyiLsWrRx02VWTWAw4ZLMjZiTJzWpUhiEOjLzLPo23uJSrsMhCt6viJVXzNxkMkWrlLYwb1oawNqJQ7BEFpUC2wIQrstk9aUWpdZXOgP~08Ab7e4bHjsU2mFyyq008aITGbtFEYp6T79CKWn7karXuJ1FA5zJRzDBqS33HcfgjQnD8vyQpWFX2aeUg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Lansing usd469 ","date","2025-09-09T02:38:31.817Z","article","A board member raised objections to a book among the monthly bills, saying excerpts she shared contained sexually explicit passages she found inappropriate for school library shelves.

The superintendent and other administrators said the book in question had not yet been processed for library shelving and that the district follows a formal review and challenge policy for instructional and library materials. The superintendent said district staff rely on vetted review sources such as Common Sense Media and other professional services and that, when a specific title is flagged, the material is reviewed according to district policy.

Board member concerns: The board member said she reviewed excerpts and found passages describing explicit sexual acts and said she could not approve paying for that title to enter school libraries. She asked for the book to be pulled from processing and for the district to follow its policy for review and, where policy requires, to remove materials that violate policy.

Administration response: The administration said the title had not reached shelves and that the district will follow established policy for reconsideration. \"Based upon what you have read, that would not fit within our policy. So it's simple enough. The book will be returned,\" the superintendent said in the meeting record.

Ending: The board did not take additional formal action at the meeting beyond discussion. Administration said it would process any formal challenges using the district's existing procedures and ensure library materials meet district policy before being made available to students.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","USD 469 Sep 8 2025 Board of Education Meeting","oneSentenceSummary","A board member objected to sexually explicit passages in a newly purchased title for district libraries; administrators said the book had not yet been placed on shelves, the district has a review policy and will follow it, and the book would be removed pending review.","taxTitle","Lansing, School Boards, Kansas","taxId",70182,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6475729,"Developer pitches Monroe Manor RHID as short-term growth generator for Lansing; board and public ask questions",333,10939000,11272000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5732123-9abe6c279c9c91a0f93edebf7a655379&start=10939&end=11272","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5732123-9abe6c279c9c91a0f93edebf7a655379/thumbnail_10939000.jpg","/articles/6475729/Lansing/School-Boards/Kansas/Developer-pitches-Monroe-Manor-RHID-as-short-term-growth-generator-for-Lansing-board-and-public-ask-questions","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6475729-a1f3456bc8486eca01c0ca91e6c28cef/orig.mp4?Expires=1770430309&Signature=jYhgweHfv4Uep4m42ezwf8MOHfwHdhMFoBUwPChWZT7tVSN0pQOtMRh6HSiO-OyzJPar2ozdmzLqoU0siZr8oQyUxw5-KZ12HeDtn41w-46q7fgkfnoOnIBXDJQb2011I1-neBdo5bvbhbmJdYCtkXg0ZzyMgVWXqTM0xSHmyi0LRkJytZVZ1TfMqFQFHoCf9mjHCMVZLveznpgqmO4E26rW-IAVp-23kKjgH-6GlH59HMzil3qqItFB8sTAkTjBnPsAObqjkXOOIflqEXwnKCHiNtVUo3lK2Tc5D82UaT4wnBtQfaOUoT7-sZxOSZKiMMsnfHQyQMnMBdbsse6pFg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","A land developer, Circle H, presented the Monroe Manor proposal to the Lansing USD 469 board, describing a roughly 50-acre infill subdivision of about 194 single-family homes and requesting a Redevelopment Housing Incentive District (RHID) that would reimburse the developer for about $3 million of the approximately $12 million infrastructure cost.

Developer presentation: The company said it worked with the city and consultants over many months, completed engineering and plan work, and purchased the land before seeking RHID approval. Circle H representatives said the project is intentionally compact to match the housing types identified in Lansing's housing study: conventional and small-lot single-family homes priced primarily between $250,000 and $450,000. The developer said the RHID is structured to be relatively short: the district would receive incremental tax revenue within the six-year RHID term and, based on the developer's modeling, USD 469 would net about $382,000 by the end of six years and roughly $7.7 million in net revenue over a 20-year projection (figures shown came from a Raymond James analysis presented to the board).

Why it matters: The project would add housing that the city\u0000a

nd the developer say is in demand; board members and neighbors questioned compatibility with existing lot sizes, impacts on traffic and school enrollment, and whether tax incentives transfer risk to taxpayers.

Board and public questions: Speakers asked about lot widths (developer described small-lot product, roughly four homes per acre in some areas), compatibility with adjacent, larger-lot neighborhoods, and the quality of homes (the developer offered to provide examples and invited board members to visit model homes). Staff and board members asked about estimated student yield; the developer cited a commonly used planning ratio that would result in roughly 58 additional students (about 30 students per 100 homes) over the build-out. The developer said the RHID reimbursement is contingent on homes being built and sold; if the project failed, the developer absorbs the cost and the taxing entities see no payment.

Public concerns and next steps: Neighbors raised compatibility concerns (smaller lots adjacent to larger established lots) and worries about long-term maintenance of new infrastructure. Board members asked staff to continue reviewing the fiscal model and to coordinate with Leavenworth County and city officials during RHID consideration.

Ending: The developer said it will present similar materials to the county and city and work with district staff on details; the board did not vote on the RHID at this meeting but directed ongoing review.","Circle H presented a 194-home infill plan called Monroe Manor and sought an RHID to fund roughly $3 million of about $12 million in front‑end infrastructure; the developer said the project would add housing in the $250,000–$450,000 range and generate incremental tax revenue for the district over time.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6475735,"Board approves up to $100,000 from carryover for Lansing Elementary inclusive playground",5038,4275000,9313000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5732123-9abe6c279c9c91a0f93edebf7a655379&start=4275&end=9313","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5732123-9abe6c279c9c91a0f93edebf7a655379/thumbnail_4275000.jpg","/articles/6475735/Lansing/School-Boards/Kansas/Board-approves-up-to-100000-from-carryover-for-Lansing-Elementary-inclusive-playground","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6475735-1d5b1d172adb6cebd1018b626e796284/orig.mp4?Expires=1770430309&Signature=ca-8GFnMgBpsHsll~B6UIjhW5v5XR3ZH8fXmgk31Bx9eUyHNppC1gNwtVxy9bp63chOhVFsX8AMBr9Ajx5IH9ihXjxK2Ioxhr~-luYeLlkt8QBCwJMqRJgBUd8wRf9fkKvZNhW2-4VVNjqPvil5-YoWlBQAecfb-TsVo5TuUw2soaM48mG58xdZD7-gw4dFbouZaJ-6sUNK9kFG26QyI2UrcELp3KFZYkVujMuWMjv4Y4-1c3rnGA7cTkcxNaLeWQ2YrixRHRiY5CcyRcOjf-TOE7FYUyjQGjEz5In74VR2o0kh9t3YMuwmzIh-Up-lyLzhFOVrvKhZqyobpr2iLPQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Lansing USD 469 Board of Education authorized up to $100,000 from district cash carryover to fund an inclusive-playground installation at Lansing Elementary School.

The request came from a parent-led playground committee that has spent roughly three years fundraising for a universally accessible play area. The board reviewed three proposals from commercial vendors, including options for pour-in-place rubber surfacing and a \"merry-go-round\" carousel-style inclusive feature.

Why it matters: The current playground area at Lansing Elementary is largely mud and inaccessible, parents said; the proposed surfacing and equipment would bring the area into Americans with Disabilities Act accessibility standards and make it usable by a wider range of students.

Details and approval: The playground committee presented proposals showing a range of equipment and surfacing options; the quote for the committee's preferred configuration was approximately $57,600–$59,150 depending on surfacing choice, and a more expansive proposal including additional adaptive equipment approached roughly $96,000. Parent representatives said they had raised roughly $1,550 to date and would continue to fundraise.

Board members debated procurement options and whether to seek cooperative purchasing contracts (Omnia/like-state-contract equivalents) or formal bid comparisons; the administration noted the district could join cooperative purchasing quickly and that the installer would meet the district\u0000a

nd school staff to finalize site plans.

The motion as recorded authorized allocation of up to $100,000 for an inclusive playground at Lansing Elementary, with administrators directed to finalize purchase details and contracting; the administration indicated the funds would be taken from an estimated $1.6 million cash carryover projection in the 2025–26 capital account.

Ending: The procurement would include installation plans to minimize downtime; the vendor estimated roughly a six-week installation window once contracts and site prep are completed.","After a multi-year community fundraising effort, the board authorized up to $100,000 from the district's cash carryover to install an inclusive playground feature and surfacing at Lansing Elementary.",{"_33":100,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":101,"_41":102,"_43":103,"_45":104,"_47":105,"_49":106,"_51":107,"_53":108,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":109,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":110,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6475741,"Board advances policy allowing posthumous diplomas after parents asked for honorary recognition",2436,6870000,9306000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5732123-9abe6c279c9c91a0f93edebf7a655379&start=6870&end=9306","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5732123-9abe6c279c9c91a0f93edebf7a655379/thumbnail_6870000.jpg","/articles/6475741/Lansing/School-Boards/Kansas/Board-advances-policy-allowing-posthumous-diplomas-after-parents-asked-for-honorary-recognition","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6475741-74516f8601c2d4c26f94aa1d80646bfe/orig.mp4?Expires=1770430309&Signature=UUJyeyjVwx4l6Hn1Essvz7VeICv3ldQrNJSQ5gokiwmc9guTcPBmO8MqMv4kKYFh2dyMFSKZvPD0mnkIYP01XHq6Q8PhL5fWLS-WJbpmS3YS4iwHc0cVtBLymZpL6vLlfwA-mV134t6efehXeev4KCGoiadaV5DyTfBTOhMqudYvxKQgorIEY-GevcQxV3GNXd5QrV7TQ3rViVrn5ZMwXTQ0w9cGpTZBtdMKfSJaKyxp~VAgbQ8MsunY5R1rMAI8EQSGU08y6W~gIVrUZoBzd0HtkClXBhVt7IwyBne9EjbOrW5oTHFV-YH89L-7uUKDZ6wQ8PPrG2PdqA8JiZAAeA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Lansing USD 469 Board of Education added a policy option to allow posthumous or honorary diplomas for students who die prior to graduation, after a parent who lost a child requested the district create a permanent process.

Marty and other administrators presented a draft addendum to existing graduation-recognition policy that would let families choose whether to receive a posthumous diploma at a public graduation ceremony, during a board meeting, in a private ceremony, or by mail. The draft also includes a provision to allow the superintendent to recommend a diploma in cases where academic or disciplinary standing could raise questions.

Why it matters: Board members described the proposal as an effort to create predictable, compassionate procedures so grieving families are not denied recognition, and so that school staff can plan for and provide trauma-informed supports when needed.

Parent request: Andy Burris (identified in the transcript as a parent and fentanyl-awareness advocate) told the board he had asked Lansing High School to award his son Cruz an honorary diploma the year Cruz would have graduated. Burris described inconsistent responses from the district and urged the board to adopt a formal policy. \"This honorary diploma will not take away or get in the way of any recognition of the well deserved graduating students,\" he said, asking the board to create a sustainable policy for future families.

Board debate: Several board members supported establishing a policy that would spare families ad hoc decisions during a crisis. Other members urged caution, asking staff to obtain the district legal counsel\u0000a

nd to involve student groups (ASB) and site councils to ensure the approach is trauma-informed and respects student perspectives. One board member requested a formal legal opinion and a standard two-reading approach for policy adoption; other members said legal review already had been consulted in drafting the language and urged the board to adopt the policy promptly to avoid retraumatizing families by delay.

Outcome: After discussion the board voted to adopt the policy language (appearing in the agenda packet as an addendum to IHF/IHF-A). Several board members asked administrators to continue work on guidelines for ceremony supports (for example, counseling availability) and to solicit feedback from students and site councils about ceremony details.

Ending: Board members asked staff to finalize administrative procedures to accompany the new policy, including a protocol for trauma supports if recognition occurs at a public event.","The Lansing board considered and moved to adopt a new policy allowing posthumous or honorary diplomas for students who die before graduation; the proposal prompted debate about process and trauma supports and drew direct requests from a bereaved parent.",{"_33":112,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":113,"_41":114,"_43":115,"_45":116,"_47":117,"_49":118,"_51":119,"_53":120,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":121,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":122,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6475746,"Lansing board weighs tax choices as residents urge staying revenue neutral amid $30M in deferred maintenance",1209,2409000,3618000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5732123-9abe6c279c9c91a0f93edebf7a655379&start=2409&end=3618","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5732123-9abe6c279c9c91a0f93edebf7a655379/thumbnail_2409000.jpg","/articles/6475746/Lansing/School-Boards/Kansas/Lansing-board-weighs-tax-choices-as-residents-urge-staying-revenue-neutral-amid-30M-in-deferred-maintenance","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6475746-5f1b13bd4c9fd2c35cbd87f73fe9a67f/orig.mp4?Expires=1770430309&Signature=Tdh~u7g0qqtQ~1wfZ1yahLvsP01CwCtTZk18GO6FDxqVRc6NxU8LzYv8M63uk8m1WHSQv6ZSXp3yjIknozlFWAqdXFpMgJ7ZZOLsB5vcuYaQUuvHaqBNsCcNNnoW1JdHGJg1gx5PTGdCDLZ9wo5OWnsTkwR~lbrlTdr-sv7mrAm7niGl0xF0oDsXJphaP7YJWDRbZgY8490srDWavEnIpktardHvy1nkYvSCIOA~MATOsgtOhw4rL9IG66ZcyVyEWITGbZDpEjQw5h88AVidyLfjlxbO1asmJ70eaq5V6TYIeJacxrI0qV7u8mabdCFB8PXgGIqg3oLTfUQbgXCnQQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Dozens of Lansing residents urged the Lansing USD 469 Board of Education on Tuesday to keep local taxes at the revenue-neutral rate as the board prepared to consider a resolution that would allow it to exceed that rate when it adopts the 2025–26 budget.

Public commenters said rising costs and assessed-value increases make higher property taxes unaffordable for many on fixed incomes, while other residents said modest increases now would prevent far larger costs later for roofs, HVAC and other repairs.

At issue was a technical step — a resolution required before a board may adopt a budget that exceeds revenue neutral — and the broader choice about whether to seek more revenue now or push for a future bond. Superintendent Marty (last name not provided in the record) presented the district

\u000budget and answered questions about revenue and expenditures during the hearing.

Why it matters: The board

\u000faces competing pressures. Parents and some community members pressed for additional revenue to address deferred maintenance the district lists as roughly $30 million in column 1 of its facility spreadsheet; other residents and some board members warned that many taxpayers are at their limit and that increasing the mill levy would hit fixed-income households hardest.

Most vocal in public comment were parents and longtime residents who framed the choice as either modest tax increases now to preserve buildings and programs or continued deferred maintenance that would cost more later. \"USD 469 is facing more than $33,000,000 in deferred maintenance,\" said Jason Lou Van Hessel, a parent, calling the deferred work \"not just a number on paper.\" \"The longer we wait, the more expensive it will be to fix,\" he said.

Several retired residents also urged caution. \"My wife, Patty, and I are residents of Lansing School District, and we are both retired and on fixed income,\" said James Dyson Sr., who asked the board to \"seriously consider the revenue neutral rate.\" Jacob Thomas, a Lansing graduate and parent, pointed out growth and staffing changes since 2009, saying, \"It doesn't need to go up again. You guys can make do with what you've got.\" Other commenters called for equity in user fees — for example, asking that a private school pay more to use the Lansing pool — and for leadership pay to reflect belt-tightening.

Board discussion and budget details: Superintendent Marty summarized the budget items the administration recommended for 2025–26, noting several revenue and cost changes: an estimated $415,000 of additional revenue from a Heartland Virtual Academy program; a local option budget (LOB) projection of roughly $599,259 for capital outlay, bond and interest; and additional expenditures including a roughly $360,000 insurance premium increase, roughly $750,000 for staff wages (about a 3% increase), $105,000 for IT network switches (50% covered by E-rate), and $243,000 for a K–12 math textbook adoption (year 1 of 3). He also said the district faces a projected roughly $600,000 tax increase tied to higher assessed values even if mill rates remain similar.

Board members pressed for specifics. One asked whether the proposed budget included funding to replace roofs or other large deferred items; the superintendent said the proposed budget includes ongoing maintenance and some projects \"if the budget allows,\" and that the capital plan and facility condition assessment items in column A are being worked on, but that none of the large replacements (for example, full roof replacements) were guaranteed in the 2025–26 budget. The superintendent noted that capital-outlay accounting changes in prior years had been used to pay some salaries and that the current budget moves roughly $400,000 from capital outlay into the LOB to free capital spending later.

Board members also asked for clearer dollar amounts taxpayers would pay. The administration presented an example: on a $300,000 home, the difference between revenue neutral and the proposed rate would be about $94.22 per year under the assumptions shown (this does not account for assessed-value changes).

Votes at a glance: The meeting record shows the board took the required procedural votes connected to the revenue-neutral process and adopted the 2025–26 budget package the administration presented (58.177 mills proposed). The board also approved the annual LOB resolution that sets a maximum for local option budget spending. (Roll-call details are in the meeting record.)

What the record does not show: The transcript contains detailed back-and-forth about whether a bond or exceeding revenue neutral would be more likely to pass with voters; board members asked staff to refine budget options and to return with additional specifics. The administration suggested the board could revisit the operational picture in spring if cash carryover and unplanned costs permitted additional one-time spending.

Looking ahead: Several board members asked staff to provide clearer, line-by-line options showing what would be cut or delayed to avoid exceeding revenue neutral and to calculate exact dollar changes to homeowner bills under several assessed-value scenarios.

Ending: The budget hearing portion closed after public comment and board discussion. Board members and the superintendent agreed to continue refining the budget details before final adoption, and the agenda moved on to other items.","At a public hearing, residents urged the Lansing USD 469 school board to adopt a revenue-neutral tax rate; board members debated exceeding revenue neutral and a related resolution before moving ahead with the 2025–26 budget and associated required resolutions.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Board discusses objection to newly purchased library title; administration says book will be reviewed and removed pending policy review

Developer pitches Monroe Manor RHID as short-term growth generator for Lansing; board and public ask questions

Board approves up to $100,000 from carryover for Lansing Elementary inclusive playground

Board advances policy allowing posthumous diplomas after parents asked for honorary recognition

Lansing board weighs tax choices as residents urge staying revenue neutral amid $30M in deferred maintenance