Earlier this summer, the Post asked our readers what issues you wanted to hear candidates running for Johnson County Community College Board of Trustees to address leading up to the Nov. 4 election.
Based on that feedback, we developed a five-item questionnaire centering the issues most important to Johnson County residents.
Each day this week, we’re publishing the candidates’ responses to one question.
Today, we’re publishing candidates’ responses to the following question:
Tuition: Johnson County resident students this year are set to pay roughly $100 per credit hour in tuition and fees. That’s one of the lowest tuition rates among community colleges in Kansas. Some readers say tuition should be increased in order to shift the burden of who pays for JCCC more from taxpayers to students. Currently, property taxes account for two-thirds of the college’s budget. Do you agree with this idea, that tuition should be raised to possibly offer taxpayers some relief? Why or why not?
Below are the answers the Post received from candidates on this issue:
Carlton Abner
People who use “never” statements when discussing policy are being, at best, disingenuous. We cannot predict the future. I can however say that foundationally, I am committed to ensuring that JCCC remains affordable to both students and the taxpayer. This means, both student and tax payer alike must see the value in what JCCC provides. Evaluating tuition and tax rates will always be a multifaceted and dynamic process and as a trustee I sincerely believe we owe all those involved to take our time and be very intentional about how we go about this issue. We cannot be overly reflexive nor can we be overly parsimonious and unwilling to strengthen resources when there is a clear need to do so.
My approach when evaluating how we should respond to this issue will be to evaluate where there may be opportunity to control or recoup spending, thoroughly evaluate the need, understand the gap and adequately assess alternatives. For example, the current funding structure is two-thirds from property taxes and one-third from tuition. The ideal structure is one-third covered by the property taxes, tuition and the state. While I’m not confident that the state will have additional dollars to contribute, there is value in attempting to achieve that ideal structure.
During my conversations with the residents of the county, they are clear that they are feeling the pinch of ever-increasing property taxes. They need to be heard and the response has to clearly show the value of what they are paying for as well as making every reasonable effort to find ways of relieving that pressure. At this time, I would have to say that I do not agree that we should raise tuition in order to provide taxpayers relief. I would favor keeping things where they are until I have a better understanding of the need. My priority would be maintaining the access and affordability of this wonderful resource. However, I will work to ensure that we do this in the most fiscally responsible way possible. Being responsive and innovating can’t always mean raising tuition. It is imperative that we maintain the affordability of this great resource for both the students and for the taxpayers.
Chad Carroll
I do not see a need to increase tuition as we must maintain an affordable tuition rate to provide access to our community. I believe that increasing the tuition rate will limit individuals from continuing their education, seeking additional career development and decrease overall enrollment. According to the American Association of Community Colleges “for every dollar of public money invested in America’s community colleges, taxpayers receive a cumulative value of $6.80 over the course of the students’ working lives”. Which I believe is beneficial to improving not only our county but the state of Kansas as well. With that being said the board has voted to decrease the mill levy for the past 4 years to offer property tax relief to Johnson County taxpayers. I would continue to advocate for tax relief to taxpayers if elected to the board. I would also advocate to the Johnson County delegation the important role that JCCC plays within Kansas and the need to increase state funding allocated to JCCC.
Jerry Charlton
Did not provide the Post with a response.
Lee Cross (incumbent)
As a board member, I have worked to keep tuition low while keeping the mil levy at reasonable levels. We are an open access institution that serves students from a variety of socio-economic situations, and in order to remain a beacon on the hill for all of our students we also must consider the tuition burden on them and their families. One of the ways to balance tuition and property taxes is to focus on recruitment and retention, the more students we serve, the greater the revenue from tuition, the more students we retain, the easier it is to keep our enrollment numbers up.
This past September, we voted to reduce the mil levy and keep tuition unchanged. This is possible due to the increasing property values, for sure, but it is also a testament to the people in our Finance department, who understand the need to balance spending and service delivery. This college is a shining example of community colleges nationwide. The support services we provide our students elicits comments from visitors about how impressive our institution is and what a wonderful place it is for our students. We would not be able to do this without the support from our community.
Furthermore, our college is an economic driver of the community and returns over 1.5 billion back to the local economy according to the most recent economic impact report. JCCC is a fraction of the overall property tax bill for residents, and we as a board continue to keep the taxpayers in mind when we make financial decisions. We thank our taxpayers for their continued support and will continue to utilize our resources in a fiscally responsible manner.
The third leg of our revenue stool is the state of Kansas—and that has not kept up with the property tax and tuition legs. If we want to continue to offer the great supports for our students, we need state officials to keep their promises to community colleges around the state. Community colleges are the driver of economic development and should not be left out of state-level budget considerations.
Mark Hamill (incumbent)
Did not provide the Post with a response.
Geoff Holton
As I have been on the campaign trail, it is apparent that many people are not completely aware of what a trustee does nor how much of their tax dollars are going towards JCCC. This is definitely something that I would like to remedy when I achieve the role because the return on this institution – financially and socially is impressive – 2023 study and report showed total economic impact equal to $1.7 billion. Their needs to be more outreach and stewardship while in office. As far as tuition is concerned, I am an advocate that we should always ensure that our school is accessible and affordable. To put it simply, I really like the $100/hour tuition, however I do believe we should always be competitively priced – it is not necessary to be the cheapest. As far as tax dollars are concerned, I go back to outreach and stewardship. The people of Johnson County are intelligent. When we show them the return on the investment, most will be on board with that kind of investment. A Feb 27, 2025 report posted by KSHB 41 shows that the average value of a home in JOCO equals $508,000. Based on a home of this value, the annual amount of dollars invested in JCCC by this household equals approximately $475. 2/3 of our annual budget comes from taxpayers. In order to make a real impact on their spend, we would have to have a significant increase in tuition.
Dawn Rattan (incumbent)
I am proud that JCCC has remained conservative about tuition increases, keeping our costs among the lowest in Kansas. Affordability is one of the most important reasons students choose community college, and raising tuition would create new barriers for our wide range of students who are striving for education and opportunity. Each year, our board carefully evaluates the budget, balancing affordability with excellence, and makes data-driven, responsible decisions.
At this time, I do not believe tuition should be raised. Instead, I would prefer the state fulfill its original commitment to fund one-third of the college’s budget. Currently, local property taxes cover about two-thirds and the remaining 1/3 is split between students tuition and state funds. Shifting a greater share onto students undermines the mission of the college to provide affordable, accessible education and workforce training.
JCCC helps students by providing millions of dollars in scholarships each year (both academic and athletic). In addition, students can access programs like the Kansas Promise Scholarship and federal Pell Grants to help with costs.
Maintaining affordability strengthens our community by ensuring more students can enroll, complete, and enter the workforce without being weighed down by debt. Keeping tuition low is not just an investment in individual students, but in Johnson County’s economy and future.
Finally, our economic impact study showed that for every $1 spent in tuition, the return on the investment is $6.40 in higher future earnings.
Kenneth Stokes
Did not provide the Post with a response.
