The next Kansas governor will take office in January facing a likely $600-700 million budget shortfall. But you couldn’t tell that listening to the leading job candidates, critics said Monday.

“I think they’re in a state of denial” said Rep. Kenny Wilk, R-Lansing and chairman of the House Appropriations Committee.

“We’ve got to have a good discussion about what the next governor’s going to do,” said Sen. Steve Morris, R-Hugoton and chairman of the Senate Ways and Means Committee.

In separate interviews, Morris and Wilk each predicted the next governor would face putting together a budget sure to be short between $600 million and $700 million.

“Whoever wins is going to be scared to death,” Wilk said. “The next two years are going to be pure hell. I’m not kidding.”

Morris called the budget picture for next year “most likely the worst in state history.”

2004 looks worse

The shortfalls, they said, will stem from declining revenues taxes on interest and capital-gains earnings, mostly unavoidable increases in welfare spending, and coming up with the $350 million needed to meet the state law requiring a 7.5 percent ending balance.

“We’re headed for another year of difficult choices either taking money out of the budget in spending reductions or raising revenues,” said state budget director Duane Goossen. “In fact, next year fiscal year 2004 is shaping up to be even more difficult than 2002.”

Goossen said the state ended its 2002 budget year Sunday, taking in $220 million less than projected. It’s starting the new year, he said, “at basically zero money in the bank.”

Candidates saying little

Morris and Wilk each said they were surprised by the dearth of information from the candidates about how they intended to respond to the crisis.

“I’m a little surprised, I guess, that our friends in the media haven’t been more aggressive in going after them on this,” Wilk said. “People really need to know.”

So far, the state’s five gubernatorial candidates Republicans Bob Knight, Dave Kerr, Tim Shallenburger, Dan Bloom, and Democrat Kathleen Sebelius haven’t said where they would cut spending or raise taxes. Instead:

Sebelius has said she planned on launching a top-to-bottom search for waste and inefficiency in government. She said she was still gathering information on the state of the budget.

Bloom, considered a long-shot candidate, has been the most specific describing a solution. He has said he would be willing to increase the statewide property tax for schools from 20 mills to 25 mills to help close a budget gap he predicted could reach $1 billion.

Kerr has said he, too, would protect education and has not ruled out increasing taxes.

Shallenburger has said he thought most of the shortfalls could be offset with increased efficiency. He has promised not to raise taxes.

Knight has said he would assemble a task force to come up with ideas about how to balance the budget. He has said he would do nothing to harm public schools.

‘Business plan’ needed

Joe Pisciotte, a spokesman for Knight’s campaign, was surprised to hear Wilk and Morris’ call for more specifics.

“I think Bob (Knight) has been very out front on the issues,” Pisciotte said. “He’s said it’s going to be more challenging than it has been in the past, and that ‘business as usual’ isn’t going to cut it.”

That’s not enough said Henry Helgerson, a former state representative from Wichita.

“I hear all this talk about how we need to run government like a business, and we need to be efficient” Helgerson said. “OK, well, the first thing I expect the CEO of a corporation that’s facing a $600-million-to-$700 million deficit to do is have a business plan. I want to see that business plan.

“Saying we’re not going to cut education or we’re not going to raise taxes is not enough,” he said. “That’s not a business plan.”

Helgerson, a Democrat, said he was drafting 10 questions he thought each candidate should answer.

“I’ll be passing them around down here,” he said. “Maybe if people know what to ask, they’ll get some answers.”

Former state welfare secretary Robert Harder has been following the gubernatorial forums. He, too, is disappointed.

“There doesn’t appear to be any serious public discussion of what the next governor is going to face,” he said. “I don’t think that serves us well.”