Topeka ? It sounded like a kitchen-table squabble over why the checkbook didn’t balance.

But it was Senate President Dave Kerr and Gov. Kathleen Sebelius’ administration arguing Tuesday about a budget law that mandates the state preserve hundreds of millions of dollars in its end-of-the-year balance.

Kerr, a Republican from Hutchinson, argued that in the past two years, Sebelius, a Democrat, ran around the law that requires the governor recommend to the Legislature a budget that shows 7.5 percent of the total budget in the ending balance.

“Ignoring the law is never a good thing to do, and ignoring the spirit of the law is what happened,” Kerr said during a meeting of the Legislative Budget Committee.

But Duane Goossen, Sebelius’ budget director, said the governor provided lawmakers with a realistic budget during historic drops in state revenue. And, Goossen noted, the Legislature essentially went along with Sebelius by approving her recommendations and approving budget provisos that suspended the ending-balance law.

“I think we all recognize we have come through a pretty tough time,” Goossen said.

Budget committee members said they would consider further whether to put more teeth into the law.

In fiscal years 2002 and 2003, the state ended its budget cycles with ending balances far below the 7.5 percent law.

In the 2004 fiscal year, which ended June 30, the state had a 7.6 percent ending balance, mainly because of accelerated property tax collections and one-time federal funds coming into state coffers.

In her two annual budget submissions so far, Sebelius provided a detailed budget of what she wanted and a four-page summary budget of what it would take to achieve the 7.5 percent ending balance.

Kerr said those summaries were worthless and put the Legislature in a tough position when going through the appropriations process because state agencies hadn’t been forced to conduct the exercise of reaching that 7.5 percent ending balance.

“The Legislature had an uphill battle the rest of the session,” he said.

But Goossen said it would have been a waste of time for Sebelius to provide a detailed budget document in the lean years on reaching the 7.5 percent ending balance because it would have required such large cuts in services that no legislator would have voted for it.