Although there seems no end to what Kansas State School Board members can find to argue about, the board should try to eliminate one area of potential conflict by clarifying and perhaps adding limits to its travel policy.

The flap that has arisen over expenses State School Board Member Connie Morris incurred on a recent trip to a conference in Miami is a strong argument for some additional oversight or a more specific travel policy for the board.

Morris announced this week that she plans to reimburse the state $2,890 for expenses she had claimed in connection with a trip in April to a magnet school conference in Miami. Questions had been raised over the fact Morris had billed the state for six nights at the Fontainebleau Hilton Resort in Miami Beach at a cost of $339 a night rather than registering in time to receive a reduced conference hotel rate or staying at a less expensive hotel within walking distance of the conference.

Travel by the board currently is approved by the full board prior to a trip, but there is no review of submitted expenses. Although state employees have limits on expenses, those limits don’t apply to board members.

In response to the Morris issue, a board’s policy committee met to discuss possible changes in the board’s travel rules. Board member Ken Willard, chairman of the committee, contended no changes were needed because, “We are adults and have to be aware we are under scrutiny.”

He added that, “Connie feels duly chastised for what happened.”

Chastised, perhaps, but certainly not contrite. In announcing she would repay the state, Morris referred to “media bullying,” which some board members took as an attempt to blame “liberal” board members for publicity about the trip. Although she is a member of the committee that discussed changes in the travel policies, Morris did not attend the meeting. The fact that Morris admitted no wrongdoing may leave the door open for future disputes of a similar nature.

Before that happens, the board should recognize, as Willard noted, that the board is “under scrutiny.” The proper response to that circumstance is to review and clarify the board’s travel policies to eliminate future disputes that aggravate the board’s political differences and reflect poorly on the board and its members.