Whatever Kansas Atty. Gen. Phill Kline had to say to the members of the Kansas State Board of Education should have been said to the entire board in a public session.

Any way you look at it, the private sessions Kline held with two groups of state school board members at least go against the spirit of the Kansas Open Meetings Act as well as aggravating a harmful political/philosophical division on the board that sets policy for public schools in the state.

Kline met privately Tuesday with two groups of board members, supposedly to discuss school finance litigation. He met with three board members at a time to skirt the Open Meetings Act, which requires meetings of a majority of a quorum of any public board for the purpose of discussing public business to be announced and open to the public. Kline says he met only with board members who align themselves with conservative policies because he believed the moderate members of the board would be counseled by other state officials, presumably those with moderate political leanings.

The main news that came out of Kline’s meetings had nothing to do with school finance but was an announcement by the attorney general that he had told the six board members with whom he met (a majority of the 10-member board) that he favored — and would fight for in court — the placement of evolution disclaimer stickers on science textbooks used in the state. He said the stickers would be a suitable compromise for the board even though a federal judge declared the use of similar stickers in Georgia as unconstitutional and ordered them removed.

This turn of events should make the public wonder exactly what was said in Kline’s meetings with the board members. Was it a political strategy session to help the conservative board members push a far-right agenda? Was it really board members who raised the issue of the stickers, or was it Kline trying to pursue his own agenda through the board? Did the meetings on Tuesday and the subsequent announcement about the stickers have anything to do with the announcement Wednesday morning that Education Commissioner Andy Tompkins had decided to “retire”? What else was discussed in these meetings? Kansans will never know.

Officials in Kline’s office were quick to say that the meetings didn’t violate the Open Meetings Act. Perhaps their position is defensible, although the configuration of the meetings clearly was intended to avoid public disclosure. Added to the irony of the situation is Kline’s outspoken support just over a week ago for a package of bills to broaden disclosure of public records and establish an office of public integrity in his office to deal with issues related to open records and open meetings. Before policing those issues with others, perhaps the AG’s office should look at its own conduct.

Kline obviously is knowledgeable enough to find ways to get around the Open Meetings Act. In this case, it seems he may have done so to further a political agenda and deepen the conservative-moderate split that already is plaguing the state school board. Neither goal is constructive or helpful to the residents of Kansas.