The budget proposed by the Kansas governor each January rarely represents more than a starting point for the budget discussions that will take place in the subsequent legislative session. But this year, more than most, it seems that the budget outlined by Gov. Kathleen Sebelius is almost certain to undergo a major overhaul before arriving back at her desk, hopefully, by April 12.

That’s the deadline set by the Kansas Supreme Court for the Kansas Legislature to address constitutional issues regarding the state’s school finance law, which is the proverbial elephant lurking in the state capitol, essentially going unnoticed in the governor’s budget.

The governor’s action is understandable. Her proposal last year to pump $300 million into the state’s public K-12 schools never received serious consideration in the Legislature. Now she says it’s the legislators’ turn to put a plan on the table. It will be interesting to see how the legislative leadership attacks this issue.

The court’s order noted that fixing the school finance system almost certainly will involve additional funding, and the only figure that has been floated is $1 billion. However, House Speaker Doug Mays already has said he believes the state can fix school finance without raising taxes. Considering that the governor’s budget is balanced with no increase in school funding and only minimal increases in any spending that isn’t mandated for such uses as debt obligations and Medicaid payments, it seems unrealistic to think legislators can squeeze out enough money from other areas of the budget to address the school issue.

On the other hand, proposing a tax increase for any purpose carries a heavy political price as two legislators who led the drive to raise taxes for schools last year learned when they were attacked and defeated in the Republican primary by anti-tax groups.

So where does that leave us? The court has set the deadline. The governor has turned the problem over to the Legislature. The House speaker seemingly is in denial about the possible need for tax increases. Other legislative leaders are talking in generalities about the need to fix school funding, but it’s hard to see where a solid plan will come from and how any plan will garner the necessary votes to gain approval in such a divided Legislature.

The court’s ruling presumably has provided the will to change the school finance system; now it’s up to the Legislature to find a way. It will be an interesting process to watch.