Various news reports have suggested the major issues facing Kansas legislators as they gather in Topeka to begin the 2007 session. Some of these include what to do about repairing buildings and facilities on state university campuses, illegal immigration, budget and taxes, school finance, gambling, and health and social services for Kansans.

There is one glaring omission, and this is what might happen at the Kansas University Hospital in Kansas City, Kan., and a potential new relationship of the hospital and the KU School of Medicine with St. Luke’s Hospital in Kansas City, Mo., and perhaps several other Kansas City, Mo., health/research facilities.

At the present time, some Kansas City civic leaders, as well as officials of St. Luke’s Hospital, Gov. Kathleen Sebelius, KU Chancellor Robert Hemenway and KU Medical Center Executive Vice Chancellor Barbara Atkinson all are making a hard drive to force the KU School of Medicine and KU Hospital to form a relationship with St. Luke’s. St. Luke’s wants the brand name of the KU School of Medicine and the use of KU medical school graduates as residents and interns.

For this, they, along with some unnamed Kansas City individuals or business interests, will come up with approximately $200 million to seal the deal.

When KU Hospital officials learned of the behind-closed-doors dealings by some at their sister institution – primarily Dr. Atkinson, Irv Hockaday of Kansas City and St. Luke’s officials – they expressed their concern. They offered $400 million over 10 years to maintain the current relationship between the hospital and the medical school.

Those pushing the plan had hoped to have it all wrapped up by late December or very early January, before Kansas legislators assembled in Topeka. Evidently those favoring the plan thought they could seal the deal without Kansas lawmakers or the Kansas Board of Regents getting involved. Never mind that KU Medical Center and its School of Medicine have received hundreds of millions of dollars over the years from Kansas taxpayers. Those putting the scheme together didn’t think they needed the approval of Kansas lawmakers.

This didn’t go over well with some Kansas legislators, who indicated they did not like being placed in the back seat on this matter, as if they had no say in what goes on at a major state institution.

It all started in the late spring of last year, maybe early summer, when a few strong St. Luke’s supporters took a report called “Time To Get It Right” as justification for them to put together a plan to develop a close tie between the KU Medical Center, St. Luke’s, the Stowers Institute and perhaps other hospitals such as Truman Medical Center. The “Get It Right” report focused on RESEARCH, not medical education, but St. Luke’s forces recognized this report as an opportunity to try to link medical education to the deal.

KU medical school people, as well as KU Hospital people, are strongly opposed to the idea. They are almost 100 percent behind a plan to develop even stronger links between Stowers and the KU medical school and hospital for research purposes, but they are opposed to the manner in which medical education is being injected into the plan.

In fact, a recent survey was sent to approximately 290 KU medical and hospital clinical staff members asking their opinion of the planned association between the medical school and St. Luke’s. The dean and others urged staffers not to participate in the survey, but 41 percent did respond to the following issues:

1. The Life Sciences Committee, chaired by Dean Atkinson, should honor the vision of the “Time To Get It Right,” by focusing on the original vision of research and being inclusive of all research entities in the Kansas City area. Response: 87 percent yes; 11 percent no; 2 percent undecided.

2. Graduate education affiliation discussion should be tabled until the potential impact of KU clinical programs has been more carefully evaluated and, specifically, any needs for affiliation are identified. Response: 81 percent yes; 17 percent no; 2 percent undecided.

3. Kansas University Hospital Authority should be the primary hospital in the National Cancer Institute designation. Response: 99 percent yes; 1 percent no.

4. KUHA should remain the primary teaching hospital for graduate medical education. Response: 99 percent yes; 1 percent no.

5. Our brand should not be extended beyond its current state until there is consensus at KUMC campus. Response: 91 percent yes; 9 percent no.

6. I endorse the $400 million proposal KU Hospital made to the KU School of Medicine. Response: 80 percent yes; 20 percent no.

That is a very clear and strong message of opposition to the plan being pushed by the dean, the chancellor, the governor and a group of St. Luke’s and Kansas City officials.

KU Hospital’s CEO and President Irene Cumming has done a magnificent job in building and developing the hospital, which is financially independent of the medical school, although there is a long historical tie between the two institutions. She has done such a good job that she receives frequent inquiries about the possibility of moving to other hospitals. She has been under extreme pressure to give her blessing to a merger plan even though organizers of the effort tried to keep her in the dark and exclude her in the early planning of the new association.

It is a very serious matter, and those who are making such a hard push for their project apparently think everything at the hospital and medical school would go along unchanged if the plan is put into action. As one senior medical center staff member noted, “There usually are a number of unintended consequences” when people try to push through a plan without the enthusiastic approval of a majority of the players.

This apparently is turning into a political issue for Sebelius. She recently replaced Eric Jager as a member of the KU Hospital Authority with Bob Regnier and put Mark Parkinson back on the board after he had resigned, saying there might be a conflict of interest when he ran for lieutenant governor. Now that he is lieutenant governor, there apparently isn’t any conflict of interest? Also, KU’s new provost, Richard Lariviere, was placed on the board by the governor.

Cumming is reported to be strong in her opposition to the medical school-St. Luke’s deal, but now she faces the efforts of the governor, the chancellor, the dean, the provost, the lieutenant governor and likely Regnier and several other board members to jam this move down her throat. Should the hospital become a political pawn?

There is one more matter concerning all the talk about the $200 million or more that some on the Missouri and St. Luke’s team are willing to put into the effort. It is understood this money would not go to the KU medical school or KU Hospital or any KU endowment plan but would be placed in control of the Kansas City Life Sciences organization. Those wishing to take advantage of this fund would have to apply and get the OK from those serving on this Kansas City organization.

On the other hand, the KU Hospital offer of $400 million would go to the KU Medical Center, not a Kansas City organization.

Some may think the fireworks are over and that they can slide this by Kansas lawmakers. It may end up that way, but at least one powerful and influential Kansas lawmaker has said he intends to get some answers and not have this move bulldozed through the Legislature.

It’s too bad politics, egos, turf wars, small thinking and selfish interests have colored this issue. KU medical school and hospital officials are strong in their support of greater research cooperation with Stowers and even St. Luke’s, but they are opposed to giving away the brand name of the KU Medical Center for $200 million and they do not want to do anything that would seriously jeopardize the KU Hospital or the educational excellence of the KU medical school.