Lawrence Journal-World opinion section

To give the state more “flexibility” as it considers how to close its ongoing budget gap, Gov. Sam Brownback announced Friday that he would delay a $92.6 million payment to the Kansas Public Employees Retirement System.

Budget Director Shawn Sullivan said it hadn’t been decided whether to use some or all of the KPERS money to address what now is a $30 million revenue shortfall, but the governor wants to keep that option open. Much depends on new revenue estimates that are due out later this month. The situation could get better or worse during the last three months of the fiscal year, but recent history indicates the revenue gap is more likely to widen than to narrow.

The KPERS decision is not without some cost to the state, which must pay 8 percent interest on the delayed payment and complete that payment no later than Oct. 1. It’s also not a particularly popular move with current and retired state employees. Officials say the action will have no impact on benefits for current retirees, but it aggravates ongoing concerns about the solvency of KPERS.

The KPERS delay was one of several strategies that reportedly were — and may still be — under consideration to address the revenue shortfall, including additional funding “sweeps” from the Kansas Department of Transportation. Sen. Ty Masterson, chairman of the Senate Ways and Means Committee, said last week that taking more money from KDOT might be acceptable. “I think it’s because everybody concedes we have a great transportation system and if you were going to delay something, that’s where you would go,” he said.

That probably is true to a point, but the state already has transferred $435 million from transportation funds for this year and nearly $1.2 billion since 2011. KDOT officials say they have been able to continue major construction projects in the state but have had to delay “preservation” work. Those delays may cost the state more over the long run because poorly maintained roads need to be rebuilt or undergo major repairs.

Perhaps the least popular budget-balancing idea is to sell the state’s future income from tobacco settlement payments to raise short-term cash. Those payments are supposed to be dedicated to funding children’s programs in the state, but if the state sells all or part of that income on the bond market, it would have to find new sources of funding for children’s programs as well as money to pay off the bonds.

None of these budget-balancing options is good, and yet, state officials refuse to reconsider the income tax cuts that have made it impossible for Kansas to fund its budget without mortgaging its future. It’s an unsustainable and irresponsible path that should concern Kansas voters as they go to the polls later this year.