Rupe talked to Rupe about school finance

Wichita attorney Alan Rupe (in photo) billed his clients — the school districts that sued the state over school funding — for at least four private conversations he had with members of the Kansas State Board of Education, the Topeka Capital-Journal reported. That raised objections from Dan Biles, the state board’s attorney, because conversations with opponents in a lawsuit are ordinarily handled through their attorney.
What made the conversations even more unusual is that one of the board members apparently was Carol Rupe of Wichita, Alan Rupe’s ex-wife. She acknowledged passing along information — though she said it was never from the board’s executive sessions, and she said she told Biles that she talked to her ex-husband about school finance. “It’s no secret I thought the state board was on the wrong side of this lawsuit,” she said.
Posted by Phillip Brownlee

4 Comments

  1. sotheysaid
    Posted October 2, 2006 at 4:39 am | Permalink

    Let’s see, Carol Rupe says she told the State School Boards attorney that she was meeting with her ex-husband but the attorney Dan Biles says he was not told? Who is telling the truth here? If she was passing along information to her ex-husband how do we know that she did not pass on information from the executive sessions? What gave her the right to pass on any information when she knows as a member of the State School Board what side of the lawsuit she was on?

    Then you have Carol Rupe saying the State School Board was on the wrong end of the lawsuit. Who did she think her ex-husband was suing?

    Either Carol Rupe is lying or Dan Biles is. Someone needs to be held accountable for lying. Should Carol Rupe be removed from the State School Board or Dan Biles face a hearing on unethical behavior for a lawyer?

  2. Skeptic
    Posted October 2, 2006 at 6:26 am | Permalink

    This editorial sounds a bit overblown. BOE attorney Dan Biles, who works for the “Born Again” majority and their unqualified Commissioner merely said he was “uncomfortable” with the contact. The case is really between the legislature and many school districts around the state.

    The CJ indicates Carol Rupe asked if she should recuse herself from discussions about the suit held in executive session. No one objected to her presence. There isn’t a whit of evidence that anything but public information was discussed.

    The four week old Capitol Journal article quotes numerous officials and experts who are very divided in their opinion about this matter. None, however, not one, thought it was a huge deal.

    Alan Rupe is a constituent of Carol Rupe with every right to speak with her or any other representative elected by the public.

    Surely the Eagle can find other less stale issues better deserving of public and media scrutiny. Has it examined the voting records of Roberts, Brownback and Tiahrt lately, as they chip away at the Constitution?

  3. Roscoe
    Posted October 2, 2006 at 8:31 am | Permalink

    Of course, it was okay for Rupe to talk to Rupe, regardless, because IT WAS FOR THE CHILDREN. And anyone who would suggest otherwise must be right wing religous fundamentalists and hate children.

    If this is old news, why are we just learning about it now?

    The “more money for our schools at any cost” crowd wants to sweep another severe ethics lapse under the rug, just like the Nuss lunch.

  4. JM
    Posted October 2, 2006 at 9:05 am | Permalink

    I suppose it’s in the same formula that make millionaires of Senators. When they come in office, a lot are so poor the can’t even pay attention.

    Ethics at any level of public office I thought included standards that address the appearance of impropriety.

    Perhaps the tag team of ex-spouses were merely talking about old times and the school board agenda popped up.

    Then again, perhaps collusion ruled the day and it was perfectly legal under the law of which nothing can be done.