For weeks, Gov. Phil Scott has been asking legislative leadership to “come to the table” and reach common ground on the school funding situation. On Wednesday, they came to the table — and the governor was nowhere to be found. He stiffed ’em.

He stiffed ’em physically by not showing up, and he stiffed ’em intellectually by presenting yet another half-baked, fiscally irresponsible “plan” for buying down property tax rates.

To me, his no-show proves that he didn’t want a deal that might be politically difficult. He’d prefer that the Legislature override his veto of the Yield Bill so he can use it as a campaign issue in hopes of eroding the Dem/Prog supermajorities.

Look, if he wanted a deal, he would have been there. If there was going to be a serious effort at compromise, he would have had to be there. His officials couldn’t have conducted meaningful negotiations in his absence.

Legislative leaders told VTDigger that they understood the governor would be there. His minions insisted that was never the plan, to which I say: see previous paragraph. Also, see his repeated invitations to “come to the table.”

It was the latest indication of Scott’s disrespect toward the Legislature. For him, coming to the table simply meant getting up from his desk and walking a few hundred feet from the Pavilion Building to the Statehouse. Hell, he could have scheduled the meeting in his fifth floor aerie and had legislative leadership come to him. Meanwhile, they had to take a day away from their regular jobs and travel to Montpelier only to find that they were bargaining with the B-team.

And being presented with a plan that was just as ridiculous as his first “proposal,” the one that was shot down by Treasurer Mike Pieciak because it amounted to borrowing money to pay for current expenses, which is never a responsible move. Just ask Scott himself when it comes to any other subject. I mean, this is the guy who vetoed H.645 because it didn’t include funding for addition staff that might be needed in the Attorney General’s office even though the AG herself said it was okay. And that was likely a matter of tens of thousands of dollars, not the $124 million he wants to spend to draw down property tax rates.

Scott’s “plan,” as described by VTDigger*, is a right royal mess. For starters, the governor would divert $20 million in projected excess state revenues — which his acting administration secretary acknowledged is “not money that’s guaranteed until it comes in.” Scott has balked at spending unanticipated revenue for other purposes precisely because it’s not a sure thing.

*Three’s no sign of a written proposal on the governor’s website, which shows you how proud they are of their work.

The plan would include another $20 million from killing universal school meals, a program with a proven positive effect on learning and student esteem. The administration would also raise $47 million by emptying out the Education Fund stabilization reserve. This, from a guy who insists on maintaining a robust “rainy day fund” for the general state budget and resists any proposal to spend any of it.

Scott’s plan would restore the reserve over five years’ time. Until then, we’d all cross our fingers and hope there isn’t an economic downturn that could knock a hole in the Ed Fund. I mean, that’s why the reserve exists, right? Because you never know?

Finally, the administration proposed making some changes in school funding to take effect in fiscal years 2026 and 2027 — changes that ought to receive careful deliberation and input from all concerned parties. It’s not something you can rush through the process in a single meeting.

The real aim of this plan is to slash school funding, in line with Scott’s generally disdainful attitude toward public education. Implementing either his first or second plan wouldn’t save a dime right now, but would commit the state to making cuts in the near future. Preferably, methinks, after Scott is no longer governor. He’s certainly not outlining any ideas for how to cut public education because he knows full well that any cuts would be politically unpopular. He doesn’t want his fingerprints anywhere near any specifics. He wants other people — say, the Legislature — to do the dirty work.

The sad thing is that Phil Scott has shown he is capable of meeting the moment. He did so in 2018 when he abandoned his longstanding opposition to new gun laws in the wake of a barely-avoided mass school shooting. He did so in the first year of the Covid epidemic. He wasn’t as careful as I would have been, but he took stronger measures than just about any other Republican anywhere. He deserves credit for that.

And it’s not like he’s short of political capital. He’s practically the uncrowned king of Vermont. He’s got absurdly high approval ratings. He’s going to face an unknown, unfunded Democrat in the fall. If any politician could go safely out on a limb to address a problem, it’s Phil Scott.

And yet, he couldn’t be bothered to show up for a meeting. It’s a damn shame.