Print Page   |   Contact Us   |   Sign In   |   Register
KBA Search
KBA Advocate
Blog Home All Blogs
The KBA Advocate is the weekly KBA legislative newsletter that contains up-to-date information on legislation that impacts your practice. It is only published when the legislature is in session and is sent to all KBA members electronically via the KBA Weekly.

 

Search all posts for:   

 

Top tags: legislature  Brownback  Supreme Court  budget  Gannon  Hard 50  Special Session  2016 Session  Alleyne  Court of Appeals  judicial branch  school finance  Senate  Caleb Stegall  HCR 5005  Kansas Supreme Court  legislators  merit selection  Montoy  opening  State of the Judiciary  2014 Session  2015 Session  2015-16  annual  Brown v. Board of Education  Call to Action  civil rights  conference  Daily Show 

Special Session 2016

Posted By Joseph N. Molina III, Wednesday, July 13, 2016
Updated: Wednesday, July 13, 2016

About the Author


Joseph N. Molina III
Legislative Services Director

KansasBarLeg

The Kansas Legislature reconvened last week to begin discussing a resolution to the school finance issue. Both chambers were in session and several committees held hearings. The Senate Judiciary Committee passed out a constitutional amendment that would prohibit the Kansas Supreme Court from closing schools. See http://www.kslegislature.org/li/b2015_16/measures/scr1602/.  This is the same proposal discussed during the Joint Meeting of the House and Senate Judiciary Committee. The KBA submitted testimony opposing this proposal at the Joint Meeting. See http://www.kslegresearch.org/KLRD-web/2016SpecialSession-Testimony.html

The Senate debated this resolution but was unable to garner the requisite votes need to pass it. The measure failed 26-13. This basically ended the discussion of limiting the court’s power in the Senate. See http://bit.ly/28Xg6nc

The House Judiciary Committee introduced a constitutional amendment that would limit school funding to no more than 45 percent of the state budget and remove the word “suitable” from the Article 6 Section 6 of the Kansas Constitution. See http://bit.ly/28Z71Qo. This proposal was introduced by Rep. John Rubin (R-Shawnee) who is not seeking reelection.

Rep. Craig McPherson (R-overland Park) introduced HB 2002 that would create the superior court of Kansas and limit the power of the Kansas Supreme Court. The superior court would hear all cases assigned by law and be the court of final appellate review in cases under its court’s jurisdiction. See http://bit.ly/28XDogT

Rep. Barker did not set a committee meeting to hear either of these proposals.  So both died without debate.

Both chambers debated the school finance bill.  The House discussed HB 2003 and the Senate debated SB 3.  Both bills are designed to shift current appropriations around to fund the equity portion of the school finance case. The total money being discussed is $38 million. Some money comes from tobacco funds ($4.1 million), some from the extraordinary needs fund ($7.2 million), virtual schools ($2.8 million) and a cut for base state aid ($13 million). The cut to base state aid will take operation money and shift that to property tax relief. See http://bit.ly/28Z6NbT

After some thoughtful reflection and some prodding from Johnson County lawmakers, the idea to cut school funding by $13 million was dumped and replaced with monies from the sale of the Kansas Bioscience Authority. Should this sale not produce the needed revenue, the equity portion of the school finance issue would be buoyed by the extraordinary needs fund. All parties, including the plaintiffs in the case, agreed that this solves the equity issue. See http://bit.ly/28YqKvP, http://bit.ly/291VLQE, and http://bit.ly/298jdLd

With the passage of the school finance bill, the 2016 Special Session came to an end. A constitutional crisis was averted and the courts withstood early challenges to its powers.  The focus now shifts to August primaries, then general elections.  Look for anti-court/non-retain ads and information to begin appearing all over the state—It should be an interesting summer.

This post has not been tagged.

Share |
PermalinkComments (0)
 

Legislative Bills Become Law

Posted By Joseph N. Molina III, Tuesday, July 05, 2016

About the Author


Joseph N. Molina III
Legislative Services Director

KansasBarLeg

July 1 marks the day when the majority of bills signed into law the previous session become effective.  There are circumstances when that can be moved up but for the most part July 1st is the date to look for. Over the next few weeks the KBA Advocate will highlight some of the more noteworthy bill/laws that will impact the legal practice.

With that in mind, below are three bills concerning the courts, docket fees, notice requirements and the supreme court nominating commission that all officially became law last week. These summaries can be found at http://www.kslegresearch.org/KLRD-web/Policy.html.

Courts and Filling Judicial Vacancies; House Sub. for SB 128

House Sub. for SB 128 amends statutes governing municipal courts and filling judicial vacancies.

Municipal Courts

The bill amends the statutes governing expungement for convictions of city ordinances or state laws, as well as arrests, to provide that when an expungement is ordered for a case appealed from a municipal court, the district court clerk must send a certified copy of the expungement order to the municipal court, which shall order the case expunged once the copy of the order is received. Similarly, the bill amends the statute governing appeals from municipal courts to require the district court to send notice of dismissal, conviction, or acquittal to the municipal court clerk at the end of the case.

Judicial Vacancies

The bill also amends and enacts law related to the filling of judicial vacancies, including the method used to select the lawyer members of the Supreme Court Nominating Commission and district judicial nominating commissions, the applicability of the Kansas Open Meetings Act (KOMA) and Kansas Open Records Act (KORA) to nominating commissions, and the number of nominees a district judicial nominating commission will be required to nominate.

Selection of Lawyer Members of Nominating Commissions

The bill requires applicants for admission to practice law to provide the following information: name, place of residence, date of birth, sex, and the last four digits of the person’s social security number or the person’s full driver’s license or nondriver identification card number. A pending applicant must notify the Clerk of the Supreme Court (Clerk) in writing of any change in name or address within ten days of such change. The bill requires any person whose application is pending as of the effective date of the bill to provide the correct information required above to the Clerk within 60 days of the effective date of the bill and requires the Clerk to send notice of this requirement within 30 days of the effective date.

A new section requires the Clerk to maintain a roster of attorneys licensed to practice law in Kansas, including the information required above and the congressional and judicial districts of residence for each person. Similar to requirements for pending applicants, the bill requires any Kansas licensed attorney to notify the Clerk of any change in name or residential address within ten days of such change. Further, the bill requires any Kansas licensed attorney whose information as required above is not correct on the roster as of the effective date of the bill to provide the correct information within 60 days of the effective date of the bill and requires the Clerk to send notice of this requirement within 30 days of the effective date.

To be eligible to nominate or receive and cast ballots for the lawyer members of the Supreme Court Nominating Commission, the bill requires attorneys to be licensed and residing in Kansas (and, for Commission members, the appropriate congressional district) on or before the February 15 prior to the selection of such positions. The same requirement applies with regard to elections of lawyer members of district judicial nominating commissions, except the relevant date is November 15.

On or before the February 20 preceding the selection of the chairperson or members of the Supreme Court Nominating Commission, the Clerk must transmit a certified copy of the roster of Kansas licensed attorneys to the Secretary of State, containing the voter information set forth above for those residing in Kansas (or within the relevant congressional district for a member election) as of February 15, in a format prescribed by the Secretary of State, who then will append the unique voter identification number for each person listed on the roster having such a number. The same procedure is required on or before the November 20 preceding the election of a lawyer member of a district judicial nominating commission, with the same voter information required for each person residing within the judicial district as of November 15.

The bill amends the statute governing voting procedures to select members of the Supreme Court Nominating Commission to require the Clerk to use the certified roster of attorneys as provided to the Secretary of State and to preserve qualification certificates for five years and then destroy the certificates. Within 14 days after a selection is certified, the Clerk must create a list containing the position and year of the selection and the names and residential addresses of all persons who returned a ballot with a signed certificate. The Clerk then will transmit a certified copy of this list to the Secretary of State, in a format prescribed by the Secretary of State.

The bill provides the names, residential addresses, dates of birth, unique voter identification numbers, and dates of licensure to practice law in Kansas of all persons on the certified rosters; the qualification certificates; and the lists of persons returning a ballot are subject to a KORA request. These provisions apply to all selections of a chairperson or members of the Supreme Court Nominating Commission that have not been canvassed, regardless of whether the selections are scheduled, upcoming, or pending as of the effective date of the bill.

Applicability of KORA and KOMA

The bill deems the Supreme Court Nominating Commission and district judicial nominating commissions to be public bodies subject to KOMA. Further, the bill prohibits the Supreme Court Nominating Commission and district judicial nominating commissions from recessing for any closed or executive meeting except for the purpose of discussing sensitive financial information contained within the personal financial records or official background check of a judicial nomination candidate. These provisions do not supersede a nominating commission’s discretion to close a record or portion of a record pursuant to any applicable KORA exception.

The bill includes the Secretary of State and the Attorney General, or their designees, as the canvassers for any election of the chairperson or members of the Supreme Court Nominating Commission or any election of lawyer members of a district judicial nominating commission, instead of two or more members of the bar residing in Kansas designated by the Chief Justice. The Clerk remains a canvasser.

For elections of lawyer members of a district judicial nominating commission, the bill requires the Clerk to use the certified roster to ascertain eligibility for ballots or membership on the district judicial nominating commission. In such elections, a ballot not accompanied by the signed certificate of the voter will not be counted. The Clerk is required to preserve the ballots for six months after the results are certified and to preserve the certificates for five years. The bill permits inspection of the ballots only upon order by the Supreme Court and requires the Clerk to destroy the ballots and certificates at the end of the preservation periods. As with the Supreme Court Nominating Commission elections, for such elections, the Clerk must provide the same list of persons returning a ballot with a signed certificate to the Secretary of State, and such lists and certificates are subject to KORA requests.

The bill amends the statute governing the appointment of judges of the Court of Appeals to require the Governor (or the Chief Justice, if making an appointment because the Governor failed to make an appointment) to make each applicant’s name and city of residence available to the public once applications are no longer accepted, but not less than ten days before making the appointment.

Number of Nominees

Finally, the bill requires the Supreme Court Nominating Commission to make nominations of three persons to fill a vacancy in the Supreme Court and certify the names of the nominees to the Governor. For district judicial nominating commissions, the bill changes the number of nominees for each vacancy from two or three to three, four, or five and amends the section governing what occurs if there are not at least two qualified attorneys willing to accept a nomination, to change two to three.

Court Docket Fees; Electronic Filing and Management Fund; House Sub. for SB 255

House Sub. for SB 255 creates new law and amends, revives and amends, or repeals various statutes related to Kansas court docket fees.

The bill creates the Electronic Filing and Management Fund. All expenditures from this fund shall be for the purposes of creating, implementing, and managing an electronic filing and centralized case management system for the state court system.

A statute regarding the remitting of moneys by the Clerk of the Supreme Court is revived and amended to redirect remittances previously made to the State General Fund to the Judicial Branch Docket Fee Fund instead.

Statutes regarding the Dispute Resolution Fund, the Access to Justice Fund, the Protection from Abuse Fund, the Crime Victims Assistance Fund, and the Kansas Juvenile Delinquency Prevention Trust Fund are revived and amended to remove references to disposition of docket fee statutes. The statute regarding the Kansas Juvenile Delinquency Prevention Trust Fund also is amended to update references to the Secretary of Corrections.

A statute establishing the Indigents’ Defense Services Fund is revived and amended to remove a provision directing the charge of a $0.50 fee in various cases to be credited to this fund.

A statute regarding expungement is amended to resolve a conflict with other versions of the statute regarding the sunset date for the Judicial Branch surcharge.

Finally, the bill repeals several additional statutes, including those regarding:

  • Disposition of docket fees (previously repealed in 2014 Senate Sub. for HB 2338);
  • The Electronic Filing and Management Fund (as created in 2014 Senate Sub. for HB 2338); and
  • Conflicting versions of docket fee and expungement statutes (previously repealed in 2014 Senate Sub. for HB 2338).

Notice to and Opportunity for Attorney General to Intervene before Statute or Constitutional Provision Declared Invalid or Unconstitutional; SB 334

SB 334 enacts new law and amends existing law related to the ability of the Attorney General to be fully heard before any Kansas statute or constitutional provision is determined by a Kansas court to be invalid or unconstitutional.

The new section begins by declaring the public policy of Kansas is the Attorney General should have notice and the opportunity to be fully heard before any Kansas statute or constitutional provision is determined by the Judicial Branch to be invalid or unconstitutional under the Kansas Constitution, the U.S. Constitution, or any provision of federal law.

Before declaring or making any such determination, enjoining any statute or constitutional provision for such invalidity, or entering any judgment or order determining or declaring such invalidity, a district court or district court judge, whether acting in judicial or administrative capacity, must require:

  • In any criminal case, the State has been given notice of the disputed validity and an opportunity to appear and be heard on the question of validity. The notice must be served by the party disputing validity on the prosecuting attorney representing the State in the case. If the prosecuting attorney fails to respond, the court must notify the Attorney General of such failure and provide the Attorney General with the opportunity to appear and be heard on the question of validity; and;
  • In any civil case and all other matters, that notice of the disputed validity has been served on the Attorney General by the party disputing validity or by the court, and that the Attorney General has been given an opportunity to appear and be heard on the question of validity

This post has not been tagged.

Share |
PermalinkComments (0)
 

Special Session 2016

Posted By Joseph N. Molina III, Monday, June 27, 2016
Updated: Monday, June 27, 2016

About the Author


Joseph N. Molina III
Legislative Services Director

KansasBarLeg

The Kansas Legislature reconvened last week to begin discussing a resolution to the school finance issue. Both chambers were in session and several committees held hearings. The Senate Judiciary Committee passed out a constitutional amendment that would prohibit the Kansas Supreme Court from closing schools, See http://www.kslegislature.org/li/b2015_16/
measures/scr1602/
. This is the same proposal discussed during the Joint Meeting of the House and Senate Judiciary Committee. The KBA submitted testimony opposing this proposal at the Joint Meeting. See http://www.kslegresearch.org/KLRD-web/2016SpecialSession-Testimony.html

The Senate debated this resolution but was unable to garner the requisite votes need to pass it.  The measure failed 26-13. This basically ended the discussion of limiting the court’s power in the Senate. See http://bit.ly/28Xg6nc

The House Judiciary Committee introduced a constitutional amendment that would limit school funding to no more than 45 percent of the state budget and remove the word “suitable” from the Article 6 Section 6 of the Kansas Constitution. See http://bit.ly/28Z71Qo. This proposal was introduced by Rep. John Rubin (R-Shawnee) who is not seeking reelection.

Rep. Craig McPherson (R-overland Park) introduced HB 2002 that would create the superior court of Kansas and limit the power of the Kansas Supreme Court. The superior court would hear all cases assigned by law and be the court of final appellate review in cases under its court’s jurisdiction. See http://bit.ly/28XDogT

Rep. Barker did not set a committee meeting to hear either of these proposals. So both died without debate.

Both chambers debated the school finance bill. The House discussed HB 2003 and the Senate debated SB 3. Both bills are designed to shift current appropriations around to fund the equity portion of the school finance case. The total money being discussed is $38 million. Some money comes from tobacco funds ($4.1 million), some from the extraordinary needs fund ($7.2 million), virtual schools ($2.8 million) and a cut for base state aid ($13 million). The cut to base state aid will take operation money and shift that to property tax relief. See http://bit.ly/28Z6NbT

After some thoughtful reflection and some prodding from Johnson County lawmakers the idea to cut school funding by $13 million dollars was dumped and replaced with monies from the sale of the Kansas Bioscience Authority. Should this sale not produce the needed revenue the equity portion of the school finance issue would be buoyed by the extraordinary needs fund.  All parties, including the plaintiffs in the case, agreed that this solves the equity issue. See http://bit.ly/28YqKvP see also http://bit.ly/291VLQE and http://bit.ly/298jdLd

With the passage of the school finance bill the 2016 Special Session came to an end. A constitutional crisis was averted and the courts withstood early challenges to its powers. The focus now shifts to August primaries and then the general elections. Look for anti-court/non-retain ads and information to begin appearing all over the state. It should be an interesting summer.

Tags:  2016 Session  Special Session 

Share |
PermalinkComments (0)
 

Special Session Gearing up

Posted By Joseph N. Molina III, Tuesday, June 21, 2016
Updated: Tuesday, June 21, 2016

About the Author


Joseph N. Molina III
Legislative Services Director

KansasBarLeg

The Kansas Legislature will reconvene this Thursday, June 23, 2016 for a special session to deal with the school finance issue. This is very similar to the special session from 2005, but this time the Kansas Supreme Court has set a school closing deadline on June 30. See http://bit.ly/28J0Cst

With time being of the essence, more than 30 lawmakers attended a Joint Meeting of the House and Senate Judiciary Committees to discuss ideas on complying with the court order and several constitutional amendments to limit the court’s power to order schools closed again.

The two-day meeting was broken down in a history lesson on school finance, public comments from interested parties (school advocacy groups, the legal community, KPI etc.) and recommendations from committee members. See http://www.ksbar.org/page/judicialservices and http://www.kslegresearch.org/KLRD-web/2016SpecialSession.html.

The Kansas Bar Association is an opponent of any constitutional amendment that limits the Supreme Court’s authority to issue remedial orders or fully adjudicate cases that come before it.  See http://bit.ly/28JkzPf.

In the end, the Senate members recommended that the Senate Ways and Means Committee and House Appropriations Committee review the testimony and minutes of the Joint Meeting. The Senate members also recommended that a constitutional amendment limiting the court’s authority to close schools be studied during the Veto Session. There is a high probability that this amendment will be introduced when the Special Session opens on Thursday. See http://bit.ly/28JbkgX.

The crux of the meeting was to find a way to deal with the Supreme Court’s order on equity. Committee members were of three different mindsets on how to best resolve the issue. One group wanted to simply pay the $38.7 million. The group proposed the extraordinary needs fund and the postponing of a $25 million road project as the source of funding, but the governor was not too keen on the idea. Another group wanted to shift money around between school districts until “equity” was reached. The last group wanted to do nothing and let the deadline pass.

See http://bit.ly/28JiA9n, http://bit.ly/28IqYdk and http://bit.ly/28J0CGq.

Sen. Greg Smith went as far as discussing the original Kansas Constitution called the Wyandotte Constitution to point to the first school finance formula. Sen. Smith used the Wyandotte Constitution to define “equity;” it was an interesting history lesson, but not many committee members took it as a true recommendation. See http://bit.ly/28J1ln6.

Rep. John Rubin is a staunch opponent of adding more money and he would like to see school funding cut. Rep. Rubin, who is not seeking reelection, was an opponent to all recommendations and he indicated he will introduce a constitutional amendment to limit school funding to 45 percent of state budget. See http://bit.ly/28JisIY.

Legislators understand that the issue needs to be resolved and quickly, the concern is how to comply with the court order. Many Johnson County legislators are concerned that shifting money around will be a net loss for their district. Johnson County would like to see a “hold harmless” provision in any school finance plan. However, the Kansas Supreme Court had specific issues with this fix. Conservative lawmakers oppose adding new money to the pot, and the democrats support moving money around and fund transfers. See http://bit.ly/28J76at and http://bit.ly/28Jjly4.

It is hard to say what proposal has the upper hand, but something needs to get done—and soon. June 30 is only 10 days away.

This post has not been tagged.

Share |
PermalinkComments (0)
 

Special Session 2016

Posted By Joseph N. Molina III, Tuesday, June 14, 2016

About the Author


Joseph N. Molina III
Legislative Services Director

KansasBarLeg

Last week Governor Brownback signed a proclamation calling for a Special Legislative Session to resolve the school finance equity issue. The Special Session will open on June 23 at 10 a.m.

See http://abcn.ws/1VMWVBy; See also http://bit.ly/1PJQ4Yh and http://bit.ly/28wYOHH

The KBA urges members of the joint committee to uphold the separation of powers and allow each branch of government to exercise their responsibilities accordingly.

As legislators work to craft a solution, a joint meeting of the House and Senate Judiciary committees will consider ways to address the Kansas Supreme Court’s proposed remedy of closing schools should the legislature fail to reach a constitutional solution. Sen. Jeff King (R-Independence) and Rep. John Barker (R-Abilene) have called the joint meeting. See http://apne.ws/1XRQNde and http://bit.ly/1ZJuK5A.

The joint meeting will begin on Thursday, June 16 and extend until Friday, June 17. The agenda calls for a school finance lawsuit update, committee discussion on the supreme court ruling and public comments.

Here is a link to members of the joint meeting

In a statement made on June 10, 2016, Sen. King argues that nothing done by the Kansas Legislature is as hard or as important as school finance. Sen. King argues that the Kansas Supreme Court wants to close schools over 1 percent of school funding. Sen. King’s goal is to draft and pass a constitutional amendment banning all branches of government from closing K-12 schools. Read full statement here: http://bit.ly/1tlZQpr

While the exact wording of the proposal is not available, the Kansas Bar Association is concerned that the concept of limiting the court’s authority in this manner is unconstitutional. To constrain the court’s authority to set appropriate remedies is a violation of the separation of powers doctrine.  As Kansas children learn in grade school, our government is based on three co-equal branches of government. The legislative branch makes the laws, the executive branch enforces those laws and the judicial branch interprets those laws. It is important to allow all branches of government the power to execute their constitutional duties as outlined. To impose a limitation on a co-equal branch of government places the process in question. The KBA urges members of the joint committee to uphold the separation of powers and allow each branch of government to exercise their responsibilities accordingly.

This post has not been tagged.

Share |
PermalinkComments (0)
 

Sine Die

Posted By Joseph N. Molina III, Tuesday, June 07, 2016

About the Author


Joseph N. Molina III
Legislative Services Director

KansasBarLeg

The Kansas Legislature ended the 2016 legislative session June 1. Sine Die is normally a formality but this year both chambers spent time approving a tax bill vetoed by Governor Brownback, voted on a transgender bathroom resolution and discussed possible solutions to the school finance decision which found their previous equity fix unconstitutional.

The tax bill is now law after both chambers, by near unanimous votes, overturned the governor’s veto.  The tax bill now allows plaintiffs to have a de novo review of their cases at the district court level. At first glance this seems a simple solution but the back story deals with the sale of a large pizza company and a tax bill near $43 million. See; http://bit.ly/1sqIXd6

The Kansas Senate also approved a resolution condemning the federal government’s order to public schools on transgender student’s bathroom usage. The Kansas Attorney General will challenge the law in court.

The Kansas Senate also approved a resolution condemning the federal government’s order to public schools on transgender student’s bathroom usage. The Kansas Attorney General will challenge the law in court. The federal edict requires schools to allow transgender students to use the restroom of the gender they identify with, not their gender at birth. See; http://abcn.ws/1spFICI

Neither chamber chose to solve the school finance issue on the last day of the session. The Kansas Senate debated the idea in caucus with a number of potential solutions but in the end leadership decided not to press the issue. The mood was tense and many legislators are upset with the court for threatening to shutdown schools and some want to defy the court’s ruling.

For his part, the Governor stated that he “will work with the Attorney General and Legislative leadership to respond aggressively and appropriately to any action taken by the Kansas Supreme Court to close schools”. See; http://bit.ly/1TY8lQt; See also, http://bit.ly/1XkvC3b; and http://bit.ly/1Y4tJGI

The last big piece of the day was the failure to meet monthly revenue projections for the 10th time in 12 tries. Revenues are down $74.5 million for the month of May. This comes after the Consensus Estimating Group reduced these estimates significantly in April. This also comes on the heels of Governor Brownback cutting state budgets, higher education and transferring funds to have an ending balance of $21 million on June 30. The ending balance is now a deficit reaching $55 million, maybe more should June number trend downwards as well. 

With the legislative session over, balancing the budget will fall to the governor. The most likely course of action would be to delay payments to K12 schools till after June 30th or cutting funds from various state programs like children’s funding, extraordinary need fund for K12 and KDOT. See, http://bit.ly/1O6F0UP; See also, http://bit.ly/1UjngBE; and http://bit.ly/1TRuzqe; and http://bit.ly/1RQHTUk.

To sum up, the state is now $55 million in the red, the legislature passed a tax bill that has the potential for a $43 million tax refund and the estimate to provide school equity is $38 million. The outlook is uninspiring.

June 1 also marked the deadline to file for legislative elections or withdraw from the election. A number of legislators decided this would be their last term, retiring on the last day of the session. Some prominent names include, Speaker Ray Merrick, Speaker Pro Tem Peggy Mast, Rep. Mark Kahrs, Rep. Tom Moxley, Senate Vice President Jeff King, Sen. Steve Abrams and Sen. Mitch Holmes.

If interested you can find those still in the race at the Kansas Secretary of State’s website http://www.kssos.org/elections/elections_upcoming_candidate_display.asp.

Revenue

http://hrld.us/285Kaa6 - Miami Hearld

Tags:  Sine Die 

Share |
PermalinkComments (0)
 

Sine Die

Posted By Joseph N. Molina III, Tuesday, May 24, 2016
Updated: Tuesday, May 24, 2016

About the Author


Joseph N. Molina III
Legislative Services Director

KansasBarLeg

The Kansas Legislature will officially close shop on June 1, sine die. Normally this is a simple formality run by a skeleton crew of legislators and staff. However, this year there may be some significant work done relating to transgender individuals and public restrooms. Several conservative lawmakers would like to pass a resolution on the last day of the session.  The matter of transgender individuals’ access to public restrooms that match their gender identify was discussed early this year, but it failed to move through the legislative process. See: http://bit.ly/245REFb.

In May, the governor did sign a few pieces of legislation that will affect the practice of law in Kansas.  For instance, Gov. Brownback approved of Sen Sub for HB 2112 that amends and recodifies the Kansas Business Combinations with Interested Shareholders Act, defining key terms and prohibiting corporations from engaging in any business combination with any interested stockholder for three years following the time such stockholder became an interested stockholder, and makes other updates to the entire code.

The governor also signed off on House Sub for SB 128 which requires applicants for admission to practice law to provide the following information: name, place of residence, date of birth, sex, and the last four digits of the person’s Social Security number or the person’s full driver’s license or non-driver identification card number. A pending applicant must notify the Clerk of the Supreme Court (Clerk) in writing of any change in name or address within ten days of such change. The bill requires any person whose application is pending as of the effective date of the bill to provide the correct information required above to the Clerk within 60 days of the effective date of the bill, and requires the Clerk to send notice of this requirement within 30 days of the effective date.  This roster of licensed attorneys will be used to receive and cast ballots for lawyer members of the supreme court nominating commission.  These elections will be administered by the Kansas Secretary of State’s Office.

To view all the other bills approved and set to become law on July 1, please visit the following links:

http://www.kslegresearch.org/... 2016-preliminary-summary.pdf

http://www.kslegresearch.org/... 2016-preliminary-summary-supp-I.pdf

http://www.kslegresearch.org/... 2016-preliminary-summary-supp-II.pdf

After sine die, the legislature will close the lawmaking portion of the year and jump immediately into the election season.  We have already seen a number of ads and postcards aimed at the Kansas Supreme Court, and the Kansas GOP passed a resolution to non-retain four justices (Nuss, Luckert, Biles and Beier).  The supreme court seats up for retention election are held by Chief Justice Lawton Nuss, Justice Marla Luckert, Justice Carol Beier, Justice Daniel Biles and Justice Caleb Stegall. If retained, a justice serves for six years prior to the next retention election. Judges Steve Leben, Joseph Pierron, David E. Bruns, G. Gordon Atcheson, Karen Arnold-Burger and Kathryn Gardner hold the appeals court seats up for retention election in 2016. If retained, an appeals court judge serves for four years prior to the next retention election. Outside of the presidential race, the retention election vote looks to be the most intriguing of the lot.

However, all 165 Kansas legislative seats are up for election and with the large amount of retirements from office or individuals not seeking re-election we could see a swing towards the political center. The candidate list has grown significantly this last few weeks. 

Here is an updated list for the Kansas Secretary of State’s website. http://www.kssos.org/elections/elections_upcoming_candidate_display.asp

Interestingly, Kansas voter turnout over the last four presidential election cycles runs nearly 16 percent higher (58.25%) than in the previous four non-presidential election years (42.9%). The last day to register to vote for the Kansas State Primary Election is July 12, 2016.  The last day to vote in the general election is October 18, 2016.

This post has not been tagged.

Share |
PermalinkComments (0)
 

Adjournment!

Posted By Joseph N. Molina III, Tuesday, May 03, 2016

About the Author


Joseph N. Molina III
Legislative Services Director

KansasBarLeg

Early Monday morning the Kansas Legislature closed shop and headed home. The session lasted a mere 73 days, tied for the 4th shortest in history. However, add that to the 110 day record session from 2015 and the two-year running total is three days more than expected.

The legislature closed out the year by voting on the state budget (Sub for SB 249) which transfers heavily from KDOT, delays payments to KPERS and makes another round of cuts to higher education. The approved budget gives the governor more authority to handle shortfalls with further cuts with the exception of K-12.

See; http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2016/may/02/lawmakers-end-session-after-narrowly-passing-budge/;

See also; http://www.kansas.com/news/politics-government/article75256752.html

and; http://www.kansascity.com/news/local/news-columns-blogs/the-buzz/article75097932.html

In total the budget provides for $480 million in cuts by the executive, transfer of $115 million from KDOT and delaying $100 million from KPERS. All of this came after the House failed to close the 2012 LLC loophole and the Senate decided against the issue in committee.

For the KBA’s part the legislature passed its Kansas General Corporate Code update (Senate Sub for HB 2112) mere hours before the budget debate began. The corporate code update would have been a casualty of a shorter veto session, however, the Judiciary Conference Committee found time when issues surrounding a health bill sprung up. Many thanks to Judiciary Conference Committee for getting this important piece of legislation across the finish line.  Special thanks to Chairman King, Chairman Barker, Rep. Carmichael, Rep. Bruchman and Rep. Macheers.  The bill now heads to the governor for approval.

Another bill approved during veto session was a conference committee report House Sub for SB 128.  The base bill, SB 128 amends the process for filling district court judge vacancies expanding the number of nominees sent to the governor from no less than three to no more than five. In addition, when the local district judicial nominating commission stops accepting nominations, the bill requires the chairperson to make the name of each person whose nomination is accepted available to the public no less than 10 days prior to submitting to the governor.

Additionally, House sub for SB 128 included some portions of SB 197.  SB 197 would amend and create law related to the roster of Kansas attorneys, selection of lawyer members of judicial district nominating commissions, and the applicability of the Kansas Open Meetings Act (KOMA) and Kansas Open Records Act (KORA).

The Judicial Branch had its budget worked on during veto session with the passage of House sub for SB 255. This bill creates new law while reviving previously repealed statutes related to Kansas court docket fees as a result of the Solomon court case. In essence, House sub for SB 255 returns the judicial budget to the position it held immediately prior to the Solomon ruling. This includes all docket fee authority, dispositive motion fees, and surcharge limits.  Everything would be put back into place except for the non-severability clause and the provisions the Solomon case found unconstitutional.

The remaining judicial budget fixes (SB 440 and SB 454) introduced by Sen. Jeff King will be referred to the Kansas Judicial Council for further study or be reviewed in an interim committee. This determination will take place at a later date.

The official close of the session, also called Sine Die, is scheduled for 10 a.m. on June 1. This is purely ceremonial and no business is on the agenda.  It also marks the opening of campaign contributions season. Look for those in your mailbox.

It should be noted that the Kansas Supreme Court is scheduled to hear arguments on the constitutionality of the school finance equity legislation passed earlier this spring.  Should that law be found unconstitutional, the legislature may be called back for a special session. It really all depends on how the court rules.

In the meantime, please take a look at the Kansas Legislative website for a summary of bills that have passed and been signed into law. 

Summary of Legislation:

http://www.kslegresearch.org/KLRD-web/Publications/SummaryofLegislation/PreliminarySummaries/2016-preliminary-summary.pdf

http://www.kslegresearch.org/KLRD-web/Publications/SummaryofLegislation/PreliminarySummaries/2016-preliminary-summary-supp-I.pdf

Another summary is due in June.

This post has not been tagged.

Share |
PermalinkComments (0)
 

Veto Session Kicks Off

Posted By Joseph N. Molina III, Tuesday, April 26, 2016

About the Author


Joseph N. Molina III
Legislative Services Director

KansasBarLeg

Legislators are starting to trickle in to Topeka to wrap up the 2016 legislative session.  The main goal is to figure out how to balance the state budget after a poor Consensus Revenue Estimate. The new forecast has the state $347 million below previous estimates.  The governor has proposed three ideas on closing the gap, but none include raising revenue. The main contributors for closing the gap would be shifting money from KDOT and KPERS. All three proposals call for a 3 percent, or $17 million, cut to higher education, a transfer of $185 million from KDOT and the possibility of delaying a KPERS payment. It should be noted that this is not tied to the governor’s authority to borrow up to $100 million from KPERS with repayment this fall with 8 percent interest.

One option would also allow the state to sell off future tobacco payments. This idea was roundly criticized by advocates for children.

One option would also allow the state to sell off future tobacco payments. This idea was roundly criticized by advocates for children. Another option would be an across-the-board cut for all state agencies, K-12 education and Medicaid. See; http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2016/apr/20/new-kansas-revenue-forecast-expected-spur-budget-c/

Adding to the pressure is yesterday’s announcement by Standard & Poor that Kansas has been put on a credit watch with the intent to lower the state’s credit rating based on poor revenue numbers. See; http://www.kansascity.com/news/politics-government/article73789707.html

The idea of closing the LLC loophole has gained some momentum over the break, but the governor is still not ready to support the action. How members of the legislature (who are up for re-election) and the governor (who is not) broker a compromise remains to be seen.

The legislature has competed some of its work by passing several bills prior to the break. Here is a summary put out by the Kansas Legislative Research Department. One more summary will be released after the session closes.

http://www.kslegresearch.org/KLRD-web/Publications/SummaryofLegislation/PreliminarySummaries/2016-preliminary-summary.pdf

http://www.kslegresearch.org/KLRD-web/Publications/SummaryofLegislation/PreliminarySummaries/2016-preliminary-summary-supp-I.pdf

To break up the routine committee meeting process, the Kansas Bar Association is hosting a CLE at the Capitol again this year. This CLE is free to any lawyer-legislator. Special thanks to the Kansas Disciplinary Officer for presenting this CLE. The CLE will take place at noon on May 4.

This post has not been tagged.

Share |
PermalinkComments (0)
 

Veto Session Outlook

Posted By Joseph N. Molina III, Tuesday, April 05, 2016
Updated: Tuesday, April 05, 2016

About the Author


Joseph N. Molina III
Legislative Services Director

KansasBarLeg

The Kansas legislature will resume its work on Wednesday, April 27. There is hallway talk that the session could last a few days, unlike last year’s record-breaking occurrence. During veto session, leadership determines when the session will come to an end; this could last from a few days to several weeks. This year, with a busy first week back, it is not unreasonable to believe the session will last more than a week.

The main issue is how poorly the April Consensus Revenue Estimates tend to come back. If revenue falls just short—like in March ($1.6 million under)—then things will move quickly. But if things get worse and numbers run similar to February ($54 million under), we may be in for a longer haul. News reports have indicated the governor has several options he could use to shore up the state budget. Sweeping from the Kansas Department of Transportation (KDOT) is always a consideration, and using his newly created authority to borrow from The Kansas Public Employees Retirement System (KPERS) dollars is another. The governor could also sell off future tobacco payments to stabilize the budget, but that seems unlikely.

The Kansas Supreme Court’s budget is in a very different position. After discussions with OJA and KDJA representatives, the judicial branch should be able to maintain its current level of service without interruptions if the major portions of the FY 15 budget remain in place. However, the judicial branch could be impacted if revenues plunge, forcing the governor to make across-the-board cuts to deal with any budget shortfall.

Forgoing that scenario, focus is on the future of the judicial branch. Sen. King introduced two bills dealing with this issue: The first is SB 440 that appears to clarify the role the Kansas Supreme Court plays in the judicial branch. The other bill, SB 454 deals with docket fees and gives authority to the Kansas Supreme Court to set rates. Both bills have been passed by the Kansas Senate.

SB 440

Supreme court’s authority of the judicial branch

SB 454

Docket fees

The Kansas House introduced their own fix to the Solomon decision and it is quite simple. Under their proposal, the judicial budget would return the court to the position it held immediately prior to the Solomon ruling. This would include all docket fee authority, dispositive motion fees, and surcharge limits. Everything would be put back into place except for the non-severability clause and the provisions the Solomon case found unconstitutional. The bill, House Sub for SB 255, cleared the Kansas House 122-0. The faith of the bill will be determined by the Judicial Conference Committee and its 6 members.

OJA also recommended raises for judges and staff, along with funds to fill the 80 full-time positions and other positions recommended by the Blue Ribbon Commission. Unfortunately, the legislature does not have the funds to make these recommendations law. Moreover, during a hearing on the topic, many found raises for judges to be ludicrous, and they would be more inclined to increase salaries for staff. The bill did not make it out of committee.

During Veto Session conference committee negotiated bills that have passed both chambers, but in different forms. These bills are considered “bills in conference”. The conference committee also discussed bills that have only passed one chamber. These bills are referred to as “conferenceable” bills. The committee can bundle bills that satisfy a subject matter test including those bills only passed by one chamber. For our purposes, many issues will be discussed in the Judiciary Conference Committee (JCC). The JCC consist of six members, the chair, vice-chair and ranking minority members of the Senate and House Judiciary Committees. The Senate members are Sen. Jeff King (chair), Sen. Greg Smith (vice-chair) and Se. David Haley (ranking minority). The House is represented by Rep. John Barker (chair), Rep. Charles Macheers (vice-chair) and Rep. John Carmichael (ranking minority).

Below are a few bills that are being considered in the JCC.

House Sub for SB 128

Increasing the number of district court judge nominees sent to the governor by district judicial nominating commissions

A bill expanding the number of nominees from no less than three to no more than five has passed the Kansas House and been discussed in conference committee. This bill, House sub for SB 128, would amend the process for filling district court judge vacancies. Specifically, when the district judicial nominating commission (commission) stops accepting nominations, the bill would require the chairperson to make the name of each person whose nomination is accepted available to the public no less than ten days prior to submitting the nominees’ names to the governor.

There is a strong possibility that House sub for SB 128 will be bundled with SB 197. SB 197 would amend and create law related to the roster of Kansas attorneys, the selection of the chairperson and lawyer members of the Supreme Court Nominating Commission, selection of lawyer members of judicial district nominating commissions, and the applicability of the Kansas Open Meetings Act (KOMA) and Kansas Open Records Act (KORA). The KBA opposes this bill.

The KBA continues to work for passage of HB 2713 dealing with the Kansas General Corporate Code. HB 2713 has passed one chamber and is a conferenceable bill. The KBA hopes to find an avenue for passed through the conference committee process.

The Kansas Legislative Research Department has complied a listing of those bills that have already passed the legislature and been signed into law by the governor. Those new laws can be found here: http://bit.ly/22YGqDQ.

Finally, the KBA will host a CLE at the Capitol on May 4 beginning at noon. All lawyer/legislators are welcomed to attend this free hour of Ethics CLE. The KBA would like to thank the Kansas Disciplinary Office for agreeing to present at this year’s CLE.

This post has not been tagged.

Share |
PermalinkComments (0)
 
Page 1 of 10
1  |  2  |  3  |  4  |  5  |  6  >   >>   >| 
more Calendar

8/10/2016
8/10/2016 (Replay Topeka) Legislative & Case Law Institute

8/17/2016
8/17/2016 Brown Bag Ethics Replay Morning Session

Featured Members

Online Surveys
Membership Software Powered by YourMembership.com®  ::  Legal