For more information on the Kansas Legislature, please visit www.kshouse.org

Legislative Issues

June 24, 2008

Tax Relief

Senate Substitute for House Bill 2434 helps Kansas small businesses, supplies disaster related income tax credits, and provides tax relief for the vulnerable.

 Any corporation with a taxable income above $50,000 would see their rates reduced from 7.35% to 7.10% for the tax year 2008, that would lower to 7.05 % for tax years 2009 and 2010, and then drop again to 7.00% for tax year 2011 and beyond.

The bill would provide income tax credits for qualified investments used to rebuild businesses in and around the nine cities damaged during the disaster declarations of 2007.

The bill would also ensure that disabled individuals would not see their homestead funds reduced because they reached retirement age.  It exempts certain property used to house low-income single-parent families and creates the Selective Assistance for Effective Senior Relief (SAFE Senior) Act which provides refundable income tax credits to help offset property taxes paid on their homesteads.

This bill is another way that the Kansas House Republicans are providing assistance for our most vulnerable citizens, relieving the tax burden, and promoting investment in the state.

Funeral Picketing

House Substitute for Senate Bill 226, or the Kansas Funeral Privacy Act, makes it illegal to publicly demonstrate within 150 feet of the entrance to any location where a funeral is held.  Demonstrations are prohibited beginning one hour before the funeral starts.

This bill fine tunes the 2007 law to ensure the constitutionality of the measure.

I stand behind our soldiers and the citizens of Kansas.  Families can now rest assured that their loved ones will no longer be harassed by those seeking exposure by capitalizing on the tragedies of others.

Budget

I made a promise to you that I would be working on improving our legislative appropriations process and looking at how we can begin the process of reform.

Our budget has grown to an unsustainable level.  We have got to start looking at the impact we are having on the future of our state.  We cannot continue to spend ourselves into debt knowing full well that the money to pay off those debts will not materialize.

We worked prior to the legislative session to prepare for agency budget and appropriations requests.  My office kept tabs on our spending throughout the session.

As a result of our rushed appropriations process,  I voted against the FY 2009 state budget. The FY 2009 budget passed by the legislature provides for general fund expenditures of over $6.4 billion. 

This represents an increase of 5.2% over FY 2008 and, while that is certainly an improvement over the 8% and 9% increases that have become common in recent years, this budget still spends some $414.5 million more than projected state revenue.

The result is a budget that reduces cash reserves to a dangerously low level and sets the stage for a fiscal crisis in FY 2010. 

 Budget Transparency

 HB 2207 sustains a searchable public website containing data from the State’s central accounting system, and the central payroll system.

The website will include financial data from FY 2002 forward. House Republicans recognize the importance of transparency in budgeting which is why this was a top agenda priority for the 2008 session.

Transparency in spending encourages agency funding accountability, forces improvement in how dollars are spent and clarifies for citizens how their government serves them. HB 2730, which passed the House 119-3, builds on the Kansas Taxpayer Transparency Act of 2007 and is the first of its kind in the nation.

 The website can be found at:  http://www.kansas.gov/kanview/

Annexation

 As many of you know, I introduced legislation to give property owners a voice in any proposed unilateral annexation proceeding.  Although my bill was altered several times in committee, I fought to keep the property owner’s rights intact.  However, the cities were able to bring considerable pressure.  They used scare tactics such as telling legislators that any change to the current annexation processes would destroy economic development.  Unfortunately many legislators were swayed by the strong lobbying of the cities and did not vote for the will of the people.

When the annexation debate reached the House floor, I tried to amend the bill to allow landowners to vote to approve or disapprove any time a city attempts to annex their land. My amendment was tailored and specific so that a vote would only have to be held if 20% of the voters signed a petition requesting a protest-style election.   My amendment was also retroactive to Jan 1^st of 2008, which would have given landowners affected by the recent Overland Park annexation an opportunity to have their voice heard. It was a heated debate; however, when the vote was taken my amendment failed 50 to 69. 

The House went on to pass unilateral annexation reform.  The bill decreased the amount of time for county commissioners to hold a hearing to consider whether or not the cities have provided the services promised in the annexation has five to three years.  If the city has not provided the services as agreed to, the landowners will only have to wait one year to petition to de-annex the land.  The bill also retroactively prohibits the annexation of narrow tracts of land in order to gain access to an area that is not contiguous to the city.

As a result of this bill not addressing the needs and concerns of the people I represent, I voted no. 

Ultimately, the bill died in a Senate committee, never being debated on the Senate floor.

This violates the essence of our representative democracy.   My wife and I moved to the area because it was rural and zoned in a manner to preserve its nature. These annexation and the zoning changes are affecting the environment and community we love.

 I will continue the fight for the property rights of my constituents.

Economic Stimulus

The fallout from several gubernatorial vetoes of legislative attempts to bring clean, affordable energy and economic development to Kansas has included the announcement that a Texas-based energy firm had backed out of plans to build an oil refinery in Kansas due to regulatory uncertainty.  The firm began the process of securing land for the $8 billion dollar project but decided to focus on building the refinery in South Dakota.  The refinery project alone would have brought 10,000 construction jobs to Kansas and would have employed 1,800 after the project was completed.   All totaled, the state is projected to lose 16 billion dollars in development from the governor’s actions.

 If the Legislature is able to override the Governor’s veto on the Stimulus Plan, we may still be able to attract the refinery.  It is important that Kansas find a number of responsible and cost effective energy sources to fulfill our growing needs.  While the state should actively support the utilization of our natural resources, we must consider how best to do this carefully.  If the state is forced to rely solely on wind, natural gas, or oil for its energy needs, energy prices will rise and citizens’ energy bills will grow dramatically each year. 

If allowed, the proposed Holcomb facility will be built with clean, new generation technology and meet stringent environmental standards.  There are many environmentally positive elements to this project: carbon emissions will be reduced by 40%, mercury emissions will be reduced from current rates and construction of the Holcomb plant will develop a transmission infrastructure for wind farms across the state.

These positive elements are in addition to the economic importance of the Holcomb project.  During construction, the new plant will create more than 2,400 jobs earning over $78 million annually.  Once completed, the Holcomb Station will employ over 300 Kansas allowing them to bring home more than $16 million.

If we are careful and responsible with the project, it can be clean and produce huge economic opportunities for our State.  We will be working to maximize this opportunity while carefully weighing the environmental impact.