Received: from unknown (HELO legemailout.ks.gov) ([10.154.203.159]) by lgip01.leg.ks.gov with ESMTP; 26 Feb 2010 16:54:10 -0600 Received: from SWCA01.LGKS.LOC (10.154.203.161) by swhtc02.LGKS.LOC (10.154.203.159) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.2.234.1; Fri, 26 Feb 2010 16:28:39 -0600 Received: from EMAIL01.LGKS.LOC ([fe80::c504:6b9d:cdb5:4803]) by SWCA01.LGKS.LOC ([10.154.203.161]) with mapi; Fri, 26 Feb 2010 16:28:39 -0600 Received: from lgip01.leg.ks.gov ([165.201.70.119]) by col0-mc3-f4.Col0.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Fri, 26 Feb 2010 14:54:15 -0800 Return-Path: From: "Jeff King" To: "Jeff King" Subject: From the Statehouse - February 26, 2010 Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2010 17:28:37 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_00E3_01CAD37B.33814B30" X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0 Thread-Index: Acq3Mwn20tgma2poQt6DlJMErkWArg== Content-Language: en-us ------=_NextPart_000_00E3_01CAD37B.33814B30 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From the Statehouse - February 26, 2010 The Kansas House began work on the second half of the 2010 legislative session this week. I will focus this newsletter on two issues of particular local importance raised in the Kansas House. State Smoking Ban The Kansas House yesterday passed a statewide ban on smoking in virtually all bars, restaurants, and other public places. Specifically, House Bill 2221 will ban smoking in the following locations: * Public places; * Taxicabs and limousines; * Restrooms, lobbies, hallways and other common areas in public buildings, condominiums and other multiple-residential facilities; * Restrooms, lobbies, and other common areas in hotels and motels and in at least 80 percent of the guest sleeping quarters within a hotel or motel; * The entryways of non-exempt buildings or facilities; * Any place of employment. HB 2221 does not ban smoking in the following places: * Any outside area beyond the entryway of a building or facility; * Private homes or residences, except when used as a day care home; * Hotel or motel rooms designated for smoking guests if the percent of such rooms does not exceed 20 percent of the total hotel or motel rooms; * A casino gaming floor or a racetrack gaming facility; * A smoking room in an adult care home that is fully enclosed and ventilated; * A smoking room in a licensed long-term medical care unit that is fully enclosed and ventilated; * Tobacco shops; * Certain private clubs. The Governor has already indicated that he will sign HB 2221. If the Governor takes this action, HB 2221 will become law on July 1, 2010. I voted no on HB 2221. I did so after much deliberation and with considerable difficulty. I voted no on this bill for three reasons. First, when the Kansas Legislature considered allowing liquor by the drink in the 1980s, it created a system that I believe effectively balances the need for state and local control on issues such as liquor by the drink and a smoking ban. The Kansas Legislature required each county to place liquor by the drink on the ballot at the next regularly scheduled election. Locals would then decide by a majority vote whether their county would permit sales of liquor by the drink. If local voters rejected the initiative, they could vote again on the issue at a later date if a certain percentage of voters expressed by petition an interest to do so. This system worked well for liquor by the drink and, I believe, would have been equally effective for consideration of a smoking ban. Second, I have strong concerns about exempting racetracks and casinos from the smoking ban. If the ban is important enough to impose on private business and bar owners, it is important enough to place on casinos and racetracks. I found greatly troubling the failure of HB 2221 to treat restaurants, bars, casinos, and racetracks in the same manner. Third, I opposed a statewide smoking ban that did not grandfather certain businesses that had made efforts to comply with exiting anti-smoking ordinances. For instance, Wichita allows smoking in bars and restaurants that have separate rooms with fully self-contained HVAC units. As such, some Wichita businesses spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to build separate rooms with individual HVAC units so that they could attract smoking customers. To avoid a draconian punishment for these enterprising small businesses, I opposed HB 2221's failure to exempt or otherwise consider this unique situation. Unfortunately, I was unable to propose amendments to the smoking ban to correct any of these three problems. The House Committee that considered the smoking ban failed to pass the bill to the House floor for debate and amendments. The Kansas House approved the smoking ban yesterday by concurring with HB 2221 exactly as it was passed by the Kansas Senate. No amendments are allowed on such motions to concur. Thus, I voted against HB 2221 not because I oppose limits on public smoking, but because I had considerable concerns about these three flaws. I know that my position will likely upset people on both sides of the smoking debate. Regardless of this reaction, however, I feel it is my job as your state representative to explain in detail the reason behind my vote on such an important issue as the smoking ban. Property Tax Relief Package As many of you likely saw in the Independence Daily Reporter, I unveiled a three-part property tax relief package this week. I discussed the first part of this plan, House Bill 2578, in last week's newsletter and will not repeat that discussion here. The second piece of this initiative - House Bill 2707 - would reestablish the protest petition for local property taxes that existed until the late 1990s. Specifically, HB 2707 would allow taxpayers to challenge through a protest petition any city or county property tax increase of 4 percent or more. To successfully challenge a property tax increase under HB 2707, at least five percent of those who voted in the last election must sign the protest petition. If voters meet this requirement, HB 2707 would place the tax increase on the ballot for the next election. The final part of this package - House Bill 2708 - addresses the sharp annual increases in property values that can plague local taxpayers. HB 2708 would establish a five-year rolling average for residential property appraisals. Instead of taxing property based on this year's appraisal, HB 2708 would use an average of the appraised value for the prior five years. HB 2708 would prevent the one-year tax spikes that are so devastating for fixed-income homeowners. The rolling average used in HB 2708 is not a new concept in Kansas. This system would mirror the rolling average approach used by decades to value Kansas farm land. Some of you have asked me why I am spending so much time on property tax relief legislation when the state is suffering from a $500 million budget deficit. Certainly, funding for education and other vital state services, as well as balancing the state budget, are key concerns of mine for this (and every) legislative session. These issues, however, are not the only important ones. We must work to create local jobs and build a sustainable tax system that does not tempt local residents to relocate to our neighboring states. My job is to address all of these issues, and this tax relief package is part of my effort to do so. In short, property tax relief and finding solutions to the state budget crisis are not mutually exclusive. None of the three parts of my tax relief package have any cost to the state for the current or next fiscal year. In fact, these three bills will never have a significant cost to the state. Tax relief, especially for local property taxes, is not always a question of cutting services or reducing funds in the state budget. Sometimes, as these three bills show, it is a question of creating a more efficient tax policy. I apologize for the length of this newsletter, but these are important and complicated issues that need to be addressed. Thank you as always for your interest in the Kansas Legislature and for the opportunity to serve as your representative. If you have any questions about these issues or other legislative topics, please do not hesitate to contact me at 785-296-7667 or by email at jeff.king@house.ks.gov. ------=_NextPart_000_00E3_01CAD37B.33814B30 Content-Type: text/html; boundary="_000_B0D05B633CB60644A35C31737041AFFE230241C640EMAIL01LGKSLO_"; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

From the Statehouse – February 26, 2010

The Kansas House began work on the second = half of the 2010 legislative session this week.  I will focus this = newsletter on two issues of particular local importance raised in the Kansas = House.

State Smoking = Ban

The Kansas House yesterday passed a statewide = ban on smoking in virtually all bars, restaurants, and other public = places.  Specifically, House Bill 2221 will ban smoking in the following = locations:

  • Public places;
  • Taxicabs and limousines;
  • Restrooms, lobbies, hallways and other common areas in public buildings, = condominiums and other multiple-residential facilities;
  • Restrooms, lobbies, and other common areas in hotels and motels and in at = least 80 percent of the guest sleeping quarters within a hotel or = motel;
  • The entryways of non-exempt buildings or facilities; =
  • Any = place of employment.

HB 2221 does not ban smoking in the following places:

  • Any = outside area beyond the entryway of a building or = facility;
  • Private homes or residences, except when used as a day care = home;
  • Hotel or motel rooms designated for smoking guests if the percent of such = rooms does not exceed 20 percent of the total hotel or motel = rooms;
  • A = casino gaming floor or a racetrack gaming facility;
  • A = smoking room in an adult care home that is fully enclosed and = ventilated;
  • A = smoking room in a licensed long-term medical care unit that is fully = enclosed and ventilated;
  • Tobacco shops;
  • Certain private clubs.

The Governor has already indicated that he = will sign HB 2221.  If the Governor takes this action, HB 2221 will become = law on July 1, 2010.

I voted no on HB 2221.  I did so after = much deliberation and with considerable difficulty.  I voted no on this = bill for three reasons.  First, when the Kansas Legislature considered = allowing liquor by the drink in the 1980s, it created a system that I believe effectively balances the need for state and local control on issues such = as liquor by the drink and a smoking ban.  The Kansas Legislature = required each county to place liquor by the drink on the ballot at the next = regularly scheduled election.  Locals would then decide by a majority vote = whether their county would permit sales of liquor by the drink.  If local = voters rejected the initiative, they could vote again on the issue at a later = date if a certain percentage of voters expressed by petition an interest to do so.  This system worked well for liquor by the drink and, I = believe, would have been equally effective for consideration of a smoking ban.  =

Second, I have strong concerns about = exempting racetracks and casinos from the smoking ban.  If the ban is = important enough to impose on private business and bar owners, it is important = enough to place on casinos and racetracks.  I found greatly troubling the = failure of HB 2221 to treat restaurants, bars, casinos, and racetracks in the same = manner.

Third, I opposed a statewide smoking ban that = did not grandfather certain businesses that had made efforts to comply with = exiting anti-smoking ordinances.  For instance, Wichita allows smoking in = bars and restaurants that have separate rooms with fully self-contained HVAC units.  As such, some Wichita businesses spent hundreds of = thousands of dollars to build separate rooms with individual HVAC units so that they = could attract smoking customers.  To avoid a draconian punishment for = these enterprising small businesses, I opposed HB 2221’s failure to = exempt or otherwise consider this unique situation.

Unfortunately, I was unable to propose = amendments to the smoking ban to correct any of these three problems.  The House Committee that considered the smoking ban failed to pass the bill to the = House floor for debate and amendments.  The Kansas House approved the = smoking ban yesterday by concurring with HB 2221 exactly as it was passed by the = Kansas Senate.  No amendments are allowed on such motions to concur.  =

Thus, I voted against HB 2221 not because I = oppose limits on public smoking, but because I had considerable concerns about = these three flaws.  I know that my position will likely upset people on = both sides of the smoking debate.  Regardless of this reaction, however, = I feel it is my job as your state representative to explain in detail the = reason behind my vote on such an important issue as the smoking = ban.

Property Tax Relief = Package

As many of you likely saw in the Independence = Daily Reporter, I unveiled a three-part property tax relief package this = week.  I discussed the first part of this plan, House Bill 2578, in last = week’s newsletter and will not repeat that discussion = here.

The second piece of this initiative – = House Bill 2707 – would reestablish the protest petition for local = property taxes that existed until the late 1990s.  Specifically, HB 2707 = would allow taxpayers to challenge through a protest petition any city or = county property tax increase of 4 percent or more. 

To successfully challenge a property tax = increase under HB 2707, at least five percent of those who voted in the last = election must sign the protest petition.  If voters meet this requirement, = HB 2707 would place the tax increase on the ballot for the next election.  =

The final part of this package – House = Bill 2708 – addresses the sharp annual increases in property values = that can plague local taxpayers.  HB 2708 would establish a five-year = rolling average for residential property appraisals.  Instead of taxing = property based on this year’s appraisal, HB 2708 would use an average of = the appraised value for the prior five years. 

HB 2708 would prevent the one-year tax spikes = that are so devastating for fixed-income homeowners.  The rolling = average used in HB 2708 is not a new concept in Kansas.  This system would = mirror the rolling average approach used by decades to value Kansas farm = land.

Some of you have asked me why I am spending = so much time on property tax relief legislation when the state is suffering from = a $500 million budget deficit.  Certainly, funding for education and other = vital state services, as well as balancing the state budget, are key concerns = of mine for this (and every) legislative session.  These issues, however, = are not the only important ones.  We must work to create local jobs and = build a sustainable tax system that does not tempt local residents to relocate = to our neighboring states.  My job is to address all of these issues, and = this tax relief package is part of my effort to do so.  =

In short, property tax relief and finding = solutions to the state budget crisis are not mutually exclusive.  None of the = three parts of my tax relief package have any cost to the state for the = current or next fiscal year.  In fact, these three bills will never have a significant cost to the state.  Tax relief, especially for local = property taxes, is not always a question of cutting services or reducing funds in = the state budget.  Sometimes, as these three bills show, it is a = question of creating a more efficient tax policy.

I apologize for the length of this = newsletter, but these are important and complicated issues that need to be = addressed.  Thank you as always for your interest in the Kansas Legislature and for = the opportunity to serve as your representative.  If you have any = questions about these issues or other legislative topics, please do not hesitate = to contact me at 785-296-7667 or by email at = jeff.king@house.ks.gov.

 

------=_NextPart_000_00E3_01CAD37B.33814B30--