Kansas Senate Bill SCR1605

Kansas 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 1/22/25
• Refer: 1/23/25

Caption

Proposing a constitutional amendment to grant counties home rule powers.

Summary

SCR 1605 proposes a constitutional amendment to add a new section to Article 9 of the Kansas Constitution establishing county home rule as a constitutional power rather than only a statutory one. The amendment would authorize counties to determine their local affairs and government, including the levying of taxes, excises, fees, charges, and other exactions, unless the Legislature has limited or prohibited those actions through laws that apply uniformly to all counties of the same class. It also allows counties to adopt charter resolutions to exempt themselves from certain state laws and to substitute or add local provisions on the same subject, subject to specified publication, referendum, and filing requirements. The measure would preserve legislative authority over matters of statewide concern, laws that apply uniformly to all counties, laws that apply uniformly to counties of the same class, and laws setting indebtedness limits. It would also require a two-thirds vote of a county governing body to adopt a charter resolution, and it gives county electors the ability to force a referendum on such a resolution by petition. The amendment would take effect July 1, 2027, if approved by voters. If adopted, the proposal would change the Kansas Constitution to expressly protect county home rule powers and make them less vulnerable to future legislative restriction. It would also clarify the relationship between county authority and state preemption by allowing the Legislature to limit county action only through uniform laws or class-based laws, rather than through non-uniform enactments targeted at individual counties. The ballot explanation states that the amendment would shift county home rule from a statutory framework to a constitutional one. The general sentiment reflected in the bill text is supportive of expanded local control, with the explanatory statement emphasizing that the amendment would give counties the “largest measure of self-government.” Because there are no committee transcripts or recorded votes provided, there is no documented opposition or debate in the available materials. The main point of potential contention inherent in the proposal is the balance between county autonomy and state oversight, especially regarding taxation and the Legislature’s ability to preempt local action.

Impact

The bill would amend the Kansas Constitution to create an express constitutional home rule power for counties, superseding the current arrangement in which county home rule exists only by statute. It would affect county governance, local taxation and fees, charter resolutions, and the scope of legislative preemption, while preserving statewide and uniform county legislation and debt-limit laws. If approved by voters, it would require counties, the Legislature, and the secretary of state to operate under the new constitutional framework beginning July 1, 2027.

Sentiment

Available materials suggest a generally favorable posture toward county self-government and local flexibility. The resolution’s explanatory statement frames the amendment as a grant of broader autonomy and a constitutional safeguard against inconsistent legislative restriction. No committee testimony or vote record is provided, so there is no evidence in the record supplied here of organized opposition or divided sentiment.

Contention

The central policy tension is between county home rule and state legislative control. Supporters of the amendment would favor stronger local authority to manage county affairs, including some taxing and regulatory decisions, while potential critics would likely worry about reduced state oversight, uneven local rules, and the possibility that counties could diverge from statewide policy. The bill addresses this by preserving legislative power over statewide concerns, uniform county laws, and debt limits, but the extent of permissible county exemption from state law remains the key issue.