The Johnson County Board of County Commissioners voted 6–1 on a motion Tuesday to direct the county’s chief counsel to prepare revised ballot language and pursue a court declaration clarifying state statutes that govern the county'wide public-safety sales tax.
The motion, moved by Commissioner Hanslick and seconded by Commissioner Allenbrand, also directed counsel to move the ballot measure from the November election to a special election in March and to file a declaratory action to clarify KSA provisions cited in Attorney General Opinion 2025-13. The board approved the motion at the conclusion of an extended discussion and multiple executive sessions; Commissioner Ashcraft voted no.
Why it matters: The board said the steps are intended to resolve legal uncertainty after the Attorney General issued an opinion questioning whether the county's proposed language and use of the sales tax fall within statutory limits. The current public-safety sales tax does not expire until March 2027, the chair said, allowing time to seek judicial clarity and still place a measure before voters in 2026.
Board discussion and action: The motion instructed chief counsel to revise ballot language in resolution 052-25 and to file a declaratory judgment to clarify KSA 12-1-187 subsections referenced in the Attorney General opinion. Chairman Kelly said the county will "seek clarity on these issues and still return the ballot in 2026 for the voters to decide." He argued that the move was necessary to avoid "lengthy or costly litigation" after ballots are already printed.
Public comment and background: Public speakers at the start of the meeting had raised concerns that the county exceeded statutory taxing authority. Ben Hobert, a registered commenter, told the board he believed "this board's resolution 52-25, if reviewed by a court of competent jurisdiction, would be found to be null and void because it exceeds the legislature's grant of taxing authority under KSA 12-1-187(b)(21)." Charlotte O'Hara also warned voters that the tax would return substantial revenue to the county and to cities and questioned whether raising revenue for cities was the county's role.
Legal and procedural notes: County legal staff and the county counselor noted there is statutory ambiguity: the state statute cited in the Attorney General opinion does not spell out a precise test for when a municipality or county is "adversely affected." The board held several executive sessions to consult with counsel about possible litigation and statutory interpretation before voting. The motion authorizes counsel to bring a declaratory action on behalf of the county to clarify the relevant KSA sections.
Outcome and next steps: The board approved the motion 6–1. The clerk recorded the roll call; the board directed counsel to prepare modified ballot language and pursue the declaratory action. The chair said moving the election to March would preserve time to seek judicial clarity while retaining the option for voters to decide in 2026.