Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Government Transparency Legal Contracts topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Judiciary committee adopts amendment to SB 242 and advances substitute for House Bill 228 tightening oversight of contingency-fee legal contracts
Summary
The Kansas Senate Judiciary Committee adopted a package of amendments to Senate Bill 242 that require political subdivisions to hold public meetings and to submit contingency-fee legal contracts to the Attorney General for review, and then advanced the amended language into House Bill 228 by substitution.
The Kansas Senate Judiciary Committee adopted a comprehensive amendment to Senate Bill 242 and then moved the amended language into House Bill 228 by substitution, recommending the substitute favorably.
The reviser summarized the amendment as requiring a political subdivision to hold an open meeting to discuss entering a contingency-fee contract for legal services and to disclose the reasons for pursuing the matter and the qualifications, experience and competence of any attorney or firm selected or being considered. The amendment adds agenda and notice clarifications, requires findings on the record that either there is a substantial need for the services or contracting is in the best interest of residents, and narrows the circumstances under which the Attorney General must disapprove a contract. The AG’s review period in the amendment was shortened from 90 days to 45 days; if the AG refuses approval the office must provide a written, detailed explanation. The amendment adds a definition of "legal services" with enumerated exemptions (bond counsel, debt collection, recoupment actions, trustees selling property) and excludes water utilities from the definition of political subdivision for this section. It also made the AG’s review of some pre-existing contracts discretionary and narrowed the retroactivity window.
Senator Corson objected to adopting the amendment without additional stakeholder input, calling it a substantial rewrite of the bill and arguing committee members had not had time to vet the changes with proponents and opponents. The chair noted the amendment was negotiated with the Attorney General’s office and the Kansas League of Municipalities.
The committee then voted on the amendment by division; the chair announced the tally as 9 in favor and 3 opposed and ruled the motion passed. The committee subsequently moved to open House Bill 228 for the purpose of replacing its contents with the amended SB 242 language and then voted to pass the Senate substitute for House Bill 228 recommended favorably; the motion carried (the committee did not read a roll-call tally for the final motion).
Why it matters: The amendment increases public transparency and state oversight of contingency-fee contracts entered by counties, cities and other political subdivisions by requiring public discussion, disclosure of attorney qualifications and a shortened, mandatory AG review with a written explanation for disapproval. Supporters framed the changes as transparency and accountability measures; opponents argued the changes were substantial and warranted additional vetting.
Key procedural actions - Amendment to SB 242 (as described above): adopted by committee (division vote announced 9-3). Mover: Chair Warren. Second: Senator Reichman. - Motion to substitute amended SB 242 into House Bill 228 and recommend the Senate substitute for House Bill 228 favorably: motion passed; no roll-call tally announced on the final motion.
The committee adjourned after completing the action.
