Committee on Local Government advances House Bill 2160, Kansas Municipal Employee Whistleblower Act

The Committee on Local Government voted to send House Bill 2160, the Kansas Municipal Employee Whistleblower Act, favorably out of committee after adopting an amendment that defines key terms and narrows a protected-disclosure sentence, the committee chair announced.

The bill, explained to the committee by the committee revisor, would model municipal protections on the existing state employee whistleblower law (K.S.A. 75-2973) and would give municipal employees the same legal protections for reporting unlawful or dangerous conduct by their employing agency. Unlike the state employee process, which generally proceeds through the Civil Service Board before district court, the municipal bill would give municipal employees a direct cause of action in district court. If enacted, the bill would take effect July 1.

Mr. Revisor told the committee the municipal bill "is the bill to create the Kansas Municipal Employee Whistleblower Act, which is modeled after the current state employee whistleblower act 75-2973," and added that the bill "uses the same definition of disciplinary action." He also said the municipal measure includes additional protections for disclosures of malfeasance, misappropriation of money, or substantial and specific dangers to public health and safety.

Committee members discussed several technical and scope questions. The committee adopted a balloon amendment that (1) adds statutory definitions for malfeasance and misappropriation and (2) strikes a separate sentence that would have explicitly protected an employee who disclosed a "substantial and specific danger to public health or safety" to any person, agency, or organization. The revisor said the struck language was redundant because paragraph 1 of the bill already allows employees to discuss municipal operations, including public-health and safety matters, with members of the legislature or auditing agencies.

Representative Barth asked whether the new statutory definitions were drawn from a legal dictionary and whether those definitions might be too narrow given testimony the committee heard. Mr. Revisor said the definitions were "generally lifted from legal definitions" and modified for the bill's context, and that whether a disclosure ultimately qualifies would be a fact-specific question for a court if disputed.

Members also asked how the Open Records Act would affect the bill. The revisor said the bill permits disciplinary action if an employee discloses information that is exempt from disclosure under the Open Records Act — for example, confidential or privileged records — and that such disclosures would not be protected.

The amendment was moved, seconded, and adopted by voice vote; the committee then voted by voice to pass HB 2160 favorably out of committee. The meeting record shows the measures passed on voice votes; specific counts were not stated on the record.

The committee chair said this was the committee's final action for the day and noted the panel will return to consider several senate bills and to approve minutes later in the week.