Reno County commissioners decline to ask legislature for authority to seek countywide sales‑tax vote

Reno County commissioners voted 3–1 to forgo asking the Kansas Legislature for permission to let county voters consider a countywide sales tax this year, bringing an end to a months‑long review of survey results, potential uses and legal constraints.

County staff opened the Jan. 21 special meeting by explaining the procedure: because county governments lack full home‑rule, the commission would need the Legislature’s consent to give voters a choice on a new county sales tax. Staff listed three options for a legislative request — a tax limited to property‑tax (ad valorem) reduction and capital outlay; a tax designated for economic development or public infrastructure; or a combined option covering property‑tax relief, economic development and infrastructure — and noted the bill‑drafting request deadline is next Monday.

The discussion centered on tradeoffs: staff said a split (one‑third/one‑third/one‑third) allocation could yield roughly $1,000,000 a year toward property‑tax reduction (about 1–1.5 mills) and about $400,000 annually for economic development, but emphasized the totals depend on the rate chosen and subsequent approvals. Staff also cautioned that state law currently does not permit counties to exempt grocery food sales; the commission could, however, ask the Legislature to consider a food exemption if it were possible under state statute.

Residents who testified raised contrasting concerns. Kevin Evenson told the commission Reno County’s sales‑tax burden is already high and urged broader state action on overall taxation, saying, "Our current, sales tax is higher than 92% of the counties in the country." Joyce Wilson and other speakers criticized the county survey — about 400 responses — as too small to be broadly representative and urged the commission to address perceived waste before raising taxes. Chris Link framed opposition in moral terms, calling it "unrighteous to tax people into poverty." Jackson Swear urged that the combined option (property‑tax relief, economic development and infrastructure) would reach more residents, while Katie Link asked about the cost to hold a vote; staff said adding the question to a regular election would cost no additional funds, but a standalone county special election might run roughly $30,000–$40,000.

After public comment and further commissioner discussion about economic impact and equity, a commissioner moved to take no action at this time — i.e., not to send a request to the Kansas Legislature to allow a county sales‑tax vote — and a second was offered. In roll call the commission recorded three votes to approve that motion and one opposed: Commissioner Vincent — yes; Commissioner Winger — yes; Commissioner Bogner — yes; Commissioner Hurst — no. The motion carried 3–1.

Because the action approved was a decision not to pursue a legislative request now, there is no ordinance, ballot language or tax rate set. Commissioners said the decision leaves open the option of reconsidering at a later date; by law the county would have to repeat the legislative‑request process in a future session if it chooses to try again. The meeting closed after commissioners thanked members of the public for commenting and reiterated where county budget and survey materials are posted.