Personal tools
You are here: Home The Sharp Record The Sharp Record Archives 2006 May 10, 2006
Subscribe to the Sharp Record

Enter your email address to subscribe to my email newsletter, The Sharp Record.

E-mail


 
 
Document Actions

May 10, 2006

The Sharp Record
ssharp@ink.org

Friends:

I think we are VERY close to wrapping up today.  The budget is ready for a vote, but we're waiting for it to be printed.  I am extremely disappointed about how education turned out (see below), but know that as long as this formula exists, we will always give more than we get.  To be honest, I'm OK with "tis better to give than to receive", but just let us give to our own students, too!

 

My next email will be the last of the session, unless the budget doesn't pass, then we'll be back for another day.

 

I'm giving you fair warning - Mother's Day is this Sunday, May 14.  Make sure to make her day special!  A couple of recognitions: 

  • Big hello and thank you to my mom, Bev Sharp in Garden City, Kansas and my Grandma Reese in Harrison, Arkansas
  • Of course, I cannot forget my new mother-in-law, Charlotte Bruyn in Kansas City, Missouri and grandmother-in-law Helen Schmidt in Alma, Kansas.

 

CORRECTION:  In the last Record, I neglected to tell you that the private prisons bill failed 48-74.  I voted NO.

 

Sharp Shadow

Education and Personal Activities

Floor Activity

Resources

 

Sharp Shadow

Jason Leib, founder of JML Consulting, LLC, which is a computer consulting company, was a Sharp Shadow for last week.  He and his wife live in Lenexa.  Here are Jason's comments about the day:

    "While school finance is not the most exciting topic to see debated for more than     five hours, the dynamics of legislator interaction and deal-making is a fascinating     process to watch.  While I’m sure it can be frustrating, repetitive, and maddening     for those directly involved, seeing the strategy involved in advancing critical         legislation while balancing the interests of your constituents, your party, your         faction within the party, your coalition with other parties, and your own personal     beliefs makes truth of the old saying that someone repeated to me yesterday just     outside the chamber doors: “Two things you don’t want to see being made:            sausage and laws”. 
    However, I still consider my day as a “Sharp Shadow” to be an overwhelming         success.  Stephanie was a terrific host, taking the time to answer every question I     had, introducing me to other members, staff, and lobbyists of both chambers, and     making a huge effort to explain what was going on both with the various bills         and amendments being debated, as well as the use of various parliamentary rules       for strategic purposes.  Having this constant interaction with Stephanie while         sitting on the House floor was the key factor in making the day a success for me;    had I just come to observe in the gallery I would have been lost in the proceedings    and likely grown bored very quickly.  So, thank you to Stephanie (and everyone    else who took the time to introduce themselves and chat for a moment) first for      having this program in place, and second for making the extra effort to keep me      informed an involved on a long, busy day.  I would urge anyone who has the             opportunity to take advantage of Stephanie’s generous offer – it is well worth the     time."

As your State Representative, you're my boss.  Ready for an interview?  Come join me in Topeka to spend the day.  Keep an eye on your calendars for next year; the legislative session begins on January 8, 2007.

Education and Personal Activities

SB 549   One more education bill and this one's a doozie. 

Basically, our Johnson County delegation has been a frazzled mess.  One day we want more high enrollment money, the next day we want more special ed funding, but we want all of that balanced with some LOB.  Everything depends on the plan at hand, and we had the best bet when we stuck to the unlimited LOB in the original House plan.

Well, we found a plan that united our delegation, for a minute or two, anyway (See article:

http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/news/front/14541804.htm).  Rural

Republicans and Democrats (sans Sue Storm of Overland Park) passed a bill that directly contradicts the Court and leaves Johnson County out of the loop, bill-in-hand.  The bill is great for the former because it increases their funding, not cut it (or at least held harmless), like the Legislative Post Audit Study (LPA) suggests.  The plan is great for the latter because they primarily represent urban areas with high levels of at-risk funding, which is also significantly increased in the bill. 

  • Not one legislator from Johnson County - all 22 of us voted against it.  The bill then passed the Senate, and all seven JoCo Senators opposed it.

Here's the scoop:  Significantly reduced money for large schools, increases in funding for tiny schools (SMSD will receive $236/pupil, while the school district with 12.5 students will receive $927/pupil).

  • SMSD will get $6.4 million in state funding and $8.3 million in local taxing authority.  The overall increase for next year could be $14.1 million.  Keep in mind, it is HIGHLY unlikely that SMSD will use all of that authority.
  • Frankly, this isn't good enough.  The original bill that passed the House included unlimited local authority and more funding for large school districts, following the LPA study.  This bill merely incents small schools to stay that way.  I stuck with the plan that was best for SMSD.
  • As a delegation, discussions are already underway to present a united front and bring 22 votes to whatever table will work with us.

In the meantime, I think Governor Sebelius should, as she did last year, send the bill directly to the Court for expedited review without her signature.  This bill sets a dangerous precedent continuing to reward inefficient schools and a flawed funding formula.

Conference Committee Report passed the House 66-54.  I voted NO.


Bills sent to the Governor

SB 297 Direct shipment of wine bill

This bill allows you to ship wine from an in-state or out-of-state winery to a Kansas address, so long as you purchase it on the winery premises.  If you order wine online, it would have to be delivered to a local retailer, and pay shipping and applicable taxes.  It also allows Kansas wineries to serve wine at the State Fair.

Conference Committee Report passed the House 87-36.  I voted YES.


HB 2583 M&E Tax Exemption

Machinery and equipment purchased after June 30, 2006 will be property tax exempt.  For the first couple of years, local entities that lose this tax revenue will be reimbursed by the state on a sliding scale until 2011.

This bill would also reinstate money the legislature stole from cities and counties a couple of years ago, beginning in 2010.  City Administrators Carol Gonzales and Eric Wade, and Mayors Jeff Meyers and Mike Boehm should not hold their breaths on this one.  Many legislators, legislation, and dollars will come and go between now and then…

Conference Committee Report passed the House 110-10.  I voted YES.


HB 2118 Gun "trailer" bill

None of these bills ever touched either chamber, whether in a bill or in a hearing.  They basically "clean up" the concealed carry bill, depending on your definition of "clean up".  Among other things, the bill hides from the public who has concealed carry permits, unless their license has been suspended or revoked.

Conference Committee Report passed the House 93-24.  I voted NO.

 

SB 142 Campaign Finance Reform?

No, you're not seeing things!  This bill is a holdout from last year and includes 12 bills with multiple provisions bundled together (most are substantive, so read carefully), none of which passed the House.  Normally, I would have a problem with this, but the House refused to run ANY campaign finance bills for fear there might actually be reforms, so I'm happy to see this bill!  It's about time we get campaign finance reform in Kansas.

I am a cosponsor of the House reform bill, which is where many of these provisions originated.  Some of these are basic, common sense measures.  Others help shine light on who is funding campaigns in Kansas.  The guts of the bill:

  • Only the voter can sign an advance voting application;
  • If a ballot is returned to an election office by anyone other than the voter, the deliverer must have written designation by the voter;
  • Requires member of the judicial branch to file a "statement of Substantial Interest" which shows their investments;
  • Anyone who holds a major party position is prohibited from sitting on the Governmental Ethics Commission for five years;
  • Up to now, automated telephone messages were exempt from the "Paid For By" requirement for most campaign communications.  This has certainly annoyed me in the past, I'm sure you've been there as well.  This bill would require those phone messages to tell you who is paying for them;
  • Any contributions over $350 within 11 days before the election must be reported within 48 hours;
  • Allows electronic reporting of campaign finances;
  • Any party or political action committee expenditure in excess of $1000 within 11 days before an election must be reported (when an organization does a mailing or an automated phone call to elect or defeat a candidate);

     o         This report must also include whom the expenditure was intended to                         elect or defeat.

  • Increases contribution limits for the House from $500 to $750, and from $1000 to $1500 for the Senate;
  • The bill also sets up procedure for an elected official to transfer funds:

      o         To a successor account (to run for another seat) only if:

  • The original candidate committee must be either terminated or placed on inactive status;
  • The candidate is prohibited from accepting contributions to the original committee until the successor committee is terminated;
  • Any contributions are limited to the difference between the total of what someone contributed to the old campaign fund and the new campaign funds' contribution limits. 

        o         For example - if you gave a candidate $250 each year for four years,                    then they wanted to run for another seat with a contribution limit of                         $1500, you could only give them $500 more, for a total of $1500.

        o         Contributions transferred and gained by the new campaign committee                     cannot be transferred back to the original committee;

Conference Committee Report passed the House 75-45.  I voted YES.

 

Resources

Johnson County Statehouse Hotline - Call Topeka for free!  Dial 913.715.5000 and ask for your Representative or Senator.  If you don't know, simply give them your address and they'll head you in the right direction!

LIVE!!  House or Senate Chamber 

Please do not hesitate to contact me about these or any other issues of interest to you.  I appreciate the opportunity to represent you in Topeka.

 

Rep. Stephanie Sharp

17th District, Kansas House

Serving Lenexa and Shawnee

www.stephaniesharp.com
Home:  913-894-1201

Topeka Phone:  I will not receive messages left on the Topeka phone during the Interim.  Please use my home number or this email address to contact me.