SESSION OF 2023
SUPPLEMENTAL NOTE ON HOUSE SUBSTITUTE FOR
SENATE BILL NO. 208
As Recommended by House Committee on
Elections

Brief*
House Sub. for SB 208 would amend provisions in the
Campaign Finance Act on topics including procedures of the
Kansas Governmental Ethics Commission (Commission).

Governmental Ethics Commission (New Section 1)
The bill would state the provisions of the Kansas
Administrative Procedure Act (KAPA), the Kansas Code of
Civil Procedure, and the Kansas Judicial Review Act (KJRA)
would apply to actions by the Commission or Commission
staff. This would include, but not be limited to, investigative
and enforcement actions of the Commission and applications
to the Commission. The bill would apply provisions of the
Kansas Public Speech Protection Act to all actions filed by
the Commission in district court pursuant to this act.
The bill would establish the deadline for bringing any
action before the Commission at five years after the first act
giving rise to the cause of action or complaint.
The bill would require the Commission to provide
through rules and regulations the standards by which any
member of the Commission, the Executive Director, or other
person employed or engaged by the Commission to recuse
themselves from any matter before the Commission for a
____________________
*Supplemental notes are prepared by the Legislative Research
Department and do not express legislative intent. The supplemental
note and fiscal note for this bill may be accessed on the Internet at
http://www.kslegislature.org
reason affecting the ability of the Commission to neutrally and
fairly enforce the Campaign Finance Act (Act).

Commission Hearings, Procedures, and Findings
Respondent Rights (New Section 1)
The bill would state no action by the Commission shall
require a respondent to waive any civil or legal rights to
judicial recourse in any manner.
Hearing Procedures (Sections 7, 8, and 11)
The bill would require all hearings conducted under the
Act to be conducted in accordance with the provisions of
KAPA and the Kansas Code of Civil Procedure. The bill would
authorize the respondent to request any hearing and pre-
hearing procedure under this act be removed for hearing
before a presiding officer from the Office of Administrative
Hearings and conducted as prescribed by KAPA. The bill
would prohibit the Commission from conducting another
hearing on the matter and would require the Commission to
make its final determination based on the record.
Commission Procedures (Sections 6, 7, and 9)
The bill would authorize the Commission to apply to the
Shawnee County District Court for an order to administer
oaths and affirmations, subpoena witnesses, compel their
attendance, take evidence, and require the production of any
documents or records that the Commission deems relevant or
material to the investigation. The bill would require all
applications for a court order to be made under the seal of the
court. The bill would require a 2/3, rather than 3/4, majority
vote to issue a subpoena or subpoena duces tecum and
would remove the requirement that the commissioners must
be physically present in order to vote. The bill would require
that no subpoena or other process issued by the Commission
2- 208
pursuant to this section shall be served upon any person
unless an application has been filed in the district court of
Shawnee County pursuant to this section and would require
the Commission to provide a copy of written findings of fact
and conclusions of law to the persons under investigation
(this section pertains to investigation by the Commission,
KSA 25-4158 amendments).
The bill would state the court shall issue the order
requiring appearance after review of the sufficiency of the
written findings of fact and conclusions of law provided by the
Commission, the Commission record, and the
reasonableness and scope of the subpoena. The bill would
allow a person responding to a subpoena to apply to a court
for relief from a subpoena.
The bill would require every subpoena so issued to
include notices regarding the rights of the person to whom the
subpoena was issued. The bill would require any person
ordered to testify or produce documents to be informed that
the person has a right to be advised by counsel and may not
be required to make any self-incriminating statement. The bill
would direct the judge to appoint counsel if the person is
indigent and requests counsel. The bill would authorize
counsel to be present while the witness is testifying and
interpose objections on behalf of the witness, but would not
authorize counsel to examine or cross-examine any witness.
The bill also would require the Commission to take
reasonable steps to avoid imposing undue burden or expense
on a person subject to subpoena and require the court to
enforce this duty against the Commission and impose an
appropriate sanction.
The bill would also prohibit any attorney or staff member
representing the complainant before the Commission from
engaging in ex parte communication with the Commission, as
well as advising, representing, or assisting the Commission
regarding the same or related matter before the Commission.
The bill would require the Commission to obtain separate
3- 208
independent legal counsel when needed to comply with these
requirements.
The bill would authorize the Commission to enter into a
contract with the Office of Administrative Hearings and
provide reimbursement for actual and necessary expenses
and compensation for such person serving as a presiding
officer, and would add duties of confidentiality for hearings to
members of the Commission, the Executive Director, or any
person employed or engaged by the Commission.
The bill would apply duties of confidentiality of
complaints and allegations therein only to members of the
Commission, Executive Director, or any person employed or
engaged by the Commission. The confidentiality statute on
records, complaints, documents, reports filed with or
submitted to the Commission, and all transcripts of any
investigation, inquiries, or hearings of the Commission would
apply only to members of the Commission, the Executive
Director, or any person employed or engaged by the
Commission.
Penalties and Fines (Section 10)
The bill would cap the fine the Commission could
impose to not exceed an amount triple the applicable fine for
a single violation of the matter. If the respondent derived
pecuniary gain from the specific violations, the bill would
authorize a larger fine but not to exceed double the pecuniary
gain derived from the violation. The bill would state its
provisions would not prevent a court from imposing a
separate fine in a criminal proceeding. Further, the bill would
direct civil fines assessed by the Commission to the State
General Fund instead of the Governmental Ethics
Commission Fund.
The bill would also prohibit the Commission from:


4- 208
 ● Ordering community service or any other specified
performance in lieu of a civil fine as part of a
consent decree or final order; and
● Entering into any agreement with any person that
legally binds the Commission from enforcing any
law against that person in exchange for the
person’s cooperation with or assistance of the
Commission in any matter unless that person has
received immunity from criminal prosecution in the
matter from a county or district attorney or the
Attorney General.
The bill would state these provisions would not prohibit
the Commission from requiring training regarding or
compliance with any provision of the Act as part of a consent
decree or final order.

Campaign Finance
Definitions (Section 2)
The bill would define “agent” to mean an individual who
is a candidate; a chairperson of a candidate, political, or party
committee; a treasurer; or any director, officer, employee,
paid consultant, or other person authorized in writing to act on
behalf of a person previously listed.
Filing Fees and Requirements (Section 3)
The bill would create a new category of registration by a
political committee and change the thresholds for annual
registration fees for political committees. A political committee
anticipating receiving within a calendar year:
● More than $15,001, a new category, would be
required to pay a $750 registration fee;

5- 208
 ● At least $7,500 and less than $15,001 would be
required to pay a $500 registration fee;
● At least $2,500 and less than $7,501 would be
required to pay a $250 registration fee; and
● Less than $2,500 would be required to pay a $50
registration fee.
The bill would make technical amendments to continue
requiring a political committee that receives more
contributions than anticipated, up to $7,501, to pay the
difference between the fee owed and the amount of the fee
accompanied by current registration.
Campaign Solicitation (Section 4)
The bill would state no solicitation from January 1
through Sine Die is a violation if it is a general public
solicitation and accompanied with a disclaimer that it is not
intended for lobbyists, political committees, or persons other
than individuals.
Campaign Expenditures and Contributions (Section 5)
The bill would expand allowable personal use of moneys
received by any candidate or candidate committee to include:
● Expenses, compensation, or gifts provided to any
volunteer, staff member, or contractor of the
candidate’s campaign or provided to any volunteer
or staff of the candidate’s political office, provided
that the total amount provided from all sources
does not exceed the total fair market value of
services provided;
● Payment of any civil penalty imposed by the
Commission pursuant to the Act related to the
candidate’s campaign and that is incurred by the

6- 208
 candidate, candidate committee, treasurer, or other
agent of the candidate; and
● Payment of legal fees related to any matter under
the Act.
Effective Date
The bill would be in effect upon publication in the
Kansas Register.

Background
The House Committee on Elections recommended a
substitute bill incorporating provisions pertaining to the
Campaign Finance Act from HB 2391, as amended by the
House Committee on Elections.
SB 208, as recommended by the Senate Committee of
the Whole, would have created law prohibiting the use of
ballot boxes for the return of advanced voting ballots, defining
“remote ballot box,” and requiring the Secretary of State to
adopt rules and regulations to implement and enforce the
provisions in the bill. These provisions were not retained in
the substitute bill.

HB 2391 – Campaign Finance Act Reform
The bill was introduced by the House Committee on
Elections at the request of Representative Waggoner.
House Committee on Elections
In the House Committee hearing, representatives of
Kreigshauser Ney Law Group and the Institute for Free
Speech and private citizens provided proponent testimony.
The proponents generally stated the Commission currently

7- 208
controls all parts of the process of handling a complaint and
violation through determining the penalty, and the bill would
place appropriate checks on the Commission’s authority.
Written-only proponent testimony was submitted by a
representative of Fleeson Gooing, Attorneys at Law.
The Executive Director of the Commission provided
opponent testimony. The opponent testimony raised
numerous concerns, including that the bill would undermine
ongoing investigations, make extensive changes to political
committee registration, allow candidates to give to political
committees, change requirements for membership on the
Commission and of staff; remove Commission authority
regarding hearings and other requirements, and otherwise
weaken the Campaign Finance Act and the Commission’s
ability to enforce it.
Written-only opponent testimony was provided by the
Chairperson and Vice-chairperson of the Commission and
private citizens.
Written-only neutral testimony was provided by the
Attorney General, which expressed support for amendments
to the definition of “political committee.”
The House Committee amended the bill to establish the
deadline for bringing any action before the Commission at
five, rather than two, years; define “coordination” or
“coordinated”; specify how a political committee establishes
its primary purpose; add revisions to a statute regarding
reporting of certain contributions; add a limitation of fair
market value of services provided on gifts to a campaign
worker; revise requirements related to a consent decree or
final order; require a trial de novo on appeal to a district court
include an evidentiary hearing at which issues of law and fact
are determined; and make technical changes.
On February 22, 2023, the bill, as amended by the
House Committee, was withdrawn from the House Calendar
8- 208
and referred to the House Committee on Appropriations. On
March 1, 2023, the bill was withdrawn from the House
Committee on Appropriations and rereferred to the House
Committee on Elections.
On March 14, 2023, the House Committee amended the
bill to replace the contents of the bill with the above-described
contents and recommended a substitute bill.

Fiscal Information
According to the fiscal note prepared by the Division of
the Budget on HB 2391, as introduced, the Commission
estimates additional expenditures of $200,659 from the State
General Fund (SGF) and an additional 3.0 FTE positions in
both FY 2024 and FY 2025 would be required to implement
the bill’s provisions. Of that amount, $170,976 would be for
salaries and wages for the FTE positions and $29,683 would
be for other operating expenditures. The Commission also
estimates a loss of revenue to the Governmental Ethics
Commission Fee Fund of $80,671 in FY 2024 and $75,971 in
FY 2025 from the reduction of fees and changes to the
disposition of fines and penalties.
The Office of Judicial Administration states any fiscal
effect of the enactment of the bill cannot be estimated until
the Judicial Branch has had an opportunity to operate under
the bill’s provisions.
The Office of the Attorney General estimates additional
expenditures of $91,914 SGF, along with an additional 0.25
attorney FTE position and a 0.50 investigator FTE position in
FY 2024 if the bill is enacted. Of that amount, $72,407 would
be for salaries and wages and $19,507 would be for other
operating expenditures. The agency states the bill’s
provisions regarding investigations would increase the
workload for the Office of the Attorney General.


9- 208
 The Office of Administrative Hearings estimates any
additional workload resulting from the enactment of the bill
would be absorbed within existing resources.
Any fiscal effect associated with enactment of HB 2391
is not reflected in The FY 2024 Governor’s Budget Report.
No fiscal note for House Sub. for SB 208 was available
when the House Committee took action on the bill.
Kansas Governmental Ethics Commission; Campaign Finance Act; subpoena;
campaign expenditures; candidate committees; political committees; express
advocacy; campaign contributions; Kansas Administrative Procedures Act; Kansas
Code of Civil Procedures


10- 208


Statutes affected:
H Sub for: 25-4143, 25-4145, 25-4153a, 25-4157a, 25-4158, 25-4161, 25-4163, 25-4165, 25-4181, 22-3415, 25-4182
Enrolled: 25-4143, 25-4145, 25-4153a, 25-4157a, 25-4158, 25-4161, 25-4163, 25-4165, 25-4181, 22-3415, 25-4182