From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re House Bill No. 3083

Supreme Court of Kansas
Jun 4, 1992
833 P.2d 1017 (Kan. 1992)

Opinion

No. 68,089

Opinion filed June 4, 1992.

ORIGINAL ACTION

LEGISLATURE — Reapportionment — Validity of Reapportioned Senate and House Districts.

Original action. Opinion filed June 4, 1992. Validity of House Bill No. 3083, reapportioning the state senatorial and representative districts, is upheld.


This is an original action pursuant to article 10, section 1(b) of the Constitution of the State of Kansas to determine the validity of 1992 House Bill No. 3083, reapportioning the state senatorial and representative districts. This legislative enactment is held to be valid.

The petition of the attorney general to determine the validity of House Bill No. 3083 was filed May 15, 1992, and a hearing on the matter was held by the Supreme Court on May 28, 1992. As required by the constitution, all interested persons were permitted to present their views on the reapportionment legislation to this court in accordance with our order filed on May 15, 1992.

Robert A. Coldsnow, Office of Revisor of Statutes, filed a brief favoring the legislation on behalf of the Kansas Senate, the Kansas House of Representatives, and the Kansas Legislative Coordinating Council.

David G. Miller, President of the Eudora Chamber of Commerce, and James V. Hoover, Mayor of Eudora, filed a joint statement on behalf of Eudora, Kansas, opposing the house reapportionment plan.

David G. Miller, in his individual capacity, Eudora, Kansas; Maurice L. Taylor, Mayor, City of Edgerton, Kansas; the McCamish Township Board, Gardner, Kansas; and Carol Lehman, Mayor, City of Gardner, Kansas, submitted written statements opposing the senate reapportionment plan.

Oral presentations were made to this court by Robert T. Stephan, attorney general; Robert A. Coldsnow, Topeka, Kansas; and David G. Miller, Eudora, Kansas. John R. Wine, Jr., General Counsel, and Brad Bryant, Census Director, both of the office of the Secretary of State, responded to questions about the census procedure.

Because the constitution requires this court to enter judgment within 30 days from the filing of the petition, we announce our decision upholding the validity of House Bill No. 3083 in this brief opinion. A formal opinion expressing the views of the members of the court will be filed when it is prepared.


Summaries of

In re House Bill No. 3083

Supreme Court of Kansas
Jun 4, 1992
833 P.2d 1017 (Kan. 1992)
Case details for

In re House Bill No. 3083

Case Details

Full title:In re Petition of Robert T. Stephan, Attorney General, To Determine the…

Court:Supreme Court of Kansas

Date published: Jun 4, 1992

Citations

833 P.2d 1017 (Kan. 1992)
833 P.2d 1017

Citing Cases

In re Substitute for House Bill 2625

"`In determining whether a reapportionment act is valid, a court must examine both the procedure by which the…

In re House Bill No. 3083

Opinion filed July 10, 1992. Validity of House Bill No. 3083, reapportioning the state representative and…