Judges: Carla J. Stovall, Attorney General of Kansas
Filed Date: 9/22/1997
Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 7/5/2016
Lonnie McCollum, Superintendent Kansas Highway Patrol 122 S.W. Seventh Street Topeka, Kansas 66603-3847
Dear Superintendent McCollum:
You inquire whether golf carts which are operated on highways must be registered pursuant to the motor vehicle registration statutes, K.S.A.
Article
"(c)(1) Any city may by charter ordinance elect in the manner prescribed in this section that the whole or any part of any enactment of the legislature applying to such city, other than enactments of statewide concern applicable uniformly to all cities, other enactments applicable uniformly to all cities . . . shall not apply to such city.
"(2) A charter ordinance is an ordinance which exempts a city from the whole or any part of any enactment of the legislature as referred to in this section and which may provide substitute and additional provisions on the same subject. Such charter ordinance shall be so titled, shall designate specifically the enactment of the legislature or part thereof made inapplicable to such city by the adoption of such ordinance and contain the substitute and additional provisions, if any, and shall require a two-thirds vote of the members-elect of the governing body of such city. Every charter ordinance shall be published once each week for two consecutive weeks in the official city newspaper or, if there is none, in a newspaper of general circulation in the city." (Emphasis added).
In Attorney General Opinions No. 85-145 and
Charter Ordinance No. 7 purports to exempt the City from "the uniform traffic code." There is no statutory enactment identified as the Uniform Traffic Code. There is the Uniform Act Regulating Traffic on Highways which includes statutes that address safety equipment on motor vehicles, but the charter ordinance does not specifically refer to that enactment. It is our opinion that Charter Ordinance No. 7 violates Article
More importantly, however, the charter ordinance is invalid because it attempts to charter out of uniform enactments. Article
The motor vehicle registration statutes, K.S.A.
In determining whether a legislative enactment is uniformly applicable to all cities, there should be a clear legislative intent. Claflin v. Walsh,
"In view of the liberal construction provision of Section 5(d) [Kan. Const., Art.
12 , §5 (d)], in determining whether a legislative enactment is applicable uniformly to all cities such a legislative intent should be clearly evident before the courts should deny a city the right to exercise home rule power in that area." Home Builders Assn. of Greater Kansas City v. City of Overland Park, Kansas,22 Kan. App. 649 (1996), citing Claflin v. Walsh,212 Kan. 1 ,7 (1973).).
In some cases the legislative intention is clear and unequivocal because the statute contains specific language that it is to be applied uniformly to all cities.
The motor vehicle registration statutes were enacted in 1929 and are codified in Article 1 of Chapter 8 of the Kansas Statutes Annotated. Section 28 of the 1929 enactment provided that the act "may be known and cited as the uniform motor vehicle registration act" in order to "effectuate its general purpose to make uniform the laws of those states enacting it." While there have been additions to the original enactment as well as repeals of statutes within this enactment since 1929, there are no sections within the motor vehicle registration statutes that apply only to cities of a certain class which arguably may have made it nonuniform pursuant to City of Junction City v. Griffin,
The safety equipment statutes, K.S.A.
The safety equipment statutes are part of a 1974 enactment that revised and reenacted the Uniform Act to Regulate Traffic on Highways. The original enactment contains nine articles that address traffic rules on the road, accidents and accident reports, the size, weight and load of vehicles, legal procedures and safety equipment. Article 20 addresses the powers of state and local authorities. K.S.A.
In accordance with the Griffin case, this statutory intent to make the Act uniform does not supplant the constitutional requirement of uniformity. The question of uniformity, therefore, goes to the entirety of the enactment and if any statute within the enactment is nonuniform then the entire enactment is considered nonuniform. Home Builders Assn. of Greater Kansas Cityv. City of Overland Park, Kansas,
While all cities are authorized to enact ordinances that do not conflict with the Uniform Act to Regulate Traffic on Highways, this authority is generally exercised by nonconflicting ordinary ordinances — not charter ordinances. Home rule precludes a city from chartering out of this enactment because there are no sections that treat differently one city from another. In short, the Uniform Act to Regulate Traffic on Highways applies uniformly to all cities and, therefore, the City of Ellinwood's purported attempt to charter out of the safety equipment statutes which are a part of the enactment is invalid.
Very truly yours,
CARLA J. STOVALL Attorney General of Kansas
Mary Feighny Assistant Attorney General
CJS:JLM:MF:jm