Attorney General Opinion No. 1999-014 PDF Download
Are you looking for read ebook online? Search for your book and save it on your Kindle device, PC, phones or tablets. Download Attorney General Opinion No. 1999-014 PDF full book. Access full book title Attorney General Opinion No. 1999-014 by Carla J. Stovall. Download full books in PDF and EPUB format.
Author: Carla J. Stovall
Publisher:
ISBN:
Category :
Languages : en
Pages :
Get Book Here
Book Description
In order to ensure that a unified school district remains within the authority conferred under K.S.A. 1998 Supp. 72-5395, it is advisable that the school district have in place some mechanism or procedure for establishing the penalty incurred under the Federal Insurance Contributions Act (FICA) or the Kansas Public Employees Retirement System (KPERS) by an employee who retires before the normal retirement age of 65 years. However, the existence of such a mechanism is not statutorily required. The fact that the early retirement incentive plan of a unified school district does not have such a mechanism in place does not, in and of itself, invalidate the plan. A person is deemed to reach "retirement age" when the person turns 65 years of age. While a person is entitled to receive a monthly old-age insurance benefit upon attaining the age of 62, the amount of the monthly benefit is reduced pursuant to a formula enacted by Congress. This reduction is the "penalty" referred to in K.S.A. 1998 Supp. 72-5395. The authority of the school district is limited to establishing an early retirement incentive program which reduces in whole or in part the penalty incurred under FICA or KPERS for retiring before the normal retirement age. A school district exceeds its statutory authority if it confers a benefit under an early retirement incentive program to an employee who has not incurred a penalty under FICA or KPERS for retiring early. An early retirement incentive plan which provides benefits on a sliding scale based solely on the age of the plan participants, resulting in a reduction of the benefits available to older plan participants, violates the Age Discrimination in Employment Act as amended by the Older Workers' Benefit Protection Act of 1990. Cited herein: K.S.A. 1998 Supp. 72-5395; 29 U.S.C.A. section 621; 29 U.S.C.A. section 623; 42 U.S.C.A. section 402; 42 U.S.C.A. section 415; 42 U.S.C.A. section 416; Pub. L. 101-433, 104 Stat. 978 (1990).
Author: Carla J. Stovall
Publisher:
ISBN:
Category :
Languages : en
Pages :
Get Book Here
Book Description
In order to ensure that a unified school district remains within the authority conferred under K.S.A. 1998 Supp. 72-5395, it is advisable that the school district have in place some mechanism or procedure for establishing the penalty incurred under the Federal Insurance Contributions Act (FICA) or the Kansas Public Employees Retirement System (KPERS) by an employee who retires before the normal retirement age of 65 years. However, the existence of such a mechanism is not statutorily required. The fact that the early retirement incentive plan of a unified school district does not have such a mechanism in place does not, in and of itself, invalidate the plan. A person is deemed to reach "retirement age" when the person turns 65 years of age. While a person is entitled to receive a monthly old-age insurance benefit upon attaining the age of 62, the amount of the monthly benefit is reduced pursuant to a formula enacted by Congress. This reduction is the "penalty" referred to in K.S.A. 1998 Supp. 72-5395. The authority of the school district is limited to establishing an early retirement incentive program which reduces in whole or in part the penalty incurred under FICA or KPERS for retiring before the normal retirement age. A school district exceeds its statutory authority if it confers a benefit under an early retirement incentive program to an employee who has not incurred a penalty under FICA or KPERS for retiring early. An early retirement incentive plan which provides benefits on a sliding scale based solely on the age of the plan participants, resulting in a reduction of the benefits available to older plan participants, violates the Age Discrimination in Employment Act as amended by the Older Workers' Benefit Protection Act of 1990. Cited herein: K.S.A. 1998 Supp. 72-5395; 29 U.S.C.A. section 621; 29 U.S.C.A. section 623; 42 U.S.C.A. section 402; 42 U.S.C.A. section 415; 42 U.S.C.A. section 416; Pub. L. 101-433, 104 Stat. 978 (1990).
Author: Carla J. Stovall
Publisher:
ISBN:
Category :
Languages : en
Pages :
Get Book Here
Book Description
The provisions of 1999 Senate Bill No. 288 do not violate the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution or Section 11 of the Bill of Rights of the Kansas Constitution, nor do they violate the Equal Protection Clauses of the United States and Kansas Constitutions. Cited herein: 1999 Senate Bill No. 288; Kan. Const., Bill of Rights, sections 1, 2, 11; U.S. Const., Amend. 1, 14.
Author: Carla J. Stovall
Publisher:
ISBN:
Category :
Languages : en
Pages :
Get Book Here
Book Description
A resolution enacted by the City of Newton that does nothing more than express a concern for the safety of the City's water resources and describe certain actions that the governing body may take in the future to protect the City's environment is not void on the grounds of vagueness and, therefore, does not offend the Due Process requirements of the 5th and 14th Amendments to the United States Constitution. Cited herein: U.S. Const., Amend. V and XIV.
Author: Carla J. Stovall
Publisher:
ISBN:
Category :
Languages : en
Pages :
Get Book Here
Book Description
Documents related to an investigation conducted by an attorney for his or her client in order to provide legal advice to the client, may be closed under the Kansas Open Records Act because they are protected by the attorney-client privilege. Cited herein: K.S.A. 1998 Supp. 45-217; K.S.A. 1998 Supp. 45-221; 60-226; K.S.A. 60-426.
Author: Carla J. Stovall
Publisher:
ISBN:
Category :
Languages : en
Pages :
Get Book Here
Book Description
A resolution enacted by the City of Newton that does nothing more than express a concern for the safety of the City's water resources and describe certain actions that the governing body may take in the future to protect the City's environment is not void on the grounds of vagueness and, therefore, does not offend the Due Process requirements of the 5th and 14th Amendments to the United States Constitution. Cited herein: U.S. Const., Amend. V and XIV.
Author: Carla J. Stovall
Publisher:
ISBN:
Category :
Languages : en
Pages :
Get Book Here
Book Description
A law enforcement officer has no authority to stop a person and make inquiry concerning a possible violation of a regulation of a private homes association unless the officer suspects that such individual has violated or is about to violate a state law or a municipal ordinance. Cited herein: K.S.A. 22-2402; U.S. Const., Amend. XIV.
Author: Carla J. Stovall
Publisher:
ISBN:
Category :
Languages : en
Pages :
Get Book Here
Book Description
By referring to "such office" in K.S.A. 25-4325, the Legislature intended that the number of signatures required on a petition seeking the recall of a local elected official be based on a percentage of the number of votes cast in the last general election at which an officer was elected from the same member district from which the officer sought to be recalled was elected. In the case of a petition seeking the recall of a city commissioner who was elected at-large in the 1997 general election, the petition must contain signatures equal in number to not less than 40% of the votes cast at the 1999 general election for all at-large candidates for city commissioner divided by the number of persons elected in the 1999 general election to the office of city commissioner for at-large districts. Cited herein: K.S.A. 25-4301; 25-4318; 25-4325; 71-1407; 72-8009; Kan. Const., Art. 4, section 3; L. 1976, Ch. 177, sections 5, 7; L. 1976, Ch. 178, sections 25, 32; L. 1913, Ch. 336, section 1.
Author: Carla J. Stovall
Publisher:
ISBN:
Category :
Languages : en
Pages :
Get Book Here
Book Description
K.S.A. 1998 Supp. 25-4501 states "there shall be held a presidential preference primary." The provision is mandatory. Although the expense of conducting the presidential preference primary may well prove burdensome for the counties of the State, the statutory language obligates the counties to conduct the presidential preference primary regardless whether the Legislature acts to appropriate monies which would be used to reimburse the counties for the costs associated with conducting the presidential preference primary. Cited herein: K.S.A. 1998 Supp. 25-4501; K.S.A. 25-4508; Kan. Const., Art. 2, section 24.
Author: Carla J. Stovall
Publisher:
ISBN:
Category :
Languages : en
Pages :
Get Book Here
Book Description
Subsection (c) of K.S.A. 25-4323 states that no more than one less of a majority of a local governing body may be subject to recall at the same time. The number of members serving on a three-member board who may be subject to recall at the same time is one. A local officer is subject to recall once a petition seeking recall of the officer is properly filed. If a petition seeking recall of one member of a three-member governing body has been filed with the county election officer and the county election officer has determined the petition was properly filed, a petition seeking recall of a second member may not be approved by the county election officer until after the recall election on the first member has been conducted. While a petition seeking recall of a second member of a three-member governing body may not be approved until the recall election on the first member is conducted, the petition may still be circulated. Cited herein: K.S.A. 25-4301; 25-4302, as amended by L. 1999, Ch. 105, section 8; 25-4318; 25-4322, as amended by L. 1999, Ch. 105, section 9; 25-4323; 25-4324, as amended by L. 1999, Ch. 105, section 10; 25-4326; Kan. Const., Art. 4, section 3; L. 1987, Ch. 130, section 1; L. 1978, Ch. 147, sections 2, 6; L. 1976, Ch. 178, section 26.
Author: Carla J. Stovall
Publisher:
ISBN:
Category :
Languages : en
Pages :
Get Book Here
Book Description
Absent statutory authority, a court order assessing attorney fees in a child-in-need-of-care action is not a civil judgment that can be enforced by garnishment. Moreover, such order cannot be enforced as a civil judgment unless the Legislature so authorizes. Cited herein: K.S.A. 1998 Supp. 22-4513; 38-1511; K.S.A. 38-1593; 60-714; 60-716.
