State ex rel. Tomasic v. Kansas City

• Decision Date: 25 November 1981
• Docket Number: No. 52961,52961
• Citation: 230 Kan. 404,636 P.2d 760
• Parties: STATE of Kansas, ex rel., Nick A. TOMASIC, Wyandotte County District Attorney, Relator, v. KANSAS CITY, Kansas Port Authority, Respondent.
• Court: Kansas Supreme Court

Page 760

636 P.2d 760

230 Kan. 404

STATE of Kansas, ex rel., Nick A. TOMASIC, Wyandotte County District Attorney, Relator, v. KANSAS CITY, Kansas Port Authority, Respondent.

No. 52961.

Supreme Court of Kansas.

Nov. 25, 1981.

Syllabus by the Court

1. Article 11, § 1 of the Kansas Constitution provides for "uniform and equal rate of assessment and taxation."

2. Property which is subject to taxation is taxed at a uniform and equal rate; however, tax exemptions are constitutionally permissible.

3. The legislature may provide statutory exemptions if such exemptions have a public purpose and promote the general welfare.

4. Article 2, § 1 of the Kansas Constitution vests legislative power in the legislature.

5. Article 2, § 21 of the Kansas Constitution sanctions delegation of legislative power in limited circumstances. "The legislature may confer powers of local legislation and administration upon political subdivisions."

6. Standards to guide the exercise of delegated power may be either general or specific in nature.

7. Article 2, § 16 of the Kansas Constitution provides, in part, that "(t)he subject of each bill shall be expressed in its title."

8. The title of a bill does not have to be a synopsis or abstract of the entire act in all its details.

9. Article 11, § 9 of the Kansas Constitution prohibits the state, as a state, from engaging in works of internal improvement, with limited exceptions.

10. Internal improvements are not prohibited per se. The state may authorize public or private corporations or individuals to construct internal improvements.

11. Article 2, § 17 of the Kansas Constitution provides in part: "All laws of a general nature shall have a uniform operation throughout the state."

12. Curative legislation, to be valid and constitutional, must meet two tests: (1) That the legislature originally had the power to authorize the acts done or to confer the powers exercised, and (2) that contracts are not impaired nor vested rights disturbed.

13. Curative legislation has long been recognized as a valid exercise of legislative power which is not special legislation in contravention of Article 2, § 17 of the Kansas Constitution.

14. Article 2, § 17 of the Kansas Constitution is construed to mean laws of a general nature which affect the people of the state generally must apply with geographical uniformity. Following Stephens v. Snyder Clinic Ass'n, 230 Kan. 115, 631 P.2d 222 (1981).

15. States are subject to the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution in the exercise of their taxing power, but flexibility and variety appropriate to reasonable taxation schemes are permitted. The state taxation scheme must have a rational basis with classifications based on differences having a fair and substantial relation to the object of the legislation.

16. The Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution finds its counterpart in Sections 1 and 2 of the Bill of Rights of the Kansas Constitution.

17. The uniform and equal rate of assessment and taxation provision of Article 11, § 1 of the Kansas Constitution is, in principle and effect, substantially identical to the principle of equality embodied in the Equal Protection Clause of the United States Constitution.

18. Favorable tax treatment for industrial-use facilities under the Port Authorities Act as amended in 1981 will promote the development of new industries 19. The Port Authorities Act prior to 1981 defining a "port" narrowly to include water, air, or land transportation facilities, K.S.A.1980 Supp. 12-3401(f ), is not sufficiently broad to include industrial-use facilities.

within the state as well as encourage the retention of old and so bears a rational relationship to the otherwise legitimate purpose of the Act.

20. The legislature did not provide adequate definitions or guidelines to authorize an industrial-use facility independent of a port as defined in K.S.A.1980 Supp. 12-3401(f ).

21. The Port Authorities Act prior to 1981 gave port authorities power and authority to acquire land for water, air, or land transportation facilities as defined in K.S.A.1980 Supp. 12-3401(f ).

22. Legislative intent must be determined from a reading of the Act as a whole.

23. In the Port Authorities Act prior to 1981 the legislature did not provide sufficient guidelines for the issuance of industrial revenue bonds by the port authority to construct and equip an industrial-use facility independent of a port.

24. In 1981 the legislature amended the Port Authorities Act to include industrial-use facilities thereby giving port authorities the power to develop and finance industrial-use facilities. L.1981, ch. 76.

25. Legislative intent can be found in the historical background of an enactment and the circumstances attending its passage.

26. The Port Authorities Act as amended in 1981 provides port authorities shall not be required to pay taxes or assessments on "property acquired and used by it or leased to another." L.1981, ch. 76, § 13. The lease-purchase agreement stipulated by the parties comes within the purview of that exemption.

27. In an action in quo warranto brought by the Wyandotte County District Attorney challenging the constitutionality of the Port Authorities Act, K.S.A. 12-3401 et seq., as amended prior to 1981, and requesting the court to oust the Kansas City, Kansas Port Authority of all rights, powers, and authority in violation of the Constitution and laws of Kansas, the record is examined and it is held : (1) The Port Authorities Act, K.S.A. 12-3401 et seq., as amended prior to 1981, does not violate the Kansas Constitution Art. 2, § 1; Art. 2, § 16; Art. 2, § 21; or Art. 11, § 1; (2) the purpose of the Act, and the rights and powers of port authorities created under the Act, are limited to a "port" as defined in K.S.A.1980 Supp. 12-3401(f ); (3) the legislature failed to provide adequate definitions in K.S.A. 12-3401 et seq., to authorize the establishment of an industrial-use facility independent of a "port" as defined in K.S.A.1980 Supp. 12-3401(f ); (4) the legislature failed to provide adequate guidelines in K.S.A. 12-3401 et seq., to authorize an industrial-use facility independent of a "port" as defined in K.S.A.1980 Supp. 12-3401(f ); (5) the legislature failed to provide sufficient guidelines in K.S.A. 12-3401 et seq., for the issuance of industrial revenue bonds by the port authority for an industrial-use facility independent of a "port" as defined in K.S.A.1980 Supp. 12-3401(f ); (6) the city of Kansas City, Kansas, in its Code of Ordinances, Article XVIII, § 2-361 and § 2-362, adopted February 1, 1979, by Ordinance No. 59263, indicating a need for a port authority to function with all the duties and powers under K.S.A. 12-3401 et seq., failed to specify the need for an industrial-use facility in the Kansas City, Kansas Port Authority; and (7) the writ of quo warranto is granted, and the respondent is prohibited from proceeding under K.S.A. 12-3401 et seq., with the proposed industrial-use facility described in the stipulation of facts. State ex rel. Tomasic v. Kansas City, Kansas Port Authority, 229 Kan. 538, 626 P.2d 209 (1981).

28. Upon reconsideration of this quo warranto action, the record is examined and it is held : (1) The Port Authorities Act as amended in 1981, L.1981, ch. 76, does not violate the Kansas Constitution Art. 2, § 1; Art. 2, § 16; Art. 2, § 21; or Art. 11, § 1; (2) under the Act as amended in 1981, definitions and guidelines clearly authorize establishment of an industrial-use facility independent Nick A. Tomasic, Dist. Atty., argued the cause for relator.

of a port, and sufficient guidelines have been enunciated by the legislature for issuance of industrial revenue bonds by the Port Authority to finance such a facility; (3) the Board of Commissioners of the city of Kansas City, Kansas, in amending its Code of Ordinances, Article XVIII, by adoption of Ordinance No. 62827 on April 20, 1981, adequately specified a need for an industrial-use facility in the Kansas City, Kansas Port Authority; (4) statutory provisions granting tax exemption to port authority projects establish a classification which bears a rational relationship to the purpose of the legislation and does not violate either the Equal Protection Clause of the United States Constitution or equal protection under the Kansas Constitution; (5) there has not been a denial of due process under the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution; (6) the grandfather provisions of the Act as amended by the legislature in 1981 relating to port authorities created prior to April 1, 1981, are not special legislation in violation of Art. 2, § 17 of the Kansas Constitution but rather are curative amendments which retrospectively give approval to proceedings commenced prior to April 1, 1981; (7) the acts of the port authority are not actions of the state in violation of Art. 11, § 9 of the Kansas Constitution; and (8) the Wyandotte County District Attorney's writ of quo warranto is denied. State ex rel. Tomasic v. Kansas City, Kansas Port Authority, 230 Kan. 19, 630 P.2d 692 (1981.)

John A. Price, of Weeks, Thomas & Lysaught, Chartered, Kansas City, argued the cause, and Leonard O. Thomas, Kansas City, of the same firm, Norman E. Gaar, of Gaar & Bell, Kansas City, Mo., and John F. Steineger, Jr., Kansas City, were with him on the briefs for respondent.

David Schauner, of Kansas National Ed. Ass'n, Topeka, Patricia Baker, of Kansas Ass'n of School Bds., Topeka, Lana Jeanne Tyree and John F. Cooper, of Oklahoma City, Okl., and Robert Miller, Kansas City, all of Unified School Dist. # 203 of Wyandotte County, were on the brief for amici curiae.

OPINION ON REHEARING

SCHROEDER, Chief Justice:

This quo warranto action, challenging the constitutionality of the Port Authorities Act, K.S.A. 12-3401 [230 Kan. 408] et seq., as amended, as well as the...