Printable Format13-101. Change of classification from city of second class to city of first class; proclamation by governor; tenure of governing body. Whenever it shall have been duly ascertained by any census of enumeration taken under any law of the United States or of the state of Kansas or by any city that any city has attained a population of more than fifteen thousand (15,000), such fact shall thereupon, by the governing body of such city, be certified to the governor of the state, who shall thereupon by public proclamation declare such city to be a city of the first class. If the governing body of any city which has attained a population of more than fifteen thousand (15,000) and less than twenty-five thousand (25,000) shall determine by resolution duly adopted that it would be more advantageous for such city to continue to operate as a city of the second class, such governing body shall not be required to so certify the population of such city to the governor and the laws relating to cities of the second class shall continue to be applicable to such city.
The change in classification of any city under the provisions of this section shall take effect on the date the proclamation of the governor is issued unless a later date is specified therein, in which case the change and classification shall take place on such later date. The governing body of any such city, holding office at the time of the proclamation, shall continue to be the governing body of such city and the members of such body shall hold their respective offices until the next city election in an odd-numbered year.
History: L. 1903, ch. 122, § 1; R.S. 1923, § 13-101; L. 1953, ch. 77, § 1; L. 1968, ch. 274, § 17; April 30.
Source or prior law:
G.S. 1868, ch. 18, § 2; L. 1874, ch. 46, § 2; L. 1881, ch. 37, § 1; L. 1903, ch. 122, Repealed L. 1881, ch. 37; L. 1897, ch. 82.
Law Review and Bar Journal References:
"Home Rule in a Nutshell," Sandra Craig McKenzie, 48 K.L.R. 1005 (2000).
Attorney General's Opinions:
Statute does not require or allow downward reclassification of a city based on population loss. The statute's enactment did not require reclassification of cities that were already classified as cities of the first class to maintain such status. 2024-8.
CASE ANNOTATIONS
1. Section considered in connection with operation of metropolitan police act. The State, ex rel., v. Hunter, 38 Kan. 578, 588, 17 P. 177.
2. Elections in cities of the first class considered. Hughes v. Parker, 63 Kan. 297, 65 P. 265.
3. Authority for election of mayor in city over 50,000 considered. Gilbert v. Craddock, 67 Kan. 346, 72 P. 869.
4. Authority for election of councilmen in city over 50,000 considered. Bernard v. Kampmeier, 67 Kan. 837, 838, 72 P. 1102.
5. Effect of repeal of former acts by this act considered. The State v. Topeka, 68 Kan. 177, 186, 74 P. 647.
6. Act authorizing cities to prohibit sale of intoxicants not repealed. Stahl v. Lee, 71 Kan. 511, 517, 80 P. 983.
7. City ordinance invalid when other than statutory penalty imposed. In re Van Tuyl, 71 Kan. 659, 664, 81 P. 181.
8. This act repeals L. 1903, ch. 123; officers in cities over 40,000. Topeka v. McCabe, 79 Kan. 329, 99 P. 602.
9. Ordinances under former act continue in effect under this act. Snattinger v. Topeka, 80 Kan. 341, 102 P. 508.
10. Authority of city to contract with public utility considered. The State, ex rel., v. Gas Co., 88 Kan. 165, 169, 127 P. 639. Affirmed: Wyandotte Gas Co. v. Kansas, 231 U.S. 622, 34 S. Ct. 226, 58 L. Ed. 404.
11. Amendment of section herein by General Statutes designation held sufficient. Brewer v. City of Pittsburg, 91 Kan. 910, 912, 139 P. 418.
12. Title to this act held sufficient; act held valid. City of Wichita v. Sedgwick County, 110 Kan. 471, 204 P. 693.
13. Cited in case involving false arrest and malicious prosecution. Thompson v. General Finance Co., Inc., 205 Kan. 76, 96, 468 P.2d 269.