Printable Format60-1205. Grounds for forfeiture of public office. Every person holding any office of trust or profit, under and by virtue of any of the laws of the state of Kansas, either state, district, county, township or city office, except those subject to removal from office only by impeachment, who shall (1) willfully engage in misconduct while in office, (2) willfully neglect to perform any duty enjoined upon such person by law, (3) demonstrate mental impairment such that the person lacks the capacity to manage the office held, or (4) who shall commit any act constituting a violation of any penal statute involving moral turpitude, shall forfeit such person's office and shall be ousted from such office in the manner hereinafter provided.
History: L. 1963, ch. 303, 60-1205; L. 2003, ch. 127, § 10; July 1.
Source or prior law:
L. 1911, ch. 237, §§ 1, 16; R.S. 1923, 60-1609, 60-1624.
Law Review and Bar Journal References:
G.S. 1949, 60-1609 discussed in survey of constitutional and administrative law, Glenn E. Opie, 12 K.L.R. 143, 154 (1963).
"The Kansas Open Meeting Act: Sunshine on the Sunflower State?" Deanell R. Tacha, 25 K.L.R. 169, 203 (1977).
"Open Meetings Profile: The Prosecutor's View," Bradley J. Smoot and Louis M. Clothier, 20 W.L.J. 241, 285 (1981).
"Treatment of the Separation of Powers Doctrine in Kansas," Marc E. Elkins, 29 K.L.R. 243, 265 (1981).
"S.B. 699—A Comment on Kansas' New 'Drunk Driving' Law," Joseph Brian Cox and Donald G. Strole, 51 J.K.B.A. 230, 234 (1982).
"The New Kansas DUI Law: Constitutional Issues and Practical Problems," Gerard Little, Jr., 22 W.L.J. 340, 353 (1983).
Attorney General's Opinions:
Quo Warranto—grounds for public office forfeiture—grounds for recall. 88-154.
County home for the aged; authority of county commissioners over administrator and board of trustees in management and control of home. 97-90.
CASE ANNOTATIONS
Prior law cases, see G.S. 1949, 60-1609 and the 1961 Supp. thereto.
1. Sheriff permitting prisoner to spend nights at home unsupervised guilty of willful misconduct and neglect of duty. State, ex rel., v. Robinson, 193 Kan. 480, 483, 489, 394 P.2d 48.
2. Direct conflict of interest sales by county commissioner to county held grounds for ouster; "present term rule" discussed and applied. State, ex rel., v. Schroeder, 199 Kan. 403, 430 P.2d 304.
3. Presentment of a false and excessive claim, knowingly padded; willful misconduct in office. State, ex rel., v. Cahill, 222 Kan. 570, 575, 567 P.2d 1329.
4. Failure to follow personnel and sexual harassment policies constitute willful misconduct in office; removal from office of county treasurer affirmed. State ex rel. Miller v. Richardson, 229 Kan. 234, 235, 623 P.2d 1317.
5. Cited; absence of tort action by county employee against commissioners for violation of cash-basis or budget laws examined. Greenlee v. Board of Clay County Comm'rs, 241 Kan. 802, 808, 740 P.2d 606 (1987).
6. Ouster of sheriff affirmed based on his concealing evidence of theft of drugs and giving false testimony under oath. State ex rel. Stovall v. Meneley, 271 Kan. 355, 22 P.3d 124 (2001).
7. Judicial ouster is an extraordinary judicial remedy that should only be invoked where the evidence is clear and convincing and the misdeeds are flagrant. State v. Morrison, 50 Kan. App. 2d 1001, 335 P.3d 1204 (2014).
8. A finding of a bad or corrupt purpose is necessary when analyzing willful neglect and willful misconduct under K.S.A. 60-1205(1) and (2). State v. Morrison, 302 Kan. 804, 817-818, 359 P.3d 60 (2015).