Attorney General Opinion No.

Kansas Attorney General Reports·Decided May 9, 1995·Published

Opinion

The Honorable Dave Kerr State Senator, 34th District 72 Willowbrook Hutchinson, Kansas 67502

Dear Senator Kerr:

As senator for the 34th district, you request our opinion regarding the establishment by unified school districts of early retirement incentive programs pursuant to K.S.A. 72-5395 et seq. Specifically, you ask: (1) whether a plan which provides for payment of benefits in future fiscal years violates the cash-basis law; (2) whether an employee may take a leave of absence and continue such status until the employee becomes eligible for benefits under the early retirement incentive program; (3) whether the limitation set forth in K.S.A. 1994 Supp. 74-4914 on compensation receivable by a retirant is applicable to a person receiving benefits from an early retirement incentive program; and (4) whether K.S.A. 72-5395 et seq. may be repealed by the legislature.

The board of education of any unified school district is authorized pursuant to K.S.A. 1994 Supp. 72-5395 to establish an early retirement incentive program for the benefit of the employees of the district "for the purpose of reducing, in whole or in part, the penalty under the federal insurance contributions act or the Kansas public employees retirement system, or both, for retirement prior to the the normal retirement age of 65 years." The program may provide for cash payments either in the form of a lump sum at the beginning of the fiscal year or in regular payments during the fiscal year. K.S.A. 1994 Supp. 72-5395. In Attorney General Opinion No. 89-18 it was opined that the provisions of K.S.A. 72-5395 et seq. do not limit the agreement for such benefits to a one-year period, but may run for the term of a negotiated agreement between the board of education and a professional employees' organization without conflicting with the continuing contract law for teachers, K.S.A. 72-5410 et seq.

Cash-Basis Law

The cash-basis law generally prohibits a municipality from entering into a contract which creates an indebtedness in excess of the funds actually in its treasury at that time for a particular purpose, K.S.A. 10-1113, and has the effect of voiding any contract which violates the cash-basis law. K.S.A. 10-1119.See also Greenlee v. Board of Clay County Commissioners,241 Kan. 802, 807-08 (1987); U.S.D. No. 207 v. Northland National Bank,20 Kan. App. 2d 321, 326 (1994). The statutory definition of municipality includes a school district. K.S.A. 1994 Supp.10-1101; U.S.D. No. 207, 20 Kan. App. 2d at 325 (1994).

The cash-basis law does not prohibit a municipality from entering into an agreement which provides for the payment of funds in future fiscal years provided the obligation to pay is dependent on a contingency and funds necessary to meet the obligation will be available after such contingency is met. City of Wichita v.Wyman, 158 Kan. 709, 712-13 (1944); International Association ofFirefighters v. City of Lawrence, 14 Kan. App. 2d 788, 801-02 (1990); see Gragg v. U.S.D. No. 287, 6 Kan. App. 2d 152, 154 (1981). A contingency is something that may or may not happen; an event which may occur; a possibility. Deluxe Black's Law Dictionary 320 (6th Ed. 1990). The municipality may estimate the amount it will actually be obligated to pay following the occurrence of a contingency. This lack of certainty in budget appropriations does not violate the cash-basis law. International Association,14 Kan. App. 2d at 801.

The time for commencement of the right of an employee of a school district to receive payment of a pension is determined by the provisions of the plan granting the right. 78 C.J.S. Schools andSchool Districts sec. 345 (1995). The legislature has left to the individual school districts the discretion of establishing an early retirement incentive program and the form such a plan may take. A determination whether an early retirement incentive program violates the cash-basis law is dependent on the terms of the specific plan. The cash-basis law does not prohibit a unified school district from establishing an early retirement incentive program which outlines payment of pension benefits over a period exceeding one fiscal year provided the obligation to pay the pension benefits is subject to the occurrence of a contingency,i.e., the retirant meets all the qualifications established in the plan for receiving benefits and the retirant survives to the periodic dates designated in the plan for payment of the pension benefit. Because payment of the pension benefits would be contingent on the future occurrence of an event, the unified school district would have available at the time of the occurrence of the contingency the funds necessary to meet its obligations under the early retirement incentive program.

Leave of Absence

Four acts control the formation, continuation, and termination or nonrenewal of teachers' contracts: the continuing contract law, K.S.A. 72-5410 et seq.; the professional negotiations act, K.S.A.72-5413 et seq.; the due process procedure and contract termination act, K.S.A. 72-5436 et seq.; and the evaluation of certificated personnel act, K.S.A. 72-9001 et seq. Miller v.U.S.D. No. 470, 12 Kan. App. 2d 368, 369 (1987). Contracts for employment of administrators are subject to the continuing contract law, K.S.A. 72-5410 et seq., the administrators' contracts nonrenewal procedure, K.S.A. 72-5451 et seq., and the evaluation of certificated personnel act, K.S.A. 72-9001 et seq. Provisions of these acts must be construed together in determining the authority of a board of education to enter into an agreement which permits a teacher or administrator to take a sabbatical or leave of absence until such time as the teacher or administrator is eligible to receive benefits under the school district's early retirement incentive program.

A sabbatical or leave of absence does not mean a permanent separation from employment, but rather signifies a temporary absence from duty with an intention to return, during which time compensation may be suspended. 63A Am.Jur.2d Public Officers andEmployees sec. 180 (1984).

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Attorney General Opinion No., (kanag 1995).

Attorney General Opinion No. (Attorney General Opinion No.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Gragg v. Unified School District No. 287
627 P.2d 335 (Court of Appeals of Kansas, 1981)
Tew v. City of Topeka Police & Fire Civil Service Commission
697 P.2d 1279 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1985)
Shapiro v. Kansas Public Employees Retirement System
532 P.2d 1081 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1975)
Unified School District No. 207 v. Northland National Bank
887 P.2d 1138 (Court of Appeals of Kansas, 1994)
Singer v. City of Topeka
607 P.2d 467 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1980)
Brazelton v. Kansas Public Employees Retirement System
607 P.2d 510 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1980)
Hamann v. Crouch
508 P.2d 968 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1973)
International Ass'n of Firefighters Local 1596 v. City of Lawrence
798 P.2d 960 (Court of Appeals of Kansas, 1990)
Miller v. Board of Education
744 P.2d 865 (Court of Appeals of Kansas, 1987)
National Education Ass'n-Wichita v. Board of Education
592 P.2d 80 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1979)
Greenlee v. Board of County Commissioners
740 P.2d 606 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1987)
Galindo v. City of Coffeyville
885 P.2d 1246 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1994)
City of Wichita v. Wyman
150 P.2d 154 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1944)