David “Lee” Roth Van Halen Fame?
Posted on Mon, Mar. 02, 2009
State revenues down in Kansas
The Associated Press
TOPEKA | The state of Kansas received more bad news about its budget from preliminary tax collection figures for February.
Those figures from the Department of Revenue show that tax collections were about $12 million short of expectations last month.
The state’s official economic forecast predicted Kansas could collect $251 million in general tax revenues. Instead, it collected about $239 million.
Revenues have been running short of expectations throughout the current fiscal year. Fiscal 2009 ends June 30.
The Legislative Research Department will issue a final report on February revenue collections later this week. That will be followed by a new deficit projection for the fiscal 2010.
Researchers now project that the state would end fiscal 2010 with a $654 million deficit if it attempted to duplicate its current budget.
There was originally to be two days for Special Hearing on this bill…but today, a third day of hearings was scheduled for tomorrow.
This is an interesting development.
So, here’s a question; in those counties that the state of KS labeled as “population < 60K”, I see 3 cities that are MAJOR college towns (Manhatten, Lawrence, & Hutchinson). Has anyone thought of that aspect; that these so called “large cities” really aren’t, just an influx of college renters?
Busshy… I’m getting two messages from you.
1st you don’t want the goverment involved in our business.
2nd you supported obamma.
How can you have one, and not the other???
Dan and I are working on things. They are happening fast. Announcements will happen soon. We are silent for now, as we all must be for the next few days. There are conflicts happening. I can say that the committee is listening.
thanks Nick from me
Maybe I am missing something but in a thread labeled Nick Gromicko’s Response all I see is a letter from a lawyer requesting a meeting. Why didn’t Nick write the letter as the leader of Inachi? Does he feel that lawyer’s carry more weight than he does? If he was really serious then he would hire a lobbyist (*who are frequently lawyers) to solicit all the Legislators for meetings. I am no politician but I do know that one legislator only has one vote…
Is Nick serious about support the Kansas and MIssouri members???
The battle…fought on several fronts utilizing a variety of tactics, persons, and contacts…has resulted in having the Kansas Senate rewrite the bill that was sent to them from the House.
The changes are, to say the least, substantial. Suffice it to say that Mr. Barnes is an extremely unhappy camper…which is good news for the profession, for the consumer, and for the Kansas home inspector.
The Senate version goes back to the House and, if not resolved by 4/24, goes in the trash and we start all over from scratch next year.
Thanks to all of the key players and to the supporters who came through with the emails, letters and faxes.
We really did change history this time by taking a bill that had actually been signed in to law…and getting rid of it.
This is proof to everyone who wants to fight the attempts of special interests to control them with licensing laws that they are NOT inevitable.
Thanks again, Nick Gromicko, for the killer blow.
Kansas HB #2260 passes the Kansas senate today; 33 yeas, 7 nays. There has been several language changes. Some parts where eleminated. I have not seen the final bill yet. The senate was very busy today, and some journals will not be posted for days. We will have to wait for the final bill. Next, the governor…???
HB 2260 passes the Kansas Senate today 38 to 4.
Gary…how did the bill pass the Senate on two different days? Which of these is correct?
H 2260 Bill by Commerce and Labor S Sub for H 2260 by Committee on Commerce – Kansas home inspectors professional competence and financial responsibility act. Effective date: Statute Bk.
02/04/2009 H Introduced -HJ 121
02/05/2009 H Referred to Commerce and Labor -HJ 126
02/16/2009 H CR: Be passed as am. by Commerce and Labor -HJ 169
02/18/2009 H COW: CR be adptd; be passed as am. -HJ 184; Engrossed -HJ 204 02/19/2009 H FA: Passed as am.; Yeas 97 Nays 26 -HJ 199
02/19/2009 S Received and introduced -SJ 217
02/20/2009 S Referred to Commerce -SJ 235
03/16/2009 S CR: Substitute be passed by Commerce -SJ 328
03/25/2009 S COW: CR recommending sub. bill be adptd; Sub. be passed -SJ 499; EFA: Passed; Yeas 33 Nays 7 -SJ 529
03/30/2009 H Nonconcurred; CC requested; apptd Brunk, Grange, Ruiz -HJ 449
03/31/2009 S Acceded; apptd Wysong, Lynn, Holland -SJ 542
04/02/2009 S Adptd CCR; Yeas 36 Nays 4
04/03/2009 H Adptd CCR on house bill; Yeas 99 Nays 26