Can one Kansas community college absorb another college's taxing district if the other college closes?

Plain-English summary

Kansas Attorney General Kris Kobach concluded that one community college cannot automatically take over another community college's taxing district after the other college closes. Community colleges are created by statute and have only the powers the Legislature gave them. Kansas law provides no mechanism for removing or transferring territory from one active community college district to another.

If a college closes, its taxing district also ceases to exist. The territory is then outside any community college district. A remaining college may seek to add that territory by following the process in K.S.A. 71-1201, but it does not acquire the territory merely because the neighboring college closed.

The opinion distinguished closure from consolidation. K.S.A. 71-1301 and related statutes allow two or more community college districts to consolidate through an agreement, approval by the state board of regents, a special election, certification of the results, and an order establishing the new district. A completed consolidation combines the original districts' territory into the new district.

What this means for you

Community college boards and administrators

A surviving college has no implied power to absorb a closed college's taxing district. If it wants to include territory that became unclaimed after a closure, the opinion says it must use the statutory territory-addition process in K.S.A. 71-1201.

Communities served by two community colleges

Closure and consolidation produce different district boundaries. After a closure, the former taxing territory leaves the community college district system unless it is later added under the statute. A consolidation, if approved through the statutory process, creates a new district containing the territory of the original districts.

State and county officials

The opinion treats community college district boundaries as a legislative matter. The state board of regents and election officials have the approval, election, certification, and boundary-establishment roles assigned by the consolidation statutes.

Common questions

Does the other community college automatically receive the closed college's taxing territory?

No. The opinion concluded that Kansas law has no automatic absorption mechanism. The closed college's taxing district ceases to exist, and its territory remains outside the surviving college's district.

Can the remaining college add the former district's territory?

Yes, but only through the procedure in K.S.A. 71-1201. The opinion did not treat closure itself as transferring the territory.

Can territory belong to two Kansas community college districts?

No. The opinion incorporated the reasoning of Attorney General Opinion 2014-13, which concluded that territory cannot be included in two community college districts.

How is consolidation different from one college closing?

Kansas law expressly provides a consolidation process for community college districts. It requires an agreement, state board of regents approval, voter approval in each district, certification of the election results, and an order establishing the new district and its boundaries.

Background and statutory framework

K.S.A. 71-1101 and K.S.A. 71-1102 govern the establishment and territory of community college districts. K.S.A. 71-1201 provides a process for adding territory to an existing community college district. The opinion noted that K.S.A. 72-521 provides a territory-transfer process for unified school districts, but community colleges are exempt from those provisions.

K.S.A. 71-1301 and the related consolidation statutes provide a separate path for combining community college districts. The opinion relied on the rule that a community college, as a statutory creation, may exercise only powers granted expressly or by clear implication. Because no statute authorized one college to absorb another district after closure, the AG declined to infer that power.

Citations and references

Statutes:

• K.S.A. 71-1101 and K.S.A. 71-1102
• K.S.A. 71-1201
• K.S.A. 71-1301, K.S.A. 71-1303, K.S.A. 71-1304, and K.S.A. 71-1305
• K.S.A. 71-1402
• K.S.A. 72-521

Cases:

• Bruce v. Kelly, 316 Kan. 218, 224, 414 P.3d 1007 (2022)
• State v. Smith, 311 Kan. 109, 113, 456 P.3d 1004 (2020)
• State ex rel. Tomasic v. Unified Gov’t of Wyandotte Cnty./Kansas City, Kan., 254 Kan. 293, 301, 955 P.2d 1136 (1998)
• State ex rel. Jordan v. City of Overland Park, 215 Kan. 700, 706, 527 P.2d 1340 (1974)
• Hobart v. Bd. of Ed. of U.S.D. No. 309, 230 Kan. 375, 383, 634 P.2d 1088 (1981)

Source

• Landing page: https://www.ag.ks.gov/reports-resources/ag-opinions
• Original PDF: https://www.ag.ks.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/25781/639201405167622488

Original opinion text

June 18, 2026

ATTORNEY GENERAL OPINION NO. 2026-9

Douglas G. Ott
815 Union Street
P.O. Box 9
Coffeyville, Kansas 67337

Re: Schools—Community Colleges—New Community Colleges—
Application to Organize; Preparatory Study
Schools—Community Colleges—New Community Colleges—Standards
for Approval
Schools—Community Colleges—Attachment of Territory—Territory
Attachment; Elections, When, Limitations and Approvals
Schools—Community Colleges—Community College Elections—
Definitions

Synopsis: A community college’s taxing district is established and limited by
statute. The Legislature has not granted community colleges the
authority to remove or transfer territory from one community college
district to another. If one of the two community colleges in
Montgomery County closed, the other one cannot absorb the closed
college’s taxing district because no statutory mechanism exists to do
so. Once a community college closes, its taxing district no longer exists,
and the territory within that taxing district is no longer be part of a
community college district. Another community college could seek to
add territory from the defunct community college district provided it
complies with the applicable statutory provisions. Cited herein: K.S.A.
71-1101; K.S.A. 71-1102; K.S.A. 71-1201; K.S.A. 71-1301; K.S.A. 71-
1303; K.S.A. 71-1304; K.S.A. 71-1305; K.S.A. 71-1402; K.S.A. 72-521.

                        *            *             *

Page 2

Mr. Douglas G. Ott
Page 2

Dear Mr. Ott:

As the attorney for Coffeyville Community College, you ask about a unique
situation in Montgomery County. The county has two community colleges, each
with its own taxing district. You ask, if one of the community colleges closes, what
would happen to the territory within its taxing district. Specifically, you inquire
what action, if any, the remaining community college must take to add the closed
college’s taxing district to its own taxing district.

In addressing this issue, we note Kansas Attorney General Opinion No. 2014-13 has
already addressed whether the territory of one community college district can be
removed or transferred to the territory of another community college district. The
opinion concluded that it could not. We find that opinion instructive and incorporate
its reasoning here.

Answering your question requires statutory interpretation. Statutory interpretation
begins with the statutory text, giving words their ordinary and everyday meanings. 1
Only when the statutory language is ambiguous do Kansas courts turn to canons of
construction or legislative history. 2

The Legislature has the power to create municipal corporations, “including the
power to designate their boundaries and to increase or decrease their corporate
limits.” 3 This power belongs solely to the Legislature, and not the executive or
judicial branches. 4 The Legislature has “absolute authority” to create or terminate
municipal corporations, as well as to enact provisions by which a municipal
corporation’s boundaries will be increased or decreased. 5

“‘A community college is a statutory creation whose actions are limited by the
content of those statutes.’” 6 A community college has only the powers conferred
upon it by statute, either specifically or by clear implication, and “any reasonable
doubt as to the existence of such power should be resolved against its existence.” 7

1 Bruce v. Kelly, 316 Kan. 218, 224, 414 P.3d 1007 (2022).
2 State v. Smith, 311 Kan. 109, 113, 456 P.3d 1004 (2020).
3 State ex rel. Tomasic v. Unified Gov’t of Wyandotte Cnty./Kansas City, Kan., 254 Kan. 293, 301,
955 P.2d 1136 (1998) (internal quotations and citations omitted); see State ex rel. Jordan v. City of
Overland Park, 215 Kan. 700, 706, 527 P.2d 1340 (1974) (“This court has uniformly held that the
power to create municipal or quasipublic corporations is a legislative power and that its exercise is a
function of the legislature”).
4 Tomasic, 254 Kan. at 301.
5 Jordan, 215 Kan. at 706.
6 Att’y Gen. Op. No. 2014-13, at *1 (quoting Att’y Gen. Op. No. 2011-4).
7 Id.; Hobart v. Bd. of Ed. of U.S.D. No. 309, 230 Kan. 375, 383, 634 P.2d 1088 (1981).

Page 3

Mr. Douglas G. Ott
Page 3
The taxing district and territory of a community college is statutorily defined as a
“community college district” or “college district.” 8 K.S.A. 71-1101, et seq. establishes
the procedure for establishing a community college district. A proposed community
college district shall include “[a]t least all of the territory of the petitioning district
or districts or all of one county.” 9 Additionally, “[a]ny contiguous compact territory
in the area in which the petitioning districts are located may be included in the
proposed community college district.” 10 The statutes also provide for adding
territory to a community college district after submission of a petition by the board
of education of a unified school district or board of trustees of a community college. 11
While a statutory procedure to transfer territory from one unified school district to
another exists in K.S.A. 72-521 et seq., community colleges are statutorily exempt
from those provisions. 12

Attorney General Opinion No. 2014-13 originated from a request by Independence
Community College, and addressed whether a community college may add territory
to its taxing district when such territory was already a part of a different
community college district. 13 The opinion found it necessary to first determine
whether territory from one community college district may be removed or
transferred from another. 14 The opinion concluded it could not because there was no
statutory authority to do so. 15 The opinion also ultimately concluded that territory
cannot be part of two community college districts. 16 The opinion further provided a
thorough history of legislative development of the statutes governing community
colleges. 17

No statutory provision addresses removing territory from one community college
district or transferring territory from one community college district to another,
even where one of the community colleges has closed. The authority to remove or
transfer territory is not clearly implied in the statutes addressing the establishment
or consolidation of community college districts, nor is it clearly implied in the
statutes addressing adding territory to a community college district. 18 Likewise, as
Attorney General Opinion 2014-13 concluded, territory may not be included in two
community college districts.

The Legislature has not provided any mechanism for one community college to take
over or absorb the territory from another community college district if that college

8 K.S.A. 71-1402(b).
9 K.S.A. 71-1102(a).
10 K.S.A. 71-1102(b).
11 K.S.A. 71-1201.
12 K.S.A. 72-521(a).
13 Att’y Gen. Op. No. 2014-13, at *1.
14 Id.
15 Id. at 2.
16 Id. at 4.
17 Id. at 2-4.
18 See id. at 2.

Page 4

Mr. Douglas G. Ott
Page 4
has closed. If a community college closes, the taxing district would also cease to
exist. The territory from the closed college would still be outside of the open college’s
district. However, if the open college wanted to then add territory from a closed
community college district, it would be able to do so pursuant to the statutory
mechanisms provided in K.S.A. 71-1201.

While there is no statutory provision for one college absorbing a closed college’s
taxing district, Kansas statutes do provide a procedure for consolidation. 19 K.S.A.
71-1301 authorizes the boards of trustees for two or more community college
districts to agree to form one consolidated community college district. These
agreements “shall be of no force or effect” without approval from the state board of
regents and subsequent approval at a special election “called for the purpose in the
territory which will compromise the consolidated community college district.” 20 “The
territory of the consolidated community college district shall be all of the territory of
the community college districts being consolidate.” 21 The plan is deemed approved if
a majority of voters in each community college district being consolidated votes
“yes.” 22 Before the consolidated community college district is finally approved, the
responsible county election officer must certify the results of the election. 23 Then an
order establishing the new community college district and describing the
boundaries of the district shall be issued. 24

Unlike if one college closed, consolidation under K.S.A. 71-1301, et seq. would result
in the consolidated college’s taxing district including the taxing districts of the
original colleges.

In summary, two community colleges exist in Montgomery County, each with its
own taxing district. If one closed, the other college could not absorb the closed
college’s taxing district. The closed college’s taxing district would cease to exist, and
that territory would no longer be part of a community college district. If the
remaining college wished to add the now unclaimed territory, it must follow the
provisions set out in K.S.A. 71-1201. Statutes do provide, on the other hand, a
mechanism for consolidating multiple community college districts into one, though
separate, specific procedures that must be followed.

19 See K.S.A. 71-1301, et seq.
20 K.S.A. 71-1303.
21 K.S.A. 71-1304.
22 K.S.A. 71-1304.
23 K.S.A. 71-1305.
24 K.S.A. 71-1305.

Page 5

Mr. Douglas G. Ott
Page 5
Sincerely,

                 /s/ Kris W. Kobach

                 Kris W. Kobach
                 Attorney General

                 /a/ Ryan J. Ott

                 Ryan J. Ott
                 Assistant Solicitor General