Kansas Attorney General Opinion 2017-017

November 20, 2017
ATTORNEY GENERAL OPINION NO. 2017- 17
Tamara Niles
City Attorney, City of Arkansas City
125 W. 5th Ave.
Arkansas City, KS 67005
Re: 	Unfair Trade and Consumer Protection—Consumer Protection; Kansas
Roofing Registration Act—Kansas Roofing Registration Act; Exemptions;
Violations; Complaints; Investigations; Subpoenas
Synopsis: 	Property owners may perform roofing services on property owned by
them. Employees of the owners of residential and farm properties may
perform roofing services on those properties; the law is ambiguous as to
whether employees of the owners of commercial property may perform
roofing services on those properties. Contractors and other non-employee
agents 	of 	property 	owners 	must 	register 	under 	the 	Kansas 	Roofing
Registration 	Act 	prior 	to 	performing 	roofing 	services 	on 	the 	owners’
properties. 	The 	Office 	of 	the 	Attorney 	General 	is 	the 	state 	agency
responsible for administering the Kansas Roofing Registration Act. Cited
herein: K.S.A. 2017 Supp. 50-6,122; 50-6,123; 50-6,129; 50-6,133.
* 	* 	*
Dear Ms. Niles:
As City Attorney for the City of Arkansas City (City), you ask our opinion on several
matters related to the Kansas Roofing Registration Act (KRRA). Specifically, you ask:
(1) whether landlords may roof residential and/or commercial property owned by them
without 	being 	registered 	under 	the 	KRRA; 	and 	(2) 	which 	entity 	has 	the 	legal
responsibility to enforce the KRRA.

Tamara Niles
Page 2
In your request for an opinion, you explained that the City Code Enforcement Division
was contacted by several landlords requesting permits to install roofs on property they
owned. You explained that the City originally required the landlords to be registered
under the Act, but that further analysis has revealed the relevant state statutes to be
ambiguous. 1 We will address each of your questions in turn.
The KRRA prohibits any person from engaging in the business of or acting in the
capacity of a roofing contractor within the state without having a valid registration
certificate.2 	The 	threshold 	inquiry 	thus 	becomes 	whether 	a 	landlord 	who 	roofs
residential or commercial property owned by him or her is acting in the capacity of a
roofing contractor. Based on the structure of the statute, we examine three distinct
scenarios that illuminate the answer to that question.
1. 	May a landlord personally perform roofing services on his or her own property
without registering under the KRRA?
Yes. The relevant definition of a “roofing contractor” within the KRRA is “any person,
including a subcontractor and nonresident contractor, who in the ordinary course of
business[ e]ngages in the business of commercial or residential roofing services for a
fee.”3 Although not separately defined, we believe “for a fee” means “in exchange for
payment,”4 which would include fixed fees, hourly wages, and salary directly attributable
to engaging in the business of commercial or residential roofing services.
A landlord who personally performs roofing services on property he or she owns is
presumably not doing so “for a fee” and, absent other facts, is therefore not acting in the
capacity of a “roofing contractor” that would require registration under the KRRA.
2. 	May a landlord cause employees of the landlord to perform roofing services on
the landlord’s property without registering under the KRRA?
It depends on the type of property. A landlord’s employees providing roofing services on
the landlord’s property are presumably being paid to provide roofing services and would
thus fall within the definition of a “roofing contractor.” 5 However, they may nonetheless
be exempt under the following provision:
The roofing contractor registration act shall not apply to:
1 Correspondence, Tamara Niles, July 18, 2017.
2 K.S.A. 2017 Supp. 50-6,123(a)(1).
3 K.S.A. 2017 Supp. 50-6,122(a)(1)(A).
4 Black’s Law Dictionary (10th ed. 2014) (defining “fee” as “a charge or payment for labor or services”).
5 We assume, without deciding, that any roofing services provided by the employees would be provided
“in the ordinary course of business.” This would, of course, be a fact-specific determination.

Tamara Niles
Page 3
An actual owner of commercial, residential or farm property who physically
performs, or has employees who perform, roofing services including,
construction, 	installation, 	renovation, 	repair, 	maintenance, 	alteration,
waterproofing or removal of materials or structures on such owner’s own
dwelling or another structure located on the residential or farm property
owned by such person without the assistance of any registered roofing
contractor.6
Under this exemption, a landlord’s employee who performs roofing services on the
landlord’s residential property does not need to register under the KRRA. Similarly, a
landlord’s employee who performs roofing services on the landlord’s farm property is
exempt from registration. It is, however, unclear whether a landlord’s employee who
performs 	roofing 	services 	on 	the 	landlord’s 	commercial 	property 	is 	exempt 	from
registration under the KRRA because the statute is ambiguous; by its plain text, the
exemption applies to an “actual owner of commercial . . . property” but only “on the
residential or farm property owned by such person.”
A 	review 	of 	the 	legislative 	history 	of 	2013 	House 	Bill 	2024 	reveals 	the 	Senate
Committee on Commerce inserted the word “commercial” before the phrase “residential
or farm property” but only in the first instance. Although the Supplemental Note to the
amended substitute bill suggests the Senate Committee believed this amendment
would exempt commercial property owners from the Act, 7 the Supplemental Note
contains a disclaimer that it was “prepared by the Legislative Research Department and
[does] not express legislative intent.” The only reflection of legislative intent comes from
the 	March 	20, 	2013 	minutes 	of 	the 	Senate 	Committee, 	in 	which 	it 	appears 	the
Committee members were concerned about exempting a “handyman” performing a
“small repair” from the provisions of the Act. This amendment does not appear to serve
those aims. 8
Courts generally do not add words to statutes when trying to interpret them, and only do
so when the intent of the Legislature can be discerned and adding those words would
be necessary to effect the Legislature’s intent.9 Although we believe the Legislature may
have intended to exempt from the Act owners of commercial property who perform
roofing services on their own commercial property, or cause their employees to provide
roofing services on their commercial property, the present ambiguity in the statute is too
great and the legislative history is insufficiently clear for us to offer a confident opinion
6 K.S.A. 2017 Supp. 50-6,129(a)(1).
7 Supplemental Note on Sub. for 2013 H.B. 2024, As Recommended by Senate Committee on
Commerce.
8 Instead, the Senate Committee included the provision now codified at K.S.A. 2017 Supp. 50-6,129(a)(8)
(including a $2,000 ceiling for small repair services by persons who do not advertise themselves as
roofing contractors).
9 E.g., Shrader v. Kan. Dept. of Revenue, 296 Kan. 3, 9-10 (2012) (reciting many oft-used rules of
statutory interpretation).

Tamara Niles
Page 4
on the matter. We believe this ambiguity can only be addressed by the Legislature in a
subsequent statutory amendment.10
3. 	May a landlord cause contractors, agents, or other non-employees to perform
roofing services on the landlord’s property without registering under the KRRA?
No. The “employee” exemption in K.S.A. 2017 Supp. 50-6,129(a)(1) applies only to
employees—not to other persons doing work for a landlord. A landlord’s non-employee
agents and contractors must be registered under the KRRA even when working for a
landlord on the landlord’s own properties.
You also ask which entity has the legal responsibility to enforce the KRRA. K.S.A. 2017
Supp. 50-6,133 provides that the Attorney General has authority to enforce the KRRA
and specifically contemplates a process by which complaints are to be filed with the
Attorney General. Thus, the Attorney General has the legal responsibility to enforce the
KRRA.
However, we note that certain local officials have non-discretionary legal duties under
the provisions of the KRRA. For example, local officials who issue permits “for roofing
services or jobs” are required to “enter a roofing contractor’s registration certificate
number on the permit.”11 The KRRA also imposes a duty on a landlord, even one
“exempt from the registration requirements of this act,” who applies for permits for
roofing projects, even on his or her own property, to supply local permitting officials the
registration 	certificate 	number 	of 	“each 	roofing 	subcontractor 	engaged 	in 	roofing
services and doing work covered by the permit, if any.”12 In such an instance, the local
permitting official is under a statutory duty to “enter each roofing contractor registration
number so supplied before inspection of the job.” 13 Thus, although the Attorney General
has the legal responsibility to enforce the KRRA, local officials have legal duties such as
those described above that tend to ensure compliance with the KRRA.
Summary
Without being required to register under the KRRA, a property owner (landlord) may:
personally and physically perform roofing services on property he or she owns; and
cause employees to perform roofing services on residential or farm properties he or she
owns. The ambiguity in K.S.A. 2017 Supp. 50-6,129(a)(1) makes it unclear whether a
property owner may cause employees to perform roofing services on commercial
properties he or she owns without complying with the KRRA registration requirements.
10 “No matter what the legislature may have really intended to do, if it did not in fact do it, under any
reasonable interpretation of the language used, the defect is one that the legislature alone can correct.”
State v. Prine, 297 Kan. 460, 475 (2013).
11 K.S.A. 2017 Supp. 50-6,135(a).
12 K.S.A. 2017 Supp. 50-6,135(b).
13 Id.

Tamara Niles
Page 5
Non-employee agents and other contractors of a property owner must register under the
KRRA when performing roofing services for a fee.
Sincerely,
Derek Schmidt
Kansas Attorney General
Craig Paschang
Assistant Attorney General
DS:AA:CP:sb