Kansas Attorney General Opinion 1992-058

ROBERT T. STEPHAN
ATTORNEY GEN ER AL April 28, 1992
ATTORNEY GENERAL OPINION NO. 92- 58
David Heger
County Counselor
P.O. Box 403
133 S. Pearl
Paola, Kansas 66071
Re: Elections--Primary Elections--Fees of Candidates;
Reimbursement
Synopsis: A county election officer may not reimburse to an
individual whose candidacy has been terminated
pursuant to K.S.A. 19-826 the fee paid pursuant to
K.S.A. 1991 Supp. 25-2061 Cited herein: K.S.A.
19-801b; 19-826; K.S.A. 1991 Supp. 25-206; 25-208.
Dear Mr. Heger:
As counselor for the board of county commissioners of Miami
county, you request our opinion regarding whether the filing
fee paid by a candidate for county sheriff may be reimbursed
when it has been determined that the candidate is not
qualified to serve as sheriff.
An individual has filed in the office of the county election
officer a declaration of intention to become a candidate for
sheriff and has paid the filing fee as required by K.S.A. 1991
Supp. 25-206. As required by K.S.A. 19-826, the candidate was
fingerprinted. A search by the Kansas bureau of investigation
of the state and national fingerprint files indicated that the
candidate had been convicted of driving while under the
influence of alcohol or drugs and an open container of liquor

offense, and therefore does not meet the qualifications for
office prescribed in K.S.A. 19-801b. Chamberlain v.
Buhrman, No. 66,858 (Kansas January 17, 1992). The county
election officer then terminated the individual's candidacy
and removed the individual's name from the ballot as mandated
by K.S.A. 19-826. The individual now seeks reimbursement of
the filing fee paid pursuant to K.S.A. 1991 Supp. 25-206.
A declaration of an intention to become a candidate for county
sheriff is to be filed in the office of the county election
officer. K.S.A. 1991 Supp. 25-208. The declaration is to be
accompanied by a fee equal to one percent of one year's salary
of the sheriff. K.S.A. 1991 Supp. 25-206.
"The officer receiving the funds shall
turn them over to the state treasurer, if
deposited with the secretary of state, or
to the county treasurer, if deposited with
the county election officer, and the funds
shall become a part of the general fund of
the respective government." Id.
The interpretation of a statute is a matter of law and it is
the function of the court to interpret a statute to give it
the effect intended by the legislature. Brabander v.
Western Cooperative Electric, 248 Kan. 914, 917 (1991). The
fundamental rule of statutory construction is that the purpose
and intent of the legislature governs when that intent can be
ascertained from the statute. Id. at 916. One of the common
rules of statutory interpretation is that the mention or
inclusion of one thing implies the exclusion of others.
State v. Wood, 231 Kan. 699, 701 (1982). When a statute is
plain and unambiguous, the court must give effect to the
intention of the legislature as expressed, rather than
determine what the law should or should not be. State v.
Coley, 236 Kan. 672, 675 (1985).
K.S.A. 1991 Supp. 25-206 clearly provides that the fees
submitted to the county election officer are to be turned over
to the county treasurer. The county election officer has no
authority to transfer the fees to any other individuals. The
fees become part of the general fund of the county. K.S.A.
1991 Supp. 25-206. Therefore, the county election officer may
not reimburse to an individual whose candidacy has

been terminated pursuant to K.S.A. 19-826 the fee paid
pursuant to K.S.A. 1991 Supp. 25-206.
Very truly yours,
ROBERT T. STEPHAN
Attorney General of Kansas
Richard a. Smith
Assistant Attorney General
RTS:JLM:RDS:jm