Conflict of interest.

Three main reasons a lobbyist for the League of Kansas Municipalities (LKM) cannot also serve as a mayor in Kansas are: a fundamental conflict of interest, the specific nature of the LKM's work, and prohibitions under state ethics laws. [1, 2]

1. Fundamental conflict of interest

As mayor, a person has a fiduciary duty to act in the best interests of their specific city and its constituents. In contrast, as a lobbyist for the League of Kansas Municipalities, that person is paid to advocate for the collective interests of all Kansas cities at the state legislature. These two duties will inevitably conflict, especially when state legislation helps some cities but harms others. For example, a bill that financially benefits the state's small towns might negatively affect a larger city. The individual would be unable to fairly serve both employers, as their "independence of judgment or action" would be compromised. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]

2. Specific role of LKM and its lobbyist

The League of Kansas Municipalities is a non-profit association of cities that advocates on behalf of its members to the state legislature. Its lobbying efforts include monitoring legislation, communicating with policymakers, and pushing for laws that benefit Kansas cities.

• As an LKM lobbyist, the individual represents the collective position of Kansas's cities in state-level legislative matters, a position that may directly oppose the specific needs of their own city.
• As mayor, the individual is the chief executive of one specific city and is sworn to represent its unique interests in all governmental affairs.

This dual role is ethically untenable, creating a loyalty conflict that damages public trust. [6, 7]

3. Kansas ethics laws and public perception

Kansas ethics laws address conflicts of interest by requiring the disclosure of substantial financial interests and prohibiting public officials from participating in contracts where they have a conflict. A paid position lobbying the state legislature on behalf of an organization that influences policy would almost certainly qualify as a significant conflict.

• A mayor who also works as a lobbyist would face constant scrutiny and allegations of using their public office for private gain or the interests of a special group, even if they recused themselves from every potential conflict.
• Even if a public official abstains from acting on a specific matter, the perception of impropriety could undermine public confidence in the integrity of both the mayor and the city's government. [1, 7, 8]

AI responses may include mistakes.

[1] https://www.facebook.com/mcre1/

[2] https://sos.ks.gov/elections/election-standards/Kansas-Election-Standards-Chapter-VII-Public-Officers.pdf

[3] https://codelibrary.amlegal.com/codes/hillcityks/latest/hillcity_ks/0-0-0-154

[4] https://www.lkm.org/page/legislative

[5] https://rbkc.moderngov.co.uk/committees/documents/s24996/Part%203%20Section%201%20Role%20and%20Functions%20of%20the%20Mayor%20250129.pdf

[6] https://ethics.kansas.gov/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/handbook-for-legislative-lobbyists.pdf

[7] https://kpdc.kansas.gov/state-level-conflict-of-interest/

[8] https://ethics.kansas.gov/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/75-4305.pdf

Henry McClure  
785.383.9994
sent from mobile 📱
time kills deals