Lawmakers want to revive a bill that would limit local governments’ ability to regulate what are described as “no-impact” home-based businesses.
The Special Committee on Commerce recently recommended that the Legislature reconsider the bill that was voted down in a Senate committee last session.
Republican state Rep. Sean Tarwater of Johnson County, chair of the special committee, said lawmakers want to refine the bill in this upcoming legislative session.
“There’s a lot of work to be done on this bill and there’s a lot of clarification and a lot of explanation to be done on the bill, and hopefully we’ll get there this year,” said Tarwater, who also chairs the House commerce committee.
Among other things, Tarwater said he wants to ensure that the bill doesn’t supersede home association rules and doesn’t prevent local governments from regulating businesses such as Airbnbs and dog kennels or dog groomers.
Tarwater said he thought the bill already addressed those issues but believes there’s a need to add language to make legislators more comfortable with the bill.
“I think it’s written correctly, we just need to put some clarifications in it,” Tarwater said in an interview.
“It will make people feel better about voting for it because they don’t want to supersede local governments for Airbnbs and things like that,” he said.
The bill establishes a “no-impact home business,” defined as one where lawful goods or services are produced or sold on residential property by the owner or tenant.
The businesses’ on-site employees and clients must not exceed the occupancy limit for the residential property and must not generate on-street parking or substantially more traffic.
Business activities must occur inside the residential dwelling or within the private
premises and not be not visible from the street.
Last session, the House voted 74-49 to approve the bill, but it later failed to get out of a Senate committee. The bill can still be debated again next year.
The bill had been opposed by cities across the state including Shawnee, Topeka, Overland Park, Prairie Village, Liberal and Garden City.
The League of Kansas Municipalities warned at one point that the bill could leave cities unable to address neighborhood safety issues and disruptions.
Republican state Sen. Larry Alley of Winfield is chair of the Senate commerce committee.
Alley said he would agree to hear the bill again, but he believes the bill needs to be better clarified to define what constitutes a nonimpact home business.
Alley said he wants to make sure that property owners who invested heavily into their homes are protected from disruptive business activity in their neighborhood.
“If you have, let’s say, a lawnmower repair shop and you had old lawnmowers all over your driveway, is that was the intent of this is?” Alley asked.
“That’s the definition that needs to be explained.”
The bill has support from Republican state Sen. Stephen Owens of Hesston, who sits on the Commerce Committee.
He amended the bill earlier this year to help get it out of committee. He was not successful.
Owens said the bill was a proactive way for the state to encourage entrepreneurship in their homes and community.
“I’m just huge believer in everybody having some kind of a side hustle,” he said.
“Are we going to regulate the DoorDasher next and make them get a license because they’re driving their car around delivering McDonald’s?” he said.
Owens talked about how his daughter started a dog-grooming business in her garage.
He said her business has grown to a point where it’s now in a storefront in Hesston and employs one full-time employee and one part-time employee.
“That business that started as a no-impact home business with no licensing requirement in her garage in Hesston, Kansas, with really zero regulation by the city, county or state has grown into a thriving little business,” he said.
“That’s what I see this as – a step into entrepreneurship,” he said.
The bill would have prohibited a municipality from requiring a “no-impact” home based business to apply, register or obtain any permit or license to operate.
The bill would have prohibited local governments from requiring those types of home businesses to get their property rezoned for commercial use, install fire sprinklers or undergo fire or building inspections, unless the codes are applied to similar homes without a business.
The bill would have allowed local governments to regulate these types of businesses for fire and building codes, health, sanitation, traffic control, waste and noise control as long as the regulations were narrowly tailored.
Republican state Sen. Brenda Dietrich of Topeka opposed the bill last year, believing the issue was a matter of local control.
“If we’re going to revisit (the bill) in Commerce, I want to make sure that the city of Topeka and the League of Municipalities have had an opportunity to speak to this,” Dietrich said in an interview.
The League of Kansas Municipalities, which opposed the bill last year, said it’s open to having talks with lawmakers to find ways to improve the legislation.
“We simply ask for an opportunity to sit down with lawmakers to discuss the proposed bill on home-based businesses,” said Spencer Duncan, lobbyist for the league.
“Our goal is to find common ground that supports entrepreneurship while also preserving the ability of cities to protect the character and safety of cities,” he said.
“We recognize the importance of supporting small, home-based businesses. We also must weigh concerns if a state law creates challenges in neighborhoods because it doesn’t truly respect the rights of nearby homeowners,” he said.
The bill was backed by the Kansas Chamber of Commerce, Americans for Prosperity, the Kansas Justice Institute and the National Federation of Independent Business and the Goldwater Institute, among others.
