Facing a charge of election perjury, Republican state Rep. Adam Thomas is taking a legal step that might enable him to remain in the Kansas Legislature.
Court records filed April 5 show that Thomas is seeking diversion for one count of election perjury, a felony that could force him out of office if he were convicted. A diversion agreement could keep him in office, state election officials said.
Thomas would not comment when asked about his application for diversion.
“We will comment in due time,” he said in a text.
The case centered on where Thomas was living when he filed to run for the Kansas House in May.
Democrats contend that Thomas misrepresented an Olathe duplex as his address within the House district when he filed to run for the Legislature.
Thomas has said he didn’t do anything wrong.
He has previously said that last May, his family entered a purchase agreement to acquire a home in House District 26. The family took possession of the house on July 5.
In the interim, Thomas said they stayed at the home of a friend until they could move to their new home.
Mike Kuckelman, chairman of the Kansas Republican Party, represents Thomas in a civil case contesting his election to the House District 26 seat, which includes Spring Hill and parts of Olathe.
Thomas defeated Democrat Deann Mitchell in last fall’s general election with almost 55 percent of the vote to win a seat in the Legislature.
Last September, Kuckelman said Thomas only had to show where he intended to live as evidenced by the fact that he had a lease-to-purchase home in the district. Kuckelman said the contract on the new home was signed before the filing deadline.
Reached Thursday, Kuckelman declined to comment on the criminal case facing Thomas. He noted that another lawyer is handling that criminal case.
The case has been ongoing since last September with several scheduling conferences, the most recent on March 6. Thomas’ next court date is set for May 8.
Diversion essentially gives someone who commits a relatively minor criminal offense a second chance.
The district attorney makes all decisions regarding diversion policy. He has the final authority to approve or deny any diversion application.
There are a number of requirements for diversion.
A defendant, for instance, is not eligible if they are charged with a range of offenses including aggravated domestic battery, residential burglaries and felony sex offenses, among others.
A defendant charged with felony levels one through six also cannot apply for diversion. Thomas is charged with a level nine felony.
“The district attorney will consider whether the defendant demonstrates a genuine sense of remorse and is prepared to acknowledge the act charged and accountability for the consequences of their actions,” the district attorney’s website says in laying out the grounds for diversion.
The state constitution requires a legislator to be a “qualified elector.” If Thomas is convicted of a felony, he would lose his right to vote and would no longer be a qualified elector.
A diversion agreement could change that. The Kansas secretary of state’s office said a diversion agreement should not cost someone their right to vote, although they acknowledged there might be circumstances that they cannot account for.
State law defines “diversion” as the referral of a defendant in a criminal case to a supervised performance program before adjudication. So the person has been charged but not convicted of a felony, meaning they would still be a qualified elector.
Ethan Corson, executive director of the Kansas Democratic Party, said Thomas’ application for diversion reaffirms the party’s initial questions about his residency.
“It shows,” Corson said, “what we’ve said all along, which is that Adam clearly was not a qualified elector in the district when he filed for office and should not be allowed in office.”
Diversion, however, wouldn’t get Thomas completely out of political danger. House rules potentially allow for a lawmaker to be expelled for “any misconduct.”
Another House member would have to file a written complaint with the chief clerk to start the proceedings.
The speaker would then appoint a special committee of six members — three Republicans and three Democrats — to investigate the complaint.
Ultimately, two-thirds of the House would be required to expel a member under chamber rules, a tough climb in the House where Republicans have 84 of the 125 members.
