The following is the text of a letter from Jane Eldredge, an attorney, to City Manager Mike Wildgen concering the Lawrence Development Code.

June 6, 2003

Mr. Mike Wildgen, City Manager
City of Lawrence
6 East 6th Street
Lawrence, KS 66044-0708

Dear Mike:

At the request of the University of Kansas, we have reviewed the portion of the Lawrence Development Code (Draft, April 23, 2003) Section 20-218 Public Use University District and Section 20-401 Use Table.

We respectfully submit that this proposal should be withdrawn before it is presented formally to the City Commission. Although the stated purpose for the district is “to provide a mechanism for establishing a zoning and land-use plan for a Institutional-type educational institution,” it has neither been provided to, nor discussed with Haskell Indian Nations University or USD 497, the other major “institutional-type” educational institutions in Lawrence. It is a discriminatory proposal aimed solely at the University of Kansas, particularly since the actual reasons given for the zoning would apply with equal or greater effect to these other institutions.

More importantly, the Kansas Legislature did not grant cities the power over any educational institution, regardless of whether it is public or private; primary, secondary or post-secondary; to approve the educational institution’s comprehensive plan facilities, even though those facilities may be located within the boundaries of a city. For the City of Lawrence to attempt to impose its control over the facility needs of the University of Kansas is inconsistent with state law.

K.S.A. 12-753 permits a city to adopt zoning regulations only for territory that is subject to its jurisdiction. The University of Kansas is a state agency that is not subject to the jurisdiction of the City of Lawrence. K.S.A. 74-3202c sets forth the power and duties of the Kansas Board of Regents “to provide adequate resources and sufficient authority … so that each institution can realize … its full potential … to the benefit of all Kansas residents …”. It is the responsibility of the Board of Regents to provide “statewide planning for higher education.” The University of Kansas is subject to the Board of Regents’ supervision to provide educational opportunities that benefit all Kansans. Education is of such state-wide importance that the legislature granted the University of Kansas powers of eminent domain for its Medical Center. The University of Kansas must be able to grow and provide facilities that serve the state’s mandate to provide higher educational opportunities to its citizens. This growth is already regulated by the Board of Regents, which, as a board appointed by the governor, has a state-wide constituency and a state-wide mission. The Board of Regents must review and approve the University’s capital plans and land acquisitions. For a local unit of government to attempt to usurp or limit this authority is unacceptable.

The City of Lawrence appears to be attempting to restrict any additional residence halls, scholarship halls, parking garages, or other educational building expansion from occuring without the prior approval and consent of the City. This is contrary to the current state of the law in Kansas. Furthermore, the City has proposed removal of “dormitories” from all multi-family residential use catergories. This use is provided for in the present RD zoning district that surrounds much of the main campus of the University of Kansas. It is consistent with the type of uses that are often found both on and adjacent to university campuses across the country. RD permits “multi-family dwellings” and “dormitory-type residence halls” such as residence halls and scholarship halls. Any attempt on the part of the City of Lawrence to prevent the reasonable and necessary expansion of the University will be vigorously opposed.

Other cities such as Rochester and Schenectady, New York, have attempted to restrict their universities’ growth through zoning. These attempts have been rejected on a consistent basis by the courts because of significant and overriding importance of the state-wide public purpose of providing for the educational needs of its citizens.

While the University of Kansas must reject the City’s current proposal, it appreciates the time and effort that you must have spent in working with the University and with its neighbors. The University remains committed to its good neighbor policies and will continue to consult and work directly with the City and its neighbors on its future expansion projects. The University believes the current community advisory committee for the Rieger scholarship hall is demonstrative of its desire and committment to include the City and our neighbors in its planning. It sees this approach as an appropriate mechanism for obtaining meaningful community input and feedback to its facilities planning. The proposed zoning, however, would be an unacceptable expansion of the City’s role.

On behalf of the University, I would like to thank you for the opportunity to review this proposal. We believe that it is best withdrawn before being made available to the general public, because it is inconsistent with state law, inappropriate, and usurps the long-standing sovereignty of the University. Consequently, the University will have no choice but to enter what likely will be a protracted legal battle to protect the rights of the University. If, for any reason, you do not agree to withdraw the proposal, please call Mark Anderson or me so that we might arrange a meeting to discuss this matter in more detail.

Sincerely,

Barber, Emerson, Springer, Zinn and Murray, L.C.

(signature)
Jane M. Eldredge