Rep. John Faber, R-Brewster, who serves on the House Rules and Regulations Committee, said he was less than reassured that an opinion by Attorney General Steven Six released Thursday will free legislators to engage in oversight activity of the state’s expanded gambling venues.

Based on an initial review of the heavily-annotated opinion, Faber said, “I, as John Faber the citizen, can comment and ask questions related to gambling, but, as far as John Faber the legislator, I’m not sure I can.”

In fact, according to the opinion, he can't.

In response to a question as to "whether there is any permissible manner in which a state or local official can advocate, testify, appear or otherwise attempt to influence a matter or possible action by the KRGC [Kansas Racing and Gaming Commission], Review Board or the executive director of the KRGC," the opinion says that only "private citizens" may make "public comments" about the activities and policies pursued by the commission. 

For a legislator to attempt to "influence" - presumably, even by discussing it - "the investigation of a proposal for a lottery gaming facility or racetrack gaming facility" is a class-A misdemeanor, Six wrote.

The opinion came as a response to a written inquiry by Stephen L. Martino, the commission's executive director.

The issue arose last week during a meeting of the Rules and Regulations Committee. As committee members discussed sending a letter to one of the state's gambling regulatory bodies, Assistant Attorney General Mary Feighny informed the committee that doing so could put the committee members on a collision course with a Class A misdemeanor charge.

Feighny, whose name also appears on the opinion, said Section 31 of the expanded lottery bill that allowed an expansion of gaming in Kansas made it a misdemeanor for members of the Kansas Legislature and other specified parties to attempt to influence the state’s gaming regulators. The bill, which was written by the gaming industry, was rushed through the Legislature after being heavily promoted by the Sebelius administration.

Faber said he believed the committee, which has not convened since the issue arose, “will have some more detailed questions regarding the opinion” when the committee reconvenes.

Faber said though the scheduling of committee meetings was the responsibility of the committee chair, he believed it was unlikely it would convene during the wrap-up session scheduled to begin April 30.

He said he believed it was possible the committee also would send letters to the state’s gaming regulating bodies to get their feedback on the impact of the attorney general's opinion.

• Read the entire text of the opinion here.