Exclusive jurisdiction ceded to the United States; concurrent jurisdiction with Kansas for military purposes, procedure

27-102. Exclusive jurisdiction ceded to the United States; concurrent jurisdiction with Kansas for military purposes, procedure. (a) That exclusive jurisdiction over and within any lands so acquired by the United States shall be, and the same is hereby, ceded to the United States, for all purposes; saving, however, to the state of Kansas the right to serve therein any civil or criminal process issued under the authority of the state, in any action on account of rights acquired, obligations incurred or crimes committed in said state, but outside the boundaries of such land; and saving further to said state the right to tax the property and franchises of any railroad, bridge or other corporations within the boundaries of such lands; but the jurisdiction hereby ceded shall not continue after the United States shall cease to own said lands. (b) (1) The state of Kansas authorizes the governor to grant requests from the United States to establish concurrent jurisdiction over land owned by the United States for military purposes within the boundaries of Kansas. Concurrent jurisdiction shall be effective upon completion of: (A) A written offer for concurrent jurisdiction being sent to the governor by the principal officer of the military installation or other authorized representative of the United States having supervision and control over the land that: (i) Clearly states the subject matter for the concurrent jurisdiction request; (ii) provides the metes and bounds description of the boundary of the concurrent jurisdiction offer; and (iii) indicates whether the request includes future contiguous expansion of land acquired for military purposes; and (B) the governor accepting the offer in writing that clearly confirms each of the elements of the offer that are accepted; and (C) the governor recording and indexing the offer, acceptance and metes and bounds description of the boundary of concurrent jurisdiction with the secretary of state who shall publish such information in the Kansas register. (2) After concurrent jurisdiction is effective: (A) The governor shall send a copy of the information provided to the secretary of state to the official who made the initial written offer; and (B) any state or local agency may enter into a reciprocal agreement or memorandum of understanding with any agency of the United States for the coordination and designation of responsibilities related to the concurrent jurisdiction. History: L. 1927, ch. 206, § 2; L. 2025, ch. 59, § 1; April 24. Source or prior law: L. 1872, ch. 135, §§ 1, 2; R.S. 1923, 27-102. Law Review and Bar Journal References: "State Criminal Jurisdiction Over Federally Owned Lands," Walter D. Navin, Jr., 1 W.L.J. 201 (1962). 1963-65 survey of taxation, Leslie T. Tupy, 14 K.L.R. 365, 369 (1965). Attorney General's Opinions: Federal property; investigation of alleged child abuse on Fort Leavenworth reservation. 85-14. Only property owned by private corporation on Fort Leavenworth military reservation is subject to Kansas property tax. 2005-19. CASE ANNOTATIONS 1. Residents on land ceded to United States may not vote at precincts established prior to cession. Herken v. Glynn, 151 Kan. 855, 859, 869, 871, 101 P.2d 946; apparently overruled by Evans v. Cornman, 398 U.S. 419, 26 L. Ed. 2d 370, 90 S. Ct. 1752. 2. Federal housing projects; state jurisdiction; residents thereon may vote. State, ex rel., v. Corcoran, 155 Kan. 714, 716, 720, 128 P.2d 999. 3. Military reservation is not part of county within which located. Miller v. Hickory Grove School Board, 162 Kan. 528, 533, 178 P.2d 214. 4. United States has exclusive jurisdiction over Leavenworth penitentiary. Hayes v. United States, 367 F.2d 216, 219. 5. Property at Fort Leavenworth belonging to an association that is neither a de jure nor a de facto corporation is not taxable. In re Armed Forces Cooperative Insuring Ass'n, 5 Kan. App. 2d 787, 789, 625 P.2d 11 (1981). 6. Cited; authority of municipal law enforcement officer in "fresh pursuit" to make warrantless misdemeanor arrest on military reservation examined. City of Junction City v. Riley, 240 Kan. 614, 618, 731 P.2d 310 (1987). Previous | Next LEGISLATIVE COORDINATING COUNCIL General Policies 2026 Archived LCC Documents Archived LCC Meetings REVISOR OF STATUTES Archived Session Documents Archived School Finance Documents USEFUL LINKS Session Laws Kansas Administrative Regulations OTHER LEGISLATIVE SITES Kansas Legislature Administrative Services Division of Post Audit Research Department Contact Us PDF Help www.ksrevisor.gov 2026