Hutchinson and Topeka could have flag license plates under Kansas bill. Here's why officials oppose it.

Hutchinson drivers could soon see their city flag on license plates, but a similar provision for Topeka hit a bump in the road when city officials opposed a bill from Kansas lawmakers.

House Bill 2633 would authorize both cities to use their flags as a logo on license plates, similar to the Wichita flag.

Royalty payments of between $25 and $100 would go to the cities, with funds earmarked to support parks and recreation in Hutchinson and the zoo in Topeka.

The Hutchinson plan enjoys support from lawmakers and city officials, but the Topeka plan faces opposition.

"We appreciate the intent of what the sponsor was trying to do," said Whitney Damron, a lobbyist for Topeka. "I would say, just for information of the committee, we weren't asked about it."

Damron testified that city officials don't want to be in the position of administering the program. Additionally, since the flag design is open source, the city doesn't control any copyright.

"Truth be told, I don't think the zoo wants this as well," he said. "I think they have their own ideas for fundraising."

Rep. Fred Patton, R-Topeka, is president of the Topeka Zoo and Conservation Center's board of directors.

Patton said he hasn't been involved with the bill, but "personally, I think it's cool seeing our Topeka flag all over the place now, and I have no problem with it being a license plate."

However, he said he would rather see any license plate revenue benefit a different charity.

"The nonprofit can be anybody, and in fact, I don't really want it to be the Topeka Zoo," Patton said. "Try to find someone — I don't know, Rescue Mission or Downtown Topeka — who is a little bit more broad-based than the zoo."

More: When Kansas police use license plate readers, should data collected be public record?

'This bill is the problem'

City attorney Amanda Stanley explained after the meeting that the bill would put Topeka in a legal gray area that city officials haven't had a chance to discuss.

"Our flag is open sourced and was designed in partnership with the Greater Topeka Partnership," Stanley said. "And so we just don't feel like, as a city, we're the appropriate person to be licensing a flag that is open sourced for any legal use."

Anyone can use the flag for any legal use, Stanley said, but the bill would effectively require the city to claim ownership of a design that no one owns.

The bill states that cities must issue statements authorizing the use of the logo.

Hutchinson's flag is also open sourced, but their officials didn't raise similar concerns.

Topeka could potentially find a way to make a flag license plate work.

"Potentially," Stanley said, but for city government officials, "we haven't had a chance to look at that."

"The problem is this bill itself," said Spencer Duncan, a Topeka City Council member. "Hutchinson, it clearly has had an opportunity as a city and a community to have some conversations about what they want, how they want it to look, how they want to structure it.

More: Race is on for a mystery megaproject. Will that doom efforts to eliminate food sales tax?

"Topeka has not been afforded any of those conversations. We would rather do it more organically, where they get together, talk with the community, where do you want the money to go, sounds like a great idea."

Duncan didn't make any promises that such a community conversation is in the city's future, but, "I'm sure there's people who would like to do it, so I think we're open to that conversation in the future."

Such a process would likely take several months, meaning it is unlikely to happen this legislative session.

"This bill is the problem, not the concept," Duncan said.

The Greater Topeka Partnership supports "the idea of seeing Topeka’s flag tastefully transformed into a design suitable for license plates," said Curtis Sneden, the president of the Greater Topeka Chamber of Commerce, in a statement.

He said a license plate could be a way to show pride in the capital city.

"We do understand, however, that an effort like this takes time to review and implement," Sneden said. "If such license-plate discussions move forward, we would welcome the opportunity to work with our partners at the city of Topeka, as well as relevant stakeholders, to ensure the project is completed in a thoughtful manner."

More: As lawmakers OK bill for $4B megadeal, Kansas officials to make pitch to mystery company

'A little bit perplexing'

Jason Probst, D-Hutchinson, was the lead sponsor of the bill. He said he reached out to members of the Topeka delegation with the intention of building broader support for the bill.

Topeka Democratic Reps. Jim Gartner, Annie Kuether, Vic Miller and Virgil Weigel signed on as co-sponsors. Patton and Republican Reps. Ken Corbet and Jesse Borjon didn't co-sponsor the bill, and neither did Democratic Rep. John Alcala.

Probst said there had been multiple unsuccessful attempts by other lawmakers to reach the Greater Topeka Partnership last month before filing the bill last week.

"I don't think anybody anticipated it was going to be problematic," Probst said. "It's a little bit perplexing to me that it's turned into this big of an issue over something that's pretty innocuous."

Hutchinson and Wichita have open source flag designs, and the bill was modeled after Wichita's program, Probst said.

"You just have to have somebody who officially says this can be done," he said. "It doesn't mean that anybody has ownership. I know that Topeka seemed to be hung up on the idea of who owns the flag. Nobody owns the flag, it's a creative commons license, but you do have to have somebody who authorizes the design."

Probst said it was his idea to have the money go to the Topeka Zoo. The bill could be amended to remove the zoo as the beneficiary and permit the Greater Topeka Partnership to hold public hearings to decide who gets the money.

Probst said the bill "doesn't compel anybody to do anything," so Topeka wouldn't be required to implement a program if officials chose not to.

"All I was trying to do was to broaden support for the initiative and to think of other communities that have a flag and try to make it as inclusive as I possibly could," he said.

More: Groups file suit over maps in state court, arguing racial, partisan gerrymandering

Hutchinson officials support

Rep. Paul Waggoner, R-Hutchinson, testified in support of the bill before the House Transportation Committee.

"I'm not normally a big local flag type of guy, but the Hutch flag I would say is different," he said. "It has gotten a good amount of traction in our town. You see it on individual flag poles, you see it in some businesses, even our local Walmart has a whole panoply of City of Hutchinson flags."

"This flag can and does create local spirit and goodwill," he said. "As a license plate, I think it will also then create revenue to the Kansas Department of Revenue and to the Hutch recreation foundation."

Anthony Finlay, executive director of the Hutchinson Recreation Commission, said the city adopted the flag in December 2018.

"It has really taken hold in Hutchinson, probably a different scale than Wichita, but same influence as far as local pride," Finlay said.

"The idea was brought up that we could create a license plate that would not only spread community pride that we're currently seeing, but also support local efforts in parks and recreation," he said.

Finlay dismissed copyright concerns.

"There is no copyright on the flag; it was open source … we wouldn't be restricted on anything," he said.

Jason Tidd is a statehouse reporter for the Topeka Capital-Journal. He can be reached by email at jtidd@gannett.com. Follow him on Twitter @Jason_Tidd.

This article originally appeared on Topeka Capital-Journal: Why officials are split on Topeka, Hutchinson city flag license plates