An Overland Park City Council member’s 2021 attempt to silence opposition has cost the state of Kansas nearly $100,000 as a federal judge has ordered the state to pay the attorney’s fees for advocacy group Fresh Vision OP.
According to a release from the Institute for Free Speech, the U.S. District Court for the District of Kansas has entered an order under which the state has agreed to pay $98,500 in attorney fees and costs to the Institute for Free Speech and local counsel Kriegshauser Ney Law Group.
The Background
The lawsuit stemmed from attempts by the state, at the behest of an Overland Park council member, to shut down neighborhood group “Fresh Vision OP,” a local community organization formed by James Muir and some of his neighbors to advocate for “preserving the quality of life in our unique neighborhoods while supporting the growth of small local businesses, maintaining safe neighborhoods, and promoting responsible development” in the Overland Park area.
“We’re a group of concerned neighbors who invested a little more than $3,000 to maintain our quality of life in South Overland Park,” Muir, the organization’s president, said in a July 2024 release from the Institute for Free Speech, which — along with the Kriegshauser Ney law firm — sued after the Kansas Election Commission ruled the group was a “political action committee” under state law.
Fresh Vision OP attorneys argued that there were two major issues with Kansas election law.
The first is the definition of “political committee.” Fresh Vision OP alleged that state law improperly extends this definition to groups for whom urging voters to elect a candidate is only an incidental purpose of their activities, rather than the group’s major purpose.
The second is the state’s “extremely low $100 threshold for triggering burdensome reporting requirements, which includes the threat of jail time for failure to comply. Even a small mailing or a few yard signs could easily surpass the $100 threshold. That would effectively transform a small group of citizens into a political action committee as far as the state is concerned,” according to a release from IFS.
After Fresh Vision endorsed a mayoral candidate, officials threatened the group with hefty fines and imprisonment, claiming it was required to register as a political committee and comply with regulations that would have threatened its existence.
Fearing further enforcement actions, Fresh Vision suspended its activities about three years ago. However, with local elections looming in 2025, the group wanted to resume its advocacy but feared “that doing so [would] trigger a new threat of hefty fines and jail time and force the disclosure of its donors’ identities.”
The judge issued a preliminary injunction against the state, saying that Fresh Vision was “likely to succeed on the merits.
In January 2025, United States District Judge Daniel D. Crabtree made it permanent, ruling that Supreme Court and Tenth Circuit precedents “require that a group have the major purpose, not simply a major purpose, of express advocacy before a state may designate the group as a political committee. But [the law’s] definition of a political committee impermissibly allows Kansas to designate Fresh Vision (a group with a major purpose of express advocacy but no more than that) as a political committee. (emp. in original)”
Moreover, a recent bill signed into law by Governor Laura Kelly adopted key Institute for Free Speech recommendations for improving campaign finance laws. House Bill 2206 was passed partially in response to the Institute’s successful Fresh Vision OP lawsuit and brought the state’s definition of a political committee into compliance with the First Amendment.
“When government officials unlawfully restrict First Amendment rights, they should expect to lose in court and to be held financially accountable for their actions,” said Institute for Free Speech Senior Attorney Charles “Chip” Miller in a release. “This outcome serves as a reminder that the First Amendment mandates that groups like Fresh Vision be permitted to speak freely, without being subject to onerous government regulations.”
Attorney Ryan Kriegshauser agreed.
“We are always happy to stand on the side of free speech,” Kriegshauser said. “This legal victory is another in a growing number of judgments against the Kansas Governmental Ethics Commission, which allowed itself to be weaponized by various political actors under the disastrous tenure of Mark Skoglund as Executive Director.
“Fortunately, Skoglund’s misguided actions and investigations are coming to an end. Our hope is that the Kansas Governmental Ethics Commission will focus on education and transparency as it transitions to become the Kansas Public Disclosure Commission later this year instead of ‘gotcha’ enforcement often spurred by ‘tips’ from ‘informants’ with political axes to grind.”