A Johnson County district judge sided with Edgerton resident Kimberly Twente and fellow defendant Carrie Schmidt, striking down an effort by the City of Edgerton to prevent an election to decide the fate of a hyperscale data center in the city.
Judge Stephanie Goodenow granted a Motion to Strike, ruling the city’s lawsuit against the pair violated their rights under the Kansas Public Speech Protection Act (KPSPA). The KPSPA protects:
(D) a communication reasonably likely to enlist public participation in an effort to effect consideration of an issue by a legislative, executive, judicial or other governmental or official proceeding; and
(E) any other communication or conduct that falls within the protection of the right to petition the government under the constitution of the United States or the constitution of the state of Kansas.
The city maintained in its lawsuit that a proposed city ordinance in the petition approved by the Johnson County Election Office was administrative, not legislative, and as such, the city could refuse to place it on the November ballot this year.
Judge Goodenow ruled the ordinance was legislative, citing four criteria based on the so-called “McAlister Factors”:
(1) Whether the proposed ordinance creates new law or executes existing law;
(2) Whether the proposed ordinance involves acts that declare public purpose and provide ways and means to accomplish that
purpose (generally legislative), or acts that deal with a small segment of an overall policy question (generally administrative);
(3) Whether the decisions affected require specialized training and experience in municipal government and intimate
knowledge of the fiscal and other affairs of a city in order to make a rational choice;
(4) Whether the proposed subject is of statewide concern, in which the State legislature has delegated decision-making to the local governing body as the designated agent for local implementation of state policy.
On all factors, Judge Goodenow found the ordinance met the standard of a legislative act, and ruled in favor of Twente and Schmidt.
The decision also means the City of Edgerton must pay the legal expenses incurred by the defendants.
Reaction to Edgerton ruling
The pair’s attorney, Linus Baker, hailed the judge’s decision, then later had some “Breaking News” involving the date of the election on the data center question:
“Today is a very good day for Carrie Schmidt, Kimberly Twente, and every Kansan who believes citizens should be able to petition their government without being targeted and hauled into court for exercising First Amendment rights. The Court granted the motions to strike and removed the defendants from the City’s lawsuit. With no defendants left, the City’s case against the petition circulators is, for all practical purposes, over, except for the remaining issue of the attorney fees incurred by each defendant in defending against the City’s claims.
“That result is exactly why the Kansas Legislature enacted the Kansas Public Speech Protection Act. Citizens should not have to spend months or years and thousands of dollars defending themselves simply because a government entity dislikes the political activity in which they engaged. The statute exists to stop that kind of litigation before the process itself becomes the punishment.
“The data-center issue now moves to the forum where it should have been all along: whether the citizens of Edgerton get to vote. That question is before the Court in Eric Twente v. Dusti Callahan, City Clerk, JO-2026-CV-002314. There is a certain irony in what happens next. The City spent its time suing the petition circulators. Now the City is the defendant, and a court can decide whether the petition is a valid exercise of the legislative power reserved to Edgerton’s citizens and whether the City Clerk must place it on the ballot.
“The City has already had its day in court against the citizens. That did not work out very well. Perhaps it is time to try democracy. Edgerton voters should be allowed to vote. The City should stop trying to defeat this petition through litigation and let the people who actually live there decide the data-center policy for themselves.”
Another statement by Mr. Baker followed minutes later:
“The Court’s September 4 Order expressly reserves whether November 3, 2026 is the election date required by the applicable statutes.
“K.S.A. 25-1220 currently provides that when a federal-services absentee-ballot application is made at least 45 days before the election, the county election officer must send the ballot ‘as soon as practicable, but not later than 45 days before the election.’
“The Kansas Secretary of State’s official 2026 calendar identifies September 19, 2026 as the “[d]eadline to transmit UOCAVA (Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act) ballots for the November 3 general election. And K.S.A. 25-1218(a) confirms that those federal-services ballots must permit voting not merely for candidates, but also on ‘any proposition or question for which the voter would otherwise be entitled to vote.’
“Thus, if the Edgerton initiative is legally required to appear on the November 3 ballot, it falls within the type of ballot question addressed by that statute.
“But I see September 19 as cutoff date. I am not sure the Judge realized that. So I will motion her for expedited schedule if judge intends to keep the November 3 election date on the table.”
Carrie Schmidt celebrated what she viewed as the restoration of her First Amendment rights:
“The decision by Judge Goodenow should teach city attorneys everywhere that they cannot haul residents into court for exercising their right to petition the government. The City of Edgerton should respect the petition process instead of treating citizen participation as a problem that needs to be litigated away, because they are scared of being sued by DAMAC (the data center developer).
“I am grateful to our attorney, Linus Baker, and everyone who signed and circulated the petition, helped behind the scenes, showed up, and refused to be intimidated by the City of Edgerton. We will keep using the lawful tools available to us, so that the citizens of Edgerton have a voice.”
Edgerton resident Kimberly Twente, on winning in court against her city:
“The Motion to Strike granted by Jude Goodenow against the City of Edgerton’s case was certainly a feeling of success in this fight, and a win for the citizens of Edgerton. The goal for Carrie and I has always been to set a precedent for other communities in Kansas, as well as nationwide, as this issue has become so much more widespread. I truly hope that this is a start in setting that precedent. No one should ever fear retaliation from their government for participating in their First Amendment rights.
“While I am happy to celebrate this win, it does not mean that I am letting my guard down. With DAMAC coming into the courtroom with their motion to intervene, it shows that they are ready to get involved and we don’t know how far in involvement, what level of involvement, they are willing to take. In addition, we don’t know that the City won’t put up more obstacles, especially after the statement they made on their website today. We want to be prepared for anything to come. That being said, I am happy that the Judge saw that we have the right of free speech and the right to petition. That is a basic American right and should never be questioned.”
