Future of Heartland Park (and KS Nationals) in jeopardy (2 Viewers)

[.]

All the city and Jayhawk Racing are doing now is delaying the inevitable. Jayhawk can't pay their bills, they can't get the city to give them the cash, and there are no bidders (or so it seems) that will step up and pay for Jayhawks debts a dollar of a dollar. So, let it go into foreclosure, and let the highest bidder take it. If it is a non-racing entity, well, sad to see that, but, that means nobody that is the racing industry sees value in it. And that lack of interest should be a warning sign to the city council. If it were valuable, they would be lined up to acquire it.

Add to that the City Council taking bids from someone who is being sued for fraud, and it is obvious they are just letting anyone float offers up to keep interest alive for a court ruling for a stay. Nobody is coming with piles of cash. They just aren't.

I have this bad feeling that somebody in the city council is in bed with Irwin on some land or business deals, and in the end, it is going to make racing look bad if millions are paid to Irwin to continue to run a place that keeps on going broke with tax payer money. Star Bonds, legislature, state in dire financial state, this is just a public relations nightmare at this point.

Best thing would be for Irwin to let it go and the bank to sell it for what they can get for it. If it goes as a racing facility, racers win. If not, it is solely on Irwin's shoulders that it failed after 1 bailout. A 2nd one is not warranted. As bad as it can be, there really isn't any other option for the land, so in time, maybe it will re-open.

NHRA, if they choose to, should bid, but not be expected to uphold a contract with the city once it goes into foreclosure. They, of all entities like soda, food and beer vendors, are not to blame in this. They are simply a supplier of a product.

I don't even see them racing a national event there this year unless some deep pockets somehow takes the place over. Let alone divisional and weekly shows. Sad to say, but I think it's over. A broke man (Irwin) trying to keep a place alive that he couldn't keep alive before is a losing argument.

 

[Chevy Nick]

Kansas Court of Appeals denies Imming's stay order in Heartland Park case
City can now move forward with its planned purchase of HPT

The city of Topeka can move forward with its purchase of Heartland Park Topeka starting tomorrow, when the stay issued in the petition appeal expires.

The Kansas Court of Appeals on Wednesday denied petitioner Chris Imming’s request to extend the stay, issued Jan. 8, beyond Thursday, court documents showed. The order prohibited the city government from issuing sales tax revenue bonds or buying Heartland Park until 10 days after all briefs were filed.

The city was not immediately available comment, but city attorney Chad Sublet in December said city wouldn’t move forward with issuing bonds while a stay in the appeal was pending, because it affects the marketability of the bonds.

Imming’s attorney last week requested the stay be continued at least until the oral arguments were presented, so as not to undermine the appeals process or the panel’s subsequent ruling, should the city take action before a decision is made.

The court on Wednesday also submitted a response to requests from all parties to move up the oral hearing date from Feb. 26 to Feb. 18, 19 or 20 or next week.

The lead counsel for the city won’t be available the week of Feb. 23 because of a previously-scheduled, non-refundable, out-of-state vacation. Also, Imming’s attorney isn’t available on Feb. 17 because of a previously-scheduled surgery for his spouse.

However, the schedules of the three panel judges won’t allow the hearing to be moved up, the filing reads.

“This court has taken extraordinary steps in setting this matter for hearing within three months of the date of the filing of the docketing statement,” the court wrote.

The court offered a couple of alternatives: Continuing the oral argument, which would put it back to some time in April, or waiving the hearing and submit the matter to the court based on the briefs from the parties.

Otherwise, the court stated, the hearing will remain at its original time and place, 9:30 a.m. Feb. 26 in the Court of Appeals courtroom, 300 S.W. 10th.

That is two days before the city’s purchase agreement allows creditor CoreFirst Bank & Trust to foreclose on Jayhawk Racing. The memorandum of understanding allows the bank to foreclose if STAR bonds involved haven’t been issued by Feb. 28. The contract allows for extensions from that deadline of up to 90 days to be granted, but neither the bank nor city have stated whether the extension would be granted.

 

[Terry]

Ok, Nick. Time for some instruction for an interested Div. 5 listener. This denial by the court of appeals is a good thing for us, right?

 

[Chevy Nick]

Terry, nothing is clear anymore. I have a couple more headlines to post.


Topeka will wait for Kansas Court of Appeals ruling before taking further action on HPT

The stay prohibiting the city of Topeka from moving forward with its purchase of Heartland Park ends Thursday, but the city will wait until the appeals court has made a ruling before taking further action.

“We respect the judicial process and will await the final ruling from the Court of Appeals before moving forward,” said city attorney Chad Sublet. “Once we have a final decision from the Court of Appeals, we will continue negotiations with the proposed owners/managers of Heartland Park.”

 

[Terry]

Thanks for all the information, Nick. We all appreciate the "on site" reports and are watching the situation very anxiously.

 

[Cletus]

The tentative 2015 schedule is online. I hope they will be able to have the races as planned.

 

[FABMAN]

The tentative 2015 schedule is online. I hope they will be able to have the races as planned.

They need to make decisions soon, NHRA won't wait much longer, unless there has been some behind the door agreement. Seems to be a norm with this group running the city.

 

[Cletus]

It sucks it has gotten that bad. Always liked going to Topeka for races and rodeo. Nice town.

 

[Chevy Nick]

I think you have to assume back room deals. My guess is that Core First bank has already agreed to extend the foreclosure deadline past Feb 28th.

 

[Jimbo]

Let's be honest as much as I love drag racing there are a great deal of better way's of investing money for return then owning a drag strip.

I wish this was not the case but it is what it is.

It's just my opinion but finding someone who loves drag racing and has a large check book and needs a write off due to their other business interests is what is needed.

When you look at the owner's of some short circle tracks around the country they are racing lovers who make millions in other business.

Every track owner works hard to try and make their business a success but it always good to know you have another business which makes you a great deal of money to fall back on just in case it does not work.

The way business tax laws are set up everyone who has a successful business should have another business that is not working or making much money to off set their income for tax purposes.

That is why looking for someone who loves drag racing and has the financial resources to either take over an excess ting track or buy the owners out is an interesting approach.

Just my opinion. Jim Hill

http://www.nostalgicracingdecals.com

 

[Chevy Nick]

Heartland Park petitioner implores appeals court to submit matter to voters

In a response brief filed Thursday, the attorney representing the Heartland Park Petition effort implores the Kansas Court of Appeals to overturn a lower court’s decision that the petition is administrative.

In the 15-page filing, R.E. “Tuck” Duncan asks the appeals court to rule the petition is legislative and subsequently “allow the matter to be submitted to the voters.”

Duncan represents Topekan Chris Imming, who initiated a petition process to bring the proposed takeover of Heartland Park Topeka by the city to a public vote. The city’s plan is to issue $5 million Sales Tax Revenue (STAR) bonds to acquire the motorsports complex free and clear of any debt in order to expand the sales tax district, so the city can pay off the debt without turning to local property taxes.

Progress on the Heartland Park project, including issuing bonds and negotiating with a new owner, has been halted pending a decision from the Kansas Board of Appeals. Oral arguments in the case are slated for 9:30 a.m. Feb. 26. in the courtroom of the Kansas Court of Appeals, 300 S.W. 10th.

Imming has appealed the Nov. 12 decision of Shawnee County District Court Judge Larry Hendricks, who found that the city ordinance to purchase Heartland Park and expand the STAR bond district — Topeka Ordinance No. 19915 — is largely administrative. Initiative petitions, the type of petition Imming filed, can’t be filed against administrative ordinances.

The city, Duncan states, wants the appeals court to uphold the ruling that the petition is administrative, because “it is an extension of the prior failed STAR bond project.”

“Were that true,” he continues, “none of the statutory requirements for notice to the public, hearings, security consents from other units of government and from the Secretary of Commerce would not have been required.”

In addition, Hendricks ruled a petition to challenge the issuance of full faith and credit STAR bonds has to be a protest petition, because STAR bonds are legislative.

“But,” Duncan wrote in Thursday’s filing, “the protest petition would not accomplish that which the initiative petition seeks ... The entire plan is not terminated by merely approving a protest.”

If there was a vote, and the city was prevented from issuing full faith and credit bonds, the city still could issue bonds backed by the sales tax and supplement any shortfall with property taxes, he argued.

 

[The Little Lizard]

http://cjonline.com/news/2015-02-16/topeka-district-4-candidates-support-public-vote-heartland-park

 

[Chevy Nick]

Coming week could be pivotal in the future of Heartland Park Topeka

Will this week provide resolution for Heartland Park Topeka?

A critical court hearing regarding the facility will be Thursday.

Then the deadline by which Heartland Park could be foreclosed upon comes Saturday.

Kansas Court of Appeals Judges Steve Hill, Karen Arnold-Berger and Kim Schroeder plan to hear oral arguments at 9:30 a.m. Thursday in Topekan Chris Imming’s appeal of a ruling made in November by Shawnee County District Judge Larry Hendricks.

Hendricks invalidated a petition drive Imming coordinated seeking to put the city’s proposed purchase of Heartland Park to a citywide vote.

Attorneys representing the plaintiffs — the city and Heartland Park’s owner, Jayhawk Racing LLC — and the defendant, Imming, will present arguments during Thursday’s hearing in the Court of Appeals courtroom at 300 S.W. 10th.

Each side will be allowed 20 minutes to make its case, with Jayhawk Racing and the city having to share 20 minutes.

Meanwhile, time races toward the Saturday deadline by which the city’s agreement to purchase Heartland Park empowers creditor CoreFirst Bank & Trust to foreclose on Jayhawk Racing if it wishes.

The memorandum of understanding involved allows CoreFirst to foreclose if STAR bonds aren’t issued by Saturday, though it allows for extensions of up to 90 days to be granted.

City attorney Chad Sublet said this past week the city — after having initial conversations about extending the MOU — had decided, for now, to wait and see whether the appeals court issues an opinion within a couple of days after Thursday’s oral argument hearing.

Sublet said he assumed, based on the history of the case, that the appeals court would rule fairly soon after the hearing.

He indicated in early February if the court took longer than expected, the city could seek to extend the MOU.

The coming week’s developments mark the next chapter in a story that became public last June, when Topeka’s city government unveiled its plan to purchase Heartland Park.

The move is targeted at solving a problem that emerged after the council voted in 2006 to issue $10.46 million worth of STAR bonds to finance improvements at the financially troubled racing
facility.

Plans called for the bonds to be paid off using sales tax revenue from the track. But Heartland Park’s STAR bond revenues have consistently fallen short of estimates, forcing the city to use property tax revenue to make up the difference.

The city’s governing body consequently voted in August to buy Heartland Park and expand its redevelopment district.

Subsequent months then saw:

■ Imming initiate his petition drive, which gained more than the required number of signatures needed to put the matter on the ballot for a citywide election.

■ The city file a lawsuit challenging the petition’s legality.

■ The city win its suit when Hendricks ruled Imming’s petition invalid in November.

■ Imming appeal Hendricks’ decision to the Court of Appeals.

 

[Leebone]

I've never been to that track, but it seems like the road course is wiping out half the seating area in the left lane side. I've never been a big fan of combination road course/drag strips. Either one or the other.

 

[Chevy Nick]

Company picked to run Heartland Park will need to make $7 million in improvements

To gain the contract to operate Heartland Park Topeka, whichever applicant Topeka’s city government chooses must agree to carry out improvements expected to cost more than $7 million, city attorney Chad Sublet confirmed Tuesday.

Sublet responded to questions about an amended project plan the city government has submitted to the Kansas Department of Commerce as part of its attempt to buy the financially troubled racing facility, which is owned by Raymond Irwin’s Jayhawk Racing LLC.

The document acknowledges the city anticipates 16 improvements — estimated to cost a total of more than $7 million — will be carried out at the track.

Those costs will be borne by the operator of the facility and not Topeka’s city government, Sublet said.

He indicated applicants for the contract understand they will need to cover those costs if they are chosen.

Sublet added that city manager Jim Colson has made it clear that if the city doesn’t acquire an operator for Heartland Park, it won’t issue the bonds.

Topeka’s city government last June unveiled its plan to purchase the racing facility. The move depends on the state’s issuing $5 million in additional Sales Tax Revenue, or STAR bonds, to try to solve problems that emerged after the council voted in 2006 to issue $10.46 million worth of STAR bonds to finance Heartland Park improvements.

Plans called for the bonds issued in 2006 to be paid off using sales tax revenue from the track. But Heartland Park’s STAR bond revenues have consistently fallen short of estimates, forcing the city to use property tax revenue to make up the difference.

The city’s governing body voted in August to buy Heartland Park and expand its redevelopment district. The plan involves the state’s issuing another estimated $5 million in STAR bonds and authorizing the city to expand the STAR bond district around the track to capture additional state sales tax dollars to pay off the debt. The total debt would come to $16.4 million, which is expected to be paid entirely by existing sales tax dollars, according to projections of existing businesses in the expanded district.

Sublet said Tuesday that Kansas statute prohibits the $5 million in additional STAR bonds from amounting to more than 50 percent of the costs for the addition to the project.

But he said the more than $7 million in costs outlined in the amended project plan will “more than match” the $5 million, with those costs being covered by the new owner or operator.

The amended project plan says the largest of those 16 costs involve spending $1.5 million to begin commerce park development, $1 million to build garages and high-end facilities, $1 million to resurface S.E. 85th and Adams streets to provide additional access and egress and $750,000 to put in a new banquet facility.

The city last year sought bids from companies interested in buying or leasing and operating Heartland Park, and received four that met its qualifications. The four bidders were MK Investments, Larry Sinks, Monopoly Acquisitions LLC and International Motorsports Entertainment and Development Corp.

City officials have postponed any further decisions regarding the purchase of the racing facility while a court case involving Heartland Park remains pending.

The case is linked to a petition drive Topekan Chris Imming initiated last year seeking to put the city’s Heartland Park purchase to a public vote. Petition drive organizers gained more than the required number of signatures needed to put the matter on the ballot for a citywide election, but Shawnee County District Judge Larry Hendricks ruled the petition invalid in November.

Imming appealed Hendricks’ decision to the Kansas Court of Appeals, which will hear oral arguments on the matter Thursday.

 

[Muddy]

It's just my opinion but from a spectator perspective that has to be the worst track on the tour as far as accessibility. It's seems like a million mile hike from the entrance and spectator side to the pits. Of course it doesn't help it's always about blast furnace hot when they hold the national events there.

 

[FABMAN]

It's just my opinion but from a spectator perspective that has to be the worst track on the tour as far as accessibility. It's seems like a million mile hike from the entrance and spectator side to the pits. Of course it doesn't help it's always about blast furnace hot when they hold the national events there.

They need to return to the fall race where it started, great racing , awesome weather.. As far accessibility they need to add tunnel at end of stands to help that issue, missed that in original design.

 

[Chevy Nick]

City kept $7M improvements for Heartland Park Topeka quiet for 5 months

Dirt track racing aficionado Larry Lowrey initially was interested in operating Heartland Park Topeka. ITP Marketing, a company owned by him and his brother, successfully ran its dirt track in 2006, and he knows enough people in the industry to give it a whirl.

Lowrey, who is from Silver Lake, met with city officials, toured the complex and eventually signed up online as a bidder in late November.

That gave him access to the contract with the National Hot Rod Association — the contract that puts the city and operator of Heartland Park on the line for a revenue guarantee of $1.8 million.

Lowrey bowed out.

“If the event made $800,000, I’d have to get $1 million in five days to somebody,” he said Wednesday. “I want to negotiate in the best interest for my business, not what the city thinks is in the best interest for my business.”

If he hadn’t dropped out of the running after learning about the NHRA contract, he said, the recently disclosed need of $7 million in improvements would have done it.

Lowrey, as did most Topekans, learned about the costly improvements Tuesday, when it was initially reported by The Topeka Capital-Journal.

“I was dumbfounded by it,” Lowrey said. “You need to make money with what you have there already before you go spending it.”

The 16 projects include $1.5 million to begin commerce park development, $1 million to build garages and high-end facilities, $1 million to resurface S.E. 85th and Adams streets to provide additional access and egress and $750,000 to put in a new banquet facility. The selected owner/operator would be responsible for those improvements, which will be needed during the 11 years of the project, said city attorney Chad Sublet.

Lowrey said he didn’t see the $7 million figure among the bidding documents, but Sublet said the city notified the four prospective operators early on about the needed improvements.

The city identified the need for $7 million in improvements back in September, when it submitted its application for Sales Tax Revenue (STAR) bonds to the Kansas Department of Commerce, Sublet said. The state received the amended request Sept. 9, according to a department spokesman.

The amount of needed improvements is coming publicly to the surface only now, Sublet said, because the city’s STAR bond application is a working document — and therefore confidential — until it receives final approval from the state.

“Parts of amended plan are confidential, but some parts of the plan are considered open record,” said commerce department spokesman Matt Keith.

Kansas statute prohibits the $5 million in additional STAR bonds from amounting to more than 50 percent of the costs for the addition to the project. The more than $7 million in costs outlined in the amended project plan will more than cover that requirement, as will obtaining the $15.3 million property for $5 million, he said.

Because it didn’t add to the amount of bonds the city was asking for, and because the proposal approved by the city council referenced those improvements, the amended plan didn’t have to go back before the council, Sublet said.

Getting the documents from the Kansas Department of Commerce turned into a months long ordeal. Petitioner Chris Imming in the first week of October requested from the state the city’s application for STAR bonds. After the request was rejected, Imming filed a complaint with the Kansas Attorney General’s Office. Finally, on Feb. 11, the state released the documents for Imming to view.

Imming almost immediately noticed the $7 million figure, and wondered why someone essentially leasing the property would invest such a sum.

“I’m curious how that’s going to work,” he said. “Unless they have $7 million sitting in their pocket, would they have to mortgage the property to do that? Get a loan from CoreFirst?”

Because negotiations with the four prospective bidders are on hold pending the appeal of the petition lawsuit, Sublet said he couldn’t get into specifics about their options. However, he said, one option is to give the operator the first right to purchase the property, possibly by giving the entity credit for any money it put into the park.

“There are a lot of ways to credit them for what they put into the project,” Sublet said.

Also, he said, giving the operator a reversionary interest in the property is off the table. Current operator Ray Irwin was given such an interest when he took it over, which is one of the reasons acquiring Heartland Park has become so expensive for the city.

Sublet repeated that none of the improvements is required immediately but will need to take place during the next 11 years. The NHRA, the four potential operators who toured the complex and at least one other evaluation of the racetracks showed they currently are in “good shape,” he said.

Lowrey, however, doesn’t see why Heartland Park needs $1 million for “garages and high-end facilities” and $750,000 for a banquet hall. He also wonders how a racetrack operator will develop the land around Heartland Park.

The request for bids released by the city in November requires “preliminary concepts and ideas to develop and use the 277-plus undeveloped acres at Heartland Park.” The plan details released Tuesday estimate the cost to begin the development of a commerce park at $1.5 million.

“I don’t see how running a racetrack and developing land work hand-in-hand,” Lowrey said. “They seem like two separate things.”

 

[Chevy Nick]

Kansas Court of Appeals hears arguments in Heartland Park lawsuit

Kansas Court of Appeals judges posed questions at a hearing Thursday that appeared to be seeking flaws in arguments Topeka’s city government made in a lawsuit regarding the city’s proposed purchase of Heartland Park Topeka.

But attorney R.E. “Tuck” Duncan, who represented petition drive organizer Chris Imming at the hearing, said that didn’t necessarily mean the judges were leaning in that direction.

“Often the judges will ask questions to see if you have some substance in your arguments, but it may not be to your liking,” Duncan told reporters afterward.

Court of Appeals Judges Stephen Hill, Karen Arnold-Berger and Kim Schroeder didn’t say when they would issue a written decision in Imming’s appeal of a ruling made in November by Shawnee County District Judge Larry Hendricks.

As the hearing ended, Hill said, “We’ll take this under advisement and issue an opinion as soon as we reasonably can.”

He’d said earlier Thursday that the decision would likely come “sooner rather than later.”

The three judges spent about 90 minutes asking questions and hearing oral arguments in Imming’s appeal of the ruling by Hendricks, who invalidated an initiative petition drive Imming coordinated seeking to put the city’s proposed purchase of Heartland Park to a citywide vote.

Hendricks ruled the city ordinance to purchase Heartland Park and expand its Sales Tax Revenue -- or “STAR” Bond district — is administrative. State law prohibits initiative petitions such as the one Imming filed from being used to challenge administrative ordinances.

Hendricks also ruled that any petition to challenge the issuance of full faith and credit STAR bonds must be a protest petition, because STAR bonds are legislative.

The court heard Thursday from Duncan; Catherine Logan, with Overland-Park based Lathrop & Gage LLP, which is working under contract to represent the city; and Kevin Fowler of Topeka-based Frieden, Unrein & Forbes LLP, representing Heartland Park owner Jayhawk Racing LLC.

Hill raised questions as to whether the city ordinance to purchase Heartland Park is really administrative.

Duncan contended the ordinance is legislative. He told the judges: “This was a set-up deal from the start. They had no intention of listening to the petition.”

Hill noted that the ordinance to make the purchase more than doubled the size of the STAR Bond district while taking other steps that included ratifying contracts.

He asked Logan, “Is that not legislative?”

Logan replied that a past ruling written by Kansas Supreme Court Justice Dan Biles concluded that if an ordinance -- when viewed as a whole -- is more administrative than legislative, then it’s considered administrative.

Hill responded by suggesting a later ruling by Biles “kind of retreated from that.”

Topeka’s city government has halted progress on the Heartland Park project -- including postponing the issuance of STAR bonds and initiation of negotiations with a new owner -- as it awaits the Court of Appeals decision.

Fowler asked the judges to issue a ruling immediately, and later release an opinion outlining their reasoning.

He said Heartland Park would “go dark” if creditor CoreFirst Bank & Trust doesn’t receive money it’s owed within three days.

The city’s agreement to purchase Heartland Park empowers CoreFirst to foreclose on Jayhawk Racing if STAR bonds aren’t issued by Saturday, though it allows for extensions of up to 90 days to be granted.

City attorney Chad Sublet said last week that the city — after having initial conversations about extending the MOU — had decided to wait and see how quickly the appeals court reached a decision. He said he thought he court would rule fairly quickly, adding that the city could still seek to extend the MOU.

Thursday’s hearing marked the latest development in a story that became public last June, when Topeka’s city government unveiled its plan to purchase Heartland Park.

The move is targeted at solving a problem that emerged after the council voted in 2006 to issue $10.46 million worth of STAR bonds to finance improvements at the financially troubled racing facility.

Plans called for the bonds to be paid off using sales tax revenue from the track. But Heartland Park’s STAR bond revenues have consistently fallen short of estimates, forcing the city to use property tax revenue to make up the difference.

The city’s governing body consequently voted in August to buy Heartland Park and expand its STAR Bond district.

Subsequent months then saw:

-- Imming initiate his petition drive, which gained more than the required number of signatures needed to put the matter on the ballot for a citywide election.

-- The city file a lawsuit challenging the petition’s legality.

-- The city win its suit when Hendricks ruled Imming’s petition invalid in November.

-- Imming appeal Hendricks’ decision to the Court of Appeals.

 

[Chevy Nick]

Topeka spends $150K on Heartland Park lawsuit in four months

The city of Topeka has spent more than $150,000 in four months on its lawsuit challenging the Heartland Park petition.

Topeka recently received its third bill from Lathrop & Gage, the law firm representing the city’s interests in the Heartland Park petition case. Combined, the three bills amount to $152,470.69, according to city records. The bills span from Oct. 8 to Jan. 30.

Of that, $150,762.50 went toward 493.1 hours of attorney services, averaging $306 an hour.

The most recent bill from Lathrop & Gage was for $79,075.68 — $77,624 in attorney services and $1,451.68 in other costs. It covers services provided between Dec. 1 through Jan. 30, said senior assistant city attorney Catherine Walter.

December and January featured a flurry of filings and hearings in the appeal of the case:

■ Dec. 2: Petitioner Chris Imming and attorney R.E. “Tuck” Duncan filed an appeal of the Shawnee County District Court decision.

■ Dec. 9: Imming and Duncan filed a request with the Kansas Court of Appeals issue a stay, prohibiting the city from taking further action on Heartland Park.

■ Dec. 15: Topeka and Jayhawk asked the judges to deny a stay or, if it is granted, require Imming to secure more than $50 million in bonds.

■ Jan. 7: Appeals court heard arguments on Imming’s request for a stay.

■ Jan. 26: City and Jayhawk filed their briefs.

■ Jan. 29: All three parties asked the oral arguments to be moved, though the request eventually was denied.

Topeka’s contract with the firm states the city will be charged for a variety of services: travel time; “time in court, including waiting time”; telephone and office conferences; responding to clients’ requests; and drafting and review of letters, pleadings and other documents.

It also states the city will compensate the firm for costs and expenses, including mileage, meals and ground transportation. Driving from the firm’s Overland Park office, 10851 Mastin Blvd., to Topeka City Hall, 214 S.E. 8th St., which is about 130 miles round-trip.

The most recent bill adds onto the first, which amounted to $72,428.50 for 233.5 hours of work — or $310 an hour.

The second bill was for $710 in attorney services and $256.51 in costs. It covered Nov. 3 to Nov. 30, Walter said.

November was a slow month for the case: Oral arguments before Shawnee County District Judge Larry Hendricks were heard Nov. 6, and an appeal of his Nov. 12 ruling wasn’t filed until Dec. 2.

“Most of the time spent preparing for the hearing was included on the first bill,” Walter explained.

At least another month’s worth of fees from the firm remain, though it likely won’t amount to much. February has been relatively quiet for the case, with the main action being Thursday’s oral arguments presented before the Kansas Court of Appeals.