Senate Bill 129 would amend Kansas statute KSA 20-2608 to allow district magistrate judges who are regularly admitted to practice law and who serve in counties with populations of 10,000 or fewer people to delay mandatory retirement until age 78 instead of 75.

The bill drew a briefing from legislative staff and largely neutral testimony from Norbert Merrick, a district judge in the Second Judicial District, who described the measure as narrow in scope and offered data and context about Kansas judgeship demographics. Merrick told the committee the proposal would apply only to a small number of judges and said he was testifying neutrally because of a personal acquaintance who could be affected.

"This bill would provide an exception to that rule to provide that district magistrate judges who are regularly admitted to practice law in Kansas, who serve in a county with a population of 10,000 or fewer people, they would not be required to retire until they reach the age of 78," legislative reviser Natalie said in her bill brief. She invited questions from the committee.

Judge Norbert Merrick, District Judge, Jackson County District Court, Second Judicial District, told senators the change would affect relatively few judges: he estimated the provision would apply to 67 Kansas counties and described statewide counts of judges, noting fluctuations over time. Merrick said roughly half of magistrates historically have been law-trained and half lay, and he described how retention and election processes provide checks on judicial competence.

Committee members raised concerns about the bill's narrow carve-out and whether a uniform change statewide would be preferable. "If you're going to do this, if you're going to pass a bill, just be consistent," Senator Reichman said, arguing for a uniform standard rather than a geographically limited exception. Senator Corson and other members suggested the committee consider collecting more data and possibly directing the Judicial Council or another body to study retirement practices before acting.

Senator Titus and other members asked practical questions about how many practicing attorneys live in small counties and how the bill might affect recruitment of magistrates. Judge Merrick said recent salary increases for magistrate judges (which he described as rising from about $80,000 to roughly $100,000 starting in January) could influence whether more attorneys apply for magistrate positions.

Merrick also provided historical examples: he said in 2020 there were two district judges statewide who reached mandatory retirement that year, and he noted that average life expectancy in Kansas is about 76 years. He emphasized that, regardless of mandatory retirement ages, judges remain accountable through retention or contested elections.

No formal committee action was taken on Senate Bill 129 during the hearing; the committee closed the public hearing after receiving no additional conferees. The committee subsequently moved to approve procedural minutes on an unrelated agenda item, a motion that passed by voice vote.

Background: KSA 20-2608 currently sets mandatory retirement ages applicable to justices and judges; SB 129 would create a statutory exception limited to law-trained magistrate judges in counties with populations of 10,000 or fewer. Committee members broadly suggested more data or a statewide review might be appropriate before changing the statute.

Votes at a glance: No vote or committee disposition on Senate Bill 129 was recorded in the hearing transcript.