Kansas Statutes Annotated

K.S.A. § 75-3731 (2026)

Examination and payment of bills, claims, refunds and other demands on state funds, authority of director of accounts and reports; payroll processing procedures; audit of receipt documents

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section KS-LEGkslegislature.org JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

75-3731. Examination and payment of bills, claims, refunds and other demands on state funds, authority of director of accounts and reports; payroll processing procedures; audit of receipt documents. (a) Unless a claim is ordered paid by act of the legislature, the director of accounts and reports may refuse to pay any account, bill, claim, refund or demand on funds in the state treasury when the director determines that it is not a valid obligation or was not incurred in accordance with applicable laws and rules and regulations.

(b) Procedures for the processing of payrolls shall be prescribed by the director of accounts and reports, subject to the approval of the secretary of administration.

(c) The state treasurer shall transmit to the director of accounts and reports copies of all receipt documents showing all receipts received by the state treasurer. Such receipt documents shall be audited and examined by the director of accounts and reports.

History: L. 1953, ch. 375, § 31; L. 1968, ch. 311, § 1; L. 1990, ch. 318, § 3; L. 1994, ch. 274, § 10; July 1.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 1 case, 1998–1998 · leading case: Legislative Coordinating Council v. Stanley, 957 P.2d 379 (Kan. 1998).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Legislative Coordinating Council v. Stanley, 957 P.2d 379 (Kan. 1998). · cites it 6× “The respondents cite K.S.A. 75-3731 for the proposition that vouchers should be submitted in the same fiscal year as the expense was incurred.”

— K.S.A. § 75-3731(a) — 1 case

Legislative Coordinating Council v. Stanley, 957 P.2d 379 (Kan. 1998). “The respondents cite K.S.A. 75-3731 for the proposition that vouchers should be submitted in the same fiscal year as the expense was incurred.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.