[{"_1":2,"_112":-5,"_113":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76,88,100],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6635128,"mediaKeyId","2651065-af1bf18fb79803206a4abdd81014647e","parentId",2651065,"title","Votes at a glance: House approves several insurance, regulatory and administrative bills","audioSeconds",3046,"startMs",4132000,"endMs",7178000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2651065-af1bf18fb79803206a4abdd81014647e&start=4132&end=7178","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2651065-af1bf18fb79803206a4abdd81014647e/thumbnail_4132000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6635128/Kansas/Votes-at-a-glance-House-approves-several-insurance-regulatory-and-administrative-bills","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6635128-6130d42ed365dd0ec82d6f960e89b3cf/orig.mp4?Expires=1771137210&Signature=Jbj0W-odE4wU2dW8kPIYgVBgur5sLfyqcWXmtuTkK6R~38nLB76mvEkk7WXGTw8nQq908JRYoHlG6~Gesj1ao0p3FhxZ7EeDSw-weGsTSrygfYRVNFcq6svRowgEwigTD5cWkliIvh6iNUnlVSEPRJENc7AuHfoaAeuOQP6HR3sVnJBwMhpOt7s~DT6ysCoOc51X5ixt~3kT945Y~0zey1r-wLa1fa3W4tW51L0Tg2xumSuYqSmxlA-yvgKuxfkLZD6dT0e~J~itzpTgP~cYdJuI2QZ-7NofKb75WUlohzvXYI98VOopGs7carTlXPFEG8HtXcqfzocdiFE9EAizGQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","House Chamber Proceedings","date","2025-03-08T19:10:45.707Z","article","The House completed final action on multiple Senate bills and reported vote tallies as follows.

Senate Bill 20 (committee on Financial Institutions and Insurance): The bill largely mirrors House Bill 2,045 and reduces the number of board members appointed by the insurance commissioner and adjusts removal authorities. The House recorded 100 votes in favor and 21 against; the bill passed.

Senate Bill 21 (committee on Financial Institutions and Insurance): The measure concerns third-party administrators; it would require separate fiduciary accounts for individual payers and mandatory disclosure to the insurance commissioner of certain bankruptcy filings. The House recorded 101 votes in favor and 20 against; the bill passed.

Senate Bill 22 (committee on Financial Institutions and Insurance): The bill relates to title insurance agents, audit-report availability, and surety-bond amounts. The House recorded 94 votes in favor and 27 against; the bill passed.

The House's committee report also listed other bills advanced earlier in the session, but the above three Senate bills were the items with recorded final votes during the floor sequence summarized here.

Ending: Each bill will proceed to the Senate or the next procedural step as required; House roll-call tallies are listed above for reporters and stakeholders tracking insurance regulatory changes.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","House Chamber Proceedings 03/07/2025","oneSentenceSummary","The Kansas House recorded final passage on a set of Senate bills addressing insurance board composition, third-party administrator rules and title insurance, plus earlier items; roll-call tallies and brief summaries are listed.","taxTitle","HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, Committees, Legislative, Kansas","taxId",15102,"location","Kansas","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6635132,"House approves bill increasing township bonding limits, including higher limits for fire departments",6179,771000,6950000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2651065-af1bf18fb79803206a4abdd81014647e&start=771&end=6950","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2651065-af1bf18fb79803206a4abdd81014647e/thumbnail_771000.jpg","/articles/6635132/Kansas/House-approves-bill-increasing-township-bonding-limits-including-higher-limits-for-fire-departments","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6635132-3116a856df2b3981ac3ca01a70d3e423/orig.mp4?Expires=1771137210&Signature=QEr1svDFEOfHz5~pXYEJR1Zl83rg5zx4fEq1LdMSR1KVAOeiBI1vzrSUzLCCOG--70ZSBvXtCnSYbfXPsKmJPkOgpYo9~TCIineWKPi-YT~GOefK1kua0nEf8Q3IlFOW-6l1mqXZ9Mg3ynPRguWJcW1Z~XkPiLT2gbHndp0D0rKstXb-JqnFWXBIrtiRcGa-nhmiPVXPhjRMQErxfJnVEmxc2vYKhjDX6dzxzmle4rRkrCkhTggDgQdRpbysZsxiA6F1kf3WUwqfs623PZ-YHCDVzmwEdMvJyQ~47sCIGQR-jZ5rQMkHA600hk8SDaK-HI3UkcLWW-hEYUs95zLa3Q__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The House voted to pass Senate Bill 7, which revises statutory bonding limits for townships and increases the bonding cap for townships that operate fire departments.

Representative McNorton, the bill's carrier, told the Committee of the Whole the legislation sets a three-tier bonding limit for townships based on population: townships with 0–5,000 residents retain the current limit, those with 5,000–10,000 residents would have a 5% bonding limit, and townships with more than 10,000 residents would have a 10% limit on outstanding bonds. McNorton said the change is a response to more populated townships that maintain miles of paved roads and full-time staffs.

The bill also increases the statutory bonding limit for townships that maintain fire departments. McNorton said the existing statute (dating to 1949) sets a 1.5% cap and the bill would allow up to 5% of assessed tangible valuation for fire department improvements. He cited Soldier Township as an example and said the township's current bonding capacity under the old limit would be about $2 million while estimates for a new fire station range from $4 million to $7–8 million.

Representative Featherston spoke in support, saying the bill could save taxpayers money by enabling needed infrastructure investment through appropriate bonding. The Committee reported the bill favorably, and on final action the House recorded 116 votes in favor and 5 against; the bill was declared passed.

Ending: Sponsors said the change is aimed at modernizing bonding authority for larger, more complex townships and specifically to give townships with fire departments greater capacity to finance new stations and equipment.","The House passed Senate Bill 7 to raise bonding caps for townships by population tiers and raise the bonding authority for townships with fire departments; bill passed on final action with broad support.",{"_33":89,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":90,"_41":91,"_43":92,"_45":93,"_47":94,"_49":95,"_51":96,"_53":97,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":98,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":99,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6635137,"Kansas House adopts constitutional amendment to cap valuation swings with multi-year average",2154,4516000,6670000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2651065-af1bf18fb79803206a4abdd81014647e&start=4516&end=6670","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2651065-af1bf18fb79803206a4abdd81014647e/thumbnail_4516000.jpg","/articles/6635137/Kansas/Kansas-House-adopts-constitutional-amendment-to-cap-valuation-swings-with-multi-year-average","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6635137-1fee8c02962dd859249b7949776e5fb7/orig.mp4?Expires=1771137210&Signature=U-KOf3DlPENnrOJtEOjFz-Rgs2UXXovk4ZD90ee-Yz4tIh-wWrgn3kcSEU1jLaURZ3yU~BTjFfcSgqqQrj-o9jYIYgZzff-dTqyeP4H9Nc7hS8ae9EzqJLk0ShT2w5G8up~3UzlllrqH1IRt8p6AzALK9MNIDkbSj56hEbxkG4-CRhOe3kWDBzplVQ8uAwMepRcIDpKyu1PBwe7YIWE-QrHdmG4B0bEsNLvsz3IZWWJKfOWdR45WxOiTifVLnS8bc0QTn4C6d~HidEjVvL8apHmfUe1pm9UjFN~WUlxUjbuMol5oBk63VooA8yEMtDRGyNlsZIXyHGl3qDla5zMNQg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Kansas House voted to adopt House Concurrent Resolution 50-11, a proposal to amend Section 1 of Article 11 of the State Constitution to limit valuation volatility for residential property by using an averaging system.

Representative Adam Smith, who carried the measure in the Taxation Committee, described the proposed amendment as a rolling-average approach (similar in principle to an existing eight-year average used for agricultural land) that would smooth rapid valuation changes. Smith said the amendment would appear on the November ballot; if voters approve it the legislature must pass follow-up legislation to set implementation details, and county appraisal systems would need reprogramming before any effective date.

Floor debate focused on operational questions and fiscal impact. Smith listed several implementation questions that a companion bill would need to resolve: treatment of property sales, improvements, parcel splits and combinations, and the phase-in schedule if an averaging method were adopted. He emphasized that the constitutional text intentionally left some details to statute because constitutional language is difficult to change.

Representative Sawyer supported the amendment as a method to reduce large single-year spikes in valuations. Representative Fairchild offered an amendment to codify a six-year rolling average directly in the resolution; Fairchild said explicitly naming six years would simplify the amendment for voters and avoid giving the legislature additional authority. Smith and others opposed that codification, warning that an immediate shift to a six-year average would create a much larger, immediate fiscal impact and would take effect as soon as the amendment was adopted.

Smith cited fiscal estimates on the floor: he said adopting the rolling-average language as proposed would reduce state 20-mill receipts and require General Fund backfill of about $25 million annually (rising in later years), while a separate proposal to impose a 3% cap would produce a substantially larger state fiscal impact (Smith quoted estimates in the hundreds of millions of dollars). Several members said those fiscal consequences required careful follow-up in companion legislation.

The House adopted the resolution by recorded vote, 117 in favor and 4 against. The measure will go to the ballot for voter consideration; if it passes the legislature will need to enact implementing statutory language and address technical questions raised on the floor.

Ending: Lawmakers said the amendment addresses valuation spikes but stressed that statutory follow-up will be required to determine details such as phase-in mechanics, appeals, and treatment of sales and improvements.","House approved House Concurrent Resolution 50-11 to put a proposed constitutional amendment on the ballot that would limit residential valuations using a multi-year rolling average; members debated implementation details and fiscal impacts.",{"_33":101,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":102,"_41":103,"_43":104,"_45":105,"_47":106,"_49":107,"_51":108,"_53":109,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":110,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":111,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6635140,"Kansas House advances Astra Fund to give $60 million annual property-tax relief, repeal revenue-neutral law",2244,1080000,3324000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2651065-af1bf18fb79803206a4abdd81014647e&start=1080&end=3324","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2651065-af1bf18fb79803206a4abdd81014647e/thumbnail_1080000.jpg","/articles/6635140/Kansas/Kansas-House-advances-Astra-Fund-to-give-60-million-annual-property-tax-relief-repeal-revenue-neutral-law","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6635140-61e9fe817a428c46d7612c6b2ed8cf78/orig.mp4?Expires=1771137210&Signature=EfeAnrLmxzz~ks5yW0I8t9NZvMN37m~cCGhgySroP5imoEGeY7yfG3r3pk-GEGrdhEJ-PLXJkGXijvi--iII6INR1fNfNXRI-fUEAMDggU1ccR37dHG4qyjmJYToZhOMdWIau7bo8X2nlRTVqNn5iL~i6PkbPV0JlxWhdq9ZIJZbKhFlkNVmtNBZL3Kiy8a7M3WFETP~rcLJ6WpOR-eLt~DR56DkP8KK~lyp9YsILnkivwTh3eF6cAdjOO-aYWzXwFoLmOxjbYTwg7EkLXhq5w0VNQscyOThV4juOKLagL~tF~OxXiEjkCIkwwV1lGsm-kXOMNAyG~Gi4cSYMOea1g__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","House representatives passed House Bill 23-96 on a voice and roll-call vote after extended floor debate, moving a new approach to property-tax relief that pairs a state transfer with limits and a citizen protest mechanism.

Representative Adam Smith, the bill's carrier and a member of the House Taxation Committee, said the measure creates the Astra Fund, a $60,000,000 demand-transfer pool distributed to qualifying cities and counties. The fund would increase by 2% annually and, Smith said, would ‘‘incentivize local governments to keep property-tax increases at a minimum.’'

Under the bill, local governments must adopt and certify budgets and meet statutory minimums to qualify. Smith said the Astra Fund's first-year appropriation would be $60 million and that if fully utilized it could leverage an additional $70 million to $75 million of local property-tax relief, producing roughly $130 million total in the bill's first year of full effect. He said the fund would be apportioned by county, with 65% of a county's allocation based on population and 35% on assessed valuation.

The bill creates a protest-petition mechanism allowing voters to seek to limit property-tax revenues above a threshold. Smith described the petition as available at the county treasurer's office between Aug. 25 and Sept. 25 and set the qualifying signature threshold at 10% of the voters in the last presidential election for the affected jurisdiction. He emphasized the petition applies to taxing jurisdictions other than the state and school districts.

Supporters argued the bill replaces an ineffective revenue-neutral hearing process and creates accountability by tying the availability of the protest petition to the legislature's appropriation for the Astra Fund. Representative Sawyer said the measure provides at least $60 million in state property-tax relief annually and fosters a partnership with local governments.

Opponents and several members raised concerns about specific provisions. Representative Vestas warned the 10% signature threshold could translate to very large raw signature counts in populous counties (she cited 21,662 as an example for Sedgwick County) and noted the time and cost of running petition drives. Representative Petr Parchel and others said the bill removes the revenue-neutral mechanism that some constituents value; Parchel said no constituents in his district sought repeal of revenue neutral and expressed constituent opposition.

Members also debated the fund's size. Representative Helgerson offered an amendment to raise the fund to $100 million; the amendment failed on a roll call (Y 43, N 74). Several members said they favored a larger appropriation but cited budget caution and the need to coordinate with the Appropriations Committee.

Smith and other supporters said fiscal administration would be handled by the State Treasurer's Office and the Department of Revenue; Smith told members that state officials indicated no additional FTEs or programming costs were expected. The bill explicitly repeals the revenue-neutral requirement for taxing subdivisions and eliminates the taxpayer-notification cost fund.

Final action: the House recorded 115 votes in favor and 6 against and declared House Bill 23-96 passed. The bill will proceed to the Senate for further consideration.

Ending: The floor debate mixed policy and fiscal concerns: supporters framed the measure as a novel state-local partnership to limit property-tax growth, while critics warned the protest process, signature thresholds and the repeal of revenue-neutral protections merit further refinement as the bill advances.","Lawmakers advanced House Bill 23-96 to create a $60 million Astra Fund to incentive local governments to limit property-tax increases, replace the revenue-neutral process and establish a protest petition; bill passed the House after extended debate.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Votes at a glance: House approves several insurance, regulatory and administrative bills

House approves bill increasing township bonding limits, including higher limits for fire departments

Kansas House adopts constitutional amendment to cap valuation swings with multi-year average

Kansas House advances Astra Fund to give $60 million annual property-tax relief, repeal revenue-neutral law