Kansas Senate cobbles $25B budget with funds for border security, legislative pay raises, World Cup

BY: SHERMAN SMITH  Kansas Reflector

TOPEKA — Senators gave initial approval to a $25.1 billion state spending blueprint following a six-hour debate Wednesday that covered legislative pay raises, the absence of special education funding, border security and whether the state should contribute to preparations for the 2026 World Cup on the Missouri side of Kansas City.

The budget contained in Senate Bill 514 includes $15.7 million to send Kansas National Guard troops to Texas, $28 million to support the World Cup and $174.4 million to raise state employee salaries by 5%. It also would hold hostage $35.7 million in funding for state colleges and universities until their top executives certify they have eliminated diversity, equity and inclusion requirements in admissions and hiring processes.

In lieu of expanding Medicaid, the proposed budget would invest $78.7 million in increases to Medicaid outpatient hospital reimbursement rates. It allocates $23 million to chip away at long waiting lists for disability services.

The Judicial Branch would receive $2.6 million and three full-time positions to deal with “a security incident,” following last year’s ransomware attack that hindered court filings and public access to court records.

The spending plan, which still requires a final vote in the Senate and negotiations the House, will be subject to line-item vetoes by Gov. Laura Kelly and can be augmented with an omnibus bill before the session ends.

The GOP-dominated Senate is poised to grow government, as it has done every year in recent history, by increasing the spending of state dollars from $9.9 billion in the current fiscal year to $10.2 billion in the fiscal year that begins in July. Republicans trimmed about a billion dollars in federal and state spending from the governor’s proposal by declining to pay down debt early, adding new debt, and removing funding for special education.

As it stands, the Senate budget would leave the state with a $3.4 billion surplus. That figure would be reduced by any forthcoming tax cuts that pass into law.

“This budget will allow for a sizable tax relief for Kansas families,” said Sen. Rick Billinger, R-Goodland.

Legislator pay

Lawmakers entertained 16 proposed amendments during Wednesday’s debate, including several dealing with plans to raise annual compensation for legislators from roughly $29,000 to $57,000.

A state law passed last year authorized a bipartisan commission to study legislative pay and implement changes in 2025. That relieved lawmakers from having to take a public vote to raise their own pay.

Sen. Renee Erickson, R-Wichita, championed the pay increase as a way to attract younger lawmakers with more diverse backgrounds. Currently, the Legislature is dominated by retirees, wealthy individuals and others who can afford to spend three months of the year in Topeka without worrying about compensation.

“What I make as a public servant is not a motivator to whether I run or not,” Erickson said. “But I’m at a point in my life, and if we’re honest about it, we look around and we can see that most of us are at a point or position in our life, where we can afford to take $88 a day.”

She said the raise approved by the appointed commission “was a way to get more diverse representation in the Kansas legislature by making it at least a financial possibility for those of us not in a position or a point in our lives to be able to afford to serve. And isn’t that what we want — more people being able to serve, and it not being a financial burden on families? And we get, let’s be honest, the potential for younger members of this body, which we need their voices.”

Sen. Rob Olson, R-Olathe, called for lawmakers to abandon the commission’s plan and consider instead a more modest raise of $10,500. That amendment failed on a 14-9 vote.

However, senators adopted an amendment brought by Sen. Dennis Pyle, I-Hiawatha, that would require the Legislature to vote on any pay raise before it can take effect.

Pyle held in his hand a packet of information that he said was brought to him during a meeting between legislators and constituents over coffee. The documentation, he said, tells the story of how last year’s bill was introduced, where it went and how it got amended before it went to the compensation commission, and how the pay raise was put in place.

“There were probably about 30 to 40 people in the room, and the paper that was covering it, everyone was questioning: ‘How can that be? Why is there no sunshine on that?’ That was what I took from the people,” Pyle said.

“People were pretty upset that it wasn’t brought in openness and fairness to the light of day,” Pyle said.

His amendment passed on a 20-8 vote with both parties divided, nine members declining to vote and three members absent.

School funding

The budget removes about $200 million requested by the governor to meet the state’s statutory requirement for funding special education needs in public schools.

The state is supposed to cover 92% of special education costs in public schools, but hasn’t done so since 2011. The current funding level is at 69% of costs, which means schools have used money that would otherwise be spent in the classroom to cover special education services.

Sen. J.R. Claeys, R-Salina, said funding for special education would be added in an omnibus bill before the session is over. He complained that an amendment brought by Sen. John Doll, R-Garden City, would redirect money from Medicaid services, debt payments and several earmarked projects, to cover special education needs. Doll’s amendment was based on “pay-go” rules that require any added expense to be offset by cuts elsewhere in the budget.

Claeys said Doll’s amendment would hamper the state’s fight against fentanyl, hurt the dairy industry, and cost rural hospitals.

“What you’re getting for that is a discussion today about adding money to special ed that was going to occur at omnibus anyway,” Claeys said. “That’s all. You’re getting it four weeks early. And that is the price you’re paying for it.”

“First of all,” Doll responded, “If we can find different places to get this money, I’m all in.”

“But if it wasn’t so sick,” Doll added, “I would find it humorous that we’re talking about closing rural hospitals, and we haven’t had a hearing on Medicaid expansion. That to me is just incredible that we that statement was even made.”

Doll’s amendment failed on a 12-19 vote.

Sen. Cindy Holscher, D-Overland Park, proposed an amendment that would block state funding from going to private schools unless they were accredited under the same standards as public schools.

That was met with fury by Sen. Mark Steffen, R-Hutchinson, who proposed that schools should welcome public funding for private schools as a “gift” that would force them to compete. Steffen said he watched the decline of public schools during an eight-year period ending in 2016, when his son and daughter had attended public high school.

“I saw our public schools go from recognized centers of excellence to bastions of mediocrity,” Steffen said.

Competition, he said, “will do nothing but improve our public schools.”

“I just wish they had the clarity of vision to understand that this is actually a gift to the public schools, and that they will only make them more responsive and better at what they do,” Steffen said.

Holscher’s amendment failed on a 12-21 vote.

World Cup funding

The budget earmarks $28 million in federal COVID-19 relief aid to support economic development around the World Cup games in 2026 — with the caveat that the money will come from the state general fund if federal rules get in the way.

Sen. Alicia Straub, R-Ellinwood, proposed an amendment that would have taken $20 million away from the World Cup and divided it between special education funding and infrastructure investments for small towns.

She read the names of more than 40 towns in her district that have fewer than 2,000 people in them, then fought back tears as she explained her proposal.

“I hate to see the hard-earned money from the people that live in these little bitty towns be sent to build practice facilities for a soccer game,” Straub said. “I don’t think a single one of these towns has a soccer program at their school. In fact, I’m certain that they don’t. They have football — American football. If we keep sending our hard-earned money to other countries, to other companies, to other people, and without taking care of our own first we are going to end up in a very bad situation, which most of these cities already are. Many of them are in their dire straits.”

Straub found support across the aisle in Sen. Tom Holland, D-Baldwin City, who questioned the merits of subsidizing the World Cup event. He proposed an amendment to eliminate the funding altogether.

“I understand the term of economic development,” he said, “but you know, guys, they already came.”

Holland said he would be amazed if promoters were counting on the state to “pony up taxpayer dollars to help them fund their for-profit deal.”

“Look at basically who’s coming to a soccer event,” Holland said. “There are people come from all over the world. There are people from all points of our country. They’ve got money to spend. And for the life of me, I don’t understand why the Kansas taxpayer has to subsidize wealthy people coming into the Midwest to spend their money.”

He also questioned the lack of transparency behind the request, because it wasn’t clear who asked for the money.

The amendments by Straub and Holland both failed on a voice vote.

“If we don’t provide our necessary funds for the transportation, security and marketing, our Kansas businesses are the ones that are going to be losing because Missouri is going to win and they’re going to have all of the activity on their side of the state line,” said Senate Minority Leader Dinah Sykes, D-Lenexa.