[{"_1":2,"_88":-5,"_89":-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],{"_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",6622617,"mediaKeyId","2783742-9bcbb695b133fa5eeea20ed62d08f233","parentId",2783742,"title","Commerce committee moves to insert SB229 language into empty SB30 and requests wording change from “assign” to “request”","audioSeconds",114,"startMs",122000,"endMs",236000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2783742-9bcbb695b133fa5eeea20ed62d08f233&start=122&end=236","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2783742-9bcbb695b133fa5eeea20ed62d08f233/thumbnail_122000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6622617/Kansas/Commerce-committee-moves-to-insert-SB229-language-into-empty-SB30-and-requests-wording-change-from-assign-to-request","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6622617-4a6abb93e1ae587402a2ebc0e02eba18/orig.mp4?Expires=1773590971&Signature=Iy63Ld-lgi7b5wjj7VtY3MlgqLZUFTQu5htsieJL9rF4TnNaxCrePEAy~zPhrbyI4OzVC5nSv4wv7SA86QfOePc6GkC9HSL-uLpU24tnu3aJutjTn~4Zljxnil3FCosPNHeVGwOrb~AdXy1vHzc3fAGW~B25G3LTJBnP~m8ygqojL5NaVzXr~xF2dzfAAhlWpqJDrwqdzhXTp7gyjzgn9rmHjQTI0OKu8hmb9Lv5azXo1I~0Pu7qcohagVLJmRQoaWPrwKencadhocLsCyZ~7bImHrqYZmVgDxsZrSZ5ve69h7Zl6TCK-h9y3OZY-df9A63LHKPolxU28Mz96foF5Q__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Kansas Legislature","date","2025-03-26T20:56:23.93Z","article","Senate Commerce Committee members discussed and informally agreed to replace the contents of Senate Bill 30 with the contents of Senate Bill 229, with a technical wording change requested by research staff.

A committee member summarized the procedural issue: earlier revisions to SB30 had been nullified when conferees were changed, leaving SB30 effectively an empty shell in this committee. The member said research had requested a change on SB229 that would avoid reopening the statute next year.

The committee member moved to “remove the contents of Senate Bill 30 if there is anything left in it and insert the contents of Senate Bill 229 with 1 change. That is on page 6 of the bill, line 1. First line, strike assign and insert request.” The speaker explained research’s concern: as currently written research “appear[s] that they would assign someone from KLRD rather than request somebody, and they would prefer it to be request so that they can assign someone.”

Members discussed leaving SB30 open to receive additional insertions later. One member asked for leeway to make additional technical edits, noting a related wording on page 6, line 6 that uses the term “assignable,” and asking to replace that with wording consistent with the requested change.

No roll-call vote or formal recorded tally appears in the transcript. Committee members indicated informal agreement (“K. We\u0000're good”) and planned to leave SB30 available for further insertion and technical edits.

Next steps: Staff were asked to implement the specific wording change from “assign” to “request” on page 6, line 1 and to make associated technical edits; the committee left SB30 open to additional insertions. The transcript does not show a recorded vote or final adoption on the motion.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Conference Committee on Senate and House Commerce 03/26/2025","oneSentenceSummary","Committee members agreed to reinsert the contents of Senate Bill 229 into Senate Bill 30 (which had become an empty shell), directed a wording change from “assign” to “request” on page 6, line 1, and left SB30 open to additional insertions; no formal roll-call vote was recorded in the transcript.","taxTitle","Senate, Committees, Legislative, Kansas","taxId",15103,"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},6622622,"Senate Commerce Committee discusses adopting Senate position on House Bill 21-19 with five-year sunset",74,18000,92000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2783742-9bcbb695b133fa5eeea20ed62d08f233&start=18&end=92","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2783742-9bcbb695b133fa5eeea20ed62d08f233/thumbnail_18000.jpg","/articles/6622622/Kansas/Senate-Commerce-Committee-discusses-adopting-Senate-position-on-House-Bill-21-19-with-five-year-sunset","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6622622-ba9fe0d3e23de257d158789b88cd80bf/orig.mp4?Expires=1773590971&Signature=iUPAKy4q6ctreZ5wa9HMkocn9ZxjWGzi0BsZ~Lbru8aA-CQqxlpcgO1LD8t1dS7ShLHaLQQqb893DBhcCJ9~rDCxANIqdD13cJ9OttWN3lz3u3Xnz2142TxlrUK~gXRF0wEaP2PmGdSoI5-VkENRzIVmdY8~J3O-DOnIAyY39AvFf5tS7AXRJeU2A0~ZxSxDZQ8uq7wntyIpedUbSdcYW1B8SR066J2oAV37d5QRZ-iOA5qoK0INJvXUq2RshvrXxQvgjQWrkbs9kXEcGcdmBayA~2IQseFOH1eFiaatFqCuUtleKCyD5zZNJd2O2y4OME~OdLPIvj7NaVyZE-7dvg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Senate Commerce Committee members discussed adopting the Senate position on House Bill 21-19 and applying a five-year sunset to the measure.

Senator Owens proposed that the committee “adopt[] the Senate position on the amended 21 19 as it passed out favorably from the tax committee with a 5 year sunset on it.” The suggestion was presented as something for members to “kick around” while other bill decisions remain pending.

A committee member asked for clarification about fiscal language in the bill, noting the bill was sent out “not necessarily with an $8,800,000 cap, but at 8,800,000.0 estimated,” and asked whether the sunset would apply to the changes made to statute or to the underlying program. The chair answered, “The program.”

No roll-call vote or formal motion to adopt the Senate position was recorded in the transcript. Committee members agreed to take the proposal under further review and return with feedback.

The discussion occurred during routine committee business; members scheduled further meetings to continue negotiations on multiple bills later the same day and agreed informally on an 8:30 a.m. meeting time for follow-up.

Next steps: Committee members asked colleagues to review the proposed adoption and sunset language; no formal vote, amendment, or final disposition of HB 21-19 was recorded in the transcript.","Members of the Senate Commerce Committee discussed adopting the Senate position on House Bill 21-19, including a proposal for a five-year sunset; committee members asked for clarification that the $8,800,000 figure is an estimate rather than a fixed cap and whether the sunset would apply to the program or just the statutory changes.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Commerce committee moves to insert SB229 language into empty SB30 and requests wording change from “assign” to “request”

Senate Commerce Committee discusses adopting Senate position on House Bill 21-19 with five-year sunset