Consultants tell Johnson County commissioners 2025 Kansas session brought major tax and budget proposals with local impacts

Federico and Durst Consulting representatives briefed the Johnson County Board of County Commissioners on June 12 on major measures from the 2025 Kansas legislative session and how they could affect county services and finances.

County leaders invited John Federico and members of Federico and Durst Consulting to report on the session’s outcomes and likely 2026 priorities after a 90-day legislative calendar produced intense activity affecting local government.

The county was told about three central threads: contested property-tax proposals, changes to state programs that affect local revenue and services, and several budget moves that include one-time and continuing appropriations that could alter county workloads.

“Maine priorities this year were property tax,” said Mihailo Ilich, Federico and Durst Consulting. He told commissioners the Senate pushed a valuation cap that would limit property valuations to 3 percent annual growth, while the House favored a rolling-average appraisal approach for residential property; neither proposal became law after the chambers rejected the other’s plan.

Consultants described a separate proposal referred to as the Astra plan, which would have replaced the existing revenue-neutral-rate calculation with a new threshold that could include new growth, CPI inflation and voter-approved bonds; the plan also proposed a $60,000,000 incentive fund for local governments that remain below the new threshold. The version that reached the Senate was substantially amended; county advocates moved to strong opposition and the measure stalled and did not become law, the consultants said.

Steven Durst outlined other items he said county leaders should watch: the low-income housing tax credit was limited to $25,000,000 in 2025 with lower caps planned in subsequent years, and a bill brought by the Kansas Bankers Association originally included a provision that would have required local governments to give banks a “first look” for investments. Consultants said county advocates successfully had that investment provision removed before the bill passed.

Durst summarized the state budget and related appropriations the county may track in coming months, including multi-million-dollar allocations for local health units, tuberculosis response, infant and toddler programs, and investment in the intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD) system and mental-health services. He referenced Kansas Legislative Research Department estimates of multi-year deficits and said lawmakers shifted to a more active role in the budgeting process this session.

Chairman Mike Kelly framed the briefing as part of the county’s advocacy role: “We are an arm of the state” for many mandated services, he said, and urged continual communication with the Johnson County legislative delegation so the county’s implementation needs are understood.

Commissioners asked for follow-up materials and schedules for interim committees and asked consultants to brief the board on specific budget and tax items as work continues toward the 2026 session. Commissioner Hanslick requested clarification on whether an appropriation for the IDD system included on-going rate increases; consultants said part of the recent funding was intended for provider-rate increases and wait-list reduction, and that some rate components are expected to continue.