Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Safety Gis topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Appropriations committee retains $2 million SGF for 9-1-1 GIS mapping of schools after heated debate
Summary
The committee approved a $2 million one-time SGF addition to the State 9-1-1 Board budget to fund interior and exterior GIS mapping for critical infrastructure with priority for schools; motions to remove the funding and to increase it to $6 million both failed after extensive floor debate on costs, coverage and equity.
The House Committee on Appropriations approved committee recommendations that include a $2,000,000 one-time State General Fund (SGF) appropriation to the new State 9-1-1 Board for grants to develop interior and exterior geographic information system (GIS) data for critical infrastructure. Chairperson Anderson said the grants would be prioritized by facility type, with public elementary and secondary schools receiving the highest priority.
Committee discussion focused on scope, cost and equity. Representative Turk, who described his law‑enforcement experience, argued for the funding’s lifesaving potential: “If you know where you're going before you go, that changes the whole ball game,” he said. Opponents said the $2 million would cover roughly a third of Kansas schools if used only for K‑12 mapping and urged either a larger investment or different funding sources. Representative Helgerson moved to remove the $2,000,000 proviso; that motion was seconded and debated but ultimately failed.
Representative Anderson said the committee intended the allocation as a phased approach. “We kinda wanted to start at $2,000,000…to test it, and come back next year,” Anderson said, characterizing the funding as an initial step rather than full statewide implementation. Representative Hoye clarified that the funding is not limited to schools — hospitals and state government buildings may also apply — but acknowledged that, if used only by schools, the $2,000,000 would reach about one third of schools.
Members proposed alternatives: Representative Hoyt offered a substitute motion to increase the one-time appropriation to $6,000,000 and restrict it to elementary, secondary and postsecondary schools; Representative Ballard seconded that substitute. Supporters argued a larger amount would ensure underserved or rural districts are not left out; opponents said the committee preferred incremental implementation and buy-in from pilot projects. The substitute motion to raise the amount to $6,000,000 failed. The Helgerson amendment to strike the $2,000,000 also failed.
The committee adopted the State 9‑1‑1 Board recommendation and passed the budget motion; Representative Helgerson asked to be recorded as a no vote. Chair Anderson and members asked the subcommittee and staff to continue assessing potential funding sources and to provide regular updates to the committee.
Ending: The committee kept the $2,000,000 proviso in the budget as a one‑time allocation for FY2026, with priority to school mapping and language directing grant administration and reporting; members signaled further review of expansion and funding sources in the next budget cycle.
