Committee hears veterans' top priorities; Proctor files Veterans Valor Act, tax-exemption bill for Guard and Reserve

Representative Proctor told the Committee on Veterans and Military on Oct. 12 that leadership from veteran service organizations identified disabled-veteran property tax relief as the summit's top priority and that he has filed legislation to respond to that request.

The 5th Annual Veterans Strategic Summit brought leaders from the VFW, American Legion, Disabled American Veterans, Vietnam Veterans of America and other groups together to develop and vote on policy priorities, Proctor said. He described the summit’s process: a plenary panel, breakout sessions with legislators, and a ranked vote by attendees to establish a short list of initiatives for the coming session.

The summit’s top item — property tax relief for disabled veterans — is packaged in legislation Proctor called the Veterans Valor Act (filed as House Bill 2005). Proctor said the bill would provide a rebate-style exemption rather than an up-front local exemption: homeowners would pay property taxes and file for a state rebate. He described the proposed benefit as a 75% exemption for veterans who are 100% permanently and totally disabled or 100% disabled due to unemployability; adding 100% disabled veterans to the prior proposal raises the fiscal note to roughly $21 million.

Proctor said the earlier version of the measure had been part of House Bill 2096 and was included in a conference committee report that the governor later vetoed. "We were not able to override that veto," he said, and added that he refiled an expanded version this year as House Bill 2005. He asked veterans and supporters to submit testimony to the tax committee; he said HB2005 has a hearing in the tax committee next week and encouraged in-person testimony.

Proctor stressed retention concerns: "We're trying to keep veterans in this state, and right now we're hemorrhaging veterans," he said, noting that roughly 3,000 service members separate from Kansas installations each year and many relocate to states with broader tax benefits.

Other priorities from the summit that Proctor described included: - Allowing charitable electronic gaming at veterans-service-organization facilities to create a fundraising stream for posts and local VSO programming; Proctor said he has not yet filed a bill on that item. - Extending the current two-vehicle property-tax exemption for active-duty service members to veterans (the existing two-vehicle exemption currently applies only to active-duty personnel). Proctor said he expects to pursue this in a future session but had no bill filed at the committee meeting. - Increasing funding for Veteran Service Officers (VSOs) and the state's Office of Veterans Services to handle rising claims workloads following new federal claims under the PACT Act. Proctor said VSOs are overstretched and need more resources. - Exempting active Guard and Reserve pay from Kansas income tax, filed this year as House Bill 2036. Proctor said the current draft would exempt pay up to the rate of the highest enlisted rank (E-9), so income above that level would remain taxable; he said the estimated cost for that exemption is about $4 million.

Committee members raised technical and fiscal questions. Representative Poskins noted past bipartisan support for property-tax relief and asked whether House Democrats had an opportunity to cosponsor the new bill; Proctor said he had inadvertently not reached out to the caucus by name when filing and apologized.

Committee member Mr. Kelly questioned the fiscal estimate for HB2005 and the underlying demographic assumptions. "I'm really skeptical that $21,000,000," he said, citing uncertainty about the homeownership rate among 100% disabled veterans and noting that many such veterans live in skilled-nursing or domiciliary VA facilities or rent. Kelly added a demographic figure: "There's about 10,700 100% disabled veterans in Kansas," and said he would try to compile more precise data for the Department of Revenue’s fiscal analysts.

Proctor and other members argued that retaining veterans produces broader economic benefits, including household spending and federal medical dollars flowing into state health providers. Proctor cited an estimate — conveyed to the Veterans Caucus by VFW representatives — that VFW-identified economic benefits equal about $600 million annually and said that additional spending by retained veterans would accrue to Kansas.

No formal committee votes or motions were recorded during this presentation. Proctor closed by asking committee members to support testimony on the tax committee docket and thanked members for maintaining veterans’ programs and the Veterans' Room.

Ending: Committee staff and members said they will follow up with additional data on the fiscal note and that Proctor’s bills will proceed through the tax committee and other committee steps as scheduled.