Judiciary conference revisers summarize bills headed to conference; multiple bills await action or further review

Committee staff and revisers provided conference members with an overview of bills currently in or potentially moving into conference committee, highlighting differences between House and Senate language and noting which measures still await action by either chamber.

Jason Thompson, a legislative reviser, walked members through the first bills on the list, beginning with Senate Bill 30, a fingerprinting and background-check measure. “Alright. So senate bill 30 is the first 1 on here. This is a fingerprinting and background check bill,” Thompson said, and explained the House had added provisions that would add the attorney general, the state gaming agency and the state bank commissioner to the list of entities authorized to receive certain records from the Kansas Bureau of Investigation and clarified references to K.S.A. 22-4714 for background checks. Thompson also told members that some Senate bills had not yet been concurred or nonconcurred by the other chamber and therefore might appear in a later iteration of the conference list.

Natalie Scott, another reviser, summarized House bill changes including a revision to the Open Records Act. “The way it came over from the house, KSA 45 2 19 was amended to include, review and redaction time and the actual cost for furnishing records, when an agency is charging for an open records request,” Scott said, describing provisions that would require agencies to use the lowest-cost staff category when fulfilling requests, to base charges on hourly wages (excluding benefits), to attempt cost-mitigation with requesters for requests likely to exceed $200 and to deem requests withdrawn if a requester does not respond within three business days to mitigation efforts. Scott noted the Senate added a requirement that agencies provide an itemized cost statement upon request.

Other items discussed included:

- Senate Bill 84: a change to the criminal-use-of-financial-card law to include gift-card related crimes; reported as fully in conference after nonconcurrence actions were resolved.

- Senate Bill 135: a technical clarification to precedents of child-related orders issued under the Protection from Abuse Act; differences between House and Senate were minor and largely numbering/technical.

- Senate Bill 156: creating the crime of unlawful use of a laser pointer; the only change noted was an effective-date change by the House.

- Senate Bill 157: a complex bill regarding search warrants and rules affecting compensated sureties; the House added provisions modifying surety-related timelines and remittance tiers for returned defendants (90% remittance if returned within 90 days; 75% if 91–180 days; 50% if 181–270 days) and added the provisions of other related Senate bills into the package.

- House bills: Scott summarized HB 2134 (Open Records Act changes), HB 2155 (modifying sheriff liability regarding oversight of jails), HB 2183 (including AI-generated material in child-exploitation and related privacy statutes, with a Senate exemption for certain satellite/video distributors in the privacy section), HB 2242 (allowing the federal government to request concurrent jurisdiction for certain U.S.-owned military lands), HB 2347 (changing culpability requirements for certain thefts and a Senate amendment making some vehicle thefts severity level 10 when between $500 and $1,500), and HB 2371 (conforming Kansas LLC law provisions with model changes, including Series LLC updates).

Thompson and Scott noted a handful of Senate bills that had not been placed on the committee’s list because the other chamber had not yet taken concurrence or nonconcurrence actions; they listed several bill numbers that remain possible additions.

Committee members asked procedural questions about which items were officially in conference and about timing; the group set follow-up meeting times to continue conference work later the same day.

Ending: The conference committee paused substantive action to allow members and revisers to check on unresolved concurrence matters and to consult with chamber leadership before taking further steps.