Committee hears bill to bar certain registered sex offenders from school property and activities

The House Committee on Judiciary opened and heard extensive testimony on House Bill 2404 on Monday, a proposal that would make it unlawful for a registered sex offender who is 18 or older and whose underlying conviction involved a victim under age 18 to enter school property or attend school activities.

Jason Thompson, the committee advisor, summarized the bill at the start of the hearing: the bill creates a new section making it unlawful for that category of offender to be on school property or attend school activities; it ties penalties to existing offender-registration penalties under the Kansas Offender Registration Act (KSA 22-4903) and adds definitions of “school property” and “school activity” that cover public K–12 and accredited nonpublic schools and a wide range of events.

Proponents included law enforcement groups, district attorneys and parents. Ed Klump said the Kansas Sheriffs Association, Kansas Association of Chiefs of Police and Kansas Peace Officers Association supported the bill as narrowly drafted with “good guardrails.” Johnson County District Attorney Steve Howe urged passage, citing studies and local experience about recidivism for offenders who target children and saying the bill is tailored “very specifically for pedophiles.” Senator Kelly Warren (Senate District 11) described a February incident in her district in which a registered offender attended an elementary school parent–child dance and was observed “taking videos of kids who were not with him,” prompting parents’ concerns.

Several parents and community members, including victims and parents from the Blue Valley School District, gave emotional testimony about the incident and urged lawmakers to act. A lower-elementary student also submitted on-the-record remarks asking lawmakers to “protect children in school, school activities, and learning.”

Neutral and opposing witnesses raised practical and policy concerns. Shannon Kimball of the Kansas Association of School Boards said school districts understand the safety concerns and that local policy options exist, but warned of conflicting legal duties in certain cases: students aged 18–21 may still be entitled to educational services (including IEP services) and districts would face implementation challenges. Grace Tran of the Legislative Committee (testimony described as opposing) cited research on residency restrictions and similar limits that found little empirical support for reducing recidivism and warned that broad restrictions can isolate registrants and hinder rehabilitation; she also said the registry includes people convicted of widely varying offenses and that retroactive consequences could be significant.

Committee members asked about specifics: whether the bill would prohibit a parent on the registry from attending a parent–teacher conference, graduation or school pickup (the reviser answered that the bill, as drafted, prohibits presence on school property and at school activities with no carve-outs); whether the statutory offender-registration framework already restricts activities (the reviser said existing registration statutes typically set reporting and registration duties and do not themselves carry site-based prohibitions); and how the bill would treat 18–21-year-olds in special education programs (several members asked whether an amendment should allow tightly supervised access for those cases).

No committee vote on HB 2404 was recorded during the March 17 meeting. Committee members asked proponents and opponents to provide additional materials; the committee chair asked members with amendments to consult the advisor before the next meeting.

Clarifying note: the bill ties penalties to the Kansas Offender Registration Act and defines school property and school activity in statutory language; the reviser said the bill would take effect July 1 if adopted, subject to legislative timelines.

Proponents and opponents who testified on the record included law enforcement associations, district attorneys, parents and civic witnesses; written-only proponent testimony and neutral written testimony (including from Wichita Public Schools) were also submitted to the committee.