Kansas School for the Blind asks legislature to restore lapsed summer funds, seeks building repairs and early‑childhood startup funding

Amanda Prosser, a fiscal analyst with Legislative Research, told the Senate committee the Kansas School for the Blind is seeking restoration of unspent summer‑school funds and several capital improvements ahead of the fiscal 2026 budget cycle. “I am Amanda Prosser with Legislative Research. I'm going to cover both schools for the blind and school for the deaf,” she said at the committee briefing.

The school is requesting a supplemental of just under $42,000 to restore FY24 funds that lapsed after summer‑school expenditures overlapped fiscal years, Prosser said. The agency also asked that that account be granted reappropriation language in the budget bill so funds can carry forward when summer activities cross fiscal years. The Legislative Budget Committee did not recommend restoration or reappropriation; the governor’s proposal did recommend both items, Prosser said.

Why it matters: the school reported increased demand for its extended‑school‑year programs and preschool services, creating pressure to preserve money for summer programming and to support an expanding early‑childhood program on campus. Kansas State School for the Blind Superintendent John Harding told the committee the agency “is growing,” noting the school serves more than 800 students across the state, with campus enrollment increased from about 50 to more than 70 and a preschool enrollment approaching 18–19 children.

Budget details and capital requests: Prosser summarized the figures in the budget packet. For fiscal 2026 the agency requested roughly $14.8 million in all funds, including about $8.3 million in State General Fund. The school submitted four State Institution Building Fund (SIBF) enhancement requests: (1) an increase for basic maintenance (not recommended by the special committee or the House bill, and not recommended by the Legislative Budget Committee), (2) $180,000 SIBF for asbestos testing and remediation (the House included this item and the governor recommended it), (3) funding to replace an underground gas line after utilities raised safety concerns (initially removed by a global motion but later included in the House amendment), and (4) renovation funding for part of Johnson Building to house an early‑childhood program (not recommended by the LBC and not in the House bill; the governor’s proposal included it).

Prosser told the committee that items the LBC did not recommend were later reintroduced in the House budget bill (sub for House Bill 2007) during the House amendment process. She also said the school’s FY25 agency column showed a 20.7% increase in State General Fund compared with the prior approved level, driven largely by salary adjustments to align with the Olathe pay plan, IT consulting costs shared with the School for the Deaf, funding for an extended school year, and startup costs for the early‑childhood program.

Policy and statewide motions: Prosser noted two statewide, “global” budget motions that affect both schools: a State General Fund lapse that removes funding for vacant positions and a 1.5% lapse of SGF operating expenditures. The motions were placed on the statewide adjustments and certified by the State Finance Council, she said; the Appropriations bill’s approach to vacant positions differs from Senate Bill 99, which requires a position to be vacant for 180 days before removal. The LBC or Appropriations language does not include that 180‑day exclusion, Prosser said.

Local impact and school perspective: Harding said most SGF dollars go to teachers’ salaries and benefits—“over 90% of our SGF goes to that”—and warned reductions would affect instruction. Harding said the school’s summer program has expanded to meet demand and that the school seeks to grow outstate offerings so students need not travel to Kansas City for summer services. Committee members pressed on specifics, including whether the requested SIBF projects could cover items such as gas‑line replacement and asbestos abatement; Prosser explained SIBF is a separate fund (a small mill levy portion of property taxes) used for capital improvements and that some items were later added back into the House bill via the Joint Building Committee and House amendments.

What was not decided: the committee did not take any formal votes during this briefing. The Legislative Budget Committee had not recommended several enhancements, but the House amendment process added some items back into the introduced House budget bill. The transcript records that the governor’s budget recommended several of the enhancements that LBC did not recommend, and that House amendments restored some items, but no final legislative action on the fiscal 2026 budget occurred in the briefing.

Ending: The committee moved next to consider the Kansas State School for the Deaf after completing the School for the Blind briefing. The Senate committee scheduled further budget work on the following days, during which members may advance recommendations on both schools’ budgets.