Senate committee advances bill to revise Kansas pari-mutuel racing law, limits historic horse-racing machines to Sedgwick County

The Senate Federal and State Affairs Committee voted to advance Senate Bill 260 after a committee hearing that included proponents from the equine industry, county interests and a state revisor. The bill would revise the Kansas Pari-Mutuel Racing Act to change licensing and revenue rules for live and historic horse racing, direct how tax revenue from historical horse-race (HHR) machines is split, and clarify that HHR machines may be operated at only one facility in Sedgwick County under current law.

Supporters told the committee the bill is intended to revive a once-larger racing industry in Kansas and to direct new tax receipts to industry supports and oversight. Jason Long, staff revisor, told the committee the bill removes certain location restrictions for horsemen’s associations and horsemen’s nonprofit organizations and adjusts organization-license requirements, including a provision that a horsemen’s nonprofit organization running live racing cannot do so before March 1, 2028, unless at Eureka Downs.

Long summarized the proposed revenue changes: 30% of revenue from historical horse-race machines would be transferred to the Kansas Horse Breeding Development Fund and 70% to the Horse Fair Racing Benefit Fund. Long said the bill also directs that the amounts required to cover the Racing and Gaming Commission’s operating expenses be paid from the state racing fund before those transfers occur. The bill would earmark 15% of monies in the Horse Fair Racing Benefit Fund for promotion of pari-mutuel racing by horsemen’s nonprofit organizations and would allow the fund to cover lease costs for land or equipment used to conduct races. The amendments in the bill would take effect July 1 if enacted.

Proponents said the changes would support rural economic development and restore industry activity. Dwayne Droge, identifying himself as representing District 13, said, “Eureka Downs is the oldest track west of the Mississippi River and the only remaining racetrack facility in Kansas,” and urged committee members to pass the bill. Justine Staton, executive director of the Kansas Horse Council, told the committee an economic impact report in 1996 documented a significant number of racing-sector horses in the state and said reviving racing would return agricultural and commerce dollars to Kansas.

Jason Watkins, representing the Golden Circle/park project in Sedgwick County, said the HHR machines would operate at the former Wichita Greyhound Park in Park City and that the project budget had grown from $55 million to $135 million. Watkins and other proponents asked for an amendment to prevent other racetrack-license applicants from operating HHR machines at new locations; the committee adopted an amendment that restricts operation of HHR machines to the single Sedgwick County facility authorized under previously enacted law.

Committee members asked several times about how “operating expenditures” are defined and whether promotion or other costs would be paid before the 30/70 split. Jason Long and other witnesses explained the statute directs that the commission’s operating expenses be paid first from the state racing fund and recommended clarifying language to read “operating expenditures of the commission” in the distribution paragraphs; the committee accepted conceptual clarifying language and later adopted a related amendment.

Senators and proponents also discussed the fiscal analysis. Long noted the fiscal note includes a reference that changing the distribution of excess pari-mutuel tax receipts could reduce revenue to the Professional Sports and Kansas fund by an unknown amount beginning in fiscal year 2027. Committee members requested the commission certify operating expenses before transfers occur and discussed the statutory process for certification.

After proponent testimony and the amendment limiting HHR machines to Sedgwick County, the committee voted to advance Senate Bill 260 favorably as amended. Senator Sam Bloom moved to pass the bill favorably as amended; Senator Clifford seconded. Senator Francisco announced he would abstain from the final passage vote. The committee chair stated the ayes prevailed and the bill will move to the Senate floor.

The bill’s next step is consideration by the full Senate. The committee record shows only proponent testimony and multiple written proponent submissions; no opponents or neutral testimony were filed with the committee.