Committee pauses vote to probe SIBF changes and capital needs at state schools for deaf and blind

The Committee on K‑12 Education Budget paused a scheduled vote and spent the meeting gathering data and hearing priorities for two state residential special schools, after staff warned the State Institutions Building Fund (SIBF) will shift funding mechanics under recent law.

Jennifer Light of the Legislative Research Department told the panel that Senate Bill 35 (2025) replaces the SIBF’s historic 0.5 mill levy with an annual transfer from the State General Fund of $25,000,000 beginning fiscal year 2027, with the transfer increasing by $500,000 each year. Light said, “there will be a transfer from of $25,000,000 from the SGF to the SIBF every year, and it will happen on July 1.” Committee members and staff discussed how the demand‑transfer structure and a 2% adjustment in subsequent years will affect the fund’s ability to support enhancement requests.

Light summarized the committee and governor differences for the two schools: the governor included a $718,000 SIBF item to replace the roof at the Edlund Dormitory and dining hall at the Kansas State School for the Blind (KSSB), and recommended $1.8 million in FY27 to demolish a powerhouse structure and $1.2 million for the Emery Elementary dorm remodel at the Kansas State School for the Deaf (KSSD). She told members those enhancement requests were not included in the special budget committee’s recommendations and that, after removing enhancements, the committee’s FY27 expenditures for SIBF projects were about $16.2 million with an ending balance of approximately $8.8 million in the scenario discussed. Later in the meeting Light corrected an earlier packet error and gave the FY25 actual ending balance as $43,758,155 going into FY26.

Members pressed for context about competing claims on limited SIBF dollars and asked for a written list of every agency and building eligible to draw on the fund. “We just have a brief report of who all this is in competition with,” the chair requested; Light said she would provide a corrected table and a more comprehensive listing to the committee.

Committee members also questioned school leaders on the urgency and student impact of specific projects. Superintendent Barron (KSSD, participating remotely) said the top priority at the deaf school would be the Emory Elementary dorm roof because “that’s where our students reside” and current leaks have required partitioning off activity areas. Barron said demolition of the powerhouse would produce a realigned entrance and parking and that the demolition estimate includes the parking work and entrance realignment. He added the city might assist with traffic‑lighting elements but said the state would be fiscally responsible for realigning the state property driveway.

At KSSB, Superintendent Harding described a damaged roof with delamination that can only be patched short term and said full replacement is more cost‑effective over time. Harding also described operational constraints: KSSB uses two part‑time substitutes, shares an FTE facilities director 50/50 with KSSD and shares IT, HR and business services broadly, which complicates unilateral calendar or staffing changes.

The committee also discussed calendar and pay parity. Members asked about a KSSD request to add six school days; Harding and Barron said changing days mid‑year would be difficult and that full parity could be pursued in FY27. Staff and legal advisors noted statutes require pay parity with Olathe for the special schools’ staff and recommended statutory adjustments if appropriations caused pay to fall below that requirement.

The committee did not take final votes on the enhancement requests and directed staff to provide corrected fiscal tables, a full list of agencies eligible for SIBF, maintenance‑cost estimates for the powerhouse structure, and clarification of reserve practices for state agencies. Members also scheduled campus visits and agreed to reconvene after reviewing the materials.

What happens next: staff will circulate updated financial tables and answers to outstanding questions, members plan site visits to the two campuses, and the committee will resume deliberations before taking any formal votes on the enhancement requests.