House budget committee hears fee-funded agency presentations; no votes taken

The House Committee on General Government Budget reviewed budget summaries Tuesday from legislative research analysts and agency directors for multiple small, fee-funded state agencies. The session was informational only — the chair reminded members that the committee cannot vote on budgets during this meeting and may take any formal actions only in session.

Analysts from the Kansas Legislative Research Department walked members through shorthand budget summaries and 10‑year expenditure histories for each agency. "This is the shorthand report following the recommendations made by the 2025 Special Committee on the State Budget," said Jacob Klesby (KLRD), explaining the document layout and columns showing changes by fund and FTEs.

Several agencies emphasized that they operate without state general fund support and rely on license and program fees. "The pooled money investment board is a completely fee funded state agency," said Jacob Crespi (KLRD) during the Pooled Money Investment Board presentation; he noted small FY2026 line‑item changes including a $513 increase in bank fees and a $500 increase for financial software subscriptions.

The Kansas Dental Board told members it spends roughly "about half $1,000,000 a year, give or take," and reported an ending fee‑fund balance of approximately $1,200,000. Director Lane Hemsley said he expects a decline in reserves as tenured licensees retire and described a planned licensing database rollout (soft launch around April) that should reduce printing and postage costs. Members pressed why the board paid litigation costs out of the main fee fund instead of its special litigation reserve; analysts reported the reserve held $125,000 and that agency practice — and any regulatory limits on the reserve’s use — would need to be clarified.

Regulatory licensing boards with small budgets described operational drivers and asked the committee to note program details. The Board of Hearing Aid Examiners explained that the travel line item pays examiner mileage and lodging for biannual practical exams. The Board of Barbering and Board of Cosmetology described rising travel and inspection costs tied to increased practical exams and enforcement processing; Barbering said it maintains a five‑year vehicle plan and agreed to provide that plan in writing to committee staff.

Cosmetology’s new executive director, Brianna Bell, told the committee the agency had unpaid prior‑year attorney and vendor fees that are now being addressed and attributed some prior overspending to contract and staffing gaps. Bell said the agency has begun reorganizing staff, restoring compliance processing and training inspectors. Members asked for a published fine schedule and a staffing breakdown for inspectors versus licensing staff; the director agreed to provide that information.

The Real Estate Appraisal Board and Real Estate Commission reported fee‑fund pressures and license trends. New appraisal board director Alicia Smith said the board has about 1,100 appraisers, a shrinking ending balance in the published projection, and is exploring fee adjustments (statutory maxima would allow higher renewal fees). The Real Estate Commission reported roughly 17,000 active licensees and described being an early implementer of the statewide online licensing system (went live April 2025).

Committee members asked analysts and agency directors for follow‑up materials (month‑by‑month expenditures, fee‑fund narratives, vehicle reserve plans, explanations for prior unpaid invoices and litigation payments, and published fine schedules). The chair said agencies not present will return during session for more detailed questioning. The committee recessed for lunch and adjourned, planning to meet in session to resolve outstanding follow-ups.

What's next: agencies will be asked to bring requested documents and clarifications to hearings in session; the committee did not take formal votes during this meeting.