Kansas CALIS modernization put on hold after vendor misses deliverables

The Committee on Legislative Modernization was told the Kansas legislative information system known as CALIS will not be ready for use this session after a multi‑year modernization effort failed to deliver stable, session‑ready functionality.

"CALIS is used by ... the reviser's office, legislative research, house and senate chambers and the residents of Kansas through the legislative website," Eric Teal, director of application services, told the committee. He said the modernization project had produced some components but that "it's full of bugs" and that required functionality was not complete.

The project timeline described to the committee: an RFP went out in October 2021; the Legislative Coordinating Council accepted a recommendation to contract with Propelon Incorporated on Feb. 23, 2022; the contract was fully executed Oct. 19, 2022; Phase 1 had been scheduled for completion in October 2024. According to Teal, the steering committee later recommended not to use the new system for the 2025 session and recommended a go‑live of June 30, 2025; subsequent stop‑work orders were delivered to the vendor on Oct. 27, 2025 and Nov. 30, 2025, with one order expiring Dec. 31. Teal said, "the CALIS modernization project is currently on hold awaiting a project review and recommendation by the newly appointed CTO."

Members pressed for details about cost and contractual remedies. Representative Neighbor asked whether there had been repercussions for repeatedly missing deadlines; Teal replied that the project had been run on a time‑and‑materials basis earlier in the contract and that stop‑work orders and suspension of payments are actions currently in place, but deferred detailed penalty questions to procurement and the reviser's office.

Chair Carl Turner framed the committee's role as primarily fact‑finding and improvement‑oriented rather than direct contracting oversight, noting that procurement oversight also involves the Legislative Coordinating Council and the JCIT committee. Gordon Self of the reviser's office explained that some contract and records questions ultimately involve open‑records considerations and chair discretion on distribution of materials to the committee.

Looking ahead, Teal said the steering committee is reevaluating options: continue with the current vendor under renegotiation, seek a new vendor, or consider writing the system in‑house. The committee did not vote on any motion; Teal and others said further action will follow the CTO's review and any steering‑committee recommendations.

The committee plans to continue monitoring the modernization project and related procurement questions at future meetings.