County staff outline sweeping state proposal to phase out property taxes and add retail surcharge
Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts
Subscribe
Summary
Sedgwick County staff explained Senate Concurrent Resolution 1621 and Senate Bill 488, proposals that would phase out property taxes by Dec. 31, 2027, cap mill levies through 2027 and impose a statewide purchase surcharge (proposed $1.60 for purchases $20+, 7.6% for purchases under $20). Commissioners asked questions about local budget impacts and timing.
Sedgwick County staff briefed commissioners on two linked state measures that would restructure how local governments are funded if enacted.
At the meeting on Feb. 11, staff summarized Senate Concurrent Resolution 1621, which would prohibit property taxation after Dec. 31, 2027, and Senate Bill 488, which would cap local mill levies (no more than 50% of 2025 levels for tax year 2026 and 25% for tax year 2027) while imposing a Kansas 'fair share' surcharge on retail purchases beginning Jan. 1, 2027. The proposed surcharge, as presented, would be $1.60 on transactions of $20 or more and 7.6% on purchases under $20; exemptions listed in the draft include SNAP food and food ingredients, prescriptions, motor fuels, residential rent or mortgage, utility services, childcare, prepaid tuition and purchases for resale.
"It basically says for tax year 2026 ... no taxing subdivision shall certify a mill levy that exceeds 50% of the mill levy certified in tax year '25," staff said, noting the phased caps and the timing that would affect 2027 and 2028 local budgets. Staff highlighted ambiguity about whether counties would be able to fund their 2028 budgets with existing local property-tax mechanisms given the proposed effective dates.
Commissioners asked specific questions about whether Kansas would be unique in eliminating property taxation and how the state intends to transition core local services. One commissioner asked, "What are you asking for?"; staff responded the briefing was primarily for awareness and to flag the potential consequences should the bills advance.
Why it matters: Property tax revenues fund core county services, including public safety, road maintenance and local human-services programs. A statewide shift from property taxation to a consumption surcharge would change revenue flows and could require the state to redesign funding disbursements to counties and cities. Commissioners sought clarity on whether the proposed state distribution mechanism would preserve funding levels for local governments.
Next steps: Staff and commissioners said they will continue monitoring the bills as they proceed through hearings and will advise if the commission should provide formal testimony or pursue advocacy to protect local budget stability.