Committee hears bill to let small Kansas towns designate whole municipality for neighborhood-revitalization rebates

At a House Committee on Taxation hearing, proponents urged lawmakers to approve House Bill 2470, which would let municipalities with populations under 10,000 designate the entire municipality as a Neighborhood Revitalization Area under the Kansas Neighborhood Revitalization Act. Tyson Eisenhower, county counselor for Pratt County, testified as a proponent via Webex.

Eisenhower told the committee the bill responds to a legal obstacle created by an attorney general opinion from the 1990s (cited in testimony as “opinion 98 or 96 38”), which he said has been interpreted to prohibit designating an entire municipality as a revitalization area and was intended to limit the program to blighted areas. “I’m not in a position where I can ignore an attorney general opinion,” Eisenhower said, and he said the bill would give smaller municipalities “local control to legally designate the entire municipality as a neighborhood revitalization area.”

Under the Neighborhood Revitalization Act, Eisenhower said, the program operates as a property-tax rebate: the property owner pays taxes on the higher assessed value after improvements and then receives a rebate based on the increment. He said the rebate applies to the local portion only and goes to the taxpayer who makes the qualifying improvements; the specific rebate percentage and term are determined locally by participating municipalities.

When asked why the bill uses a 10,000-person threshold, Eisenhower said he did not originate that figure and estimated about 35 counties might meet it, but he deferred to legislative sponsors for the precise policy choice. He gave a simple example to illustrate how the rebate works: if a property’s value rose from $100,000 to $200,000 after improvements, the rebate would be based on the $100,000 increment; rebate percentages and terms vary by locality and can run the gamut, Eisenhower said, noting some plans can be as high as 95% of the increment spread over a five-year period.

Committee members pressed on practical impacts. Representative Corbett asked whether a countywide implementation would help the average taxpayer; Eisenhower said any taxpayer with qualifying improvements in a designated area would be eligible for the rebate. Representatives also asked whether school districts and community colleges could opt out; Eisenhower said local participating jurisdictions set the program details and that school and college participation can vary.

Eisenhower added that municipalities may tailor their plans to require minimum investment levels, set rebate schedules, or carve out specific areas to remain compliant with legal guidance. The committee recorded several written proponents, had no neutral or opposing witnesses in person, and closed the hearing without taking immediate action.

The hearing on House Bill 2470 is closed; no vote was taken during the meeting.