Kansas legislative panel weighs faster access to testimony, considers online portal

The Committee on Legislative Modernization spent its meeting examining how committee testimony is collected, posted and accessed, with members pressing for more consistent filing, earlier release of materials and an online portal that would let people upload testimony directly.

The committee chair opened the discussion by saying the group’s charge is to "look for improvements" to internal processes so legislators have the information they need to do their jobs. Multiple members described a recurring problem: testimony arriving only hours before hearings or being filed in inconsistent folders across the S-drive and committee web pages, which makes it hard for members and the public to find and review materials in time.

“There are two places they go,” the chair explained, describing how committee assistants pull PDFs from conferee mailboxes, put them on an S-drive, and mirror them to the public committee system. Representative McDonald said the result can be chaotic: "When you're scrambling last minute getting testimonies because hearings are given less than 24 hours in advance, sometimes it really is hard for the public to engage in a fair way." She added that earlier distribution would let members arrive better prepared.

Members proposed a range of fixes, from standardized folder structures and longer notice periods to preserving paper bill briefs for members who prefer printed copies. Representative Riley suggested looking at other states’ practices, including dedicating full days to a committee's business so lobbyists and the public know when testimony will be heard.

On a technical fix, the chair raised the idea of an online portal for testimony submission. Eric Teal, director of application services, said the technology is feasible: "We could design a portal ... access the website, enter their information, upload the document, hit submit, and it would go to a location that the committee assistant for that committee could then parse out." Teal warned the portal would still require design work and coordination with the reviser's office on legal and timing questions.

Several members and staff stressed legal limits. Committee staff explained that under the Kansas Open Records Act, once a document is distributed to all committee members it becomes a public record; that timing requirement is why staff aim to put testimony on the S-drive and public site simultaneously. Tom Day and reviser office staff cautioned that pre-screening testimony for "appropriateness" or removing material before distribution can raise legal issues and practical problems, noting past incidents where content later had to be redacted.

Lawmakers said any portal should include clear, prominent guidance for submitters about the public nature of testimony and potential consequences of posting images or personal data. Members also discussed administrative improvements—consistent folder hierarchies, better S-drive practices, use of on-screen timers to limit speaker time in crowded hearings, and measures to ensure WebEx participants can provide hard copies when required.

The committee did not take any formal votes on changes. Members concluded the discussion by asking staff to draft best practices and technical options that could be implemented within the session’s time frame and legal constraints.