Division of the Budget
Landon State Office Building Phone: (785) 296-2436
900 SW Jackson Street, Room 504 adam.c.proffitt@ks.gov
Topeka, KS 66612 http://budget.kansas.gov
Adam C. Proffitt, Director Laura Kelly, Governor
Division of the Budget
February 13, 2024
The Honorable Susan Humphries, Chairperson
House Committee on Judiciary
300 SW 10th Avenue, Room 582-N
Topeka, Kansas 66612
Dear Representative Humphries:
SUBJECT: Fiscal Note for HB 2755 by House Committee on Judiciary
In accordance with KSA 75-3715a, the following fiscal note concerning HB 2755 is
respectfully submitted to your committee.
HB 2755 would specify that when a municipal court judge sets an appearance bond, the
amount would be the same regardless of the method used to secure the appearance of the accused.
The bill would amend various definitions and add a definition for “appearance bond premium” as
outlined in the bill.
The chief judge of the judicial district may require a compensated surety to submit to a
state and national criminal history check as a qualification for initial or continued authorization to
act as a surety in the judicial district. The chief judge or designee would be authorized to submit
the surety’s fingerprints to the Kansas Bureau of Investigation (KBI) or the Federal Bureau of
Investigation for a state and national criminal history record check. The chief judge or designee
may use the information obtained to verify the identification of the individual and for making an
official determination of the qualifications for authorization in the judicial district. Disclosure or
use of any information received by the chief judge or the chief judge's designee for any other
purpose would be a class A nonperson misdemeanor. The KBI may charge a reasonable fee for
conducting the criminal history record check and the individual seeking initial or continued
authorization would be required to pay the costs of fingerprinting and the criminal history record
check. The bill outlines actions a compensated surety would be required to take and reasons a
chief judge may terminate or suspend the surety’s authority to operate.
The Office of Judicial Administration states enactment of HB 2755 could increase the
number of cases filed in district court because it would create a new crime, which could result in
more time spent by court employees and judges processing and deciding these cases. Since this The Honorable Susan Humphries, Chairperson
Page 2—HB 2755
crime carries a misdemeanor penalty, there could be additional supervision of offenders required
to be performed by court service officers. According to the Office, a fiscal effect cannot be
estimated until the Judicial Branch has had an opportunity to operate under the bill’s provisions.
The Office states enactment of the bill could result in the collection of docket fees, fines, and
supervision fees in those cases filed under the bill’s provisions, which would be credited to the
State General Fund.
The KBI states any fiscal effect resulting from the bill’s enactment would be negligible.
Any fiscal effect associated with HB 2755 is not reflected in The FY 2025 Governor’s Budget
Report.
The League of Kansas Municipalities states enactment of the bill would have a fiscal effect
on cities. According to the League, municipal courts would experience increased costs associated
with enforcement of the bill’s provisions and related training. The League indicates that for some
cities the bill’s enactment would create a shift in how the courts currently operate.
Sincerely,
Adam C. Proffitt
Director of the Budget
cc: Trisha Morrow, Judiciary
Paul Weisgerber, Kansas Bureau of Investigation
Wendi Stark, League of Kansas Municipalities
Jay Hall, Kansas Association of Counties