Kansas Senate Bill SB50

Kansas 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 1/21/25
• Refer: 1/22/25
• Report Pass: 2/11/25
• Engrossed: 2/19/25
• Refer: 2/19/25
• Report Pass: 3/3/25
• Enrolled: 4/10/25
• Passed: 4/10/25

Caption

Establishing uniform interest rate provisions for service scholarship programs administered by the Kansas board of regents, authorizing the board of regents to recover the costs of collecting such repayment and charge fees for administration costs, requiring eligible students to enter into agreements with the board of regents as a condition to receiving a grant under the adult learner grant act and sunsetting the low-income family postsecondary savings accounts incentive program in 2028 and reducing the number of audits required for such program.

Impact

The enactment of SB50 is expected to have far-reaching implications on how Kansas manages its scholarship and financial aid programs. By centralizing the repayment process and delineating clear terms, the bill aims to reduce administrative burdens and ensure consistency across various educational grants. However, it also raises concerns about the potential financial strain on students who may default on payments due to unforeseen circumstances, placing them at risk of significant financial repercussions. Additionally, aspects of the bill that allow for the collection of fees and costs associated with repayment tracking may add further pressure to borrowers.

Summary

Senate Bill No. 50 introduces significant revisions to student financial aid programs in Kansas by establishing uniform interest rate provisions for scholarships that mandate repayment. Beginning July 1, 2025, the bill stipulates a fixed interest rate of 5% per annum for repayments of state-funded scholarships, grants, or other financial aid. It standardizes the conditions under which students must repay their financial assistance, including clear guidelines on accruing interest and repayment timelines, thereby aiming to streamline the handling of financial obligations.

Sentiment

Support for SB50 appears to stem from advocates who believe that standardizing interest rates and repayment procedures will enhance transparency and fiscal responsibility within education financing. However, critics have raised concerns regarding the implications of imposing a fixed interest rate, which some argue could be burdensome, particularly for low-income students. This polarized sentiment reflects a broader debate on balancing the need for educational funding with the financial realities faced by students and graduates.

Contention

Notable points of contention include the stipulations regarding the timeline for repayment, the imposition of a flat interest rate, and the administrative costs associated with managing repayments. Critics argue that these terms may disproportionately impact financially vulnerable students, suggesting the need for a more flexible approach to repayment obligations. Further, the power granted to the Kansas Board of Regents to turn over delinquent accounts to collection agencies has raised alarm among advocates for student rights, who worry that such measures could lead to aggressive collection practices against individuals struggling to meet their obligations.