SESSION OF 2025
SUPPLEMENTAL NOTE ON SUBSTITUTE FOR SENATE
BILL NO. 66
As Recommended by Senate Committee on
Local Government, Transparency and Ethics
Brief*
Sub. for SB 66 would amend law regarding filing
requirements for statements of substantial interests by local
officials and require verbal public disclosure of certain
substantial interests.
The bill would require elected or appointed officers of a
city or county to file statements of substantial interest
annually. Current law requires statements of substantial
interest to be filed by candidates for local office and
individuals appointed to elected office of governmental
subdivisions to file initial statements of substantial interest,
and thereafter only if a change occurred in the individual’s
substantial interest.
The bill would not amend filing requirements for elected
or appointed officers of a township, school district, drainage
district, or any other governmental subdivision that is not a
city or county.
The bill also would require verbal disclosure of a
substantial interest by any local officer who participates in the
consideration of or decision on a proposed zoning change or
permit that may affect the substantial interest of that officer or
that officer’s relative. The disclosure would be required at the
first open meeting such officer attends at which such zoning
change or permit is discussed, reviewed, or voted upon.
____________________
*Supplemental notes are prepared by the Legislative Research
Department and do not express legislative intent. The supplemental
note and fiscal note for this bill may be accessed on the Internet at
https://klrd.gov/ The bill also would require the office receiving a
statement of substantial interest to submit a copy of that
statement to the Secretary of State. [Note: Under continuing
law, the statement is filed in the office where declarations of
candidacy for the local governmental office sought or held
must be filed, the office of the city clerk or county clerk, as
specified in law for the office.]
Background
The bill was introduced by the Senate Committee on
Federal and State Affairs at the request of Senator
Thompson.
As introduced, the bill would have added law prohibiting
any local governmental officer from acting on any matter or
participating in the making of any contract regarding a major
development project with a project cost of at least $250,000 if
the officer, the officer’s relative (defined in the bill as a parent,
child, sibling, spouse, or former spouse), or a person with
whom the officer has an intimate relationship would receive
compensation or profit from the major development project,
and providing for prosecution for violation. It would have
created definitions for a substantial interest in a major
development project and several other terms used in the bill.
Senate Committee on Local Government, Transparency
and Ethics
In the Senate Committee hearing, Senator Thompson
and two private citizens provided proponent testimony. The
proponents described example projects, including wind and
solar energy installations, for which potential conflicts of
interest or potential for benefits to the local officials were not
disclosed and stated the actions of those officials undermine
trust in public institutions.
2- 66 Written-only proponent testimony was provided by two
precinct committeewomen from Sedgwick County, the editor
of the Kansas Informer, and eight private citizens.
A representative of the City of Overland Park provided
neutral testimony, noting concerns with the scope of the bill.
Representatives of the Kansas Association of Counties,
Kansas Advanced Power Alliance, and League of Kansas
Municipalities provided opponent testimony. They cited
concerns with the scope of the prohibitions and the definitions
in the bill, specifically for “relative” and “intimate partner,” and
with the focus on wind and solar installations. They also cited
current disclosure requirements and potential
discouragement of development.
Written-only opponent testimony was provided by
representatives of Polsinelli Energy Practice Group and the
City of Topeka.
The Senate Committee removed the contents of the bill
as introduced, amended the bill to add the contents described
above, and recommended a substitute bill.
Fiscal Information
According to the fiscal note prepared by the Division of
the Budget on the bill as introduced, no fiscal information had
been provided by the Office of the Attorney General. Any
fiscal effect associated with enactment of the bill is not
reflected in The FY 2026 Governor’s Budget Report.
No fiscal note on the substitute bill was not available
when the Senate Committee took action on the bill.
Disclosure; governmental ethics; statement of substantial interest; local government
3- 66