The Kansas House on Wednesday approved a nearly $10.6 billion state general fund budget for 2026 that is about $246 million less than the year before and includes the elimination of funding for about 1,000 vacant positions and a 1.5% cut in general operating expenses.
The new spending plan developed by the House still includes money for pay raises to bring some state employees up to market pay as well making services for Kansans with intellectual and developmental disabilities more available.
It adds money for special education, although about $60 million below the amount recommended by Gov. Laura Kelly, who proposed bringing the state up to the required funding level set by law.
The budget didn’t include money for free breakfasts and lunches for less affluent students despite attempts by Democrats to add it to the spending roadmap.
For the first time in memory, the Legislature is writing its own budget this year rather than relying on the spending plan the governor put forward at the start of the session. The House approved the budget on an 83-36 vote. The budget now goes to the Senate.
The 2026 budget approved by the House totals $10.57 billion in state general fund dollars, although the state’s ending balance is still projected to run in the red by fiscal year 2028. The state would still have about $1.8 billion in its rainy-day fund in 2028.
The governor’s proposed budget for 2026 totaled $10.65 billion in state general fund spending, although numbers showing the impact in the out years were not available Wednesday morning.
The House found about $34.5 million in savings for 2026 by lapsing 1.5% for state operations funded from the state general revenues.
The cut does not affect capital improvements, debt service principal and interest, state aid, and other assistance. It excludes the Kansas State Schools for the Blind and Deaf, state hospitals, and correctional facilities.
The chamber also cut another $11.1 million in state general funding for about 1,000 vacant full-time positions in fiscal year 2026, which starts July 1.
“This budget puts Kansas’s future on a better course,” said House Appropriations Committee Chair Troy Waymaster said in a statement after the budget passed.
As the bill was debated on the House floor Tuesday night, lawmakers agreed to return $1 million to the Commerce Department after withholding the money until they got information they wanted about how much is spent on economic development incentives.
Republican state Rep. Kristey Williams said the agency has provided the information that lawmakers sought about development incentives.
There also was an attempt to use money for the student meals that had been allocated to hire a vendor to equip public buildings with surveillance cameras with artificial intelligence that can locate people carrying guns. The effort failed.
A major point of contention over the budget was how much money the state spends on special education and what should be done to comply with a law that requires the state to cover 92% of excess costs for providing special education.
The budget approved by the House adds $10 million for special education compared to $30 million recommended by a budget subcommittee and $72.6 million a year for four years recommended by the governor.
The governor’s proposal would bring the state up to that 92% level by 2029, a level the state hasn’t been at since 2011. It would have been above the roughly $75 million that the Legislature approved for special education last year.
The extra $10 million means the state will be funding 73% of the excess costs of special education.
Democratic state Rep. Jarrod Ousley of Merriam tried to take money from a special fund used to attract a professional sports teams for special education but came up short on a 40-76 vote Tuesday night.
He immediately faced resistance from Republicans, who said using the money from the sports fund – bankrolled with sports wagering proceeds – would not solve the special education funding problem over the long haul.
“If you take all the money out of the sports fund this year and put it in there, how are you going to sustain it? Where are you going to get this money going forward?” asked Republican state Rep. Sean Tarwater of Stilwell.
“Special ed is a good thing and we do need to find more money for it, but we’ve got to do it in a sustainable way,” Tarwater said. “We certainly can’t destroy an opportunity that this state has lying in front of it to bring tons of money to the state of Kansas.”
Tarwater said the state could end up looking like “a bunch of idiots” if took the money allocated for luring a professional sports team to Kansas and undercut any deal Kansas might have at bringing the Royals or Chiefs to this side of the state line.
Democratic state Rep. Nikki McDonald of Olathe urged lawmakers to support the amendment, noting that school districts are being forced to divert money from general education to cover the cost of special education.
McDonald said that two districts that she represents – Olathe and Blue Valley – have transferred about $50 million combined last year into special education.
“This is a way we can send a message that we do prioritize not just our special ed kids…but acknowledging that this failure of ours to fund the excess costs for special education is harming all of our children,” McDonald said.
“I understand that political courage is sometimes in short supply here, but if it was ever called for I think this is a pretty good chance for you to speak up, think independently, vote for your constituents and for the best interests of all of our children,” she said.
Lawmakers are wrestling with spending decisions at a time when Republican lawmakers are trying to cut taxes, knowing that the state has been spending more than it takes in.
They say any effort to curtail spending is more directed toward putting the state on steady financial footing rather than cutting taxes.
A House committee has already signed off on a bill cutting property taxes for schools that is estimated to cost about $823 million over five years.
A revenue forecast presented to lawmakers in December showed the state spending down its ending balance as spending surpasses revenue.
The revenue profile at that time – which took into account tax cuts approved last year – showed the state’s ending balance dropping from $3.2 billion in fiscal year 2024 to $1.5 billion in 2026.
It is eventually predicted to fall to about $152 million in 2029.
The state, however, still has about $1.8 billion set aside in a rainy-day fund that could be available to meet state needs.
At the same time, however, the state is spending more than it’s taking in.
The state was predicted to spend about $1.3 billion more than revenues in 2025 and about $416 million in 2026.
The state was projected to spend about $464 million more than revenues in 2027, $437 million in 2028 and $423 million in 2029.
