TOPEKA —  Three agriculture organizations, a lobbyist for real estate interests and a conservative think tank endorsed legislation Tuesday repealing a statewide property tax delivering $84 million to public building projects in Kansas.

Under a Senate bill, the state’s 1.5-mill property tax for constructing, equipping and repairing state buildings would be deleted. The state’s general treasury would be responsible for $75 million — a $9 million cut from this year’s property-tax allocation — dedicated to projects at universities, veterans’ homes and cemeteries, schools for blind and deaf children, state hospitals for people with mental illness or developmental disabilities, and the state’s juvenile correctional facility.

The bill says the general fund, which includes sales and income tax revenue, would be the source of $50 million earmarked for university building priorities. Separately, $25 million would be designated for other state building projects. The measure says lawmakers should raise appropriations to both funds by 2% annually.

The Legislature, however, would retain authority to reset on a yearly basis state spending on building maintenance.

The proposal was part of the Republican-led Legislature’s response to complaints about high property taxation in Kansas. During the 2024 legislative session, the House, Senate and Gov. Laura Kelly approved a $1.2 billion, three-year plan that concentrated on income tax policy. There were sales and property tax changes in that law, but the public was disappointed property tax adjustments took a back seat.

“This bill is a great starting point to provide much-needed relief to all Kansas property taxpayers,” said John Donley of Kansas Farm Bureau. “As we have testified in the past, the state and local government’s reliance on property taxes has reached a point where action must be taken.”

The Kansas Livestock Association and Kansas Grain and Feed Association shared comparable testimony with the Senate Assessment and Taxation Committee.

Mark Tomb, lobbyist with the Kansas Association of Realtors, said changing the source of funding for building projects at Kansas Board of Regents universities and other state agencies was overdue.

“The two funds addressed in this legislation support institutions that work with Kansas’ most vulnerable residents as well as support construction and repair of buildings under control of the Kansas Board of Regents,” he said. “Removing these property tax levies does not eliminate the state’s obligation to support these important programs.”

There was no question the state of Kansas could afford property tax relief simply by finding efficiencies in the state budget, said Dave Trabert, CEO of the Kansas Policy Institute.

Under Senate Bill 35, the change would occur in the fiscal year starting July 1, 2026. On July 1, 2027, an additional 2% would be allocated to the building funds. In that second year, it would equate to a $1 million bump for universities and a $500,000 upgrade for the other building fund. The law would sunset in 10 years, which means the Legislature would have to reconsider the program in 2036.

Blake Flanders, CEO of the state Board of Regents, offered conditional support for removal of a “vital and stable” source of funding for building objectives at state universities. The educational building fund had been the only consistent source of state dollars for academic and research building projects for 80 years, he said.

“We absolutely appreciate that property taxes in Kansas need to be addressed,” Flanders said. “Because facilities and the stewardship of those facilities are such an important aspect of what we offer our students, we can support the legislation with amendments I have in my testimony.”

He proposed the initial state general fund appropriation to universities be set at $56 million rather than $50 million. Annual increases should be pegged to the preceding three years’ growth in property valuations in Kansas, he said.

Flanders said the Board of Regents was implementing a capital renewal initiative requiring annual investment by universities in facilities maintenance equal to 2% of the building asset replacement values.

Colton Gibson, executive director of University Contractors Association of Kansas, said there were many examples of government failing to meet commitments for building maintenance through annual discretionary appropriations.

“Make no mistake, if we don’t pay for this now, we will pay for it later at a higher cost,” he said.