2026 Legislative Session Recap

The 2026 session is over, and the veto override session was a befitting end to a session full of haphazard legislation at a breakneck pace. Governor Kelly vetoed 24 bills and dozens of line items in the proposed budget. Republicans overrode the vast majority of the vetoes; only a scarce few fell short of the two-thirds supermajority vote required to override any given veto (84 in the House, 27 in the Senate).

In the end, we made it harder to vote and harder to receive SNAP benefits and other public assistance. We increased the curriculum demands of the State Board of Education while continuing to chip away at the efficacy of public education through widespread underfunding. We leaned harder into giving public dollars to private schools through tax credits and school vouchers. And we required the Kansas Department of Health and Environment to provide medically dangerous misinformation to Kansans who seek the services of unregulated crisis pregnancy centers.

Here are a few other highlights.

Motion to Override SB 391:

SB 391 allows landlords the right to refuse housing to an individual based solely on that individual receiving a housing voucher or any other housing assistance program. This legislation was borne out of a desire to negate an ordinance in Lawrence that stipulates that a landlord cannot refuse housing based solely on someone receiving housing assistance. Many attempts were made to defeat this bill citing a municipality’s ability to address their housing needs on a local level, but these attempts ultimately failed. The override was successful and passed 85 – 38.

My vote on the override of SB 391: NO

Motion to Override HB 2372:

HB 2372 concerns local and federal law enforcement agencies and their expanded latitude in enforcement measures. Firstly, it enacts what is commonly referred to as “halo legislation,” a 25-foot perimeter that any law enforcement officer can invoke entirely at their discretion. Proponents claim this is to help law enforcement safely carry out their duties, but the law is dangerously vague on what constitutes chargeable behavior, including things that an officer might subjectively consider a “distraction.” Opponents claim this law impairs the constitutional freedoms of the press as well as discourages legal observers for fear of prosecution.

HB 2372 also allows sheriffs to enter into agreements with ICE -- called 287(g) agreements -- without any county oversight, provides civil immunity to officers and agencies working with ICE, and generally increases the financial responsibility of federal agencies onto the state of Kansas, and thus, the taxpayer. The opportunities for abuse as it pertains to these activities cannot be understated, and we can only reasonably expect law enforcement to act with even more impunity with these new “protections” in place.

My vote on the override of HB 2372: NO

HB 2365 will add all kratom and kratom-related products as Schedule I drugs in Kansas. Schedule I is the most severe category of the drug schedule and includes other substances such as heroin and fentanyl. Legislators as well as the governor were inundated with emails recounting the effectiveness of helping folks manage chronic severe pain as well as recover from life-ruining addictions to illicit drugs and alcohol. There are several forms of kratom, natural and synthetic, and attempts were made to regulate kratom instead of an outright ban, but those efforts failed.

On the topic, Gov. Kelly said, “Until such a time as quality scientific reviews determine positive impacts and minimal health risks, it is wise to safeguard the health of Kansans.” That scientific knowledge will be hard to obtain because the ban will prematurely end three separate kratom studies that are already currently underway at KU.

Also, some confusion exists about other substances that are included in the legislation. Here’s the easy way to remember what it does. All kratom is illegal. HHC is illegal. The legal status of delta-based products (Delta 8, Delta 9, etc.) is unchanged and remains governed by the Industrial Hemp Act.

My vote on HB 2365: NO

Now, you might think the budget is an odd forum in which to strip away someone’s First Amendment rights, but that’s exactly what happened when the Legislature voted to override the Governor’s line-item veto of a measure that carries penalties for student walkouts and protests. Among fines levied against a school district for a student walkout, the measure also requires that if a walkout/protest occurs, then that school day will not count as an instructional school day.

As school districts have a minimum number of required instructional days and a shrinking pool of financial resources each year, this incentivizes administrators to crack down on students’ ability to practice their First Amendment rights.

The budget also includes a 4.4% pay increase for legislators but only 1% for other state employees. Considering the effects of inflation, a 1% increase is effectively a pay decrease and an insult to the hard-working people that make the state work each and every day.

My vote on the budget: NO

Finally, but just as important, is what the Legislature did (or did not do) about property tax relief. While the session was short, there was more than enough time to focus on meaningful tax relief if that was the priority. Instead, lawmakers waited until the last minute to propose legislation that would bring relief to Kansans who are starting to feel a little like they are drowning in property taxes.

Ultimately, SCR 1616 was voted down multiple times by the House during veto session. Tax policy by nature can be convoluted and difficult to understand, and this legislation was no different. House Taxation Committee chair, Rep. Adam Smith, did a great job of breaking it down in accessible language, so I’ll let him explain:

“Restricted taxable valuation does not always result in lower taxes, and I am more than willing to explain. Local governments, which determine the bulk of your property tax bill, don’t set the mill levy - they adopt budgets and then calculate the tax rate required to fund their budget. If valuations are restricted, the mill levy will just increase and their budget will still be fully funded.

“I won’t argue the fact that the Senate’s 3% valuation cap would provide tax relief for some. But the simple question to ask is… if the government is still fully funded, where does the tax relief come from? The answer will disturb you… other taxpayers.

“If the cap is 3%, a property with a 20% increase gets a 17% reduction in value whereas a property with a 3% increase gets NO reduction in value. Since the overall tax base is artificially restricted but the local governments are still fully funded, the total mill levy will be higher than it would have been without the cap. All properties with small valuation changes will actually see a tax INCREASE to offset the other properties receiving a large benefit from the cap.

“That is the sole reason this valuation limit has to be placed in the Kansas Constitution – it would otherwise violate the “equal and uniform” clause and be ruled unconstitutional if attempted as a law…There are many ways we could provide direct property tax relief, but out of the $10.7 billion general fund budget this year, not a penny was dedicated to enhancing existing property tax relief programs or providing any additional property tax relief.”

SCR 1616 ultimately failed in the House.

My vote on SCR 1616: NO

The 2026 legislative session is over and campaign season is now at the forefront. It’s been a pleasure to serve as the representative for House District 86 this session, and I’d be honored to return to Topeka as your representative in 2027 and 2028 as well. But I can’t do it without your support! Pitch in today at actblue.com/donate/abi-boatman-1, and let’s get to work getting Kansas back on track.