WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

HB 2053

Establishing the ninth grade success grant program.

2023-2024 Regular Session Introduced by Lisa Callan and 14 co-sponsors

Repeals Kansas 25-2711, letting cities/counties regulate political signs during the 45-day pre-election and 2-day post-election window, expanding local control.

Public hearing in the House Committee on Appropriations at 4:00 PM.
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · HB 2053

HB 2053 — Summary (Kansas, 2025 session)

Status: Introduced (referred to Committee on Elections)
Introduced: January 23, 2025
Primary sponsor(s): Alexander Kolodin; cosponsors: Pamela Carter, John Gillette, David Marshall, Sr., Tony M. McCombie (as listed)
What the bill would do: repeal K.S.A. 25-2711 (removes statutory limits on municipal regulation of political signs during specified pre‑ and post‑election periods)

Purpose / intent

HB 2053 would remove a state law that currently limits the ability of cities and counties to regulate political signs during a defined time window around elections. The stated effect is to allow municipal and county governments greater authority to regulate the placement, number, size, or setback of political signs at all times, including the 45 days prior to and the two days after any election.

Key provisions / changes

  • Repeals K.S.A. 25-2711 in its entirety. That statute currently:
    • Prohibits a city or county from regulating or prohibiting the placement or number of political signs on certain properties during the 45‑day period before an election and the two‑day period following an election; and
    • Explicitly allows cities and counties to regulate sign size and setbacks for safety reasons.
  • Removes the statutory prohibition, thereby permitting local governments to adopt or enforce sign regulations (including limits on placement, number, size, and setbacks) during those previously protected election periods.
  • Effective date: the act would take effect upon publication in the statute book.

Who would be affected

  • Local governments (cities and counties): would gain broader authority to regulate political signage during the 45‑day pre‑election and two‑day post‑election windows.
  • Candidates, political parties, issue committees, and private sign companies: could face new or newly-enforced local restrictions on where, how many, and how large signs may be displayed during election periods.
  • Property owners and the public: could be subject to municipal sign ordinances during the previously protected timeframe.
  • State agencies: the Secretary of State and local election offices would need to update training and public education materials.

Fiscal and administrative impact

  • Division of the Budget (Fiscal Note, 2/14/2025) estimates a minimal fiscal effect:
    • Secretary of State: minimal, absorbable administrative cost to update training and outreach.
    • Governmental Ethics Commission: no fiscal impact.
    • Kansas Association of Counties: notes potentially increased resident complaints and reduced county enforcement of the prior statute but cannot estimate fiscal effect.
    • League of Kansas Municipalities: indicates no fiscal effect on cities.
  • The fiscal note states the FY 2026 Governor’s Budget does not reflect any costs from this bill.

Procedural status / timeline (selected actions)

  • Introduced / filed: January 22–23, 2025 (filed Jan. 23)
  • Referred to: Committee on Elections
  • Committee action: Do Pass recommendation reported (Executive Committee, 03‑12, reported 12‑0‑0); placed on calendar for second reading (March 12); subsequent scheduling and calendar activity noted (including deadlines extended to May 31).

Considerations / likely impacts

  • Local regulatory flexibility: municipalities and counties may adopt uniform sign rules applying at all times, which proponents may argue promote traffic safety, aesthetics, and consistency.
  • First Amendment and litigation risk: changes to political sign regulation can raise free speech concerns; potential for legal challenges depending on the content and enforcement of new local rules (analysis of legal risk is not provided in the fiscal note).
  • Enforcement and public response: counties anticipated possible increase in complaints or enforcement workload; municipalities indicated no expected fiscal effect but may see operational impacts depending on ordinance changes.

If you want, I can:
- Provide the current text of K.S.A. 25‑2711 (to compare language before/after repeal), or
- Draft a short briefing note for a city council on implications of the repeal and ordinance options.

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.