WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

HB 2196

Restorative Schools in Virginia Pilot Program; established, report, effective date.

2025 Regular Session Introduced by Lamont Bagby and 18 co-sponsors

Permits Kansas colleges to permanently exempt campus buildings from PFPA concealed carry rules, allowing ongoing bans without meeting “adequate security” criteria.

Passed by indefinitely in Finance and Appropriations (13-Y 1-N)
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · HB 2196

Summary — HB 2196 (Kansas)

Providing a permanent exemption for postsecondary educational institutions from the public building requirements under the Personal and Family Protection Act

Purpose / Intent

HB 2196 would make permanent an existing temporary exemption that allows the governing body or chief administrative officer of a postsecondary educational institution to exempt campus buildings (including leased buildings and buildings on campus grounds) from certain Public and Family Protection Act (PFPA) requirements governing prohibitions on carrying concealed handguns in public buildings. The bill amends K.S.A. 75‑7c20 and repeals the current section that limited that exemption through July 1, 2017.

Key provisions

  • Amends K.S.A. 75‑7c20 to allow postsecondary institutions (as defined in K.S.A. 74‑3201b) to exempt any building or public area of the institution from PFPA requirements on an ongoing/permanent basis (removes the prior expiration date of July 1, 2017).
  • Retains the existing administrative process for exemptions: the institution must state reasons for the exemption and send notice of the exemption to the Kansas Attorney General. (Under current law, a campus security plan used to justify exemption is maintained on file and is not subject to disclosure under the Kansas Open Records Act.)
  • Repeals the prior statutory language that made the exemption temporary.

Who would be affected

  • Postsecondary educational institutions in Kansas (public colleges and universities, including buildings on campus grounds and leased facilities).
  • Students, faculty, staff, campus visitors, and campus security operations — insofar as institutions that adopt exemptions could change or maintain policies that prohibit concealed carry in specified campus buildings without meeting PFPA “adequate security measures” criteria.
  • State legal authorities (Attorney General) and potentially the courts, if litigation arises over constitutionality or other legal challenges.

Fiscal and legal considerations

  • Board of Regents: enactment could produce cost savings for institutions that have been maintaining additional security measures (e.g., metal detectors, additional officers) since the temporary exemption expired in 2017; the Board could not quantify those savings.
  • Office of the Attorney General: warned of potential federal constitutional legal challenges and estimated additional State General Fund expenditures of approximately $1.0 million in FY2026 and $1.0 million in FY2027 for outside counsel to defend litigation — with the caveat that litigation costs could exceed that estimate.
  • Fiscal note indicates the bill would take effect upon publication in the Kansas Register.

Status & sponsors

  • Introduced: Jan 29, 2025; referred to Committee on Federal and State Affairs.
  • Principal sponsor: Rep. Ballard (House version); related/companion SB 569.
  • Co‑sponsors and supporters include multiple legislators listed in the bill file (see legislative record).

Practical impact / considerations

  • Institutions choosing exemptions could continue or restore prohibitions on concealed carry in campus buildings without satisfying PFPA’s “adequate security measures” rule, potentially reducing certain security expenditures but raising policy and safety debates for campus communities.
  • Legal exposure could produce state litigation costs and uncertainty pending judicial resolution of constitutional claims.

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

Sign in to ask a question.