Home values, gross rent, homeownership, housing cost burdens, and the pressure from prices and incomes.
Median owner-occupied home value$217.2K2020–2024 · #41 of 50 · highest first
Median gross rent$1.06K2020–2024 · #38 of 50 · highest first
Homeownership rate67.2%2020–2024 · #29 of 50 · highest first
Kansas over time
Explore Kansas readings, major events and reviewed actions on the same date scale. Kansas officeholders appear in separate lanes. National event evidence describes national context; it does not measure a Kansas effect.
Major events & context · A curated selection, including uncertain effects. Milestone dates do not establish that an event caused a Kansas change.
Enacted / issuedDid not proceedPending / in progressStatus unclear
Colors show the latest recorded status. Passing one chamber is not enactment. A number groups actions with the same date, body and status.
Home-price growth since 2016 Kansas · source units
KansasPublished U.S. benchmark
Move across the chart to inspect the nearest observation. Click or tap to keep a reading selected, or focus the chart and use the arrow keys. Hover over or focus a marker to explore; click or tap to pin. Press Escape to clear.
6 of 6 reviewed Kansas actions match · 6 date markers shown. 29 major events shown separately.
Kansas · 2025: +82.5% · Rank #29 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: Not available
FactVote averages the four quarterly, not-seasonally-adjusted FHFA all-transactions HPI observations for each year. It compares that series with BEA annual per-capita personal income distributed by FRED, then rebases both to 100 in 2016. This is a pressure indicator, not a home-price-to-income ratio and not a measure of monthly mortgage affordability. Both series are nominal; neither is adjusted for inflation. Per-capita personal income includes earnings, property income, and transfers and is not median household income. Annual observations use December 31; monthly observations use the first of the month. Lines connect consecutive readings and do not supply values between them. Missing observations break the lines.
View observations and export data
Kansas Home-price growth since 2016 · source units
The timeline combines the corresponding national fact’s reviewed event catalog, labeled National context, with individually reviewed state milestones. State events use primary sources and distinguish signing, effective and filing dates. Each milestone keeps its source-check date, geographical limits and evidence limits. This curated selection is not a complete history.
Date ranges affect events and actions. Action type, status and official-name search affect government records only. Events remain separate from action counts. An event after the latest observation extends context without creating a new reading.
Kansas · state comparison
Home values, rent, and homeownership
Census values are estimates for occupied housing, rather than current listing or sale prices.
Kansas · 2020–2024$217,200
Kansas rank#41among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark$332,700Same measure and period when published
#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.
Median owner-occupied home value
Median reported value of owner-occupied housing.
2024 dollars; a higher value can benefit owners and make buying harder.
Compare states on the graph
Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Kansas stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.
Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Kansas has a dark outline.
Lower value · $162.6KHigher value · $839.1KStriped: unavailable
Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.
Kansas · $217,2002020–2024 · Rank #41 of 50, highest firstSelected state
50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.
Compare Kansas with every state · 50 ranked
Median owner-occupied home value · 2020–2024 · highest value ranked #1
Rank
State
Value
Comparison notes
#1
Hawaii
$839,100
—
#2
California
$734,700
—
#3
Washington
$564,600
—
#4
Massachusetts
$562,100
—
#5
Colorado
$539,400
—
#6
Utah
$489,400
—
#7
Oregon
$477,600
—
#8
New Jersey
$454,400
—
#9
Nevada
$435,400
—
#10
New York
$423,800
—
#11
Maryland
$419,900
—
#12
Idaho
$418,600
—
#13
Rhode Island
$404,200
—
#14
New Hampshire
$402,500
—
#15
Arizona
$394,500
—
#16
Virginia
$383,700
—
#17
Montana
$375,800
—
#18
Connecticut
$366,900
—
#19
Florida
$359,000
—
#20
Alaska
$352,900
—
#21
Delaware
$352,000
—
#22
Minnesota
$329,300
—
#23
Vermont
$316,600
—
#24
Wyoming
$309,700
—
#25
Georgia
$303,300
—
#26
Maine
$296,600
—
#27
North Carolina
$288,900
—
#28
Tennessee
$286,700
—
#29
Texas
$283,800
—
#30
Wisconsin
$266,500
—
#31
Illinois
$263,300
—
#32
South Carolina
$259,000
—
#33
South Dakota
$257,400
—
#34
Pennsylvania
$254,500
—
#35
North Dakota
$249,900
—
#36
New Mexico
$248,100
—
#37
Nebraska
$238,600
—
#38
Michigan
$231,600
—
#39
Missouri
$230,300
—
#40
Indiana
$218,200
—
#41
Kansas · your comparison
$217,200
—
#42
Louisiana
$216,500
—
#43
Ohio
$214,800
—
#44
Alabama
$209,900
—
#45
Iowa
$208,000
—
#46
Kentucky
$205,600
—
#47
Oklahoma
$199,800
—
#48
Arkansas
$188,000
—
#49
Mississippi
$169,800
—
#50
West Virginia
$162,600
—
All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.
Compare moderate-or-severe and severe housing cost burdens for three distinct housing groups.
Kansas · 2020–202443.5%
Kansas rank#47among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark51.1%Same measure and period when published
#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.
Renters · spending at least 30% of income
Housing costs as a share of household income, excluding households for which a ratio cannot be computed.
Renters and owners have separate denominators. Ratios use the Census computed-income universe.
Compare states on the graph
Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Kansas stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.
Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Kansas has a dark outline.
Lower value · 38.9%Higher value · 60.1%Striped: unavailable
Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.
Kansas · 43.5%2020–2024 · Rank #47 of 50, highest firstSelected state
50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.
Compare Kansas with every state · 50 ranked
Renters · spending at least 30% of income · 2020–2024 · highest value ranked #1
Rank
State
Value
Comparison notes
#1
Florida
60.1%
—
#2
Hawaii
56.7%
—
#3
Nevada
55.9%
—
#4
California
55.3%
—
#5
Louisiana
54.8%
—
#6
Colorado
52.9%
—
#7
Connecticut
52.6%
—
#8
Oregon
52.5%
—
#9
Georgia
52.4%
—
#10
South Carolina
52.1%
—
#11
New York
52.1%
—
#12
Massachusetts
51.8%
—
#13
Texas
51.7%
—
#14
New Jersey
51.6%
—
#15
Maryland
51.5%
—
#16
Arizona
51.4%
—
#17
Mississippi
51.3%
—
#18
Michigan
50.4%
—
#19
New Mexico
50.2%
—
#20
Washington
49.9%
—
#21
Delaware
49.6%
—
#22
North Carolina
48.9%
—
#23
West Virginia
48.9%
—
#24
Tennessee
48.8%
—
#25
Alabama
48.8%
—
#26
Virginia
48.5%
—
#27
Maine
48.4%
—
#28
Vermont
48.4%
—
#29
New Hampshire
48.2%
—
#30
Pennsylvania
48.2%
—
#31
Minnesota
48.1%
—
#32
Indiana
48.1%
—
#33
Rhode Island
48%
—
#34
Illinois
47.9%
—
#35
Utah
47.2%
—
#36
Idaho
46.9%
—
#37
Oklahoma
46.3%
—
#38
Ohio
45.9%
—
#39
Missouri
45.6%
—
#40
Kentucky
45.4%
—
#41
Nebraska
45.1%
—
#42
Arkansas
44.8%
—
#43
Montana
44.8%
—
#44
Alaska
44.6%
—
#45
Iowa
43.9%
—
#46
Wisconsin
43.7%
—
#47
Kansas · your comparison
43.5%
—
#48
Wyoming
43.1%
—
#49
South Dakota
39.8%
—
#50
North Dakota
38.9%
—
All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.
Both series start at 100 in 2016. The gap describes price pressure; it is not a mortgage payment or a price-to-income ratio.
Kansas · 2025+82.5%
Kansas rank#29among all 50 states
U.S. benchmarkNot availableSame measure and period when published
#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.
Home-price growth since 2016
FactVote averages the four quarterly, not-seasonally-adjusted FHFA all-transactions HPI observations for each year. It compares that series with BEA annual per-capita personal income distributed by FRED, then rebases both to 100 in 2016.
This is a pressure indicator, not a home-price-to-income ratio and not a measure of monthly mortgage affordability. Both series are nominal; neither is adjusted for inflation. Per-capita personal income includes earnings, property income, and transfers and is not median household income.
Hover to inspect. Click or tap to compare that period with every state. Focus the graph and use arrow keys, Home or End to select a period. Press Escape to return to the latest period.
Kansas
2025 · Kansas: +82.5% · Rank #29 of 50, highest first · Selected for state comparisonView history and select a period
Kansas Home-price growth since 2016 history
Period
Kansas
Compare
2016
+0%
2017
+3.2%
2018
+6.8%
2019
+11.1%
2020
+16.6%
2021
+29.8%
2022
+47.2%
2023
+56.5%
2024
+67%
2025
+82.5%
Compare states on the graph
Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Kansas stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.
Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Kansas has a dark outline.
Lower value · +38.2%Higher value · +141.7%Striped: unavailable
Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.
Kansas · +82.5%2025 · Rank #29 of 50, highest firstSelected state
50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at the index base (0% growth); #1 means the highest value.
Compare Kansas with every state · 50 ranked
Home-price growth since 2016 · 2025 · highest value ranked #1
Rank
State
Value
Comparison notes
#1
Idaho
+141.7%
—
#2
Florida
+114.5%
—
#3
Maine
+113.7%
—
#4
Utah
+113.6%
—
#5
Tennessee
+112.4%
—
#6
Arizona
+112.3%
—
#7
New Hampshire
+110.1%
—
#8
Rhode Island
+108%
—
#9
Georgia
+107.6%
—
#10
North Carolina
+107.1%
—
#11
Montana
+106.7%
—
#12
Nevada
+106.1%
—
#13
South Carolina
+105.5%
—
#14
Washington
+100.2%
—
#15
Indiana
+94.5%
—
#16
Wisconsin
+94%
—
#17
Michigan
+93.7%
—
#18
Ohio
+93.3%
—
#19
Vermont
+92.6%
—
#20
New Jersey
+88.9%
—
#21
Missouri
+86.9%
—
#22
New York
+85.9%
—
#23
Nebraska
+84.6%
—
#24
Massachusetts
+84.3%
—
#24
South Dakota
+84.3%
—
#26
Texas
+83.3%
—
#27
Kentucky
+83.2%
—
#28
Colorado
+83.1%
—
#29
Kansas · your comparison
+82.5%
—
#30
New Mexico
+82.3%
—
#31
Alabama
+81.3%
—
#32
Arkansas
+80.8%
—
#33
Connecticut
+79.8%
—
#34
Pennsylvania
+78.4%
—
#35
Virginia
+76.5%
—
#36
Delaware
+75.4%
—
#37
Oregon
+74.7%
—
#38
California
+72.7%
—
#39
Oklahoma
+71.9%
—
#40
Minnesota
+70%
—
#41
Wyoming
+69.3%
—
#42
Illinois
+65.3%
—
#43
Iowa
+64.2%
—
#44
Mississippi
+63.9%
—
#45
Hawaii
+63%
—
#46
Maryland
+59.4%
—
#47
West Virginia
+58.6%
—
#48
Alaska
+51.9%
—
#49
North Dakota
+45.9%
—
#50
Louisiana
+38.2%
—
All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.
State building activity, vacant units, mortgage performance, and borrowing rates are different measures.
Kansas · 202510,299
Kansas rank#35among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark1,431,616Same measure and period when published
#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.
Total housing units authorized
New privately owned housing units authorized by building permits; final annual, not seasonally adjusted.
A permit is authorization, not a start or completed home. Absolute counts reflect the size of a state. Units in permit-issuing places; excludes public housing.
Compare states on the graph
Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Kansas stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.
Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Kansas has a dark outline.
Lower value · 848Higher value · 210,217Striped: unavailable
Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.
Kansas · 10,2992025 · Rank #35 of 50, highest firstSelected state
50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.
Compare Kansas with every state · 50 ranked
Total housing units authorized · 2025 · highest value ranked #1
Rank
State
Value
Comparison notes
#1
Texas
210,217
—
#2
Florida
178,297
—
#3
California
103,856
—
#4
North Carolina
86,167
—
#5
Georgia
61,196
—
#6
Arizona
51,532
—
#7
South Carolina
45,862
—
#8
Tennessee
43,374
—
#9
New York
38,667
—
#10
Washington
34,913
—
#11
Colorado
33,754
—
#12
Ohio
33,640
—
#13
Virginia
33,094
—
#14
Indiana
29,076
—
#15
New Jersey
27,661
—
#16
Utah
26,775
—
#17
Pennsylvania
25,709
—
#18
Wisconsin
25,569
—
#19
Michigan
23,075
—
#20
Minnesota
20,947
—
#21
Alabama
19,061
—
#22
Illinois
18,551
—
#23
Nevada
18,540
—
#24
Idaho
17,944
—
#25
Missouri
17,474
—
#26
Oklahoma
15,513
—
#27
Arkansas
15,492
—
#28
Kentucky
14,940
—
#29
Oregon
14,839
—
#30
Louisiana
14,203
—
#31
Iowa
13,664
—
#32
Maryland
13,358
—
#33
Massachusetts
12,477
—
#34
Nebraska
10,596
—
#35
Kansas · your comparison
10,299
—
#36
Mississippi
8,405
—
#37
New Mexico
7,747
—
#38
Connecticut
7,273
—
#39
Maine
6,979
—
#40
Delaware
6,468
—
#41
South Dakota
5,305
—
#42
Montana
5,258
—
#43
New Hampshire
5,030
—
#44
West Virginia
3,962
—
#45
Hawaii
3,708
—
#46
North Dakota
2,440
—
#47
Vermont
2,294
—
#48
Wyoming
2,238
—
#49
Rhode Island
1,738
—
#50
Alaska
848
—
All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.
Explore current officeholders and explicitly reviewed historical executive officials, labeled at the time of their actions. Timeline dates, action type, status and search also filter this list. Read any record’s summary, latest recorded status and official evidence below, or open it beside the timeline.
6 of 6 reviewed Kansas actions · newest first
Jun 29, 2026 · Executive Order 26-04 · Uniform Fire Code Task Force · housing, rent, homeownership and borrowing costs · Issued · historical policy contextGovernor · Executive Order 26-04
Uniform Fire Code Task Force · housing, rent, homeownership and borrowing costs
Jun 29, 2026 · Issued · historical policy context
Gov. Laura Kelly · Issued
Reviewed Kansas signed original · selected provisions
EO 26-04 establishes a task force to review a proposed fire prevention code, evaluate implementation and fiscal issues, and provide advisory findings to the State Fire Marshal. It also directs recommendations for a long-term code-review process to the governor and 2027 Legislature. The order itself does not adopt the proposed fire code. The proposed-code review addresses building safety, including hotels and residential care facilities expressly identified by the order. It does not itself impose a new code on every home or establish construction savings. Code-review recommendations were due August 15, 2026; administration, enforcement and training recommendations September 30; a final report and proposed legislation November 30. Issued June 29 and immediately effective until rescinded. Those deadlines do not prove recommendations were delivered or regulations adopted. The separately reviewed HB 2739 enrolled reference retains legislative ratification and a 120-day attorney-general review condition for submitted proposals; actual submission, review and ratification remain unverified. The signed order establishes historical policy context. Advice, report deadlines, forecasts and authorizations do not establish implementation, delivered benefits, spending, jobs or a measured change in this chart. Later amendments and present operation require separate evidence.
Code-review recommendations were due August 15, 2026; administration, enforcement and training recommendations September 30; a final report and proposed legislation November 30. Issued June 29 and immediately effective until rescinded. Those deadlines do not prove recommendations were delivered or regulations adopted. The separately reviewed HB 2739 enrolled reference retains legislative ratification and a 120-day attorney-general review condition for submitted proposals; actual submission, review and ratification remain unverified.
Why this record is included
EO 26-04 establishes a task force to review a proposed fire prevention code, evaluate implementation and fiscal issues, and provide advisory findings to the State Fire Marshal. It also directs recommendations for a long-term code-review process to the governor and 2027 Legislature. The order itself does not adopt the proposed fire code. The proposed-code review addresses building safety, including hotels and residential care facilities expressly identified by the order. It does not itself impose a new code on every home or establish construction savings. Code-review recommendations were due August 15, 2026; administration, enforcement and training recommendations September 30; a final report and proposed legislation November 30. Issued June 29 and immediately effective until rescinded. Those deadlines do not prove recommendations were delivered or regulations adopted. The separately reviewed HB 2739 enrolled reference retains legislative ratification and a 120-day attorney-general review condition for submitted proposals; actual submission, review and ratification remain unverified. The signed order establishes historical policy context. Advice, report deadlines, forecasts and authorizations do not establish implementation, delivered benefits, spending, jobs or a measured change in this chart. Later amendments and present operation require separate evidence.
Retained Kansas evidence context: health coverage, healthcare costs, access to care and public health · reviewed Kansas policy context · schools, learning, college costs and educational attainment · reviewed Kansas policy context · budgets, government spending, deficits and public debt · reviewed Kansas policy context · housing, rent, homeownership and borrowing costs · reviewed Kansas policy context. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
Inspect this action on the timeline ↑Apr 10, 2026 · SB 370 · Modifying how a rental agreement terminates in the case of material noncompliance by the landlord with the rental agreement. · Died in committeeKansas Legislature · SB 370
Modifying how a rental agreement terminates in the case of material noncompliance by the landlord with the rental agreement.
Apr 10, 2026 · Died in committee
Sen. Dinah Sykes · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
SB 370 would allow a tenant’s termination notice for material landlord noncompliance to take effect on the specified notice date regardless of the periodic rent-paying date. It retains the 30-day notice framework and the stated opportunity to remedy an initial breach. This tenancy proposal died in committee and does not set rent levels. For a remediable initial breach, adequately initiating a good-faith remedy within 14 days prevents termination. A repeated similar breach permits a new 30-day notice without another opportunity to remedy; tenant-caused conditions are excluded.
Died in committee on 2026-04-10. This bill did not enact the reviewed proposal.
Why this record is included
Gross rent includes contract rent and estimated tenant-paid utilities. Tenancy rules and assisted rental housing concern rental-market conditions, but do not set the statewide median. Upfront deposits and late fees are not themselves components of measured gross rent. This connection does not establish causation. Actions after the measurement period cannot explain the earlier observed value.
Retained Kansas evidence context: Median gross rent. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
Section 1. K.S.A. 58-2559 is hereby amended to read as follows: 58- 2559. (a) Except as otherwise provided in this act, if there is a material noncompliance by the landlord with the rental agreement or a noncompliance with K.S.A. 58-2553 , and amendments thereto, materially affecting health and safety, the tenant may deliver a written notice to the landlord specifying the acts and omissions constituting the breach and that the rental agreement will terminate upon […] date not less than […] (30) days after receipt of the notice. The rental agreement shall terminate as provided in the notice, regardless of the periodic rent- paying date, subject to the following: (1) If the breach is remediable by repairs or the payment of damages or otherwise, and the landlord adequately initiates a good faith effort to remedy the breach within […] (14) days after receipt of the notice, the rental agreement shall not terminate. However, in the event that the same or a similar breach occurs after the […] 14-day period provided […] in this paragraph , the tenant may deliver a written notice to the landlord specifically describing the breach and stating that the rental agreement shall terminate upon […] date not less than […] (30) days after the receipt of such notice by the landlord without providing the opportunity to remedy the breach. The rental agreement then shall terminate as provided in such notice regardless of the periodic rent- paying date. (2) The tenant may not terminate for a condition caused by an act or omission of, or […] that is or can be properly attributable or applicable to, the tenant or any person or animal or pet on the premises at any time with the tenant's express or implied permission or consent. (b) Except as otherwise provided in this act, the tenant may recover damages and obtain injunctive relief for any noncompliance by the landlord with the rental agreement or K.S.A. 58-2553 , and amendments 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 SB 370 2 thereto. The remedy provided in this subsection shall be in addition to any right of the tenant arising under subsection (a) […] . (c) If the rental agreement is terminated, the landlord shall return that portion of the security deposit recoverable by the tenant under K.S.A. 58- 2550, and amendments thereto. (d) The provisions of this section shall not limit a landlord's or tenant's right to terminate the rental agreement pursuant to K.S.A. 58- 2570, and amendments thereto.
Inspect this action on the timeline ↑Apr 9, 2026 · HB 2357 · Substitute for HB 2357 by Committee on Judiciary - Providing for expungement of certain court records and consideration of mediation in eviction actions in which the underlying rental agreement is governed by the residential landlord and tenant act. · SignedGovernor · HB 2357
Substitute for HB 2357 by Committee on Judiciary - Providing for expungement of certain court records and consideration of mediation in eviction actions in which the underlying rental agreement is governed by the residential landlord and tenant act.
Apr 9, 2026 · Signed
Gov. Laura Kelly · Signed
FactVote reviewed summary
Laura Kelly signed HB 2357. HB 2357 requires courts to grant covered eviction-record expungement after three years when the monetary judgment is satisfied and no further eviction judgment falls within that period. An unsatisfied judgment may be expunged if both parties agree; absent an objection within 30 days after service, payment is presumed. A later eviction judgment postpones the earlier judgment’s eligibility. Courts must consider mediation unless it would not materially help or is impracticable. Expungement does not extinguish rent or other monetary obligations. These are housing-access rules, not a rent reduction.
Approved by Governor on Thursday, April 9, 2026. Enactment, effective dates, implementation and current enforceability are distinct.
Why this record is included
Gross rent includes contract rent and estimated tenant-paid utilities. Tenancy rules and assisted rental housing concern rental-market conditions, but do not set the statewide median. Upfront deposits and late fees are not themselves components of measured gross rent. This connection does not establish causation. Actions after the measurement period cannot explain the earlier observed value.
Retained Kansas evidence context: Median gross rent. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
New Section 1. (a) (1) Except as otherwise provided in this subsection, a defendant in an eviction action in which the underlying rental agreement is governed by K.S.A. 58-2540 et seq., and amendments thereto, may make an electronic filing for an expungement with the clerk of the district court at no cost. Such filing shall be made under the docket number of such eviction action. The defendant shall provide service of process to the plaintiff in such action by return receipt delivery as described in K.S.A. 60-303, and amendments thereto. (2) The plaintiff in such action shall have 30 days after delivery of such service of process to file with the court an objection to such expungement. If an objection is filed, the court shall conduct a hearing and determine whether such expungement will be granted pursuant to this section. If no objection is filed, the court shall make such determination without a hearing , and there shall be a presumption that the monetary judgment owed by the defendant to the plaintiff arising from the underlying tenancy or rental agreement related to such eviction action, if any, are satisfied. (3) The court shall grant an expungement if three years have passed since judgment was entered in such action, the defendant shows that the monetary judgment owed by the defendant to the plaintiff arising from the underlying tenancy or rental agreement related to such eviction action, if any, are satisfied and the defendant has no additional judgment entered in an eviction action in which the underlying rental agreement is governed by K.S.A. 58-2540 et seq., and amendments thereto, within the three-year period. (4) If a tenant has an additional judgment entered in an eviction action in which the underlying rental agreement is governed by K.S.A. 58-2540 et seq., and amendments thereto, within the three-year period described in paragraph (1), the preceding judgment shall not be expunged until the ensuing judgment is eligible for expungement. (5) In accordance with federal law and requirements, a public housing authority may request access to eviction judgment history for the past three-year period for active applicants for federal housing assistance. (6) An eviction action in which the underlying rental agreement is governed by K.S.A. 58-2540 et seq., and amendments thereto, and the defendant has an unsatisfied monetary judgment arising from the underlying tenancy or rental agreement related to such eviction action shall not be expunged unless the defendant and the plaintiff agree to such expungement. (7) An order expunging an eviction action pursuant to this section shall not be construed to satisfy, extinguish or otherwise affect any monetary obligation owed by the defendant to the plaintiff arising from the underlying tenancy or rental agreement related to such eviction action. Nothing in this section shall impair or limit a plaintiff's right to pursue or maintain a separate civil action for unpaid rent, damages or other sums owed, including any action permitted under K.S.A. 61- 3804, and amendments thereto, or other applicable law, within the applicable statute of limitations. (b) The judicial council shall develop a form to be utilized for obtaining expungement pursuant to this section. Sec. 2. K.S.A. 61-3806 is hereby amended to read as follows: 61- 3806. (a) A defendant shall either appear in person or by counsel at the time and date set forth in the summons or file on or before such date a written answer. (b) The answer, when filed, shall contain the information as Substitute for HOUSE BILL No. 2357—page 2 required under subsection (b) of K.S.A. 61-2904 (b), and amendments thereto. (c) In an action in which the underlying rental agreement is governed by K.S.A. 58-2540 et seq., and amendments thereto, the court shall consider mediation unless the court finds that mediation would not aid the parties materially or is impracticable. Sec. 3. K.S.A. 61-3807 is hereby amended to read as follows: 61- 3807. (a) If a trial is necessary, the trial shall be conducted within 14 days after the appearance date stated in the summons. (b) (1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), no continuance shall be granted unless the defendant requesting a continuance shall file a bond with good and sufficient security approved by the court, conditioned for the payment of all damages and rent that may accrue if judgment is entered against the defendant. (2) In an action in which the underlying rental agreement is governed by K.S.A. 58-2540 et seq., and amendments thereto, the court shall order a continuance of not more than 14 days from the date that the mediation order is entered if the parties are participating in mediation.
Inspect this action on the timeline ↑Jan 8, 2026 · S 3602 · Public Charge Clarification Act of 2026 · In CongressU.S. Congress · Kansas delegation · S 3602
Public Charge Clarification Act of 2026
Jan 8, 2026 · In Congress
Sen. Roger Marshall · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
The reviewed section 3 of S 3602 would expand public-charge definitions and benefit categories, specify a totality-of-circumstances assessment, and add support-documentation and bond requirements. It includes exemptions for refugees, asylees and specified military families. This pending proposal is not a finding about any Kansas resident’s immigration status or benefits. The proposed threshold is receipt of benefits for more than 12 months in a 36-month period; receiving two benefits in one month counts as two benefit-months for the public-charge definition. Its Medicaid category excludes emergency assistance and benefits for people under 21 or pregnant women. A required bond would be at least $10,000 where other factors warrant conditional admission or adjustment.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary. No enactment of this bill is recorded at the review cutoff.
Why this record is included
Foreign-born residents include naturalized citizens and lawfully and unlawfully present noncitizens. Immigration-status rules address only subsets of this population and do not change birthplace. This connection does not establish causation. Actions after the measurement period cannot explain the earlier observed value.
Retained Kansas evidence context: Residents who are foreign-born. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
3.Definition of public chargeSection 212(a)(4) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(4)) is amended to read as follows:(4)Public charge(A)In generalAny alien who, in the opinion of the consular officer at the time of application for a visa, or in the opinion of the Attorney General at the time of application for admission or adjustment of status, is likely at any time to become a public charge is inadmissible.(B)DefinitionsIn this paragraph:(i)Likely at any time to become a public chargeThe term likely at any time to become a public charge, with respect to an alien, means the alien is likely to receive 1 or more public benefits for more than 12 months, in the aggregate, during any 36-month period after the date on which—(I)the alien is admitted to the United States; or(II)the alien's status is adjusted under this title. (ii) Public benefits The term public benefits means any Federal, State, local, or tribal cash assistance for income maintenance, supplemental nutrition assistance, housing assistance, non-emergency medical assistance, or other similar benefits, including all monetizable and non-monetizable benefits (as defined in the proposed rule entitled Inadmissibility on Public Charge Grounds, (83 Fed. Reg. 51114)), including benefits received from— (I) supplemental security income authorized under title XVI of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1381 et seq.); (II) temporary assistance for needy families authorized under part A of title IV of such Act (42 U.S.C. 601 et seq.); (III) any Federal, State, local, or tribal cash benefit program for income maintenance; (IV) the supplemental nutrition assistance program authorized under the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008 (7 U.S.C. 2011 et seq.); (V) the housing choice voucher program and project-based rental assistance (including moderate rehabilitation) authorized under section 8 of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437f); (VI) public housing funds authorized under section 9 of such Act (42 U.S.C. 1437g); (VII) the Medicaid program authorized under title XIX of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1396 et seq.), excluding emergency medical assistance, benefits provided to individuals who are younger than 21 years of age, and benefits provided to pregnant women; (VIII) premium and cost-sharing subsidies authorized under section 36B of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to refundable credit for coverage under a qualified health plan) or section 1402 of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (14 U.S.C. 18071; relating to reduced cost sharing); and (IX) any other Federal, State, local, or tribal program providing monetizable or non-monetizable benefits, including programs established after the date of the enactment of the Public Charge Clarification Act of 2026. (iii)Public chargeThe term public charge means an alien who receives 1 or more public benefits for more than 12 months, in the aggregate, within any 36-month period. The receipt of 2 benefits in a single month shall be deemed to constitute 2 months of benefits for purposes of this clause.(C)Publication of list of benefits(i)In generalNot later than 180 days after the date of enactment of the Public Charge Clarification Act of 2026, the Secretary of Homeland Security, acting through the Director of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, shall publish in the Federal Register a comprehensive list of all public benefits that may render an alien a public charge or likely to become a public charge.(ii)UpdatesThe Secretary shall—(I)update the list described in clause (i) whenever necessary to include any new programs or benefits created after the publication of such list; and(II)publish notice of such updates in the Federal Register.(D)Factors to be considered(i)In generalIn determining whether an alien is inadmissible under this paragraph, the consular officer or the Director of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services shall consider, in the totality of the circumstances, the alien’s—(I)age;(II)health;(III)family status;(IV)assets, resources, and financial status;(V)education and skills;(VI)prospective immigration status and expected period of admission; and(VII)any affidavit of support executed by a sponsor in accordance with section 213A(a)(1).(ii)DeterminationNo single factor listed under clause (i) shall be dispositive. The determination of inadmissibility shall be based on a holistic assessment of the alien’s likelihood of becoming a public charge.(E)ExemptionsThis paragraph shall not apply to—(i)refugees admitted under section 207;(ii)asylees granted asylum under section 208; or(iii)aliens serving in the Armed Forces of the United States and the dependents of such aliens.(F)WaiversNo waiver of inadmissibility under this paragraph shall be granted to any alien, other than the aliens exempted under subparagraph (F), unless such waiver is specifically authorized by an Act of Congress.(G)Affidavits of supportAn affidavit of support submitted by the sponsor of an alien in accordance with section 213A—(i)shall be accompanied by documentary evidence demonstrating the sponsor’s ability to financially support the alien and all members of the sponsor’s household, including proof of income, assets, and resources sufficient to maintain the household at an annual income equal to at least 125 percent of the Federal poverty line; and(ii)may be considered as a factor in the totality of the circumstances under subparagraph (D), but shall not be sufficient to overcome a finding that an alien is likely to become a public charge.(H)Public charge bonds(i)RequirementThe consular officer or the Director of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services shall require the posting of a public charge bond as a condition of an alien's admission or adjustment of status if the alien is likely at any time to become a public charge, but other factors warrant conditional approval.(ii)Amount; forfeitureEach public charge bond required under clause (i) shall be—(I)in an amount equal to not less than $10,000;(II)payable to the United States; and (III) forfeited if the alien for whom it is posted becomes a public charge during the 10-year period immediately following the alien's admission to the United States or adjustment of status. (iii)RulemakingThe Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Director of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, shall promulgate regulations for the administration, forfeiture, and cancellation of public charge bonds required under this subparagraph..
Inspect this action on the timeline ↑Jul 23, 2025 · S 2423 · Streamlining Rural Housing Act of 2025 · In CongressU.S. Congress · Kansas delegation · S 2423
Streamlining Rural Housing Act of 2025
Jul 23, 2025 · In Congress
Sen. Jerry Moran · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
S 2423 would require HUD and USDA to coordinate environmental reviews for jointly funded housing, evaluate joint physical inspections and consult an advisory group including residents and housing providers. Its report requirements prohibit recommendations that materially reduce resident safety, shift long-term costs to residents or undermine environmental standards. This proposal does not establish completed projects or lower rents.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs. No enactment of this bill is recorded at the review cutoff.
Why this record is included
Gross rent includes contract rent and estimated tenant-paid utilities. Tenancy rules and assisted rental housing concern rental-market conditions, but do not set the statewide median. Upfront deposits and late fees are not themselves components of measured gross rent. This connection does not establish causation. Actions after the measurement period cannot explain the earlier observed value.
Retained Kansas evidence context: Median gross rent. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
2. Memorandum of understanding (a) In general Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development and the Secretary of Agriculture shall enter into a memorandum of understanding to— (1) evaluate categorical exclusions (as defined in section 111 of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4336e)) for housing projects funded by amounts from the Department of the Housing and Urban Development and the Department of Agriculture; (2) develop a process to designate a lead agency among the Department of Housing and Urban Development and the Department of Agriculture and streamline the adoption of environmental impact statements and environmental assessments approved by the other agency to construct housing projects funded by amounts from both agencies; (3) maintain compliance with environmental regulations under part 58 of title 24, Code of Federal Regulations, as in effect on January 1, 2025; and (4) evaluate the feasibility of a joint physical inspection process for housing projects funded by amounts from the Department of the Housing and Urban Development and the Department of Agriculture. (b) Advisory working group (1) In general Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development and the Secretary of Agriculture shall establish an advisory working group for the purpose of consulting on the implementation of the memorandum of understanding entered into under subsection (a). (2) Members The advisory working group established under paragraph (1) shall consist of rural and non-rural stakeholders, including— (A) affordable housing nonprofit organizations; (B) State housing and housing finance agencies; (C) nonprofit and for-profit home builders and housing developers; (D) property management companies; (E) owners of multifamily properties, including nonprofit and for-profit owners and operators; (F) public housing agencies; (G) residents in housing assisted by the Department of Housing and Urban Development or the Department of Agriculture and representatives of those residents; and (H) housing contract administrators. (c) Report Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development and the Secretary of Agriculture shall submit to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs of the Senate and the Committee on Financial Services of the House of Representatives a report that includes recommendations for legislative, regulatory, or administrative actions— (1) to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of housing projects funded by amounts from the Department of the Housing and Urban Development and the Department of Agriculture; and (2) that do not materially, with respect to residents of housing projects described in paragraph (1)— (A) reduce the safety of those residents; (B) shift long-term costs onto those residents; or (C) undermine the environmental standards of those residents.
Inspect this action on the timeline ↑Jun 24, 2020 · Executive Order 20-48 · Commission on Racial Equity and Justice · housing, rent, homeownership and borrowing costs · Issued · historical policy contextGovernor · Executive Order 20-48
Commission on Racial Equity and Justice · housing, rent, homeownership and borrowing costs
Jun 24, 2020 · Issued · historical policy context
Gov. Laura Kelly · Issued
Reviewed Kansas signed original · selected provisions
EO 20-48 establishes an advisory commission of no more than 15 members to study policing first, then other systems, conduct outreach and make recommendations to the governor, Legislature and local governments. Paragraph 6 makes its advice nonbinding. Housing systems are explicitly included in the review. The order does not deliver housing units, amend lending rules or establish a change in rents. Reports were due December 1, 2020, July 1, 2021 and January 1, 2022. The original is immediately effective and prints no explicit sunset; report deadlines are not proof of submission, implementation or an extension. No later status or measured outcome is established here. The signed order establishes historical policy context. Advice, report deadlines, forecasts and authorizations do not establish implementation, delivered benefits, spending, jobs or a measured change in this chart. Later amendments and present operation require separate evidence.
Reports were due December 1, 2020, July 1, 2021 and January 1, 2022. The original is immediately effective and prints no explicit sunset; report deadlines are not proof of submission, implementation or an extension. No later status or measured outcome is established here.
Why this record is included
EO 20-48 establishes an advisory commission of no more than 15 members to study policing first, then other systems, conduct outreach and make recommendations to the governor, Legislature and local governments. Paragraph 6 makes its advice nonbinding. Housing systems are explicitly included in the review. The order does not deliver housing units, amend lending rules or establish a change in rents. Reports were due December 1, 2020, July 1, 2021 and January 1, 2022. The original is immediately effective and prints no explicit sunset; report deadlines are not proof of submission, implementation or an extension. No later status or measured outcome is established here. The signed order establishes historical policy context. Advice, report deadlines, forecasts and authorizations do not establish implementation, delivered benefits, spending, jobs or a measured change in this chart. Later amendments and present operation require separate evidence.
Retained Kansas evidence context: health coverage, healthcare costs, access to care and public health · reviewed Kansas policy context · unemployment, jobs and workforce issues · reviewed Kansas policy context · schools, learning, college costs and educational attainment · reviewed Kansas policy context · crime, victimization, policing and criminal justice · reviewed Kansas policy context · housing, rent, homeownership and borrowing costs · reviewed Kansas policy context. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
mental health, education, housing and economic opportunity
Records come from published fact relationships or reviewed topic records with official supporting evidence and verified Kansas officeholder attribution. Historical executive officials require evidence tied to the action date and are excluded from incumbent proposals. Inclusion follows an explicit topic review, a related state fact, or the action’s title and supporting evidence. Explicit topic reviews take priority; repeated actions use the most recent explicit review for this topic. Duplicate actions attached to several facts appear once. This topic match is not a new finding that an action caused a result, and the reviewed collection is selective. Collection reviewed Oct 6, 2026.
What candidates are saying
Explore statements about housing, rent, homeownership and borrowing costs from FactVote’s Kansas candidate profiles. Compare candidates within each recorded race, with each person’s matching statements kept together. These are candidate and campaign statements, not verified outcomes.
11 statements from 6 candidates
2026 Kansas Governor and Lieutenant Governor — General Election
2 candidates with matching statements · 4 statements
Cindy aims to lower residential property tax assessment rates from 11.5% to 9.0%, providing significant tax relief for homeowners across all income levels. She’ll add exemptions to our tax system, too, to make sure that the property tax burden doesn’t push seniors and disabled veterans out of their …
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Economy, taxes, spending, and affordability
Candidate campaign source
Cindy aims to lower residential property tax assessment rates from 11.5% to 9.0%, providing significant tax relief for homeowners across all income levels. She’ll add exemptions to our tax system, too, to make sure that the property tax burden doesn’t push seniors and disabled veterans out of their homes.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026
Lower residential property assessment rates from 11.5% to 9.0%, lowering annual tax burdens and providing significant property tax relief for homeowners across all income levels. Establish a task force to determine other avenues for property tax relief.
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Economy, taxes, spending, and affordability
Candidate campaign source
Lower residential property assessment rates from 11.5% to 9.0%, lowering annual tax burdens and providing significant property tax relief for homeowners across all income levels. Establish a task force to determine other avenues for property tax relief.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026
Every working family should be able to afford a place to raise their kids, but for too many, wages and salaries aren’t keeping up with the cost of housing. Cindy will fight to build more affordable housing in communities that need it. And she’ll fight for fairness for renters as well as homeowners, …
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Economy, taxes, spending, and affordability
Candidate campaign source
Every working family should be able to afford a place to raise their kids, but for too many, wages and salaries aren’t keeping up with the cost of housing. Cindy will fight to build more affordable housing in communities that need it. And she’ll fight for fairness for renters as well as homeowners, so if they make a late payment, they’re not at risk of losing their homes.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026
This section matches specific housing, rent, homeownership and borrowing costs terms in retained, attributed source text from published Kansas candidate profiles. A profile heading or biography alone does not qualify. The Florida geography is fixed; saved state preferences cannot change these results. A mention can concern a community or group rather than Florida’s statewide measure.
Matching is automatic and does not establish a candidate’s stance, the accuracy of a claim, or an effect on the measured result. Results are grouped by recorded race, then by candidate name. Within each candidate, the matching issue mentions appear first. Only candidates with matching retained statements are shown; this is not a complete race roster. Repeated identical text for the same candidate is shown once. Coverage follows the existing state profiles and is not a complete record of all candidates or everything they have said. Review dates are not statement dates.
Kansas incumbents
What incumbents are proposing
Explore reviewed bills sponsored by current Kansas legislators and Kansas’s congressional delegation, plus retained proposals from Kansas’s governor and agencies. Each record keeps its latest recorded status and official evidence.
3 matching sponsorships or proposals · 3 Kansas incumbents. These filters apply only to this section.
Sen. Dinah Sykes
Kansas Senate, District 21 · D–KS
1 proposalView proposals from Sen. Dinah SykesKansas Legislature · SB 370
Modifying how a rental agreement terminates in the case of material noncompliance by the landlord with the rental agreement.
Apr 10, 2026 · Died in committee
Sen. Dinah Sykes · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
SB 370 would allow a tenant’s termination notice for material landlord noncompliance to take effect on the specified notice date regardless of the periodic rent-paying date. It retains the 30-day notice framework and the stated opportunity to remedy an initial breach. This tenancy proposal died in committee and does not set rent levels. For a remediable initial breach, adequately initiating a good-faith remedy within 14 days prevents termination. A repeated similar breach permits a new 30-day notice without another opportunity to remedy; tenant-caused conditions are excluded.
Died in committee on 2026-04-10. This bill did not enact the reviewed proposal.
Why this record is included
Gross rent includes contract rent and estimated tenant-paid utilities. Tenancy rules and assisted rental housing concern rental-market conditions, but do not set the statewide median. Upfront deposits and late fees are not themselves components of measured gross rent. This connection does not establish causation. Actions after the measurement period cannot explain the earlier observed value.
Retained Kansas evidence context: Median gross rent. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
Section 1. K.S.A. 58-2559 is hereby amended to read as follows: 58- 2559. (a) Except as otherwise provided in this act, if there is a material noncompliance by the landlord with the rental agreement or a noncompliance with K.S.A. 58-2553 , and amendments thereto, materially affecting health and safety, the tenant may deliver a written notice to the landlord specifying the acts and omissions constituting the breach and that the rental agreement will terminate upon […] date not less than […] (30) days after receipt of the notice. The rental agreement shall terminate as provided in the notice, regardless of the periodic rent- paying date, subject to the following: (1) If the breach is remediable by repairs or the payment of damages or otherwise, and the landlord adequately initiates a good faith effort to remedy the breach within […] (14) days after receipt of the notice, the rental agreement shall not terminate. However, in the event that the same or a similar breach occurs after the […] 14-day period provided […] in this paragraph , the tenant may deliver a written notice to the landlord specifically describing the breach and stating that the rental agreement shall terminate upon […] date not less than […] (30) days after the receipt of such notice by the landlord without providing the opportunity to remedy the breach. The rental agreement then shall terminate as provided in such notice regardless of the periodic rent- paying date. (2) The tenant may not terminate for a condition caused by an act or omission of, or […] that is or can be properly attributable or applicable to, the tenant or any person or animal or pet on the premises at any time with the tenant's express or implied permission or consent. (b) Except as otherwise provided in this act, the tenant may recover damages and obtain injunctive relief for any noncompliance by the landlord with the rental agreement or K.S.A. 58-2553 , and amendments 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 SB 370 2 thereto. The remedy provided in this subsection shall be in addition to any right of the tenant arising under subsection (a) […] . (c) If the rental agreement is terminated, the landlord shall return that portion of the security deposit recoverable by the tenant under K.S.A. 58- 2550, and amendments thereto. (d) The provisions of this section shall not limit a landlord's or tenant's right to terminate the rental agreement pursuant to K.S.A. 58- 2570, and amendments thereto.
1 proposalView proposals from Sen. Jerry MoranU.S. Congress · Kansas delegation · S 2423
Streamlining Rural Housing Act of 2025
Jul 23, 2025 · In Congress
Sen. Jerry Moran · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
S 2423 would require HUD and USDA to coordinate environmental reviews for jointly funded housing, evaluate joint physical inspections and consult an advisory group including residents and housing providers. Its report requirements prohibit recommendations that materially reduce resident safety, shift long-term costs to residents or undermine environmental standards. This proposal does not establish completed projects or lower rents.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs. No enactment of this bill is recorded at the review cutoff.
Why this record is included
Gross rent includes contract rent and estimated tenant-paid utilities. Tenancy rules and assisted rental housing concern rental-market conditions, but do not set the statewide median. Upfront deposits and late fees are not themselves components of measured gross rent. This connection does not establish causation. Actions after the measurement period cannot explain the earlier observed value.
Retained Kansas evidence context: Median gross rent. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
2. Memorandum of understanding (a) In general Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development and the Secretary of Agriculture shall enter into a memorandum of understanding to— (1) evaluate categorical exclusions (as defined in section 111 of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4336e)) for housing projects funded by amounts from the Department of the Housing and Urban Development and the Department of Agriculture; (2) develop a process to designate a lead agency among the Department of Housing and Urban Development and the Department of Agriculture and streamline the adoption of environmental impact statements and environmental assessments approved by the other agency to construct housing projects funded by amounts from both agencies; (3) maintain compliance with environmental regulations under part 58 of title 24, Code of Federal Regulations, as in effect on January 1, 2025; and (4) evaluate the feasibility of a joint physical inspection process for housing projects funded by amounts from the Department of the Housing and Urban Development and the Department of Agriculture. (b) Advisory working group (1) In general Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development and the Secretary of Agriculture shall establish an advisory working group for the purpose of consulting on the implementation of the memorandum of understanding entered into under subsection (a). (2) Members The advisory working group established under paragraph (1) shall consist of rural and non-rural stakeholders, including— (A) affordable housing nonprofit organizations; (B) State housing and housing finance agencies; (C) nonprofit and for-profit home builders and housing developers; (D) property management companies; (E) owners of multifamily properties, including nonprofit and for-profit owners and operators; (F) public housing agencies; (G) residents in housing assisted by the Department of Housing and Urban Development or the Department of Agriculture and representatives of those residents; and (H) housing contract administrators. (c) Report Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development and the Secretary of Agriculture shall submit to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs of the Senate and the Committee on Financial Services of the House of Representatives a report that includes recommendations for legislative, regulatory, or administrative actions— (1) to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of housing projects funded by amounts from the Department of the Housing and Urban Development and the Department of Agriculture; and (2) that do not materially, with respect to residents of housing projects described in paragraph (1)— (A) reduce the safety of those residents; (B) shift long-term costs onto those residents; or (C) undermine the environmental standards of those residents.
1 proposalView proposals from Sen. Roger MarshallU.S. Congress · Kansas delegation · S 3602
Public Charge Clarification Act of 2026
Jan 8, 2026 · In Congress
Sen. Roger Marshall · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
The reviewed section 3 of S 3602 would expand public-charge definitions and benefit categories, specify a totality-of-circumstances assessment, and add support-documentation and bond requirements. It includes exemptions for refugees, asylees and specified military families. This pending proposal is not a finding about any Kansas resident’s immigration status or benefits. The proposed threshold is receipt of benefits for more than 12 months in a 36-month period; receiving two benefits in one month counts as two benefit-months for the public-charge definition. Its Medicaid category excludes emergency assistance and benefits for people under 21 or pregnant women. A required bond would be at least $10,000 where other factors warrant conditional admission or adjustment.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary. No enactment of this bill is recorded at the review cutoff.
Why this record is included
Foreign-born residents include naturalized citizens and lawfully and unlawfully present noncitizens. Immigration-status rules address only subsets of this population and do not change birthplace. This connection does not establish causation. Actions after the measurement period cannot explain the earlier observed value.
Retained Kansas evidence context: Residents who are foreign-born. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
3.Definition of public chargeSection 212(a)(4) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(4)) is amended to read as follows:(4)Public charge(A)In generalAny alien who, in the opinion of the consular officer at the time of application for a visa, or in the opinion of the Attorney General at the time of application for admission or adjustment of status, is likely at any time to become a public charge is inadmissible.(B)DefinitionsIn this paragraph:(i)Likely at any time to become a public chargeThe term likely at any time to become a public charge, with respect to an alien, means the alien is likely to receive 1 or more public benefits for more than 12 months, in the aggregate, during any 36-month period after the date on which—(I)the alien is admitted to the United States; or(II)the alien's status is adjusted under this title. (ii) Public benefits The term public benefits means any Federal, State, local, or tribal cash assistance for income maintenance, supplemental nutrition assistance, housing assistance, non-emergency medical assistance, or other similar benefits, including all monetizable and non-monetizable benefits (as defined in the proposed rule entitled Inadmissibility on Public Charge Grounds, (83 Fed. Reg. 51114)), including benefits received from— (I) supplemental security income authorized under title XVI of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1381 et seq.); (II) temporary assistance for needy families authorized under part A of title IV of such Act (42 U.S.C. 601 et seq.); (III) any Federal, State, local, or tribal cash benefit program for income maintenance; (IV) the supplemental nutrition assistance program authorized under the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008 (7 U.S.C. 2011 et seq.); (V) the housing choice voucher program and project-based rental assistance (including moderate rehabilitation) authorized under section 8 of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437f); (VI) public housing funds authorized under section 9 of such Act (42 U.S.C. 1437g); (VII) the Medicaid program authorized under title XIX of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1396 et seq.), excluding emergency medical assistance, benefits provided to individuals who are younger than 21 years of age, and benefits provided to pregnant women; (VIII) premium and cost-sharing subsidies authorized under section 36B of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to refundable credit for coverage under a qualified health plan) or section 1402 of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (14 U.S.C. 18071; relating to reduced cost sharing); and (IX) any other Federal, State, local, or tribal program providing monetizable or non-monetizable benefits, including programs established after the date of the enactment of the Public Charge Clarification Act of 2026. (iii)Public chargeThe term public charge means an alien who receives 1 or more public benefits for more than 12 months, in the aggregate, within any 36-month period. The receipt of 2 benefits in a single month shall be deemed to constitute 2 months of benefits for purposes of this clause.(C)Publication of list of benefits(i)In generalNot later than 180 days after the date of enactment of the Public Charge Clarification Act of 2026, the Secretary of Homeland Security, acting through the Director of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, shall publish in the Federal Register a comprehensive list of all public benefits that may render an alien a public charge or likely to become a public charge.(ii)UpdatesThe Secretary shall—(I)update the list described in clause (i) whenever necessary to include any new programs or benefits created after the publication of such list; and(II)publish notice of such updates in the Federal Register.(D)Factors to be considered(i)In generalIn determining whether an alien is inadmissible under this paragraph, the consular officer or the Director of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services shall consider, in the totality of the circumstances, the alien’s—(I)age;(II)health;(III)family status;(IV)assets, resources, and financial status;(V)education and skills;(VI)prospective immigration status and expected period of admission; and(VII)any affidavit of support executed by a sponsor in accordance with section 213A(a)(1).(ii)DeterminationNo single factor listed under clause (i) shall be dispositive. The determination of inadmissibility shall be based on a holistic assessment of the alien’s likelihood of becoming a public charge.(E)ExemptionsThis paragraph shall not apply to—(i)refugees admitted under section 207;(ii)asylees granted asylum under section 208; or(iii)aliens serving in the Armed Forces of the United States and the dependents of such aliens.(F)WaiversNo waiver of inadmissibility under this paragraph shall be granted to any alien, other than the aliens exempted under subparagraph (F), unless such waiver is specifically authorized by an Act of Congress.(G)Affidavits of supportAn affidavit of support submitted by the sponsor of an alien in accordance with section 213A—(i)shall be accompanied by documentary evidence demonstrating the sponsor’s ability to financially support the alien and all members of the sponsor’s household, including proof of income, assets, and resources sufficient to maintain the household at an annual income equal to at least 125 percent of the Federal poverty line; and(ii)may be considered as a factor in the totality of the circumstances under subparagraph (D), but shall not be sufficient to overcome a finding that an alien is likely to become a public charge.(H)Public charge bonds(i)RequirementThe consular officer or the Director of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services shall require the posting of a public charge bond as a condition of an alien's admission or adjustment of status if the alien is likely at any time to become a public charge, but other factors warrant conditional approval.(ii)Amount; forfeitureEach public charge bond required under clause (i) shall be—(I)in an amount equal to not less than $10,000;(II)payable to the United States; and (III) forfeited if the alien for whom it is posted becomes a public charge during the 10-year period immediately following the alien's admission to the United States or adjustment of status. (iii)RulemakingThe Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Director of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, shall promulgate regulations for the administration, forfeiture, and cancellation of public charge bonds required under this subparagraph..
Only current Kansas officeholders retained in the reviewed collection qualify. Bills require a recorded primary sponsorship; cosponsors and signing officials are excluded from sponsorship counts. An official introducer recorded as acting by request is labeled “Introduced by request”; that procedural role does not establish personal policy endorsement. Governor and agency records qualify when recorded as proposed. A separately verified governor transmittal can also establish an original proposal whose latest status reflects its later outcome. Signing an enacted law alone does not establish a proposal. A record appearing under several facts is counted once per officeholder. A bill with multiple primary sponsors appears under each recorded sponsor.
Enacted bills, adopted resolutions and unsuccessful measures remain visible as proposal history. Passing one chamber is not enactment. These counts do not measure effectiveness or prove that an action changed a Kansas statistic. Collection reviewed Oct 6, 2026.
Sources & methods
Every section retains its primary sources, units, reporting periods and comparison limits. Maps, graphs and tables use the same observation and cohort. All 50 states are listed; D.C. and territories are excluded. Missing and suppressed values remain unavailable and never become zero.
#1 is the highest measured value. Equal source values share a rank and leave gaps (1, 2, 2, 4). Ranks use source precision and are descriptive, not a score of the state. Survey uncertainty and reporting coverage can limit comparisons. Published U.S. benchmarks are used where available; a state average is not substituted.
Kansas snapshots and fiscal sources keep their own dates and accounting scope. National events and federal distribution explainers describe national context. Actions and statements are filtered to Kansas, retain their reviewed evidence, and do not establish that a policy caused a measured change.
Retained state source collections assembled October 5, 2026. Original review and source dates remain visible. Refreshing this page does not refresh an official data release.