SESSION OF 2024
SUPPLEMENTAL NOTE ON HOUSE SUBSTITUTE FOR
SENATE BILL NO. 291
As Amended by House Committee of the Whole

Brief*
House Sub. for SB 291, as amended, would create and
amend law concerning the administration and organization of
information technology (IT) and cybersecurity services within
each branch of state government.

Cybersecurity Staff Reorganization; IT Services
Consolidation and Judicial Branch IT Hardware Plans;
Website Domains (New Section 1)
Cybersecurity Staff Reorganization
On and after July 1, 2027, the bill would direct that all
cybersecurity services for every branch of state government
to be overseen by the Chief Information Technology Officer
(CITO) and the Chief Information Security Officer (CISO)
within each respective branch. Furthermore, it would require
that all cybersecurity staff within each branch of state
government to be directed by the CITO of that branch. The
bill would exempt State Board of Regents’ institutions from
this reorganization.
IT Services Consolidation and Judicial Branch IT Hardware
Plans
The bill would require the Information Technology
Executive Council (ITEC), in consultation with cabinet agency
____________________
*Supplemental notes are prepared by the Legislative Research
Department and do not express legislative intent. The supplemental
note and fiscal note for this bill may be accessed on the Internet at
http://www.kslegislature.org
heads, to formulate a plan to consolidate all Executive Branch
IT services under the Office of Information Technology
Services (OITS).
The bill would require the Judicial Branch CITO to
estimate project costs for providing IT hardware to judicial
agencies and employees,, including state and county-funded
Judicial Branch district court employees. These employees
would be required to use the state-issued hardware. The bill
would require the Judicial Branch CITO to consult with the
Executive Branch CITO to develop a plan allowing each piece
of IT hardware used to access Judicial Branch applications to
become part of the KANWIN network before July 1, 2027.
The bill would require these plans to be presented to the
House Committee on Legislative Modernization and the
Senate Committee on Ways and Means before January 15,
2026.
Website Domains
The bill would also require all branch or agency websites
be migrated to a “.gov” domain by February 1, 2025.

Creation of Judicial Branch and Legislative Branch
CISOs; Changes to Executive CISO Responsibilities
(New Sections 2 and 3 and Section 23)
The bill would establish CISO positions for both the
Judicial and Legislative branches. These officers would be
placed in the unclassified service under the Kansas Civil
Service Act. The Judicial Branch CITO would be appointed by
the Judicial Administrator, subject to approval by the Chief
Justice of the Kansas Supreme Court. The Legislative Branch
CISO would be appointed by the Legislative Coordinating
Council. The responsibilities of the CISOs would include:
● Reporting to the Judicial Administrator or the
Legislative Branch CITO, respectively;
2- 291
● Establishing security standards and policies to
safeguard the branch’s IT systems and
infrastructure;
● Ensuring the confidentiality, availability, and
integrity of information transacted, stored, or
processed within the branch’s IT systems;
● Developing a centralized cybersecurity protocol for
protecting and managing the branch’s IT assets
and infrastructure;
● Detecting and responding to security incidents
consistent with information security standards and
policies;
● Being responsible for the cybersecurity of all
branch data and information resources and, for the
Legislative Branch CITO, obtaining approval from
the Revisor of Statutes prior to taking any action on
any matter that involves a legal issue related to IT
security;
● Collaborating with the CISOs of the other branches
in order to respond to cybersecurity incidents;
● Ensuring that all branch employees complete
cybersecurity awareness training annually and
revoking an employee’s access to any state-issued
hardware or the state network if the employee does
not complete the required training;
● Reviewing all IT contracts entered into by a person
or entity within the branch to make efforts to reduce
the risk of security vulnerabilities within the supply
chain or product and ensure they contains
standard security language; and
● Coordinating with the U.S. Cybersecurity and
Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) to conduct

3- 291
annual audits of branch agencies for compliance
with state and federal laws, rules, regulations, and
branch policies. The CISO would be required to
make such audit requests regardless of whether
CISA has the capacity to perform the requested
audit.
The bill would also modify requirements in current law
for the Executive Branch CISO to make the position’s
responsibilities more consistent with the responsibilities of the
Judicial Branch and Legislative Branch CISO positions and
account for the creation of the new CISO positions.

Appointment of Elected Office CISOs (Sections 9–14)
The bill would require the Attorney General,
Commissioner of Insurance, Secretary of State, State
Treasurer, and the Director of the Kansas Bureau of
Investigation each to appoint a CISO for their respective
office or agency. Each CISO would be responsible for
establishing security standards and policies to safeguard the
office or agency’s IT systems and infrastructure.

Cybersecurity Programs and National Institute of
Standards and Technology Cybersecurity Framework
(New Sections 2–3; Sections 9, 11–14, and 23)
The bill would require all CISOs, in consultation with
their respective agency heads, to develop cybersecurity
programs for their respective agencies that would be in
compliance with the National Institute of Standards and
Technology Cybersecurity Framework (CSF) 2.0, ensuring
agency achievement of specific tiers by July 1, 2028, and July
1, 2030. [Note: The CSF contains guidelines and best
practices to reduce risk of a cyberattack and improve an
organization’s overall security posture.]


4- 291
Cybersecurity Audits and Vulnerability Assessments
(New Sections 2–3; Sections 9–14, 18, and 24)
The bill would require, in the event of a CISA audit
failure, the appropriate CISO to report the failure to the
Speaker of the House and President of the Senate within 30
days, with a plan to mitigate identified security risks. Results
of audits and related reports would remain confidential and
exempt from disclosure under the Kansas Open Records Act
(KORA).
The bill would also allow the CITO for each branch of
government to make a request to the Adjutant General for a
National Guard active duty operations group to perform
vulnerability assessments of the respective branch for the
purposes of enhancing branch security. The operations group
would be required to limit harm to the system being assessed
whenever possible.

Appropriations and Compliance (New Sections 4–8)
Beginning on July 1, 2025, and annually thereafter,
appropriations from the State General Fund (SGF) or any
special revenue fund of any state agency for IT and
cybersecurity expenditures would be allocated as separate
line items. These appropriations would not be merged with
other items of appropriation for the respective state agency.
Beginning on July 1, 2028, and annually thereafter, the
Director of the Budget (Director), in consultation with relevant
CITOs, would assess each state agency’s compliance with
the provisions of the bill for the previous fiscal year. If found
non-compliant, the Director would certify an amount equal to
5.0 percent of the appropriated and reappropriated SGF
moneys and 5.0 percent of the funds credited to and available
in each special revenue fund for that agency. If a special
revenue fund lacks an expenditure limitation, the Director
would be required to establish a limitation that is 5.0 percent
less than the total amount available in that fund. The bill
5- 291
would require a detailed written report each year on these
compliance determinations to be submitted to the Legislature
prior to the regular session, outlining the amounts certified for
each non-compliant state agency for the fiscal year. The
Senate Committee on Ways and Means and the House
Committee on Appropriations would review and consider a
5.0 percent lapse and decreased expenditure limitation for
non-complying agencies during budget committee hearings.
The bill would also appropriate $15.0 million SGF in FY
2026 to the Kansas Information Security Office (KISO). For
the appropriation, the bill would require the Director, in
consultation with the Executive Branch CITO and CISO, to
determine the five-year average of each state agency’s
cybersecurity service cost financed with SGF and special
revenue funds and lapse the certified SGF amount and
transfer appropriate special revenues to a new fund that
would be created by the bill.
The bill would appropriate $250,000 to the Adjutant
General’s Department for two full-time employees for the
Intelligence Fusion Center for the purpose of monitoring state
IT systems.
The bill would also create, and appropriate in FY 2025
and 2026, a no-limit Information Technology Security Fund
within the State Treasury, for use by the KISO for receipt and
expenditure of special revenue funds transferred from other
state agencies for the purposes provided in the bill.

Information Technology Executive Council Changes
(Sections 16–17, 19, and 20 )
The bill would modify the composition of ITEC to make
the Legislative Branch CITO, Judicial Branch CITO, and the
appointees of the President of the Senate, Senate Minority
Leader, Speaker of the House, and House Minority Leader
non-voting members. [Note: Current law provides that these
members are voting members.] The bill would also add two IT
6- 291
employees, appointed by the State Board of Regents, as
voting members of ITEC. The Executive Branch CITO would
serve as the Chairperson of ITEC.
The bill would modify ITEC’s responsibilities to make
clear the polices it establishes would apply only to Executive
Branch agencies. The bill would add to the list of
responsibilities the requirement to develop a plan to
consolidate all Executive Branch IT services into OITS and
report on such a plan to the Legislature.
The bill would remove requirements for the Judicial
Branch and Legislative Branch CITOs to monitor and
determine whether their respective agencies are in
compliance with ITEC policy, and instead would require them
to monitor and comply with policies set by their respective
branches or offices.
Finally, the bill would require ITEC to meet monthly
instead of quarterly.

CITO Requirements (Sections 18–22)
The bill would modify requirements of the Executive
Branch, Judicial Branch, and Legislative Branch CITOs to
add requirements to:
● Consult with appropriate legal counsel on matters
pertaining to confidentiality of information, KORA,
the Kansas Open Meetings Act, and any other
legal issues related to IT;
● Ensure each agency has the necessary IT and
cybersecurity staff embedded to fulfill its duties;
● Maintain all third-party data centers at locations
within the United States or with companies that are
based in the United States; and

7- 291
● Create a database of all electronic devices within
the branch and ensure that each device is
inventoried, cataloged, and tagged within an
inventory device.
The bill would specify IT and cybersecurity staff
employed by OITS within branch agencies would be
prohibited from disclosing confidential information of the
agency. Violation of this prohibition would constitute a
severity level 5 nonperson felony.
The bill would modify the definition of “executive branch
agency” in the Kansas Cybersecurity Act to include the
Judicial Council and the Kansas Public Employees
Retirement System.
Additionally, the bill would modify the definitions of
“business risk” and “information technology project change or
overrun” to include policies or thresholds adopted by the
Judicial Branch or Legislative Coordinating Council.

Agency Head Responsibilities (Section 25)
The bill would remove certain requirements relating to
an agency head’s responsibility to ensure the agency’s
compliance with certain cybersecurity policies, but would
make clear that an agency head would be responsible for
security of all data and IT resources under their purview, and
the bill would require coordination with the respective CISO to
implement security standards.

Definition Changes and Exemptions (Sections 15, 21–22)
The bill would modify the definition of “executive agency”
in statutes governing IT in Chapter 75 of the Kansas Statutes
Annotated to include the Judicial Council but not elected
office agencies.

8- 291
Background
SB 291, as passed by the Senate on March 28, 2023,
contained provisions enacting the Kansas Public Investments
and Contracts Protection Act and provisions concerning
environmental, social, or governance (ESG) criteria.
On March 20, 2024, the House Committee on
Legislative Modernization removed the contents of SB 291,
inserted the contents of HB 2842, as amended by the House
Committee, and recommended a substitute bill be passed.
The House Committee of the Whole amended the
substitute bill to appropriate $15.0 million to KISO instead of
OITS, and to clarify the Judicial Branch employees subject to
provisions of the bill would include both state and county-
funded Judicial Branch district court employees.

HB 2842
The bill was introduced by the House Committee on
Appropriations at the request of Representative B. Carpenter.
House Committee on Legislative Modernization
In the House Committee hearing, Representative B.
Carpenter testified as a proponent of the bill, stating the bill
contains comprehensive measures to strengthen
cybersecurity infrastructure across all branches of state
government.
The Executive CITO and representatives of the Office of
Secretary of State and the Judicial Branch provided neutral
testimony on the bill, generally expressing the need for
amendments and further consideration of the bill’s impact on
certain agency and branch operations before enacting the bill.
No other testimony was provided.

9- 291
The House Committee amended the bill to clarify
language regarding services and employees that would be
transferred to OITS and which agencies or officers would be
subject to the bill’s provisions.

Fiscal Information
A fiscal note for HB 2842 was not available when the
House Committee of the Whole took action on House Sub. for
SB 291.


Chief Information Security Officer; Chief Information Technology Officer;
cybersecurity; information technology; Information Technology Executive Council;
state government


10- 291

Statutes affected:
As introduced: 74-4921
As Amended by Senate Committee: 74-4921
As Further Amended by Senate Committee: 74-4921
{As Amended by Senate Committee of the Whole}: 74-4921
Version 5: 48-3706, 40-110, 45-215, 45-229, 75-413, 75-623, 75-710, 75-711, 75-7201, 75-7202, 75-3223, 75-7203, 75-7205, 75-7206, 75-7208, 75-7209, 75-7237, 75-7238, 75-7239, 75-7240
{As Amended by House Committee of the Whole}: 48-3706, 40-110, 45-215, 45-229, 75-413, 75-623, 75-710, 75-711, 75-7201, 75-7202, 75-7203, 75-7205, 75-7206, 75-7208, 75-7209, 75-7237, 75-7238, 75-7239, 75-7240
Enrolled: 48-3706, 40-110, 45-215, 45-229, 75-413, 75-623, 75-710, 75-711, 75-7201, 75-7202, 75-3223, 75-7203, 75-7205, 75-7206, 75-7208, 75-7209, 75-7237, 75-7238, 75-7239, 75-7240