Kansas Senate Bill SB295

Kansas 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 3/11/25
• Refer: 3/12/25

Caption

Removing the criminal penalties for possession of a personal-use quantity of marijuana and creating a civil penalty for possession of a personal-use quantity of marijuana.

Summary

SB 295 would decriminalize possession of a personal-use quantity of marijuana in Kansas by replacing criminal penalties with a new marijuana infraction. For adults 18 and older, the infraction would carry a $25 fine with no court costs, or up to three hours of community service if requested. For minors, the bill would require up to five hours of community service, a drug awareness program, or both. The bill also exempts cannabidiol treatment preparations from the new offense and bars arrest for the infraction. The measure goes beyond simple possession penalties by limiting local regulation and collateral consequences. Municipalities would be prohibited from enforcing ordinances on possession of personal-use marijuana or paraphernalia, and existing local laws on that subject would be voided. The bill also states that a marijuana infraction cannot be used to affect driving privileges, student aid, public housing, public benefits, foster care or adoption eligibility, probation or parole status, or as probable cause or reasonable suspicion for a stop or search. Records of marijuana infractions would not be entered into criminal databases, would be confidential, and would be exempt from the Kansas Open Records Act for a limited period. SB 295 would also amend Kansas drug and supervision statutes to align with the new infraction. It would carve marijuana paraphernalia out of the general drug paraphernalia statute when tied to personal-use marijuana, and it would prevent probation, postrelease supervision, or parole conditions from banning marijuana use unless a court finds marijuana use would create a danger. A positive marijuana test or a marijuana infraction could not itself be treated as a supervision violation. The bill also creates a drug awareness program fund, dedicating half of marijuana-infraction fine revenue to that fund and half to the state general fund. The bill’s overall sentiment, based on its caption and structure, appears reform-oriented and supportive of reduced criminal penalties for low-level marijuana possession. Because there were no committee transcripts or recorded votes provided, there is no documented debate in the supplied materials showing direct support or opposition from legislators. The text itself suggests an intent to reduce arrests and collateral consequences while preserving some local authority over public consumption. The main points of potential contention are likely to be the scope of preemption over municipalities, the removal of criminal enforcement tools, and the limits placed on probation, parole, and law-enforcement searches. Opponents could view the bill as too broad because it restricts local ordinances and bars use of marijuana possession or a positive test as a supervision violation, while supporters would likely emphasize that it preserves penalties for public consumption and creates a low-level civil response instead of criminal punishment.

Impact

SB 295 would amend Kansas controlled-substance, paraphernalia, probation, and parole statutes to remove criminal penalties for possession of a personal-use quantity of marijuana and replace them with a marijuana infraction. It would also bar municipalities from regulating possession of personal-use marijuana or paraphernalia, limit the use of marijuana-related conduct in criminal justice and public-benefit decisions, and create a new drug awareness program fund financed by half of the infraction fines. The bill would repeal the existing statutory sections it amends and make the changes effective upon publication in the statute book.

Sentiment

The bill appears generally supportive of marijuana decriminalization and reduction of collateral consequences, with a reform-oriented approach reflected in its caption and detailed statutory changes. No committee transcript or vote data were provided, so there is no recorded legislative debate in the supplied materials to indicate organized support or opposition. Based on the text alone, the measure is framed as a public-policy shift away from criminal enforcement for low-level possession while retaining some penalties and public-consumption restrictions.

Contention

Likely areas of contention include whether the state should preempt local governments from regulating personal-use marijuana possession, whether a $25 infraction is sufficient deterrence, and whether marijuana possession or a positive marijuana test should be excluded from probation, parole, and postrelease supervision violations. Another possible point of dispute is the bill’s restriction on using marijuana possession as probable cause or reasonable suspicion for stops or searches. Supporters would likely favor the reduced criminalization and collateral-consequence protections, while opponents may argue the bill weakens enforcement and limits local control.