Arts, entertainment, business converge in attempt to secure Kansas film production incentives
Stuart Little, a lobbyist for Grow Kansas Film, photographed in 2021. (Noah Taborda/Kansas Reflector)
TOPEKA — Film and television production professionals are hoping this is the year incentives become law so Kansas can attract talent to grow the local media industry.
Kansas is one of a small handful of states without incentives for film production, which industry professionals say is a missed opportunity for an economic boost.
A film production tax incentive bill made it through the 2024 legislative session, passing the House with a 102-22 vote and the Senate with a 32-5 vote, but it was caught in Gov. Laura Kelly's blanket veto of a package of tax break bills. The Legislature first considered an incentive bill in 2022.
This year, Senate Bill 52 has garnered support from the state's tourism and economic development groups, the state Department of Commerce and native Kansan film professionals.
'Kansas does not make it easy for its creative young people to stay here. We are unwilling to staunch the creative brain drain by actively telling our kids that it's better for them to move away,' said Kristin 'Kiki' Bush, an actor from rural Kansas, at a Feb. 4 hearing for the bill.
'Without incentives, they probably will,' she added.
The bill would create the Kansas Film and Digital Media Production Development Program within the Kansas Department of Commerce. It's based on a similar tax credit used in 40 other states, according to Stuart Little, a lobbyist for Grow Kansas Film, a coalition of film professionals.
'You come in and you spend money on a production in a state,' Little said. 'You do the qualified expenditures. You follow the rules. You get an audit. You get done. You can collect 30% of a tax credit.'
The program would offer up to $10 million in tax credits per year for eligible film, video or digital media companies, with the caveat that at least 10% of credits approved each year are Kansas-based production companies. Productions must meet certain criteria in order to receive a 30% production or post-production income tax credit.
The amount of tax credits can increase if a project is a multi-film deal, a television series, a big-budget production or if it contributes to Kansas' film production infrastructure or workforce. Credits can also increase if at least half of a production crew are Kansas residents or if a company has previously participated in the program.
Investments in production facilities at Wichita State University and Kansas State University-Salina and in a 50-acre underground film preservation and restoration facility in Hutchinson indicate a burgeoning film business, according to industry professionals advocating for the bill.
'This is in some ways an arts issue, an entertainment issue,' Little said. 'It's a business issue.'
For filmmakers, actors and investors supporting the bill, all the issues are one.
Bush, the actor, added: 'I believe our landscapes and our people's stories are worthy enough to compete with other states — that our stories are worthy enough to film.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
30 minutes ago
- The Hill
Jeffries says Trump ‘intentionally' inflaming unrest in Los Angeles
House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) is hammering President Trump over the clashes in Los Angeles, saying the president is purposefully escalating tensions to distract the country from a volatile economy. Speaking to reporters in the Capitol, Jeffries railed against Trump's aggressive deportation policies and defended the rights of Americans to protest such government actions — if it's done peacefully. He accused Trump of 'fanning flames and inciting things on the ground' to distract from a domestic policy agenda that Jeffries has dubbed 'a failure.' 'Donald Trump is clearly trying to distract from the fact that he has a failed administration,' Jeffries said. The Democratic leader also dismissed Trump's argument that, by intervening in the L.A. immigration protests, he's simply bringing law and order to a city where local officials have failed to do so. Jeffries noted that Trump, for hours, had declined to intervene on Jan. 6, 2021, when a mob of his supporters attacked law enforcers at the U.S. Capitol in an effort to block the certification of Trump's election defeat a few months earlier. In January, Trump pardoned roughly 1,500 of the rioters — a move that, according to Jeffries, gives Trump and his supporters 'zero credibility' to claim the mantle of law and order. 'Donald Trump wasn't a leader on Jan. 6. He didn't send the National Guard to stop the violent mob that was brutally beating police officers in plain view for every single American to see,' Jeffries said. 'And this guy, who likely withheld the National Guard — he certainly didn't send them forward — is lecturing the country about law and order?' 'Give me a break. We're not feeling you — particularly as it relates to this issue,' he continued. 'Donald Trump and all of these minions who support him — the sycophants, the extremists — have zero credibility on this issue. Republicans have become the party of lawlessness and disorder.' Amid the unrest in L.A., Trump over the weekend activated members of the National Guard, drawing criticisms from California officials — notably Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) — who said local law enforcement agencies are sufficiently equipped to handle the situation without the involvement of federal troops. Newsom announced Monday that he is suing the administration over the federal intervention. 'This is a manufactured crisis,' Newsom posted on X. 'He is creating fear and terror to take over a state militia and violate the U.S. constitution.' Jeffries is standing squarely behind Newsom and L.A. Mayor Karen Bass (D), a former member of the House, who have both argued that local and state law enforcers in California have the faculties and manpower to protect both First Amendment rights and public safety. 'The LAPD, the L.A. Sheriff's Department, other local law enforcement, and the California Highway Patrol, seem to have the capacity to make sure that the situation is addressed — that peaceful protests are allowed to occur, and that law-breakers are held accountable,' Jeffries said.
Yahoo
34 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Judge denies Michael Madigan's motion for new trial, setting stage for high-stakes sentencing Friday
A federal judge on Monday denied a motion by former House Speaker Michael Madigan seeking to overturn his recent conviction on bribery and other corruption counts, setting the stage for a high-stakes sentencing hearing later this week. Madigan, 83, was back in the federal courtroom for the first time since a jury convicted him nearly four months ago. But unlike his marathon trial, Monday's hearing was brief. After both sides waived oral arguments on the defense motion, U.S. District Judge John Robert Blakey announced he was denying it, though his ruling, which he said is more than 100 pages long, won't be made public for some time. Madigan sat through the 15-minute hearing without comment and walked out carrying an umbrella. Blakey is holding another hearing Tuesday to go over issues on the sentencing guidelines in Madigan's case, which hinge partly on how much money ComEd stood to gain because of legislation the speaker helped usher through the legislative process. Madigan's attorneys are also asking Blakey to strike language from a prosecution filing last Friday revealing for the first time publicly that Madigan 'has amassed a personal fortune of more than $40 million' — a disclosure reported by the Tribune over the weekend. The defense wrote in a motion filed ahead of Monday's hearing that Madigan served the public as a legislator and lawyer for more than 60 years and 'chose frugality over extravagance, remaining in the same modest home for more than fifty years while making prudent savings and investment choices.' 'The government offers zero evidence—absolutely nothing—to justify broadcasting specific details about his net worth,' the motion stated. 'The government's decision to splash his personal financial information across a public filing represents a gross breach of the rules.' Blakey said he'd take up the issue on Tuesday. Madigan's sentencing, set for Friday afternoon, is one of the most highly anticipated hearings in years at the Dirksen U.S. Courthouse. Prosecutors have asked for a hefty 12 1/2 year prison term and $1.5 million fine, while the defense is seeking probation along with a period of home confinement. Madigan's defense team filed a motion in March arguing for a new trial in his corruption case, saying prosecutors failed to prove the then-powerful Democrat knew about a scheme by ComEd to pay off his associates and alleging Blakey made a series of mistakes in his evidentiary rulings. The 73-page motion alleged those errors tainted the jury with highly prejudicial evidence, and asked Blakey to reverse the jury's verdict on certain guilty counts and grant a new trial on others. Among the missteps that Madigan's legal team says warrants a new trial: letting in a now-infamous FBI wiretap where Madigan tells his longtime confidant, Michael McClain, that some ComEd contractors 'made out like bandits' for little work; allowing the jury to hear prejudicial testimony about sexual harassment allegations; and including a recorded phone call between McClain and the speaker's son, Andrew Madigan, about another public utility, Peoples Gas, being forced to make political hires. The defense filing also argued that despite the jury's guilty verdict, prosecutors failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Madigan knew about any scheme to enrich his friends or that there was a 'this-for-that' agreement to help shepherd ComEd's legislation in Springfield. 'Michael Madigan is not corrupt. He never exchanged his duty to serve his constituents for private benefit — the essence of corruption,' the filing stated. 'For decades, Madigan sought to ensure ComEd did not get away with ripping off consumers in Illinois. Madigan's primary purpose was to work hard for his community and the Democratic party.' Such post-trial motions are routine and rarely granted. But the filing provides a blueprint for a likely appeal to the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. Madigan's trial capped one of the most significant political corruption investigations in Chicago's checkered history. It also cemented an extraordinary personal fall for Madigan, the longest-serving state legislative leader in the nation's history who for decades held an iron-tight grip on the House as well as the state Democratic Party. After 11 days of deliberation, the jury's final verdict was mixed. Madigan was convicted of 10 of 23 counts, including marquee allegations that he agreed to squeeze lucrative, do-nothing contracts from ComEd for pals such as former Alds. Frank Olivo and Michael Zalewski and precinct captains Ray Nice and Edward Moody, all while the utility won a series of major legislation victories. Madigan was also convicted on six out of seven counts — including wire fraud and Travel Act violations — regarding a plan to get ex-Ald. Daniel Solis, a key FBI mole who testified at length in the trial, appointed to a state board. Jurors deadlocked on all six counts related to Madigan's co-defendant McClain. jmeisner@
Yahoo
34 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Federal Judge Blocks Trump From Enforcing DEI and Anti-Trans Executive Orders
A federal judge on Monday blocked several of President Donald Trump's executive orders that have threatened federal funding to nonprofits that primarily service LGBTQ+ communities. District Judge Jon Tigar in Oakland, California, issued a preliminary injunction halting three of Trump's anti-DEI and anti-transgender executive orders. Nine nonprofits around the country, including the San Francisco AIDS Foundation, had sued the Trump administration, calling its actions unconstitutional. 'While the Executive requires some degree of freedom to implement its political agenda, it is still bound by the Constitution. And even in the context of federal subsidies, it cannot weaponize Congressionally appropriated funds to single out protected communities for disfavored treatment or suppress ideas that it does not like or has deemed dangerous,' Tigar wrote in the order. Hard-won queer rights are under attack. HuffPost remains committed to standing with the LGBTQ+ community. Support our work by The federal government therefore cannot withhold funding from grant recipients if they continue programs that promote diversity or service transgender people. The order will remain in effect nationwide while the case continues, and Trump administration's lawyers are likely to appeal. On Jan. 20, Trump's first day in office, he signed an executive order announcing the federal government would only recognize 'two sexes, male and female,' and barred the promotion of 'gender ideology,' a right-wing term used to refer to the existence of transgender people and their rights. Shortly after he also signed two orders directing agencies to terminate federal funding for all diversity, equity and inclusion programs. Almost immediately, nonprofit organizations saw that their contracts, totaling hundreds of thousands and, in some cases, millions of dollars in federal funding, were being canceled. On April 22, the Department of Justice informed FORGE, a Wisconsin-based nonprofit that provides training and support to crime victims, that it was terminating a $749,000 grant to update its toolkit to support transgender survivors of sexual assault. The very next day, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention notified the Los Angeles LGBT Center, another plaintiff in the suit, that it was terminating a $1 million grant to study new strategies to mitigate the spread of sexually transmitted infections among all populations, but specifically including gay and bisexual men and transgender women, court documents show. 'All of [these organizations] have lost funding because they serve trans people and BIPOC people … For some of these groups, the amount of the budget they are losing is almost 50% of their budget. These are people who do things like give people their HIV meds, feed people, house people,' Kevin Jennings, the chief executive officer of Lambda Legal, an LGBTQ legal advocacy group, told HuffPost ahead of the order. 'So let's be really clear about what the bottom line of these cuts is. People will die. People don't have any place to live, don't have a place to live, adequate nutrition. We consider this a life and death lawsuit,' he added. Over the last six months, advocacy groups have sounded the alarms as Trump has leveraged executive orders to withhold federal funding from universities, nonprofits and medical institutions that specifically service people of color and transgender communities and to scrub federal websites that include data, research, history on those groups. Already, HIV advocates worry that the Trump administration's cuts to the CDC and termination of hundreds of federal research grants on treatment and prevention has reversed the momentum of the decadeslong fight to end the epidemic.
