Ron Estes (R-KS)
To remove the limitation imposed as a result of receiving funding under the Land and Water Conservation Fund on the conversion of Northeast Sedgwick County Park in Sedgwick County, Kansas, to a use other than public outdoor recreation.
A Republican bill with no cosponsors
Last activity — Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
In committee
Introduced and handed to a committee in the chamber it started in.
The committee holds it, and most bills are never heard from again. A hearing or a committee vote would be news; silence is the usual outcome, and it kills the bill without anyone voting against it.
Its path through Congress
- Introduced
- In Committee
What this bill would do
This bill aims to remove a specific limitation for Northeast Sedgwick County Park in Sedgwick County, Kansas. This limitation was caused by the park receiving funding from the Land and Water Conservation Fund. By removing this restriction, the park can be converted to a use other than public outdoor recreation.
Yes
- Scored +2
Would business owners be better off under this?
Removing land-use restrictions may allow for commercial development opportunities.
- Scored +2
Does this leave more decisions to the states?
It grants the local county more flexibility and autonomy over land use.
The opposite· 3 of 13
- Scored -3
Would households on low incomes be better off under this?
Low-income households rely more heavily on free public parks for recreation.
- Scored -3
Does this better protect air, water and wildlife?
The bill permits the conversion of a public outdoor recreation area to other uses, potentially reducing protected green space.
- Scored -2
Would children be better off under this?
Potential loss of public outdoor recreation space can negatively impact children's play areas.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
- Flexibility in Land Use: The bill removes the limitation found in Section 200305(f)(3) of title 54, United States Code, which allows the Northeast Sedgwick County Park to be converted to a use other than public outdoor recreation.
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- Loss of Recreational Space: Because the bill allows the conversion of Northeast Sedgwick County Park to a use other than public outdoor recreation, the area may no longer serve as a public outdoor recreation site.
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Tap or hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would business owners be better off under this? — Removing land-use restrictions may allow for commercial development opportunities. Would households on low incomes be better off under this? — Low-income households rely more heavily on free public parks for recreation. Would children be better off under this? — Potential loss of public outdoor recreation space can negatively impact children's play areas. Would people in middle age be better off under this? — Potential loss of public outdoor recreation space may reduce available leisure areas. Would middle-income households be better off under this? — Loss of public recreation space generally reduces quality of life for local residents. Would people with disabilities be better off under this? — Loss of public parks may reduce access to accessible outdoor spaces. Would retired people be better off under this? — Retirees often rely on public parks for low-cost exercise and socialization. Would people over 65 be better off under this? — Potential loss of public outdoor recreation space may reduce accessible walking and leisure areas. Would students be better off under this? — Students lose a potential outdoor space for recreation and study. Would people in cities be better off under this? — Residents of developed areas benefit more from preserved public parks. Would people in their twenties and thirties be better off under this? — Potential loss of public outdoor recreation space may reduce available leisure areas.
- Environment Energy And Infrastructure
- Does this better protect air, water and wildlife? — The bill permits the conversion of a public outdoor recreation area to other uses, potentially reducing protected green space. Does this better protect public land such as parks and forests? — It removes restrictions that ensure land funded by the LWCF remains used for public recreation.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this leave more decisions to the states? — It grants the local county more flexibility and autonomy over land use. Does this give the federal government more power? — The bill reduces federal oversight regarding the use of land funded by a federal program.
- 8/26/2025
- Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
- Introduced in House