Voice For Liberty

Tag: Wichita city government

  • City Council divvies up tax dollars for the arts

    A Wichita Eagle news story today tells how City Council divvies up tax dollars for the arts.

    Can you imagine sitting through these meetings with people like Joan Cole and other members of the Arts Council as they decide who gets — and who doesn’t get — government largesse?

    I imagine that these people actually think they have a heightened vision of what Wichitans should experience for their art and culture.

    Why not let ordinary Wichitans decide what they prefer for arts and culture? Why not let the people decide which institutions they want to support, and to what extent?

    As I explain in the post Government Art in Wichita: “Is this not a sterling example of an oxymoron? Must government weasel its way into every aspect of our lives?”

  • Wichita’s new airport terminal: Has its time passed?

    Reporting in the Wall Street Journal (Airports Suffer Terminal Illness) tells us that airports across the country are suffering just like the airlines:

    This loss of passengers is creating a vicious economic spiral that is gripping airports across the country. At a time when airports have taken increasing roles in passenger comfort and care because of the service slide of airlines, today’s financial pressures are forcing major service reductions and financial strains.

    The flight cuts will make the airport more expensive for airlines. Many airports set landing fees and terminal rents charged to airlines based on debt payments and operating costs. When the number of passengers is reduced, costs per passenger go up. Flights become less profitable, and airlines reduce schedules more, potentially driving per-passenger costs even higher. Cash-strapped airports will likely also scale back on upkeep and building improvements. Facing reduced foot traffic — and sales — struggling airport shops and restaurants may close. …

    Southwest and other carriers say fuel cost and flight profitability are the biggest drivers influencing decisions on where to eliminate flights, but airport costs are becoming an increasingly important factor.

    I’ve written in the past in posts such as Consider Carefully Costs of a New Wichita Airport Terminal that we in Wichita need to make sure that we don’t add costs to the airlines that they aren’t prepared to pay.

    As shown in the accompanying chart (click on the chart for a larger version), Wichita’s air traffic has been growing at a faster rate than the nation as a whole. Recently it has leveled off and even dropped. What will happen in the future? Almost no one has an optimistic outlook for airlines, and with the recent turmoil in the markets, the outlook may be even bleaker. If there is any way to economize on Wichita’s new air terminal, I would urge us to do that.

  • Should a Beat Journalist be a Layman?

    Keeping TIFs from a public tiff by Wichita Eagle business reporter Bill Wilson on the Eagle’s Business Casual blog contains some comments that are troubling to me.

    In these comments, reporter Wilson wrote this: “Instead, a TIF, to this layman, actually is a government bet on the success of a development.” (emphasis added)

    Now I believe that Mr. Wilson may be wrong in his understanding of the mechanism behind tax increment financing (TIF) districts. I certainly don’t agree with his assessment of their public policy impact when he says “TIFs are miscast as a government giveaway.”

    When our city stakes the success of its downtown development efforts on TIF districts and other economic development incentives, is it asking too much for journalists to acquaint themselves with matters like TIF districts to the point where they are no longer laymen?

    It is not complicated. These articles may be of interest: Tiff over Wichita TIFs, Wichita City Council’s Misunderstanding of Tax Increment Financing, Tax Abatements in Wichita, and Tax Increment Financing in Wichita Benefits Few.

  • Records Requests Sent Today

    Today, I’ve made two records requests under the Kansas Open Records Act.

    The first, to USD 259, the Wichita public school district, is this:

    All correspondence between USD 259 and Schaefer Johnson Cox Frey Architecture and its representatives from July 1, 2007 to the present. I ask for both written and electronic correspondence such as email. This would include email between USD 259 and Schaefer Johnson Cox Frey Architecture’s email accounts at sjcf.com, and also email accounts of Schaefer Johnson Cox Frey Architecture representatives such as Joe Johnson, Kenton Cox, and Ken Arnold that may not be at an sjcf.com email address.

    Then, to the City of Wichita:

    All correspondence between the City of Wichita and HH Holdings, LLC and its representatives from January 1, 2007 to the present. I ask for both written and electronic correspondence such as email. This would include email between the City of Wichita and Kevass Harding at both business and personal email addresses, between the City of Wichita and Key Construction and its representatives at both business and personal email addresses, and between the City of Wichita and Landmark Commercial Real Estate at both business and personal email addresses.

  • Wichita School District: TIF Action Tests Accountability and Ethics

    Remarks to be delivered to the board of USD 259, the Wichita public school district, at tonight’s meeting.

    Regarding the Ken Mar Redevelopment District: There is simply no way to look at this TIF district other than as a transfer of $2.5 million from the taxpayers to Reverend Harding’s group. Why? According to material prepared by the City of Wichita, the development was $2.5 million short in its funding. But after the creation of the proposed TIF district, the project is fully funded.

    Furthermore, as I explained at an earlier meeting of this board, a TIF district allows developers to pay for things — using their own property taxes — that non-TIF developers must pay for themselves. If this were not so, how does the TIF district benefit the development?

    Some say that but for the creation of the TIF district, the project would not happen, and therefore no increased tax revenue would be collected. But as recently reported in the Wichita Eagle, these binary, either/or choices are rarely the actual case. For this development, it has been reported that the development already has $11 million in funding. So it appears that the TIF district is not required for something nice to happen to Ken Mar.

    The real problem with this TIF district, however, is the conduct of the applicant, who is a member of this board.

    At a meeting of the Wichita City Council, Reverend Harding told the council that he had informed his fellow school board members of what he was doing. But two members of this board have told me personally that he did not do that. So there’s a discrepancy somewhere.

    Then, I am Reverend Harding’s constituent. He has not responded to my several email and telephone messages with questions about this project.

    In meetings of the Wichita City Council and Sedgwick County Commission, he spoke about himself and what he wants to do for the community. But he hasn’t explained why the taxpayers need to subsidize his project with $2.5 million.

    He hasn’t explained why he has voted for property tax increases, but now seeks to avoid paying some of those increased taxes. He hasn’t explained why district residents should vote to increase their property taxes — by way of the proposed school bond issue — but desires to avoid paying some of those taxes himself.

    And importantly, in his role as school board member, he hasn’t explained why the school district should forgo tax revenue just so Ken Mar can be redeveloped even grander.

    Recently the Sedgwick County Commission took up this matter even though they were not required to, just as this board is not required to. The commission heard testimony from the public. The commissioners spoke, and then they voted. Although the commission did not vote the way I asked, the matter was handled with a reasonable degree of openness and transparency.

    This board now faces a test of accountability, openness and transparency, and most importantly, ethics. So I ask that this board consider a resolution vetoing the formation of this TIF district. Those members with a conflict of interest may then recuse themselves, and the remaining board members can vote. This must be done tonight, as any delay means automatic consent to the formation of the TIF district.

    If this is not done, the citizens of the Wichita school district will wonder if the fix is in, if a political insider used his position and connections for personal gain. They will be justified in wondering.

  • Testimony before the USD 259 Wichita Public School board regarding the Ken Mar TIF

    From John Todd.

    President Rogers, School Board Members, and Superintendent Libhart, I thank you for this opportunity to speak. My name is John Todd. I live at 1559 Payne in Wichita, Kansas, and I am opposed to the Ken Mar shopping center TIF that was created by the City of Wichita on August 12, 2008, and that you have the authority as the Board of Education for the Wichita Public School District USD-259 to reject as bad public policy for public schools and other local governmental units on behalf of the taxpaying citizens of this community.

    County Commissioner Gwen Welshimer, who voted against this TIF when it was considered before the Sedgwick County Board of County Commissioners, advised me that her investigation into the $2.5 million dollar TIF revealed that HH Holding, LLC was the owner of the Ken Mar shopping center and that one of the HH Holdings owners was school board member, Kevis Harding. Commissioner Welshimer further advised that county records show that the HH Holdings group paid $2.215 million dollars for the shopping center, and that the group’s purchase of the property closed on April 2, 2008.

    Is there any other concerned citizen here tonight besides me who is outraged by a real estate transaction with a purchase price of $2.215 million dollars that warrants a $2.5 million dollar cash contribution from the taxpayers of this community? Isn’t the Ken Mar transaction akin to having local government simply donating the $2.215 million dollar shopping center to the investors for free and then handing them $285,000 cash as additional boot from the public treasury? Does the Ken Mar TIF sound like a project that demands full public disclosure of Mr. Harding’s ownership interest in the Ken Mar project and his membership on the School Board?

    In the interest of transparency, I would request the School Board bring the Ken Mar TIF project to a vote before the School Board tonight in the interest of full disclosure as to the relationship of a School Board member and the project, and also in the interest of full disclosure of the potential financial impact, if any, that taxes diverted away from the USD-259 mill levy participation in the Ken Mar TIF will have on Wichita Public Schools in particular, and/or on the school children of Kansas if this money is diverted away from the State of Kansas school funds.

    A recent article in the Wichita Eagle reported that an estimated $73,000 per year over 15 years would be diverted away from the Sedgwick County treasury due to the Ken Mar TIF. And, since the Sedgwick County and the USD-259 mill levies are similar in size, where will the school mill levy portion of the TIF Bond payback be diverted from, local or state school funds?

    I believe the stockholders/citizens of the USD-259 community deserve an answer to the questions I have asked tonight, and the answers need to be in an “on-the-record” format that only inclusion on the school board agenda tonight would provide.

    Please help your constituents follow the money trail.

  • Are airlines pilots the best judge of airline economics?

    Once in a while you read a letter in the newspaper that makes you wonder. A letter in the Wichita Eagle by Susan Priest of Wichita makes me wonder a few things.

    This letter reports on an overheard conversation among airline pilots. One source of their amusement is that there are no direct flights between Wichita and Oklahoma City.

    I’m not positive about this, but I’m sure that the demand for air travel between Wichita and Oklahoma City is very low. Google maps tells me that the driving time from one city’s downtown to the other is two hours and 30 minutes. The drive to a city’s airport, arriving way early to make sure you get through security, combined with the flight time and the drive from the other city’s airport to wherever your destination is — this would take much more time than that. And what do you do for ground transportation? Renting a car takes time, too.

    But what really makes me wonder is the pilot’s claim, and Ms. Priest’s evident agreement, that you can’t get good airfares from Wichita. Our government leaders would be distressed to hear that, as currently we spend $6.5 million per year in subsidy to a low-cost airline in order to artificially suppress all airfares. Is this subsidy not working?

    I have argued that the subsidy is not in the best interests of Wichita for several reasons. The post Remarks to Wichita City Council Regarding the AirTran Subsidy on July 11, 2006 summarizes the arguments and gives links to other supporting articles. Now, if people complain that Wichita airfares are not low, and if they’re still driving to Oklahoma City or Kansas City to catch flights — as the pilots and Ms. Priest claim — we have a serious problem.

  • Wichita Smoking Ban Starts. Sharon Fearey is Excited.

    Today, September 4, 2008, marks the first day of the ban on smoking in Wichita. It’s not quite a total ban, and that has some smoking ban supporters upset. In a letter to the Wichita Eagle, anti-smoking activist Cindy Claycomb writes “If you are a supporter of clean indoor air, please do not spend your money in businesses that allow smoking indoors, including smoking rooms. If we continue to spend our money at places that allow smoking indoors, that tells the business owners that we do not care — that we will tolerate secondhand smoke even though we all know the harmful effects.”

    Not everyone is upset, though. In the Wichita Eagle article Smoking ban takes effect; for smokers, end of an era, Wichita city council member Sharon Fearey is quoted as “I feel this is an exciting time for the city.” If, like council member Fearey, you appreciate increasing government and bureaucratic management of the lives of Wichitans, you might be excited, too. Those who value liberty and freedom, however, are saddened — even if they aren’t smokers.

    Fortunately Ms. Fearey is precluded from running again for her seat on the city council by term limits. The two architects of this smoking ban — Lavonta Williams and Jeff Longwell — can run for election again. The position held by Ms. Williams is up for grabs in the March 2009 primary. Hopefully the citizens of Wichita city council district one will elect someone respectful of property rights, not to mention personal rights.

    For more coverage of the smoking issue and why it’s important, these articles will be of interest: It’s Not the Same as Pee In the Swimming Pool, Haze Surrounds Wichita Smoking Ban, Property Rights Should Control Kansas Smoking Decisions, Let Property Rights Rule Wichita Smoking Decisions, Testimony Opposing Kansas Smoking Ban, and No More Smoking Laws, Please.

  • Being Open and Transparent: A Sedgwick County Commissioner’s View

    Yesterday (August 27, 2008) I testified briefly at a meeting of the Sedgwick County Commission opposing the formation of a tax increment financing (TIF) district that will benefit a Wichita political insider. My concern that I wanted the commissioners to be aware of is was that the applicant, Wichita school board member Reverend Kevass Harding, has not acted in an open, transparent, and ethical manner.

    Commissioner Dave Unruh said that he had thought that Harding was being open and transparent. I suppose if you’re a full-time county commissioner who, presumably, thinks about these matters on a full-time basis, and you have a staff of well-paid professionals to prepare reports and other documents for you, and you have an applicant who is seeking $2.5 million in taxpayer subsidy and would do just about anything to secure that sum, you probably don’t have any problems finding out what you want to know.

    But for average citizens who don’t watch county commission meetings on television, who don’t pour over the minutes of the meetings, and who may not read the sketchy coverage of this matter in newspapers, they won’t be aware of what’s going on.

    This is another example of how many members of the Wichita City Council and the Sedgwick County Commission are out of touch with the citizens they govern. Three of the last three county commissioners to face the voters for re-election have been defeated. A fourth faces an opponent this November.

    My remarks from yesterday:

    The concern I have with the formation of this TIF district is that the applicant may be using his political connections for profit, and he has not been forthright with his constituents and the community.

    The Wichita school board, of which Reverend Kevass Harding is a member, is required, as is this commission, to consent to the formation of this TIF district. The problem is that since no vote is required by the school board, how can we ask him to declare his conflict of interest and recuse himself from discussion and a vote?

    He told the Wichita City Council that he had told city staff and his colleagues on the school board of what he was doing, but it’s not to them that he has en ethical obligation. Instead, his obligation is to the residents of Sedgwick County, the City of Wichita, and USD 259. It is to them that he has the ethical obligation to make sure that this matter is handled with openness and transparency. To my knowledge, he has not done that.

    This smacks of a political insider using his connections for personal profit.

    Furthermore, the applicant has not been responsive to community concerns over this TIF district. I am Reverend Harding’s constituent, as he is the at-large school board member for USD 259, and I am a resident of that school district. He has not returned my several telephone calls and email messages regarding this matter.

    For these reasons, I urge this commission to veto the formation of this TIF district. Let the applicant apply again, this time being open and forthright with the citizens of Sedgwick County, and perhaps this matter can be viewed differently.