Voice For Liberty

Tag: Wichita city government

  • The power and influence of the Wichita mayor

    The power and influence of the Wichita mayor

    When pursuing a large Wichita city contract, did the winning company lobby all council members, or primarily Mayor Jeff Longwell?

    The role of Wichita Mayor Jeff Longwell in the awarding of the contract for the new Wichita water plant has been in the news. A recent Wichita Eagle article showed how the mayor steered the award to a company other than the company recommended by the city’s selection committee. 1

    Central to the story is the relationship between the mayor and the company he favored. There was, according to Eagle reporting, a close relationship including a cash gift that was not disclosed 2 and some eerily chummy emails. 3

    The mayor, however, downplayed his role. In a response from Longwell posted on the city’s Facebook page, he said he is part of a team: “A team that deliberately keeps each other in check. We question and challenge each step, and that is an intentional process designed to ensure we have the best deal for our city.” 4

    Some council members agree. In the Eagle article, two council members were interviewed, Brandon Johnson (district 1, northeast Wichita) and James Clendenin (district 3, southeast and south Wichita):

    Johnson and Clendenin both downplayed Longwell’s role in awarding the contract, saying the mayor is just one vote.

    “You give the mayor too much credit,” Johnson said.

    “Yeah, this idea that the mayor of the city of Wichita has enough power to make any decision he would like is something that I think is a misconception,” Clendenin said.

    What, then, is the power of the mayor to lead or steer the council in his preferred direction?

    The answer to this question holds the answer: Did the winning company (Wichita Water Partners) lobby, flatter, or gift any Wichita City Council members with anything approaching the consideration directed to Mayor Jeff Longwell?

    —
    Notes

    1. Swaim, Chance. Wichita’s mayor steered multi-million-dollar water plant contract to friends. Wichita Eagle, September 29, 2019. Available at https://www.kansas.com/news/politics-government/article234701932.html. ↩
    2. “Before Longwell cast the deciding vote, the president of one of the Water Partners’ companies paid for Longwell to enter a $1,000-per-person charity golf tournament. … Nor did Longwell disclose the $1,000 entry fee on a state ethics form for local officials that he filed in February.” ↩
    3. “They frequently referred to each other in emails by nicknames — Your Eminence, His Highness, Homecoming Queen, Eye Candy, Jethro and Wine Delivery Guy, after Young, the president of PEC, offered to drop off to Longwell leftover wine from a previous dinner party.” ↩
    4. Longwell, Jeff. City of Wichita Facebook page. Available at https://www.facebook.com/cityofwichita/posts/2535037446542240. ↩
  • Metro Monitor for Wichita, 2019 edition

    Metro Monitor for Wichita, 2019 edition

    In a report looking at the economics of the 100 largest metropolitan areas, Wichita often ranks near the bottom.

    Each year Brookings Institution creates an index of major metropolitan areas called Metro Monitor. The report, says Brookings, “explores the local realities of America’s economic progress, illuminating how metropolitan economies are performing today and over the past decade.” The report for 2019 is available here.

    The report examines the 100 largest metropolitan areas. For 2018, the Wichita MSA ranked as the 89th largest, falling from rank 82 as recently as 2011. 1

    Growth

    To examine growth of a metro, Brookings considered percentage change in jobs, percentage change in gross metropolitan product, and percentage change in jobs at young firms. The nearby charts shows the results. (Some data is not available for all metro areas.)

    Click charts for larger versions.

    Prosperity

    Prosperity looks at percentage changes in productivity, standard of living, and average wage.

    Inclusion

    Inclusion looks at percentage changes in median earnings, relative poverty, and employment rate.

    Racial inclusion

    Racial inclusion looks at change in white/people of color median earnings gap, relative poverty gap, and employment rate gap.

    Looking forward

    As the Brookings analysis ends with 2017, what might we find if the analysis was based on 2018 and 2019 data? Some of the data Brookings uses is not available until after a lengthy delay, such GDP for metropolitan areas. That data, which is an important indicator of a region’s economic health, is not yet available for 2018 for metropolitan areas.

    Employment data is available quickly, however. The nearby chart, displaying data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, shows changes in the number of jobs for Wichita and the nation, displaying the percentage change from the same month of the prior year. 2 It’s easy to see the slump in Wichita in 2017. Since then Wichita has improved, with some months showing greater job growth than the nation. From January 2018 to August 2019, national jobs grew by 2.6 percent, and in the Wichita MSA, by 2.2 percent. 3

    —
    Notes

    1. Weeks, Bob. Wichita population falls; outmigration continues. Available at https://wichitaliberty.org/wichita-government/wichita-population-falls-outmigration-continues/. ↩
    2. An interactive version of the chart is available at https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/?g=p11T. ↩
    3. FRED, from the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, is a resource for examining economic data and creating charts and tables. Most of the available data is data gathered from other sources, in this case the Bureau of Labor Statistics. FRED provides a consistent interactive interface to the data, and provides several ways to share the data. Start at https://fred.stlouisfed.org/. ↩
  • From Pachyderm: Wichita mayoral candidates

    From Pachyderm: Wichita mayoral candidates

    From the Wichita Pachyderm Club this week: Wichita mayoral candidates Jeff Longwell and Brandon Whipple. This audio presentation or podcast was recorded on September 27, 2019. Todd Johnson is the moderator.

    Shownotes

    From left: Brandon Whipple, Jeff Longwell, and moderator Todd Johnson.
  • Downtown Wichita population

    Downtown Wichita population

    Wichita economic development officials use a convoluted method of estimating the population of downtown Wichita, producing a number much higher than Census Bureau estimates.

    How many people live in downtown Wichita? The answer, according to Downtown Wichita, is 2,749.

    This value comes from the 2019 State of Downtown Report, published by Downtown Wichita. 1 It is for zip code 67202, which is commonly recognized as greater downtown Wichita. While this report highlights the number of people living in downtown Wichita, it no longer reports the number of people working in downtown. 2

    How does Downtown Wichita arrive at the number of residents in downtown? An endnote from the report gives the details:

    The 2010 U.S. Census states the population in the 67202 area code [sic] is 1,393. Per Downtown Wichita records, 1,228 units rental units have opened in the Downtown SSMID district since 2010 when the Census was taken. Per data provided directly from the Downtown residential rental properties, the absorption rates of the market rate units has an average of 85%. Per the U.S. Census Bureau, 2013-2017 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, the average size of renter-occupied units is 1.3 persons. Therefore, an estimate for the current population is 2,749. 3

    What Downtown Wichita has done is to take a reliable figure (the 2010 decennial census) and extrapolate forward to 2018. (Presumably 2018, as the report doesn’t say.)

    There is a problem with this approach. The DW calculation makes use of two estimates, absorption rate 4 and size of renter-occupied units. Each of these is an estimate that has its own error probabilities, and those errors compound when multiplied.

    There is no need to go through this roundabout calculation, as the Census Bureau has provided an estimate for the population of downtown in 2017. Data from the American Community Survey 5 estimates that the population in downtown Wichita for 2017 was 1,587, with a 90 percent confidence interval of plus or minus 221. 6 This means the Census Bureau is confident the population of downtown Wichita in 2017 was in the range of 1,366 to 1,808, that confidence factor being 90 percent. (2018 values should be available soon.)

    But Downtown Wichita says the population of downtown is 2,319, which is far — really far — outside the range the Census Bureau gives for the 2017 population. While Downtown Wichita’s population estimate is probably for 2018, it still lies far outside the range of probability, based on Census Bureau estimates.

    A nearby chart plots the Census Bureau’s population estimates (labeled ACS, for American Community Survey) with the lower and upper bounds of 90 percent confidence levels. This is compared with Downtown Wichita’s population estimate. From 2015 to 2017, Downtown Wichita’s population estimates are far above the Census Bureau’s estimates. The probability that Downtown Wichita’s figures are correct is vanishingly small.

    It’s curious that Downtown Wichita, if it wants to know how many people live in downtown, doesn’t simply use the Census Bureau estimate of population. That estimate is available annually in the Bureau’s American Community Survey. Downtown Wichita didn’t use that number, but it relied on the same body of data to get “average size of renter-occupied units.”

    Why would Downtown Wichita use the Census Bureau for one datum but not another, especially when the Census Bureau data reports the statistic Downtown Wichita is trying to estimate in a roundabout manner?

    It’s simple. DW’s calculations produce 2,319 people living in downtown. The Census Bureau estimate is a much smaller number: 1,587.

    By the way, DW’s calculations start with the 2010 Census Bureau population for downtown. Of the downtown population of 1,393 that year, 253 were men living in institutions like the Kansas Department of Corrections Wichita Work Release facility at Emporia and Waterman Streets. It has a capacity of 250. 7

    Click for larger.

    —
    Notes

    1. Downtown Wichita. 2019 State of Downtown Report. Available at https://downtownwichita.org/development/state-of-downtown. ↩
    2. Weeks, Bob. Downtown Wichita report omits formerly prominent data. Available at https://wichitaliberty.org/wichita-government/downtown-wichita-report-omits-formerly-prominent-data/. ↩
    3. 2019 State of Downtown Report, page 51. ↩
    4. “Absorption is the amount of space or units leased within a market or submarket over a given period of time (usually one year). Absorption considers both construction of new space and demolition or removal from the market of existing space.” Institute of Real Estate Management. Calculating Absorption. Available at https://www.irem.org/education/learning-toolbox/calculating-absorption. ↩
    5. U.S. Census Bureau, 2013-2017 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates ↩
    6. U.S. Census Bureau. American Community Survey Multiyear Accuracy of the Data (5-year 2013-2017). Available at https://www2.census.gov/programs-surveys/acs/tech_docs/accuracy/MultiyearACSAccuracyofData2017.pdf. ↩
    7. See https://www.doc.ks.gov/facilities/wwrf. ↩
  • From Pachyderm: Wichita City Council Candidates

    From Pachyderm: Wichita City Council Candidates

    From the Wichita Pachyderm Club this week: Wichita city council candidates from districts 4 and 5. This audio presentation or podcast was recorded on September 20, 2019. Todd Johnson is the moderator.

    Shownotes

  • Wichita metro employment by industry

    Wichita metro employment by industry

    An interactive visualization of Wichita-area employment by industry.

    The Bureau of Labor Statistics, part of the United States Department of Labor, makes monthly employment statistics available. I’ve gathered them for the Wichita metropolitan statistical area and present them in an interactive visualization.

    This visualization is updated with data through July 2019.

    To learn more about the data and access the visualization, click here.

  • Downtown Wichita jobs decline

    Downtown Wichita jobs decline

    Despite heavy promotion and investment in downtown Wichita, the number of jobs continues to decline.

    The United States Census Bureau has a program known as LEHD Origin-Destination Employment Statistics, or LODES. According to the Bureau, “The LEHD program produces new, cost effective, public-use information combining federal, state and Census Bureau data on employers and employees under the Local Employment Dynamics (LED) Partnership. State and local authorities increasingly need detailed local information about their economies to make informed decisions. The LED Partnership works to fill critical data gaps and provide indicators needed by state and local authorities.”

    Data is available by zipcode. This allows isolation of downtown Wichita, which usually recognized as zip code 67202. Data was released at the end of August for calendar year 2017.

    What does the data tell us about downtown Wichita? As can be seen in the nearby chart, the trend in jobs is down, and down almost every year. Most notably, the number of private sector jobs has declined by 28.6 percent since 2002. (Click charts for larger versions.)

    Since 2010, about the time Wichita started more aggressive promotion of downtown, the number of private sector jobs has fallen by 9.4 percent.

    Of note, for the three age groups this data tracks, the jobs in group “age 55 or over” is growing, although it is numerically the smallest group.

    The City of Wichita and the Wichita Metropolitan Statistical Area are not doing well. According to the same data set, the rate of job growth has been declining since 2012, and was near zero or negative for 2016 and 2017.

    For more information on this data, and to access the interactive visualization of this data, see Visualization: Downtown Wichita jobs.

    Because of the public policy aspect of this data, I asked both candidates for Wichita Mayor for a response. Wichita Mayor Jeff Longwell did not respond to repeated requests. Challenger Brandon Whipple provided this by email:

    Under current city leadership, our sister cities are all growing at a higher rate economically than Wichita. Wichita’s recent job growth is at .5%, compared to Oklahoma City at 3.4%, Omaha, NE at 1.9% and the national average at 1.6%. The current Mayor brags that our unemployment rate is at 3.9%, but that’s the same as the national average, which means it’s nothing to brag about. Omaha, Tulsa, Oklahoma City and Des Moines all have lower unemployment than Wichita and the national average.

    Wichita has competed and beat our sister cities in the past economically. We need leaders who are not afraid to compare Wichita not only to our past, but also to other mid-size cities and have the vision to again become an economic leader among them. There is no silver bullet but the first step towards economic growth is recognizing we have room to grow.

    Also we’re not gaining jobs, we’re losing people. That’s nothing to brag about.

    For the two institutions planning and developing policy for downtown, the city’s public information office did not respond. Jaimie Garnett, Executive Vice President of Strategic Communications, Greater Wichita Partnership provided this:

    Based on how the Census Bureau collects LEHD data it can be difficult to get a true comparison of year-to-year numbers especially in smaller geographic areas. Our understanding is that how a company reports its workers can vary and that the Census Bureau gives data in each category what they call a “noise infusion” to protect individual firms’ confidentiality. When we have talked with economic groups such as WSU’s CEDBR, they consider the LEHD data the best data available while also recognizing these issues.

    We’re excited about many recent Wichita area announcements from downtown to the region. For downtown Wichita, we’re pleased by the fact that the private sector made 90 percent of the investment in 2018 and over the past 10 years, the private sector made 77 percent of the investment. In addition, downtown is experiencing corporate investment and there are companies relocating to the core.

    While these concerns about LEHD data are valid, I don’t believe they explain the long-term trend. Additionally, both the city, its agencies, and WSU’s CEBDR have made gross errors in using LEHD data. 1 2

    —
    Notes

    1. Weeks, Bob. Downtown Wichita jobs, sort of. Available at https://wichitaliberty.org/wichita-government/downtown-wichita-jobs/. ↩
    2. Weeks, Bob. Census data for downtown Wichita workers. Available at https://wichitaliberty.org/wichita-government/census-data-downtown-wichita-workers/. ↩
  • Wichita mayoral debate

    Wichita mayoral debate

    Details of the Wichita baseball stadium land deal were an issue at the first Wichita mayoral debate.

    The Wichita first mayoral debate of the general election season between Wichita Mayor Jeff Longwell and Brandon Whipple was characterized by the Wichita Eagle headline, “Wichita mayor candidates accuse each other of lying in first debate.” But I noticed a story told by the mayor that sounds like a good deal, but deserves scrutiny.

    It has to do with the four acres of land sold for $1 per acre to the owners of the new Wichita baseball team. The controversy is that the fact of the sale was not known by the public until shortly before the council was asked to approve the deal. As reported by the Wichita Eagle:

    The City Council sold four acres of public land for $1 an acre in a deal where some city staff members acknowledged they didn’t follow city guidelines for selling city property.

    “We can always communicate better,” Longwell said. “Certainly, it was a learning opportunity for many of those at City Hall that had been working on that bill for a long time.

    “But let me tell you what really didn’t get reported. The previous stadium had a contract where the team paid us $25,000 a year to play there. The new team is going to be paying us up to $600,000 a year. I’ll negotiate four acres away every day for $600,000 every year that we can put into the Wichita city coffers and all of the growth that it’s going to bring that river corridor.

    “So at the end of the day, what people are not arguing is how good the deal is. They’re just complaining about the communications, and we can improve that.” 1

    Let’s look at “how good the deal is.” The money Longwell referenced is called a “management fee.” More commonly, a payment like this is called “rent.” It’s paid to the city by the new baseball team annually. Here’s the contract language: “Beginning with the first year of the Initial Term, the Team will pay annual fees of Three Hundred Fifty Thousand Dollars ($350,000) per year, with an increase to be determined every five years based on the average increase in the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers over the previous five years.” 2

    I’m not sure how to model the calculation described in this agreement, but one attempt showed that inflation would have to be nearly four percent per year in order to reach an annual payment of $600,000 at the time of last adjustment. For reference, the average inflation rate for the last ten years is about 1.6 percent.

    But the inflation rate doesn’t really matter, as the purpose of a payment that increases with inflation is so that its value remains constant in real dollars. So whatever the annual management fee years from now, it should be worth, in real terms, its value today, which is $350,000.

    Click for larger.

    Then: No matter what the management fee paid by the new team, some of it goes to the Wingnuts, the old team. Nearby is a table from the agreement between the city and the Wingnuts. 3 The $2,200,000 the city needs to pay is more than the first six years of management fees the new team will pay.

    One more thing: In order the get these management fees, the city had to build a stadium costing some $75 million. The management fees, after the Wingnuts are paid off, represent a rate of return of one-half of one percent.

    The mayor mentioned that a benefit would be “all of the growth that it’s going to bring that river corridor.” For now, that growth exists as plans only. I hope the river corridor is a commercial success, but the city’s experience in development is mixed.

    —
    Notes

    1. Tidd, Jason. “Wichita mayor candidates accuse each other of lying in first debate.” *Wichita Eagle,* September 10, 2019. Available at https://www.kansas.com/news/politics-government/article234948907.html. ↩
    2. Ballpark facility use and management agreement between the city of Wichita, Kansas and Yes2No, LLC, a Massachuetts limited liability company authorized to do business in Kansas. October 12, 2018. ↩
    3. Agenda for September 11, 2018: “The total settlement amount of $2,200,000 will be paid over time by annual payments from 2018 to 2026 from the first six (6) years of management agreement payments paid by the new AAA baseball team.” ↩
  • For Wichita, another agenda surprise

    For Wichita, another agenda surprise

    Wichita city hall again places a controversial matter on the consent agenda, where it might pass without notice.

    Should the City of Wichita lease part of a new park to a private entity for its exclusive use? That’s what the Wichita City Council will consider this week. But there are issues apart from the lease itself.

    The subject of the item this week is Naftzger Park in downtown Wichita. The new building on the east side of the park has ground floor retail space, including a restaurant. To have an outdoor patio area in which alcohol is served, the restaurant’s patio must be fenced in. Furthermore, the proposed patio sits on park land, which requires execution of a lease.

    The problem is that plans for the fenced patio were not known by the mayor, the city council, or the public until last week when the city council agenda for its September 10, 2019 meeting was released.

    Not only that, the item was placed on the consent agenda. That’s a section of the meeting where a number of agenda items are considered and voted on in bulk without discussion, unless a council member asks to “pull” an item. The consent agenda usually holds non-controversial items.

    But the redesign of Naftzger Park has been controversial. There was much community discussion about the design, and not everyone was happy. The park and the surrounding development have received millions in taxpayer subsidy, which adds to the controversy.

    So it’s surprising that anything involving this park would be handled on a consent agenda. But in February the council considered an error in the park design, correction of which cost $115,000. That was passed on the consent agenda with no discussion.

    Where is the fence? Click for larger.
    Now, another matter regarding Naftzger Park was placed on the consent agenda, and it is definitely controversial, as is any plan to lease city park land to private interests. Credit to Wichita City Council Member Bryan Frye (district 5, west and northwest Wichita) for objecting to the consent agenda placement, according to Wichita Eagle reporting.

    The city has had other trouble with its consent agenda. This summer the lease of airport land to a hotel developer was placed on the consent agenda. The lease was found to have errors and the matter was delayed twice.

    According to the minutes of the July 16 council meeting, Mayor Longwell referenced “a mistake made by staff to put this on consent agenda without the knowledge of any Council Member.”

    On the same matter, the Wichita Eagle reported: “‘We really don’t like, in this case, last-second changes that are brought to us,’ Longwell said. ‘And it’s not fair to the community to have last-second changes presented to the council and then ask us to vote on it.’” A few days later the newspaper reported, “On Friday, Longwell said he plans to ask the council to change its policies so “every negotiated agreement goes on a regular agenda, not consent.”

    Someone didn’t get the message, it seems.

    Should the city lease part of Naftzger Park for exclusive private use? That’s an issue worthy of discussion. But two things are certain:

    Any lease should have been part of the original discussion on the redesign of Naftzger Park two years ago.

    And, stuff like this shouldn’t be on the consent agenda.