Voice For Liberty

Author: Guest Author

  • Subsidy for Planeview Save-A-Lot grocery store bad for Wichita

    By John Todd

    I am troubled by what I see the Wichita city government doing to the owners of the Checkers Grocery store located near the Wichita Planeview neighborhood. At the public hearing before the Wichita City Council on September 14th, one of the Checkers owners testified that their grocery business has been serving the people of Planeview for many years. After listening to the owner’s testimony and listening to testimony presented by Planeview customers at the hearing, it appears obvious to me that the Checkers grocery store’s Planeview customer base is a vital part of their business.

    At the hearing, the Checkers owner expressed his opposition to the massive subsidy our city was offering the developer of the proposed Save-A-Lot grocery store in Planeview. His concern was the unfair economic advantage city government was creating for their competitor through the use of public funding programs.

    The total economic incentive package city officials were offering the Save-A-Lot project through tax increment financing (TIF) and Community Improvement Districts (CID) funding packages was $880,440 of total project cost of $2,083,430. That figure is in excess of 40 percent of the total project cost.

    I believe the Checkers grocery store owner’s concerns are valid, and the massive subsidy that the Wichita City Council has approved for their Save-A-Lot competitor is wrong. The council vote was 7 to 0 in favor of the subsidy with no consideration given by council members for Checkers or any other taxpaying grocery businesses that competes in the Wichita market.

    The CID funding program, as approved by the Wichita city council, allows the Save-A-Lot grocery store to charge an additional two cents per dollar sales tax. This extra sales tax is then given to the project developer. Under the guise of helping an economically “underserved” neighborhood, customers of the new Planeview Save-A-Lot grocery store will soon be paying 9.3 percent sales tax on their grocery purchases. This additional sales tax enriches the developer and punishes the residents of the Planeview neighborhood.

    The TIF funding program, also approved by the city council, diverts future real estate taxes into developers’ pocket instead of paying for police and fire protection and the schools that educate our children.

    The subsidy programs our city is offering the Planeview Save-A-Lot grocery project are great for the developer, but bad for competing businesses and their customers. They create an unfair advantage for other grocery stores and result in increased sales tax for the very residents it is intended to help. The grocery store will no doubt expect fire and police protection and the grocery store customers will want schools for their children. Yet, the store will not be paying anywhere near its fair share for these services, as it will continue to effectively pay the same property taxes as does a vacant lot. Perhaps these programs should be renamed “The Developer Relief Act!”

    Under TIF, the developer is the winner and the people that pay the city’s bills lose. In other words, one guy wins and the taxpaying public loses. The harm is that by exercising its power to choose winners and losers, government discourages the risk-takers that invest their own money in projects. The potential for abuse of government’s power to create winners and losers in the marketplace creates a sense of regulatory uncertainty.

    This uncertainty serves to keep private capital on the sidelines rather than being invested, as businessmen are justifiably concerned that the city may prop up a subsidized competitor in their same market. Not only do entrepreneurs have to contend with all the usual economic risks they face, they must also face political risk coming from Wichita City Hall. No one can plan ahead with this type of government involvement tampering with markets.

    Unfortunately, as is the case when government exercises its power to influence economic development outcomes, the hidden results of this intervention does more harm than good. Government mandated stimulus programs, even on the local level, are not good public policy.

    State law gives the Sedgwick County Commissionand USD 259 (the Wichita public school district) until October 14th to voice objection to the diversion of tax funds away from county services and schools and into the pocket of the Planeview Save-A-Lot grocery developer. I hope they exercise the check over local government’s abuse of local economic stimulus tools by voting to opt out the county taxpayer from the city’s abuse of their economic power. Sedgwick County commissioners need to step to the line and put a stop to this nonsense!

  • Wichita City Council subsidizes pizza and doughnuts for Planeview

    Here’s some citizen-powered commentary and research from a Wichita citizen, Wendy Aylworth.

    At the September 14th Wichita City Council meeting the public was treated to tales of the helpless nature of Wichita’s Planeview residents. It sounded as if residents are being held in an open-air prison, victims of society, greedy QuikTrip stores, and price-gouging cab companies, unable to obtain the necessities of life without trekking an entire ONE mile to get groceries! (See City OKs tax at Planeview store, Wichita Eagle, September 15, 2010)

    There are in fact four grocery stores right across the street from Planeview on Hillside, and one more just around the corner from Hillside on 31st Street South. Two are owned by Americans of Latino descent and three by Americans of southeast Asian descent. Perhaps the race of the owners is the reason the media refuses to report that these are indeed grocery stores and carry milk, eggs, apples, oranges, fish, fresh meats, lettuce, cheese, cereals, spices and all the other basics of a good, healthful diet.

    However, one does have to go to QuikTrip if one wants pizza. Thus the “need” for a Save-a-Lot financed by you and me. Cheaper pizza, that staple of food stamp life.

    Save-A-Lot will also provide a variety of 129 snack foods including potato chips and microwave popcorn with theater butter! Finally junk food will be available within 1.1 miles of Planeview at prices lower than QuikTrip!

    And although residents speaking to the city council on Tuesday complained about having to go to QuikTrip for milk, the truth is QuikTrip carries milk at prices rivaling the cheapest in town. The price was $3.29 gallon on Wednesday, Sep 15th. On other days it’s on sale for $2.99 gallon. But Save-A-Lot should have a lower regular price on bacon. Pop might also be cheaper!

    The claim by the government-subsidized developer that this chain grocery store must be built because there are large numbers of residents of Planeview who don’t have cars (and thus have to walk to QuikTrip to get pizza) is also false. There are a few; only a few. One Planeview resident explained that those not having vehicles could take a cab or get a ride — and the bus drives right through Planeview. The City of Wichita on one hand pushes for residents to make greater use of the public buses, yet the city council members clearly believe residents can’t possibly go shopping using a bus. Still, people who live in cities like San Francisco, New York, and Portland shop via subway and bus every day. The Wichita City Council is hypocritical, forever at odds with itself, and constantly undermining families who start businesses in an attempt to meet the needs of fellow citizens.

    The grocery stores the media ignores, in case you’d like to show them your support, are:

    Thai An Oriental Market at 2425 South Hillside Street, Wichita, KS, telephone 440-7888. Open everyday 9:00 am to 8:00 pm, except they close early at 7:00 pm on Mondays. This is a large store in a brand new building the owner built from the ground up.

    Super Del Centro at 2425 South Hillside Street, Wichita, KS, open 9:00 am to 9:00 pm 7 days a week This store shares the new building with the Thai An market.

    Four Star Asian Market at 2441 South Hillside Street, Wichita, KS, telephone 684-0966. This is a smaller family business, but still carries a great selection.

    Lao Food Market at 3141 South Hillside Street, Wichita, KS. This is a large family-owned store in a building built in 1994, very clean and well-kept. Open 9:00 am to 9:00 pm everyday and often stays open even later on Saturdays and Sundays, if a customer needs.

    Carniceria Mexicana Super Tienda at 3108 E 31st St South. Open 7 days a week 8:00 am to 9:00 pm They have probably the largest avocados in town!

    No, none of these stores on Hillside have doughnuts, but they all have cookies!

    There’s also Checkers grocery store at the southeast corner of Pawnee and K-15, open 6:00 am until Midnight everyday. It’s locally owned and run and is only one mile from Planeview, and 1.3 miles from the new, smaller grocery store the city council is subsidizing.

  • Avoiding bad decisions in good times

    By Dave Trabert, Kansas Policy Institute.

    An associate of mine once said, “Some of the worst decisions are made in the best of times.” His observation pertained to negotiating agreements with labor unions but I was reminded of it by a news report saying local governments may eliminate 500,000 jobs across the country if Congress doesn’t pony up more federal tax dollars. The story was based on a survey released by the National League of Cities, the National Association of Counties and United States Conference of Mayors.

    Here’s the taxpayer perspective.

    According to the US Census Bureau and the Bureau of Economic Analysis, the country’s population grew 34.4% between 1980 and 2008 but local government employment jumped 51.3%. If local government employment had simply kept pace with population gains, there would be 1.6 million fewer local government jobs today. Instead, we’ve seen runaway property taxes (93% over the last twelve years in Kansas) and higher local sales taxes. Governments chose to add extra employees when revenues were flowing (instead of reducing taxes and improving the economy), and now face the painful task of backing off some of their excess employment.

    Local government job growth outpaced population growth in most states but some were extreme, including Kansas, which had 65% local government job growth but only an 18% population increase. In 2008 Kansas had 65.7 local government employees for every thousand residents; that’s 39% above the national average and the second-worst state ratio in the country.

    No one wants to see someone lose their job, but using tax dollars to subsidize employment is bad policy to begin with and spending federal dollars on local government employment destroys the Constitutional protections of state sovereignty. Governments have no money of their own; they simply take money from taxpayers and redistribute it. Raising federal taxes to maintain a bloated local government workforce will only make an already weak economy even worse.

  • Will the real robber barons please stand up?

    By Helen Cochran.

    At the April 13th meeting of the Wichita City Council a request from downtown developer Real Development will be made for an additional $2.2 million taxpayer subsidy for its condo project Exchange Place, located at Douglas and Market. With two weeks to go before this public hearing there is still time for council members to read The Myth of the Robber Barons by Burton Folsom. Folsom’s easy-to-read 134-page narrative lays out the case for entrepreneurship in America and can be read in one evening. It’s a history lesson worth reading by all.

    Folsom highlights two kinds of business developers: “political entrepreneurs” and ‘market entrepreneurs.” And while Folsom focuses on the larger-than-life entrepreneurs of the nineteenth and early twentieth century, the lessons gleaned have far reaching implications and relevance, even on a local level.

    According to Folsom, “political entrepreneurs” are those that seek government/taxpayer subsidy, public private partnerships, protective tariffs, special privileges, etc. Folsom makes a sound case that economic development fueled by political intervention invariably fails and undermines the very ideology it purports to serve.

    On the other hand “market entrepreneurs” are those that obtain their successes by producing a product that is better and of more value to the consumer, unbridled by the government controls and restrictions that come with subsidy. No one can argue that it is the market entrepreneurs that create the wealth in this country.

    Despite the anti-business rhetoric spewed by most historians and reinforced in school curriculums across this country, Folsom offers concrete evidence that the likes of Commodore Vanderbilt, John D Rockefeller, Andrew Mellon, the Scrantons of Pennsylvania, James J. Hill, and Charles Schwab should be revered because of the consumer benefits achieved when free markets are allowed to flourish without government involvement. Folsom contrasts these successes with failure-after-failure of those in the same respective industries that received government subsidy. Government cannot do it better and most certainly cannot do it cheaper.

    In Wichita, Real Development is one of several downtown “political entrepreneurs.” What was originally a $27.8 million project with an approved $9.3 million subsidy from the City of Wichita is now a $51.5 million project seeking an additional $2.2 million subsidy from the City. Real Development boasts that with approved additional City subsidy they will be able to qualify for a $30 million loan from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development — a government guaranteed loan. This “guarantee” is none other than you and me. Our taxpayer dollars are lost if this project fails.

    According to Goody Clancy, the City’s downtown development consultant, there is a market for downtown development in Wichita. Specifically, Goody Clancy consultants found that downtown Wichita demand for residences is 1,000 units over the next five years.

    If such a market truly exists where are the market entrepreneurs and why are they not clamoring to develop? Why are local banks not willing to loan these political entrepreneurs money without a government guarantee? Michael Elzufon, one of the principals of Real Development, states this is a “low risk deal.” Yes, it’s a low risk deal for Elfuzon but I suggest it is a very high-risk deal for the taxpayer.

    The Wichita City Council, as with as many city councils nationwide, continues to insist that economic development in downtown Wichita requires government subsidy. Fear mongering becomes a tactic used when justifying subsidies offered to private enterprise to locate or expand here: “Everyone else is offering them” or “If we don’t subsidize, Company X will go elsewhere or relocate” or “Without subsidy this won’t happen.” Millions of taxpayer dollars have been invested in the name of economic development or downtown revitalization and when projects fail, millions more are spent in an attempt to salvage the project.

    Development succeeds when market entrepreneurs perceive a need and are willing to risk their own capital for success. Anything short of that has historically failed.

    The Myth of the Robber Barons is a must read for anyone interested in the writing on the wall but especially for those with the power to commit taxpayer money to projects that are better left to market entrepreneurs.

  • In Kansas, everyone wins or we all lose

    By Dave Trabert, Kansas Policy Institute.

    One of the biggest obstacles to conflict resolution is the petty notion that one party has to lose in order for the other party to win. Amazingly, people (regrettably, including me) who very clearly understand and explain this common-sense concept when settling squabbles among their children can completely lose sight of it when they are engaged in a conflict. It happens in the boardroom, in personal relationships, in union negotiations and is increasingly becoming the hallmark of politics.

    The budget battle raging in Topeka is a classic example, where the actions of both parties make one wonder whether it’s more important to both that the other party lose than for anyone to win. Party, in this case, refers not to Democrats and Republicans but to those who want a tax increase and those who oppose tax increases. Those pushing for a tax increase primarily do so under the premise that a tax increase is the only way to balance the budget without crippling the state’s ability to provide necessary services. Those opposed to tax increases believe they would be harmful to the economy and that further spending reductions can be made without undermining the ability to provide services. One side says no further cuts are possible, the other says they are.

    But the debate really isn’t about whether spending cuts are feasible; it’s whether state spending should be increased. Those pushing for a tax increase say it’s to prevent unwarranted spending reductions, but they are really calling for a $380 million or 7% spending increase. The facts suggest that the true disagreement is over a great ideological divide over the growth of government.

    Pursuit of absolute “either/or” positions will have a negative impact on citizens regardless of which side prevails. Kansas Policy Institute is among those who believe that tax increases would cost jobs, but we also believe that across-the-board spending cuts could produce undesirable results. Instead of waging ideological war, legislators should be working together to find ways we can do both: avoid harmful tax increases and prevent crippling service cuts.

    By the way, Kansas employers are already absorbing a $163 million (81%) increase in unemployment premiums, so there will be a big tax increase. The budget debate will only decide if it will be even greater.

    The House Appropriations Committee made some recommendations last week that are moving in the right direction of common-sense compromise. The proposal maintains total state aid to schools (but doesn’t replace approximately $172 million in declining federal aid), restores $6.9 million in welfare aid to the developmentally and physically disabled and offsets expected revenue declines by reducing state government payroll 5% through mandatory furloughs and a 1% across-the-board cut to agency operating budgets (except K-12, colleges, corrections, and human service caseloads). The plan doesn’t raise taxes and leaves a $312 million ending balance.

    Perhaps the most contentious aspect of the House plan is that schools would still see a decline because of less federal money. There is ample evidence as provided by various Legislative Post Audit reports that schools could save a lot of money by operating more efficiently, and probably more than enough to offset the loss of federal money. On the other hand, some districts have chosen to make high-profile cuts that directly impact students (and even encouraged to do so by some education officials as a means of rallying support for tax increases), so students could suffer unnecessarily if the federal money isn’t replaced.

    Alternatively, it would be interesting to see how schools would respond to a proposal that would maintain total state aid and replace federal stimulus money, which could be accomplished by selling some state assets (an option that has already been vetted). Schools would be held harmless, the State would be increasing its portion of aid and taxpayers wouldn’t have to suffer a tax increase. Total per-pupil aid is currently $12,225 and 26% higher than five years ago; most taxpayers would probably find that to be a pretty good outcome in today’s economy.

    It may not be everything schools want and it may be more than some legislators feel is necessary, but as Mick Jagger once said, “You can’t always get what you want, but if you try sometimes you just might find you get what you need.”

    Come to think of it, that’s a pretty good budget theme. Maybe it should be the legislature’s official song.

  • Kansas Governor misleads Kansans on taxes

    By Dave Trabert, Kansas Policy Institute.

    If President Reagan had attended Kansas Governor Mark Parkinson’s press conference last Friday, he likely would have said, “There you go again…” in response to Parkinson’s claim that $9 billion in tax cuts and exemptions over the last decade are to blame for the budget crisis. South Carolina Congressman Joe Wilson (R) might have put it less delicately, but both would have been justified in challenging the governor’s claims.

    The $9 billion dollar figure comes from a Department of Revenue (DOR) estimate of the effect of selective tax changes enacted between 1995 and 2009. I say “selective” because DOR only included changes that reduced taxes but conveniently ignored changes that increased taxes; they also made no allowance for taxes generated from economic activity as a result of any changes. Further, the $9 billion total is artificially inflated. The largest item on the list is a property tax “reduction” of $4.4 billion that doesn’t belong on the list. The amount represents the difference between collecting 35 mills for school funding versus the current 20 mills. The change was made in the mid-90s following property revaluation; when property values were adjusted upward to market value, the mill rate was supposed to be lowered so that the higher property values generated the same amount of property tax. By the way, property taxes increased 96% between 1995 and 2008.

    The governor also claims that big business and wealthy people have benefited the most from those changes, with “ordinary Kansans” receiving virtually nothing. Well, there he goes again. The second largest amount on the DOR list is car tax reductions at $1.4 billion. A lot of ordinary Kansans benefited from that one. Other large tax reductions that Parkinson seems to be overlooking include:

    • $616.6 million to reduce the single income rate
    • $446.5 million to increase the earned income tax credit
    • $368.7 million to increase the personal exemption
    • $356.6 million to increase the food sales tax rebate
    • $174.2 million to increase the standard deduction

    There’s also $825.9 million attributed to reductions in the inheritance, or “death” tax. The two primary reasons for making that change are to avoid double taxation (the income was already taxed once when it was earned) and to encourage people to stay in Kansas and continue paying income, sales and property taxes. Those with high-value estates can easily (and do) move to other states where they can avoid double taxation and leave their estates to their families.

    It’s also important to understand that most of the changes on that misleading $9 billion list were implemented in the 1990s following 75% revenue growth from 1990 to 1998, much faster than necessary to sustain spending. Government could easily afford to reduce the tax burden and the vast majority of that relief was directed to “ordinary Kansans.”

    So what about the governor’s claim that tax reductions are to blame for the budget crisis? Once again, cue President Reagan. Revenue grew another 41% over the next ten years, well beyond inflation (28% according to the Midwest Urban Consumer Price Index). At the same time, however, general fund spending grew 61%. That is the reason we’re in this mess. In fact, if spending had been held to 4.5% growth over just the last five years, we would have finished last year with a $3 billion surplus and could have easily weathered the recession.

    Then there’s the claim that the state has already reduced spending by more than a billion dollars. There he goes again! Prior to changes announced last week, the governor’s own estimate put FY 2010 spending at $5,451 billion; last year’s actual spending was $6.064 billion. That’s a reduction of $613 million; a big number to be sure, but not even close to a billion dollars.

    There were some tax reductions over the years that were not good policy; sound tax policy says reductions should be broad-based and not favor one group over another. But the facts clearly demonstrate that the vast majority of our budget problems stem from spending well beyond our means. President Reagan once explained it as only he could: “Government is like a baby. An alimentary canal with a big appetite at one end and no sense of responsibility at the other.”

    Speaking of no responsibility, Governor Parkinson failed to mention that he not only voted for, but actually led the charge for some of the sales tax exemptions for which he now castigates the legislature for passing.

    It’s bad enough having to work our way out of a budget situation that is largely self-inflicted. Distorting or ignoring the facts to justify a tax increase is a disservice to “ordinary Kansans.”

  • State budget ‘gap’ is all about perspective

    By Dave Trabert, Kansas Policy Institute

    When businesses or individuals talk about cutting their expenses, it means they are going to spend less money that they did in the past. But when governments talk about budget cuts they often have a different perspective: they are spending less than they had hoped to but not necessarily less than the year before. For example, we often heard how Kansas schools had to cut their budgets last year but they still spent $12,660 per pupil, or 3.9% more than the previous year.

    “Gap” is another example of how the meaning of words differs depending upon one’s perspective. When it’s said that a tax increase is needed to close a $400 million budget “gap” in the 2011 state budget, one might reasonably assume that that means recession-driven revenue declines have created a “gap” that needs to be filled to maintain the same level of spending.

    But that is not the case. The Consensus Revenue Estimate calls for general fund revenues to decline by $122.2 million. Governor Parkinson’s budget proposal calls for spending to increase $380 million; that’s 7% more than we’ll spend this year and $1.1 billion more than we spent in FY 2005. From a revenue, or taxpayer, perspective, the gap is $122.2 million — not $400 million.

    It really does come down to perspective. Most of the proposed expenditure increase is to replace declines in federal stimulus money, so from the government’s perspective there is less money to spend unless taxes are increased. (Another way to replace those federal tax dollars is to become more efficient and reduce spending without cutting services, but the bureaucracy doesn’t seem interested in that option.)

    Governor Parkinson is proposing a significant spending increase but he deserves no blame for redefining the meaning of “gap;” his budget proposal was very forthright in explaining his rationale for spending more money. (OK, maybe he could have corrected those who are overstating the amount of the “gap” but at least he didn’t start it.)

    Whether we should raise taxes to increase spending as the governor and others are proposing is a legitimate topic of debate that needs to be held out in the open, but taxpayers need to know the truth about the details in order to make informed decisions.

    You can download more commentaries, news and publications at www.kansaspolicy.org.

  • Kansas should not repeat Europe’s mistakes

    By Ann McElhinney

    Not for the first time, the prosperity of thousands of Kansans rests in the hands of politicians more than 1,000 miles removed in Washington, D.C. In the next few weeks politicians will decide whether to embrace the hype about manmade “climate change” and impose a costly global warming tax to address it.

    Some Americans believe the country needs to adopt more “European” policies such as “cap and trade” which would ration the use of fossil fuels and drastically push up energy prices. But many other Americans fear the legislation now before the Senate will spell an end to the American dream.

    They are right to be nervous — and Kansans should be particularly nervous. Midwestern states generate most of their electricity from coal-fired power plants that would feel the brunt of cap-and-trade. Two studies released last month show just how destructive the cap-and-trade regime would be for Kansas. The Heritage Foundation predicted that House-passed bill could kill 16,000 jobs in 2012; the National Association of Manufacturers said the number could reach up to 29,000 by 2030. The Heritage study also found that electricity prices in the state would jump $928 a year, and gas would cost $1.31 more per gallon.

    As a European, I can’t understand the contempt for coal and other fossil fuels in America. (Al Gore is campaigning to end their use within ten years.) This country is blessed with an abundance of natural resources that produce cheap energy and drive economic progress.

    Jobs already are at stake in western Kansas, where global warming hysteria has delayed Sunflower Electric Power Corp.’s plans to construct a coal-fired generator. The project is essential to meeting Kansas’ power needs over the next 10 to 20 years, and it will keep energy rates lower for the state’s residents.

    It also will boost the economy and create thousands of jobs in construction and during many many years of operation. That’s real money for real people — and income in the form of tax revenue for the state. Kansas is being deprived of the prosperity that will come from the Holcomb power plant because of environmentalists who use alarmism to win support for economically devastating rules.

    There is no scientific basis for the current climate hysteria. Our new film soon to be released titled, Not Evil Just Wrong, shows how it has been warmer in the past — a past that had no SUVs or mass industry. The film also shows how it has not warmed in the past 13 years — despite the dire predictions of climate models.

    Not Evil Just Wrong also details how the British High Court ruled that Al Gore’s documentary An Inconvenient Truth had nine significant errors and exaggerations. Being from Ireland, I will admit that historically the British justice system has had its flaws but I urge you to read the judgment on our website www.noteviljustwrong.com. It is a devastating summary of the half-truths and misinformation that pass for science nowadays.

    Because Not Evil Just Wrong reveals these untold stories, elites from New York to Hollywood want to stop you from learning the truth about this issue. So we are bypassing Hollywood to get the message out. We are having a “people’s premiere” at 8:00 pm on Sunday, October 18.

    You can order a premiere pack through our website noteviljustwrong.com. We will send you a dvd, a movie poster for your home theater and a piece of red carpet for your home premiere. It will be a national movement with everyone not pressing PLAY until 8:00 pm eastern (7:00 pm for most of Kansas) on October 18.

    It will be a world record largest ever simultaneous movie premiere — the first cinematic tea party.

    Americans need to take a stand because environmentalists are pushing for cap-and-trade legislation that will increase energy costs and drive jobs out of America during one of the biggest recessions in living memory. It is nothing more than a stimulus bill for China, a country that will continue to emit carbon regardless.

    Many environmentalists are desperate to suppress that news. But it paints the painful reality of America’s future.

    Ann McElhinney is an Irish filmmaker and journalist. She is the director of Not Evil Just Wrong: The True Cost Of Global Warming Hysteria (www.noteviljustwrong.com). For coverage of her talk in Wichita, see ‘Not Evil Just Wrong’ filmmaker tells of harms of radical environmentalists. For my review of Not Evil Just Wrong, see “Not Evil Just Wrong” a powerful refutation of Al Gore, environmental extremism.

  • Kansas open records law needs an overhaul

    This is the unedited version of an op-ed that appeared in today’s Wichita Eagle.

    Open Records Law Needs an Overhaul

    By Dave Trabert

    “An open and transparent government is essential to the democratic process. Under Kansas law, citizens have the right to access public records and observe many meetings where decisions are made that affect our state.”

    That quote is taken from the Kansas Attorney General’s web site. Unfortunately, the second sentence isn’t really true. Kansans may technically have the right to access some public records (those not protected by more than 300 exemptions the Legislature has granted), but too often we lack the ability because of government opposition.

    Our own ongoing struggle is a classic example of overt, and to some extent, coordinated, government efforts to deny taxpayers access to public information. On April 15, we e-mailed open records requests to county appraisers, asking for 2009 appraisal data and some historical information on residential appraisals. Initial replies ranged from full, speedy and courteous fulfillment of the request to no reply whatsoever, even though the Kansas Open Records Act (KORA) requires that government respond within three business days.

    In some cases, the reply was essentially, “go away.” Some said the 2009 data wouldn’t be released until it was certified to the County Clerk; even though there is no such exemption under KORA. Others said they wouldn’t release the data until we signed their Open Records form, some of which asked for information that KORA expressly prohibits.

    Others hid behind a provision that permits government to reject a request that causes them to “create” a record, meaning they don’t have to provide information unless it is maintained in the exact manner in which it is requested. Government shouldn’t have such broad latitude, but they do. One part of our request is covered by that exemption, but even after we arranged for their software vendors to supply a free update that would generate the requested information, some counties refuse to provide the information.

    Charging high costs to receive information is another way to discourage the public. KORA allows government to charge the actual cost of providing information, but some counties attempted to charge us more.

    There are other, even more egregious examples of government’s open attempts to discourage legitimate requests. The Shawnee County appraiser wrote a “Dear Colleagues” letter, encouraging others to seek the guidance of their legal counsel and informing them of his intention to deny portions of our request. Last week in front of a large gathering, the Sumner County appraiser screamed at me for “demanding” information and “threatening” (having the temerity to challenge their county counselor’s decision).

    Two months after our initial request we have complete information from only 67 counties. Formal complaints filed with county attorneys were largely ignored, so we have notified the remaining 38 counties that our next step will be to file suit to compel compliance. Unfortunately, that is the only recourse and one that many citizens lack the means to pursue.

    This travesty must end. The Legislature should completely rewrite KORA so that citizens’ rights to access public information are completely protected. No charges for information … limited exemptions … requirements to find ways to comply even if it means creating a record … and realistic enforcement provisions. After all, an open and transparent government is essential to the democratic process.

    Dave Trabert is President of the Kansas-based Flint Hills Center for Public Policy and he can be reached at dave.trabert@flinthills.org.