Voice For Liberty

Tag: Carl Brewer

Wichita Mayor Carl Brewer

  • Some Wichita communications breakdowns are more important than others

    At the December 16, 2008 meeting of the Wichita City Council, Mayor Carl Brewer scolded interim city manager Scott Moore for failure to communicate effectively with council members. The process, according to the mayor, “made a complete mockery of the entire process and everything we actually do.”

    He also said “We cannot afford as a city to create an environment where citizens have question or they have doubt as to what we’re doing.”

    It’s puzzling to me as to why the mayor is upset about this incident that featured a breakdown in communications, when events surrounding a December 2, 2008 public hearing are more egregious. In that case, citizens were left in the dark. A public hearing was conducted with substantial changes having been made without reasonable notice to citizens. Wichita Mayor Carl Brewer’s Selective Outrage provides more information and background.

  • Wichita Mayor Carl Brewer’s selective outrage

    At the Tuesday December 16, 2008 meeting of the Wichita City Council, Mayor Carl Brewer expressed his displeasure with the way city staff handled its investigation of a developer the city was preparing to do business with. The problem, it seems, is largely one of communications. City staff didn’t present the council members with relevant information. The process, according to mayor Brewer, “made a complete mockery of the entire process and everything we actually do.”

    The mayor’s fault-finding is quite selective. The December 2, 2008 meeting of the council was marked by something that, in its own way, is worse. That’s when the council, having published notice of a public hearing, substantially changed the plan that was the subject of the hearing. That, to borrow a phrase from the mayor, made a complete mockery of the public hearing. Why wasn’t the mayor upset about that?

    Previous coverage:
    Wichita Public Hearing Action Not Evidence of Leadership
    Problems with Open Government in Wichita
    Wichita TIF Public Hearing Was Bait and Switch
    Randy Brown: Reopen Downtown Wichita Arena TIF Public Hearing
    Letters to Wichita City Council and Sedgwick County Commission Regarding Downtown Wichita TIF District

  • Wichita TIF Developer’s Ownership Restructuring not Very Reassuring

    Recent reporting by the Wichita Eagle uncovered troubling facts from the past of a developer the city is considering partnering with. (See the Wichita Eagle story 35 suits in developer’s past and my blog post Wichita’s Faulty Due Diligence.)

    Referring to the C.O.R.E. Redevelopment District project, Wichita Eagle reporter Dion Lefler said this on the KPTS television public affairs program Kansas Week yesterday: “This is a project the city has been working on for years, and it was absolutely astonishing to me that in a relatively short period of time I was able to come up with something — I mean, they have a development department, they have a legal department, they have a police department, they have two ex-investigative reporters on staff. So why this came to light literally on the day of the vote was just astonishing to me.”

    So now that it’s been reported that this potential city business partner has some problems in his past. What to do? Here’s some material from the agenda report for the December 16, 2008 Wichita city council meeting:

    “ICDC, LLC was formed by Grant Gaudreau and Joel Associates, LLC several years ago to undertake real estate development projects. Joel Associates, LLC is wholly owned by Joseph L. Cramer and Len Marotte. Due to recent developments, ICDC has been reorganized to vest sole ownership of ICDC in Joel Associates. To eliminate any possibility that former ownership interests could adversely impact the viability of the development project, Joseph L. Cramer and Len Marotte have formed a new entity to act as developer of the project. The new entity is Renaissance Square, LLC (the “Developer”), whose sole member is Joel Associates, LLC.”

    So in less than two weeks, the person that Wichita economic development director Allen Bell referred to as “principal developer” is now thrown under the bus so that the project can proceed. I would submit, however, that a little shuffling of the ownership structure of the project is hardly assurance to Wichitans that this project is on the up-and-up.

    (There’s some confusion as to the spelling of the name “Cramer.” On the document he is to sign, his name is spelled “Kramer.”)

    Here’s some unanswered questions:

    • Did Allen Bell and city staff know everything about the background of Grant Gaudreau that the Wichita Eagle was able to uncover in a day and a half of reporting? If no, then why not, given the resources the city has at its disposal?
    • If they knew these things, what should we make of Allen Bell and city staff’s judgment, in that they thought these things weren’t a problem?
    • How much did Joel Associates, LLC pay Grant Gaudreau for his ownership interest in ICDC, LLC?
    • And finally, the most important question: when did Wichita Mayor Carl Brewer and city council members learn of these problems?

    Until we get some definitive answers to these questions, approval of this TIF development should be not be considered.

  • No Diligence in Wichita City Hall

    Rhonda Holman’s Wichita Eagle editorial today (Need vetting of City Hall partners) correctly states that city staff “missed the mark in vetting negotiator Grant Gaudreau.” Or is the proper title “principal developer,” as stated by Wichita’s director of urban development Allen Bell? (See Wichita’s Faulty Due Diligence for video.)

    There’s a lot of confusion over this matter, and times like this let us get a closer look at what’s going on in city hall. We can also learn a lot about the attitudes of government officials and city staff. For example, a Wichita Eagle news story reported this:

    “Grant was never a big money player in this,” Fearey said. “He’s always just been the person who had time to come to the city and work through things and also knew a lot about who to go to in the city and how to work the system.”

    First, note the disparity between Allen Bell’s “principal developer” and Wichita city council member Sharon Fearey’s “never a big money player.” But what’s really troubling is that Fearey acknowledges that there’s a “system” at city hall that someone knows “how to work.” This doesn’t say a lot for openness and transparency in Wichita city government. It also perpetuates the realization that there’s a network of insiders who know how to milk the halls of government power for their own benefit.

    Then, the Eagle news story contains this: “[Wichita Mayor Carl] Brewer said he wants to ensure that developers can complete the project in a reasonable time and that there are no other problems.” If our mayor can figure out some way to eliminate the risks that entrepreneurs take, more power to him. If successful, I might consider voting for him, should he decide to run for re-election.

    The fact is, however, that real estate development is a tremendously risky endeavor. Entrepreneurs — people with their own money at stake, with their ears to the ground every day and the experience, power, and discretion to alter plans as the situation dictates — are the people best suited to assume and negotiate this risk. Politicians operate in a different environment with a different set of incentives.

  • Letters to Wichita City Council and Sedgwick County Commission Regarding Downtown Wichita TIF District

    John Todd has prepared letters that we hope will influence local governments regarding the downtown Wichita TIF district. One, to the Wichita City Council, asks them to conduct a proper public hearing. A second letter to the Sedgwick County Commissioners asks them to not consider passing this TIF district until Wichita conducts a proper public hearing. A third is a letter to the Wichita Eagle explaining citizens’ concerns.

    If you’d like to sign these letters, please contact John Todd at john@johntodd.net. Here’s the one to the Wichita City Council:

    Mayor Carl Brewer
    Wichita City Council Members
    Wichita City Hall
    Wichita, Kansas

    Subject: Citizens request for a new and open City Council public hearing before implementing the Center City South Redevelopment TIF District, commonly known as the downtown Wichita arena TIF district.

    The December 2, 2008 public hearing as conducted by the Wichita City Council concerning the expansion of the Center City South Redevelopment TIF District was not a true and meaningful public hearing. Therefore, we ask that you withdraw the proposal until a proper public hearing can be held before the City Council. This issue needs to be sent to the District Advisory Boards (DAB) for their review. Wichita citizens in general and DAB boards both need all the details and a complete cost analysis for this TIF district scheme.

    Let me refer you to Randy Brown’s letter in the Eagle (see “Reopen TIF issue” Dec. 7), referring to Bob Weeks’ letter in the Eagle (see “TIF public hearing was bait and switch” Dec. 5) that hit the nail on the head by saying, “conducting the public’s business in secret causes citizens to lose respect for government officials and corrupts the process of democracy.” Brown further states, “… we (the people) had a mockery of the public hearing process rather than an open and transparent discussion of a contentious public issue. The Wichita officials involved should publicly apologize, and the issue should be reopened. And this time, the public should be properly notified.”

    The citizens of this community deserve open, honest, and transparent government. The Wichita City Council needs to hold a new and open public hearing on this issue before proceeding with the implementation of this project.

  • Wichita TIF public hearing was bait and switch

    This appeared in today’s Wichita Eagle.

    On Tuesday December 2, 2008, the Wichita City Council held a public hearing on the expansion of the Center City South Redevelopment District, commonly known as the downtown Wichita arena TIF district. As someone with an interest in this matter, I watched the city’s website for the appearance of the agenda report for this meeting. This document, also known as the “green sheets” and often several hundred pages in length, contains background information on items appearing on the meeting’s agenda.

    At around 11:30 am Monday, the day before the meeting, I saw that the agenda report was available. I download it and printed the few pages of interest to me.

    At the meeting Tuesday morning, I was surprised to hear council member Jim Skelton expressed his dismay that a change to the TIF plan wasn’t included in the material he printed and took home to read. This change, an addition of up to $10,000,000 in spending on parking, is material to the project. It’s also controversial, and if the public had known of this plan, I’m sure that many speakers would have attended the public hearing.

    But the public didn’t have much notice of this controversial change to the plan. Inspection of the agenda report document — the version that contains the parking proposal — reveals that it was created at 4:30 pm on Monday. I don’t know how much longer after that it took to be placed on the city’s website. But we can conclude that citizens — and at least one city council member — didn’t have much time to discuss and debate the desirability of this parking plan.

    The news media didn’t have time, either. Reporting in the Wichita Eagle on Monday and Tuesday didn’t mention the addition of the money for parking.

    This last-minute change to the TIF plan tells us a few things. First, it reveals that the downtown arena TIF plan is a work in progress, with major components added on-the-fly just a few days before the meeting. That alone gives us reason to doubt its wisdom. Citizens should demand that the plan be withdrawn until we have sufficient time to discuss and deliberate matters as important as this. What happened on Tuesday doesn’t qualify as a meaningful public hearing on the actual plan. A better description is political bait and switch.

    Second, when the business of democracy is conducted like this, citizens lose respect for both the government officials involved and the system itself. Instead of openness and transparency in government, we have citizens and, apparently, even elected officials shut out of the process.

    Third, important questions arise: Why was the addition of the parking plan not made public until the eleventh hour? Was this done intentionally, so that opponents would not have time to prepare, or to even make arrangements to attend the meeting? Or was it simple incompetence and lack of care?

    The officials involved — council members Jeff Longwell and Lavonta Williams, who negotiated the addition of the parking with county commissioners; Allen Bell, who is Wichita’s director of urban development; and Mayor Carl Brewer — need to answer to the citizens of Wichita as to why this important business was conducted in this haphazard manner that disrespects citizen involvement.

    Additional coverage:
    Wichita TIF Districts Mean Central Government Planning
    Downtown Wichita Arena TIF District Testimony
    Jim Skelton is Frustrated
    Downtown Wichita Arena TIF District Still a Bad Idea
    Wichita Mayor and City Council Prefer to Work Out of Media Spotlight
    Wichita’s Naysayers Are Saying Yes to Liberty
    Tiff over Wichita TIFs
    Downtown Wichita Arena TIF District
    Do Wichita TIF Districts Create Value?
    Wichita City Council’s Misunderstanding of Tax Increment Financing
    Tax Increment Financing in Wichita Benefits Few
    Tax Increment Financing in Iowa

  • Kansas highways influence, for better or worse

    Kansas Department of Transportation Secretary Deb Miller wrote a Wichita Eagle editorial in which she states:

    One of the studies examines the K-96 northeast Wichita bypass. The study found that since it was finished in 1993, the bypass has dramatically influenced the region’s development patterns. Much of Wichita’s job growth between 1994 and 2006 has occurred along the K-96 corridor.

    No doubt this is true. But what are the consequences? Highways like K-96 enable and encourage growth in the outer fringes of Wichita and in suburban towns like Andover. Then, there’s a reaction.

    Officials of USD 259 complain that there’s a “doughnut” and that urban schools are being underfunded. Much taxpayer money will be needed to fix this, they say.

    Politicians like Wichita Mayor Carl Brewer still want to have a vibrant downtown, even though people have moved away. To achieve this, they’ll propose spending hundreds of millions of taxpayer funds to lure people back downtown. At tomorrow’s meeting of the Wichita City Council, more of this will be proposed.

    The corker, though, is the global warming alarmists who don’t want people driving carbon-emitting automobiles on these roads. But since we’re doing that, they want us to undertake expensive and job-killing measures to mitigate these carbon emissions.

  • Wichita Mayor Carl Brewer’s Reformulated TIF Plan Still a Bad Idea

    Today the Wichita City Council holds a special meeting to consider a reformulated plan to provide tax increment financing (TIF) for the area surrounding the downtown Wichita arena. It’s still a bad idea.

    It appears there are two major changes in the new plan. First, the TIF district is smaller. Second, spending on the district would be 70 percent of the new property taxes — the “increment” — instead of 100 percent.

    Why is this plan a bad idea? Why, you may be asking, aren’t I in favor of development and progress in downtown?

    To me, there’s a difference between entrepreneurs working in markets and government centralized planning. That’s one of the reasons why I oppose this TIF district. It represents government making plans for us, rather than people deciding themselves what they want. It’s the difference between political entrepreneurs — who work to please elected officials — and market entrepreneurs — who work to please customers.

    If it turns out that when people express their preferences freely that they don’t really want much downtown development, that’s okay with me. I, for one, do not feel that I have the superior knowledge needed to tell people where they should go for fun and entertainment. I’d rather let people decide themselves.

    I’m not willing to use the blunt tool of government to direct people and their money to where I think it should go. I wouldn’t do that even if I was convinced I was right.

    But there are people in Wichita who don’t share my view of free people trading freely in free markets. Mayor Carl Brewer and several city council members — Sharon Fearey and Lavonta Williams being most prominent among them — and quasi-governmental organizations such as the Wichita Downtown Development Corporation feel differently. They feel that they know better than Wichitans do where development should be happening, and they’re willing to use the tools of government to force their vision upon you.

    This is what’s happening at this time. This is why Wichitans need to oppose this TIF district.

    Other article about TIF districts in Wichita: Do Wichita TIF Districts Create Value?, Downtown Wichita Arena TIF District, Wichita City Council’s Misunderstanding of Tax Increment Financing, Tax Increment Financing in Wichita Benefits Few, Tiff over Wichita TIFs, and Wichita City Manager’s Warning is Too Late.

  • Wichita Mayor and City Council Prefer to Work Out of Media Spotlight

    In a statement read at the August 26, 2008 meeting of the Wichita City Council (see City Council Acts on Arena Area Redevelopment), Wichita Mayor Carl Brewer expressed his concern that “The naysayers have gotten too much media attention while those who are engaged and do the hard work are too often ignored and criticized.”

    I think the mayor’s assessment is a little overblown. Can a tiny group of citizen volunteers — a ragtag group, some might say — manage to outmaneuver the vast resources of the City of Wichita and its allied quasi-governmental organizations such as Visioneering Wichita, Wichita Metro Chamber of Commerce, Greater Wichita Economic Development Coalition, Wichita Downtown Development Corporation, and the Greater Wichita Convention and Visitors Bureau?

    It doesn’t seem likely.

    The mayor has the editorial board of the Wichita Eagle, the state’s largest newspaper, squarely behind almost all of his initiatives. Except for the fiasco surrounding the hiring of would-be city manager Pat Salerno, I can’t recall criticism of the mayor on the Eagle’s editorial page, except from citizens who write letters.

    I can’t imagine any news reporter in town who, upon receiving an invitation from the mayor to come to his office, would not hurry over to City Hall and report on whatever the mayor said. At length.

    The city has a Community Relations Team, consisting of three people (and perhaps other staff) with experience in media. The city’s website fares well in Internet searches, with its pages placing high in the search results pages of Google and other search sites.

    We must also remember that the people doing the “hard work” the mayor mentioned are often city staff working at a job just like anyone else. Or, they might work for quasi-governmental groups like those mentioned above.

    Importantly, remember that many of these people working for passage of the mayor’s economic initiatives stand to profit handsomely from them. These people — Wichita’s class of political entrepreneurs — prefer to earn their profits mining the halls of government power and the pockets of taxpayers rather than by pleasing customers in free markets. It’s a lot easier to please the mayor and a majority of the city council rather than working hard in the marketplace. These people get their share of media attention. They richly deserve criticism.

    I believe that the mayor and the city council thought that passage of the expansion of the TIF district surrounding the downtown arena would be business as usual. But thanks to council member Paul Gray and a few snippets of coverage here and there in the newspaper, things didn’t proceed as usual.