Voice For Liberty

Tag: Karl Peterjohn

Sedgwick County Commissioner Karl Peterjohn

  • Wichita downtown arena parking problem

    This week the Wichita Eagle printed a letter submitted by Sedgwick County Commissioner Karl Peterjohn. The printed letter is quite a bit shorter than what Peterjohn submitted. The unabridged letter follows.

    The Wichita Eagle editorial written by Rhonda Holman on June 29, 2009 now claims that the new Intrust Bank Arena in downtown Wichita lacks adequate parking. This is a major change by the Eagle editorial board’s position. I have repeatedly asked county staff about the available parking in and around this soon-to-open facility since I became a commissioner in January. I have been repeatedly told by county staff that adequate parking will be available when the Intrust Arena opens next year. The most recent public assurance I have received was only a few days ago.

    In 2004, while I led the opposition to the proposed downtown arena in my role as the executive director of the Kansas Taxpayers Network, I repeatedly raised the parking availability issue. In 2004 the arena advocates claimed that arena parking would not become a problem and that the critics were wrong.

    Voters were repeatedly assured that there was plenty of parking that would be available downtown for the arena. The Wichita Eagle editorial page was among the leading advocates for this project and ignored opponents arguments concerning this $206 million (back then it was described as a $185 million) project. At that time there was only a general area for this new facility’s location so this argument lacked specificity. The exact location was unknown when voters cast their ballots.

    The Friday before the 2004 election I held a news conference pointing out the dimensions of the parking problem downtown in particular and the related location and capacity issues in great detail. At this news conference I provided a map of the Kansas Coliseum’s Britt Brown Arena and adjacent parking area available for comparison purposes with the existing 3,500 parking spaces for this 12,000 seat facility along I-135. I still have a few extra copies of this Britt Brown Arena aerial view. Arena proponents attended this 2004 news conference and claimed that the arena opponents concerns were invalid because of existing downtown parking. The Eagle editorial page repeatedly backed these arena proponents’ claims.

    The 2004 election is now political history. I want the Intrust Arena to be a success because this project has now become very important to the entire community. The reservations I expressed in 2004 have not disappeared just because of time. The decision to eliminate some of the one-way streets with two-way streets will not be an improvement in traffic flow in my opinion. There will be challenges for people to become comfortable with access into and out of this new facility while participating in high attendance events when the arena opens in a few months. To get beyond this challenge for any new facility, the county staff and parking consultant need to be correct about the adequacy of parking for the Intrust Arena and I believe are working to accomplish this objective.

  • Wichita Child Advocacy Center still in business, despite headline

    A headline in the Thursday August 6, 2009 Wichita Eagle is a little bit misleading: “Sedgwick County budget saves pavilions, denies site for abused kids.”

    Recognizing that the reporter who wrote the story probably didn’t write the headline, the fact is that the Sedgwick County Commission didn’t deny a site for the Child Advocacy Center. This Center is still operating. What happened at the meeting is that the county commission declined to grant a last-minute request for funding that would improve the Center’s office quarters.

    The request for funding was sprung on the commission at the last moment, with Wednesday’s meeting being the first time the commission received a formal request. Commissioner Karl Peterjohn told me that representatives from the Center didn’t attend public workshops or hearings, or participate in the budget process. They did have private discussions with some commissioners, including Peterjohn, but these discussions, in Peterjohn’s case, were general in nature and did not contain a specific request.

    Peterjohn pointed out that in light of the recent problems with Rainbows United and their bankruptcy filing, it is only prudent for the county to expect a business plan with specific details. That was not presented to the county commissioners.

    It’s important to note, Peterjohn said, that the Center’s current location is provided at no cost from state of Kansas, in the state office building downtown. The state even pays utilities.

    Testimony by Diana Schunn, Child Advocacy Center executive director, revealed that sometimes victims of crimes and perpetrators of crimes might have to use the same waiting room, which I can understand might be uncomfortable. But the center schedules cases so that victims and offenders in the same case aren’t there together.

    Schunn also mentioned that parking is a problem at the state office building. Questioning by Peterjohn revealed that people don’t want to pay a fee to park in a garage adjacent to the state office building. (That garage charges a flat rate of $3.00 to park all day.) While there is a visitors’ parking lot a block away, people don’t like to use it.

    The action the county commission took — or rather didn’t take — is far removed from denying a site for abused kids, as might be concluded if all one did was to read the Wichita Eagle headline. The Center is functioning, although in conditions that might be less than ideal.

    Related to this issue is the consideration that the county funded a pavilion used for, among other things, horse and dog shows. Some have asked: aren’t children more important?

    Yes, they are. That’s why I would have voted to let the horse and dog show people fully pay for their pavilions.

  • Sedgwick County Manager Bill Buchanan should be dismissed

    Last year a political science professor, a keen observer of Kansas politics, told me that city or county managers shouldn’t be in office more than four or five years. After that, he said, they gain too much power. They know too much: all the secrets, where the bodies are buried. Think of J. Edgar Hoover and his reign.

    If managers are to serve their councils or commissions — instead of the other way around — sometimes a change needs to be made, just for the sake of change.

    This alone is enough reason for change in the Sedgwick County manager’s office after 18 years of manager Bill Buchanan.

    There are reasons specific to Mr. Buchanan, too, that argue for his dismissal.

    Two Sedgwick County commissioners have told me of frustrations with getting information from the county manager’s office or other county offices and departments. If legislators — that’s the role of the county commissioners — don’t have access to information, they can’t make good laws. They can’t do their job.

    Another reason to remove Buchanan is his opposition to the property tax reform measure Proposition K. Opposing reform allows him to make empty boasts as he did in his 2006 Wichita Eagle op-ed in support of a property tax increase: “Sedgwick County has worked through difficult times in the past eight years without raising the mill levy.” Rapidly rising assessments allow rising spending without tax increases. He knows that.

    Finally, there’s Buchanan’s relationship with the business community, which, according to his many prominent supporters, is the reason why the county needs him.

    There is a vigorous campaign led by the Wichita Chamber of Commerce‘s Bryan Derreberry in support of Buchanan. A commenter on a Wichita Eagle story referred to the “pro-business Buchanan.” Unfortunately, “pro-business” doesn’t mean “pro-capitalism.” In Wichita and Sedgwick County, many businessmen choose to operate not by competing in free markets, but by gaining favor at Wichita City Hall or the Sedgwick County Courthouse. This favor comes in the form of TIF districts, industrial revenue bonds, STAR bonds, forgivable loans, subsidy, outright grants, historic and other tax credits, and other incentives and programs. While much of this originates in Wichita City Hall, the county approves of most of it, and in some cases, gives its explicit or implicit consent or manages the program.

    Derreberry and his chamber are for all of these programs that enrich business at the expense of consumers, taxpayers, and free market competition. That’s why the chamber opposed Commissioner Karl Peterjohn last year in his bid for election. Its political action committee spent a huge sum — nearly half of its entire political budget — in favor of Peterjohn’s opponent.

    By all accounts and by his own words, Mr. Buchanan favors all this government interventionism.

    For these reasons, the Sedgwick County Commission should dismiss their county manager.

  • Sedgwick County solid waste fee criticized

    Today’s Wichita Eagle column by Rhonda Holman is a two-fer. Two issues for the price of one column, and two issues she’s wrong on. The first issue is explained in Wichita water economics.

    She criticizes Commissioner Karl Peterjohn and Board Chairman Kelly Parks for the opposition of a solid waste management fee that would add a relatively small amount to property tax bills.

    (When writing about Peterjohn, do I need to disclose that he and I are friends, and that I helped manage his campaign last year? I’d feel more compelled to do so if Holman would start writing editorials using her entire name.)

    Holman pokes fun at Peterjohn and Parks for “operating on anti-tax autopilot” and at Peterjohn specifically for fulfilling a campaign pledge.

    Anti-tax ought to be the first instinct of politicians. To me, that’s axiomatic and not a basis for criticism. There are always plenty of people in government like Commissioner Dave Unruh who are nuanced enough to recognize — as Holman reports — “with an admirable lack of exasperation: ‘It’s 69 cents.’”

    The problem is that little amounts here and there add up to real money. I think that’s something like the argument Wichita City Council members used in rejecting a $2.00 per month increase in water and sewer bills. Holman supported that action.

    Then, keeping a campaign pledge — what a novel concept! How refreshing!

    We should also look at the public policy aspects of this waste management fee. One of the things it was used for is to fund a Christmas tree recycling program. Here’s a few questions: Is it wise economics to fund recycling projects? Specifically, if natural Christmas trees as such an environmental nuisance that they must be recycled, shouldn’t people who buy them pay for their recycling? Perhaps through a tax — wait, let’s call it a “surcharge” or a “pre-paid environmental mitigation fee” — levied at the corner tree lot?

    Here are comments left to this post that were lost and then reconstructed:

    Wichitatator: What is Rhonda Holman’s legal name? Why doesn’t she use it when she signs her editorials? The Eagle should not have mystery editorial writers without fully disclosing this salient fact.

    Ms. “Holman” could be married to an attorney who is suing the state over school finance or some other public issue. Ms. “Holman” is a public person who wants to enjoy the perks of her editorial position in influencing public policy in this community without assuming the responsibility of publicly disclosing her name.

    For an editorial board that regularly fulminates about “full disclosure” this is an odd position to take. The Eagle regularly criticizes folks who do not fully disclose a lot more than their names in their paper.

    LonnythePlumber: What is her entire name? You imply mystery and wrong motivation if revealed.

  • Lack of information clouds Sedgwick County industrial park plans

    At yesterday’s meeting of the Board of Sedgwick County Commissioners, questions about a proposed industrial park development reveal that there’s still a long way to go before all issues are uncovered, much less understood.

    At the meeting, Chris Chronis, Chief Financial Officer for Sedgwick County, presented information and responded to questions. While Mr. Chronis was thorough in some areas, even some basic information and understanding is missing.

    For example, questioning by Board Chairman Kelly Parks revealed that it is unknown at this time who owns the mineral rights to the property.

    Commissioner Karl Peterjohn asked Chronis about the relationship between the county and the city of Bel Aire, if the land is not deannexed from that city. Chronis said there is a “complete understanding” about the role each governmental unit would play. Peterjohn then asked if that agreement was in writing. Chronis replied no.

    Peterjohn asked about the costs of other things besides land acquisition, citing a figure of $.50 to $2.00 per square foot for specific streets, landscaping, telephone and communications lines, natural gas, and other items. This could amount, Peterjohn said, to $9 to $35 million in costs that aren’t included at this point.

    Chronis said “It has not been our plan, nor our intent, to do any infrastructure development within this industrial park. What we are committed to do is to provide site-ready land, build-ready land, to the industrial prospects. They have to make that land serve their purposes.”

    Chronis also said it’s not his plan to spend any money on the interior of this land for these things. But sources in the real estate industry tell me that prospective tenants will expect these things to be done. Somehow government will have to provide incentives to cover these costs, and these costs are not being recognized by the county at this time.

    The deannexation of the land from Bel Aire is an issue that may be difficult to resolve. Remarks by Commissioner Tim Norton brought up the scenario that platting the land, if it remains in Bel Aire, would go through that city’s planning commission. That could be problematic, said Norton, if that commission wouldn’t allow the types of things the county wants to do.

    The commissioners voted unanimously to defer this matter for 30 days and to have a public workshop on this issue. The date for the workshop was not set.

  • Here’s what the Wichita Chamber of Commerce could do

    Today’s Wichita Eagle has a story wondering if economic conditions have affected local chambers of commerce. (Has economy affected area chambers?)

    In particular, Wichita Metro Chamber of Commerce CEO Bryan Derreberry mentioned measures aimed at retaining members.

    The context of this, besides the current economic conditions, is the shift of the local chamber of commerce away from promoting free markets, limited government, and capitalism. But today, as Stephen Moore wrote two years ago in the Wall Street Journal, “chambers of commerce deploy their financial resources and lobbying clout to expand the taxing, spending and regulatory authorities of government.”

    In other words, local chambers now support big-government crony capitalism. See The Decline of Local Chambers of Commerce.

    Recently I asked Derreberry a question based on Moore’s assertion. In an noncommittal response, he disputed that this transformation has taken place in the Wichita Chamber. (See Wichita Chamber of Commerce makes case for interventionism.)

    An illustration of this shift is last year’s election for the third district Sedgwick County Commission seat. One candidate, Karl Peterjohn, had a long and proven record of supporting free markets, limited government, and capitalism. His opponent had no such record, and in fact, had recently presided over a large tax increase in the small town she served as mayor.

    So what did the Wichita Chamber do? Support the proven fiscal conservative?

    No. Its political action committee spent some $19,000 — 44% of all it spent on campaigns — on Peterjohn’s opponent.

    What should the Chamber do? Abandon its present course of supporting government interventionism. Instead, support policies that will generate prosperity for everyone, which are free markets, limited government, and capitalism.

  • On the wall of Karl Peterjohn’s office

    Earlier this week I stopped by the Sedgwick County Courthouse to visit with newly-elected commissioner Karl Peterjohn. Next month I’ll have a feature about Peterjohn’s first few months in office. Until then, here’s a photograph I took of a cartoon that hangs on the wall of his office (click to view a larger version):

    Karl Peterjohn cartoon by Richard Crowson 1996