Voice For Liberty

Tag: Sedgwick county government

  • Bobby Rozzell’s Great Idea for Wichita Leaders

    At the imaginatively-named Bobby Rozzell’s Blog the author has a suggestion for Wichita government. Here’s the idea:

    Some smart local leader is going to figure out that social media (blogging and such) has the potential for building relationships with a large number of citizens. A number that would be impossible if it was attempted physically. This smart local leader will start a blog and will be respected for their transparency and willingness to engage in a conversation rather than post a few pronouncements every so often. This smart local leader will be the beginning of something good.

    A great idea! Outstanding! As someone who files records requests once in a while, and asks informally for information at other times, there are some local governmental bodies and officials that either don’t believe transparency is important, or don’t know how to go about accomplishing it. Yet, they insist they want to be held accountable.

    There are some other observations about the local Wichita blogging scene in the full post at Everytime he passed a window they heard him say, “So far so good.”

  • In Sedgwick County, New Technology vs. Old School

    I was one of the two campaign co-managers for Karl Peterjohn’s successful campaign for the Republican nomination for Sedgwick County Commissioner, third district. As such I was invited to the election night party where we watched the returns roll in.

    I had my laptop computer with me, connected to the outside world by a wireless network connection. Several others did the same. We all were viewing the Sedgwick County Election Office’s website. Every once in a while we’d hit the refresh button to see if new returns were posted. Not really new or advanced technology at all; just something that many people have today.

    A lone small television sat in the corner, its poor reception more static than anything else. Not many people watched. A Wichita Eagle reporter covering the event remarked he’d not seen a return-watching party like this, where the computers, rather than television, were the focus.

    The next day we learned of a party where Sedgwick County Commissioner Tom Winters (our opponent) and friends were gathered. They were relying on television to get election results. The Wichita Eagle reporter there had her computer, and upon seeing on the election office website that all votes were counted, and that Tom Winters had lost, she told the party the sad (for them) news. Commissioner Dave Unruh didn’t believe it, and insisted on seeing the results on a television screen before he’d believe his colleague had lost. Then, “Unruh tossed a napkin on a bar table when he learned of Winters’ loss.” (Peterjohn overwhelms Winters in county race, Wichita Eagle, August 6, 2008)

    But where, Commissioner Unruh, do you suppose the television stations get their data?

    Link to Wichita Eagle photograph: Old school politicians watching election returns.

  • Predictions of Downtown Wichita Arena’s Success are Premature

    Several Wichita Eagle editorials in recent weeks have mentioned the success of the Intrust Arena being built in downtown Wichita.

    Success, I might ask, at doing what?

    The fact that the arena structure is rising is evidence of only the smallest measure of competence by Sedgwick County officials. Having entrusted them with some two hundred million dollars, it’s the least we can expect.

    We won’t know the success or failure of this arena for five to ten years.

  • Sedgwick County Taxpayer Relief?

    This was received from a friend, and was also printed in the Wichita Eagle. The writer accuses the Sedgwick County Commission of doing something “questionable.” He is being much too kind to the commission with his choice of words.

    I read with great interest “Sedgwick County budget halts jail plans” (July 17 Eagle). What really caught my eye was the opening sentence, stating that this was a “move that would save taxpayers money.”

    Why all of a sudden, after taking our tax money for two years for this purpose, did Sedgwick County Commission Chairman Tom Winters decide that we “can’t build our way out of a jail problem”? Why was this not discussed and concluded before commission members asked for a raise in the mill levy by 2.5 mills back in 2006 (for the aviation training school as well as the jail expansion), at an annual cost of $28.75 on a $100,000 home?

    Since the money was not used for the purpose intended, shouldn’t the taxpayers be reimbursed for the taxes paid so far? Instead, I guess we are supposed to be overjoyed at the 1 mill that is to be given back to us now.

    This is very questionable — taking money and not using it for the intended purpose and then giving back only a portion of our money taken.

    I believe that every one of the county commissioners should be replaced just as soon as possible with new blood, and, I hope, with people who will think before they act and will do things honestly and above reproach.

    DEL LOPEZ
    Wichita

  • No New Sedgwick County Sales Tax Without Property Tax Elimination: Taxpayer Protection is Needed

    A press release from the Peterjohn for County Commissioner campaign

    23 July 2008

    The Wichita Eagle’s lead story July 23 mentions a new county proposal to raise a new local sales tax to cover a variety of new spending programs. A variety of new or expanded county spending projects were mentioned in this article.

    There is a history of trying to shift taxes. Sometimes this has been done to intentionally raise additional revenue (see 1992 statewide tax hike) or to shift from property to sales tax (1984 in Sedgwick County) and expand other spending. Sadly, the net effect in almost all of these case has been expanding tax revenues for government. This is a reason why we need to proceed carefully and with a detailed plan.

    “There should not be any new local sales tax until the following steps occur,” said Karl Peterjohn, candidate for the 3rd district county commission seat. “First, any new local sales tax should eliminate the county’s current 31.3 mill property tax. By my rough estimate this would require a sales tax of approximately 1.5-to-1 5/8 cents to be revenue neutral for the county. At the same time protection must be provided to taxpayers to prevent property taxes from rising again.”

    “Voter protection can be provided by a requirement that all county taxes receive voter approval before being raised. The county cannot raise sales taxes without voter approval. This protection for taxpayers must also be provided for all other new or existing county taxes too,” said Peterjohn.

    “Second, the county must go to the state to receive authorization before it could implement this tax shift from property to sales (or tax on capital to one on consumption). That can’t happen until the 2009 legislature. I believe that a county wide sales tax that eliminates the existing county mill levy would be a net positive for economic growth in our community by cutting total property taxes by over 25% for most taxpayers in our county.

    “Many businesses currently seek property tax abatements due to the high level of property taxes in our county. Eliminating the county’s property taxes would be very economically stimulative and would provide an overall property tax reduction for all homeowners, farmers, and businesses. Roughly 10-to-15% of retail sales in this county occur from purchases made by folks who do not live in Sedgwick County,” Peterjohn said.

    “Sadly, there are a number of cases where shifting from property to sales taxes has provided a permanent increase in sales taxes and only temporary property tax relief. One example is just up the road in Shawnee County. That is why it is imperative that any new local sales tax hike contain ironclad provisions to protect county taxpayers. It is also imperative that we should eliminate the county’s property tax with any new local sales tax proposal.”

    Donations to the campaign can be mailed to the address listed below. A paypal account is available to accept on line donations at the karlpeterjohn.com campaign web site. There is a limit of $500 per person or business for contributions made until the August 5 primary.

    Peterjohn for County Commissioner
    PO Box 8734
    Wichita, 67208
    316-312-1585
    karlpeterjohn.com

    Discolsure: I am one of the campaign co-managers for this candidate.

  • Wichita and Sedgwick County Candidate Websites

    I’ve started a page that lists candidates for election in the Wichita and Sedgwick County area, containing links to candidate websites. It’s not quite finished, but it’s a start. The link is here: Wichita and Sedgwick County Candidate Websites.

  • Wichita Eagle Voter Guide Responses

    I am running for Republican precinct committeeman. The Wichita Eagle sent me a request to answer some questions to appear in a voter’s guide. These are the questions asked (to the best of my recollection; I didn’t record the text of the questions and now I can no longer log in to the system to see them) and my responses.

    1. What do you believe should be in the party’s platform?

    I believe the Republican party has strayed from its commitment to individual liberty, limited government, and free markets. The party should commit itself to nurturing economic prosperity by reducing government control of the economy. We should allow people to decide how to best spend and invest their time, money, and talents. By reducing the intrusiveness of government, we can create a laboratory of economic freedom in Wichita that would restore Wichita’s tradition of entrepreneurship.

    2. What is your position on social issues?

    Government should relinquish its monopoly on the financing of education by allowing school choice through tax credits. Parents would then have more control over the education of their children. Government’s ability to take private property through eminent domain should be severely restricted. All elected officials should be subject to term limits. Governments should respond to citizen requests for records in a reasonable way.

    3. What is your position on fiscal issues?

    Voter approval should be required for all tax increases. Governments should pledge to limit their increases in spending to the inflation rate plus population growth. The use of tax increment financing (TIF) districts and tax abatements should be eliminated. Giveaways such as the interest-free loan to the Old Town Warren Theater must be stopped. We should be careful that trading a higher sales tax rate for property tax relief doesn’t lead to more taxes overall.

  • Wichita School District Economic Impact

    In February 2008, Janet Harrah of the Center for Economic Development and Business Research at Wichita State University produced a report titled “Wichita Public Schools: Impact Analysis Operations Impact, Bond Impact and Success Measures.” This report painted a glowing picture of the USD 259 (Wichita, Kansas public school district) bond issue in 2000. The district uses it to promote the success of the 2000 issue, and to promote the proposed bond issue that may be voted on sometime in 2008. The study may be viewed at the CEDBR website here.

    The author of the study told me that the Wichita school district paid $1,500 for this study. Usually, research such as this that is purchased by the customer is treated as just that: something bought because it suits the customer’s needs. Since the customer controls what is done with the product, it is certain that if this study had produced a result that didn’t show a fantastically positive benefit for Wichita school district spending, the school board would not have released it to the public. But as we shall see, the way this study is structured guarantees a positive result. Also, the price of $1,500 is astonishingly low for a study of some 28 pages with three authors.

    Perhaps the primary problem with this study is that it treats the cost of the bond issue as though it doesn’t exist. The study presents evidence of the benefits of school district spending, but mentions only in passing school district taxation:

    An opportunity cost exists for the use of public funds for education. If public funds were not used to provide public education, they would be available for alternative use. Estimating the potential economic impact of alternative uses of these opportunity costs was beyond the scope of this analysis. (Page 6)

    It is the lack of analysis of these “alternative uses” that is most important. Actually, not much analysis is required. All that is needed is to recognize that when money is paid to the Wichita public schools, that money is not available for other spending. It means that when a construction worker is hired to build a Wichita school, that construction worker isn’t working on something else in Wichita. It cannot be any other way. As Henry Hazlitt explained in his classic work Economics in One Lesson:

    Therefore for every public job created by the bridge project a private job has been destroyed somewhere else. We can see the men employed on the bridge. We can watch them at work. The employment argument of the government spenders becomes vivid, and probably for most people convincing. But there are other things that we do not see, because, alas, they have never been permitted to come into existence. They are the jobs destroyed by the $1,000,000 taken from the taxpayers. All that has happened, at best, is that there has been a diversion of jobs because of the project.

    The study also uses the technique of the “multiplier,” which is to say that spending by the school district causes other spending to happen, and other jobs are therefore created. But the construction worker, whether working on a school building or a shopping mall, is paid the same and spends his wages in the same way. The multiplier effect is the same.

    This study also analyzes the impact of the bond issue (and ongoing operations) on local governments such as the City of Wichita and Sedgwick County. From page 6: “These measures view the taxing entities’ expenditures as a public investment. Public benefits are measured by tax collections. If public benefits exceed public costs then the rate of return is greater than 100 percent and the benefit-cost ratio is greater than 1.”

    These rates of return can be fantastic. For Wichita and Sedgwick County, their rate of return for the 2000 bond issue is over 1,000%! By way of explanation the study states: “These ROI percentages for the city and county are relatively high since these jurisdictions derive significant benefits from increased sales tax collections as a result of the District’s payroll, while incurring very few costs.”

    The problems with this analysis are these: First, the taxing entities’ investment is raised by taxing their residents. Second, the public benefits, as explained above, are the taxes that the government collects. It is as though we tax ourselves so that we can pay even more taxes, all this to feed the machinery of government. And if you believe in limited government and personal liberty, it is not a benefit to pay more taxes.

    While it is true that the City of Wichita derives benefits from Wichita school district spending, the city’s benefits are funded by taxes paid to the school district. It is only by considering these local governmental entities to be separate from each other that this fantastic rate of return on “investment” is possible. If the total cost of government is considered, the picture is different.

    These defects and omissions — not realizing that tax funds could be spent elsewhere if not sent to government, not realizing that benefits that government receives are the taxes that people pay, and separating government into compartments that play off each other to create artificial returns — need to recognized as we read this report.

  • Sedgwick County trash franchising: on the road to economic perdition

    I received this letter to Sedgwick County (Kansas) Commissioner David Unruh “over the transom” and I thought it merited reading by the general public. The author speaks of the “road to economic perdition.” I had to use the dictionary to refresh my memory of the exact meaning of the word “perdition.” While that term seems at first to be a little strong, I believe that trash franchising, like a ban on smoking, is just the first step in the plans of our local government officials. If politicians and newspaper editorialists can convince us that we require the force of government to take care of something as simple as picking up the trash — something that works very well already – it’s an easy jump to the next level of control. So perdition seems appropriate.

    The May 21 Wichita Eagle reported that you and a number of other commissioners want to impose some sort of franchise on trash collection by cities operating in the area where Sedgwick County is responsible for trash disposal with state authorities. The Eagle quotes you as supporting a government franchise monopoly by haulers in specific areas as well as uniform terms for collection of residential refuse.

    Before joining the commission I know that you were a businessman in the car repair business. Since government monopolies and uniformity in service is apparently preferable to free markets and open competition I hope that you will want to extend government into providing uniform monopoly in car repair as well as other private sector businesses. If the county’s goal is ending duplication of services and allegedly “wasteful” competition what basis do you have for only limiting franchising to trash hauling?

    It is very clear to even the most casual consumer that there is significant variations in pricing among the folks repairing automobiles just like there are in the trash hauling business. There is a lack of uniformity in people getting their cars repaired too.

    I must also note that an Unruh repair shop near 13th St. W. and Maize Rd. is only a short distance away from Westlink Auto Service. Having two firms competing for customers is obviously as duplicative and excessive as multiple trash firms going down the same street to collect refuse.

    We have a similar situation nearby where two instances of two separate firms selling groceries are located on adjacent corners at 21st W and Maize Rd. (Walmart and Dillons) as well as Maize Rd. and W. Central (Aldi and Dillons).

    Government monopolies have also a proven track record of performance. There is a name for this when university students study 20th century governments where these types of restrictions are commonplace.

    Look how Wichita water and sewer rates have performed in the last few years and how it now appears likely that the city will be once again raising these rates significantly soon. Municipal power plants that dot many small Kansas towns also have a similar track record of costly performance for the citizens who have to pay the rates.

    The City of Wichita got out of the trash hauling business in the late 1970’s for a reason. Establishing private/public franchise monopolies is a power that should be exercised very cautiously and carefully and has failed in the past. However, if you are going to expand local government’s roles in establishing ways of eliminating duplication of services and wasteful competition, you should fully understand where this road to economic perdition leads.