Tag: Wichita city government

  • Wichita man who complained of regulations now asks for your tax dollars

    Wichita man who complained of regulations now asks for your tax dollars

    Gary Oborny of Wichita appeared on Fox News in August to explain problems with onerous government regulations. Next week he will ask the Wichita City Council to use laws and regulations to grant him millions of tax dollars. For more, see Union Station TIF provides lessons for Wichita voters.

  • WichitaLiberty.TV: The proposed one cent per dollar Wichita sales tax

    WichitaLiberty.TV: The proposed one cent per dollar Wichita sales tax

    In this episode of WichitaLiberty.TV: Considering the proposed Wichita sales tax, looking at unmet maintenance needs, claims that we have few economic development incentives, the cost of the sales tax to families, the taxes already going to the transit system, and the bad choice the city gives us for water. View below, or click here to view at YouTube. Episode 61, broadcast October 5, 2014.

  • Wichita sales tax does little to close maintenance gap

    Wichita sales tax does little to close maintenance gap

    The proposed Wichita sales tax does little to close the city’s delinquent infrastructure maintenance gap. Despite this, there are rumors of another sales tax next year for quality of life items.

    Earlier this year the steering committee for the Wichita/Sedgwick County Community Investments Plan delivered a report to the Wichita City Council. The report contains facts that are very relevant to the proposed Wichita one cent per dollar sales tax. Voters will decide on this in November.

    Community Investments Plan document, February 2014
    Community Investments Plan document, February 2014. Click for larger version.
    The most important thing Wichita voters need to know that the city is delinquent in maintaining the assets that taxpayers have purchased. The cost to remedy this lack of maintenance is substantial. On an annual basis, Wichita needs to spend $180 million on infrastructure depreciation/replacement costs. Currently the city spends $78 million on this, the presentation indicates.

    The “cost to bring existing deficient infrastructure up to standards” is given as an additional $45 to $55 million per year.

    How does this relate to the proposed sales tax? Of the funds the sales tax is projected to raise over five years, $27.8 million is allocated for street maintenance and repairs. That’s $5.6 million per year.

    Wichita/Sedgwick County Community Investment PlanSubtract that from what the Community Investments Plan says we need to spend on deficient infrastructure, and we’re left with (roughly) $40 to $50 million per year in additional spending on deficient infrastructure. Remember, that’s on top of ongoing infrastructure depreciation/replacement costs.

    Does the proposed sales tax do anything to address those needs? No, it doesn’t.

    So what about the deficiency? Is it likely that Wichitans will be asked to provide additional tax revenue to address the city’s deficient infrastructure? So far, city hall hasn’t asked for that, except for recommending that Wichita voters approve $5.6 million per year for streets from a sales tax.

    But if we believe the numbers in the Community Investments Plan, we should be prepared for city hall to ask for a lot more tax revenue. That is, if the city is to adequately maintain the things that taxpayers have paid to provide.

    It gets even worse.

    Wichita has unmet maintenance requirements, and many wants on top of that.
    Wichita has unmet maintenance requirements, and many wants on top of that.
    Earlier this year the city council considered various proposals for spending a new source of tax money. Four survived the discussion and will be the recipient of sales tax funds, if Wichita voters approve. Those needs are a new water supply, jobs and economic development, transit, and street maintenance and repair.

    There were proposals that did not make the cut for the proposed sales tax, generally in the category of “quality of life” facilities. These include a new convention center, new performing arts center, new central library, newly renovated Lawrence-Dumont Stadium, renovation of the Dunbar Theater, renovation of O.J. Watson Park, and help for the homeless.

    Evidently there are many who are not happy that these proposals will not receive sales tax money. Rumors afloat that groups — including city officials — are plotting for another sales tax increase to fund these items.

    People are rightly concerned that even though the proposed Wichita sales tax ordinance specifies an end to the tax in five years, these taxes have a way of continuing. The State of Kansas recently had a temporary sales tax. It went away, but only partly. The Kansas state sales tax rate we pay today is higher than it was before the start of the “temporary” sales tax.

    But the people who want to spend your tax dollars on these “quality of life” items aren’t content to wait five years for the proposed sales tax to end. They are plotting to have it start perhaps one year from now.

    These are things that Wichita voters need to consider: There is a backlog of maintenance, and there is appetite for more tax revenue for more spending. Even if the sales tax passes, these remain unfulfilled.

  • Wichita water projections from 2008

    Wichita water projections from 2008

    Do you get the feeling that Wichita’s promises and projections regarding water are quite, well, fluid?

    Wichita's Future Water-Supply Plan Moves Ahead (excerpt)Six years ago a Wichita city news release stated “Through the ASR project, Wichita will receive the water it needs through the year 2050 …” (“Wichita’s Future Water-Supply Plan Moves Ahead,” July 3, 2008)

    But now, Wichitans are told there is a water crises, and the way to solve it is by voting for a sales tax of one cent per dollar. Either that, or the city will meet the crisis by borrowing money and having water users pay an extra $221 million in interest on a $250 million project.

    Perhaps the city’s 2008 news release was based on overly-optimistic engineering. Perhaps the claim of being able to meet our water needs through 2050 is based on all four phases of ASR being completed.

    Now, the most recent city documents promise much less: “A new water supply is expected to delay the year (with no conservation) in which drought protection for a 1% drought is provided. This date is projected to be 2030.”

    Do you get the feeling that the city’s promises and projections regarding water are quite, well, fluid? Do you remember that eleven years ago then-Mayor Bob Knight was told we had sufficient water for the next 50 years?

    An adequate water supply is vitally important. But we are not in a crisis. We had plenty of water this year. Cheney Reservoir has been full most of the year, although currently a little less than full as it’s been dry the last month or so.

    Wichita’s water crisis — to the extent it exists — does not need to be solved in a rush. The risks of making big-dollar mistakes are too high to hurry.

    Speaking of the ASR project: At a time of heightened interest in ASR, the project’s website has been abandoned. Readers will find language like Phase II “will be complete by the end of 2011.” The last newsletter was for December 2011.

    The first years of operation of Phase II of ASR have not been a total success. Maybe that’s why there’s been no news.

    Cheney Reservoir 2014-09-29

  • ‘Activate Wichita’ illustrates city approach to citizen involvement

    ‘Activate Wichita’ illustrates city approach to citizen involvement

    A City of Wichita outreach system is lightly used, and risks gathering only positive feedback.

    Activate Wichita is touted by Wichita city officials as an “online conversation about the future of the Greater Wichita metropolitan area.”

    Described on its companion Facebook page as “Activate Wichita is an innovative new way to be heard on the issues your passionate about. Whether your passion is local arts, the environment, or employment creation, you can log on and voice your opinion and local leaders will respond. Together communities come up with solutions and vote on the best course.”

    For a system designed to be an interactive conversation, there aren’t many people talking. And maybe I didn’t look diligently enough, but I didn’t see local leaders responding. (Sometimes ideas were marked as “referred to appropriate party.”)

    Here’s a real problem: When citizens are asked to rate ideas, to express their approval or — well, that’s the problem. Your choices for voting on an idea are:

    • I Love It!
    • I Like It.
    • It’s OK.
    • Neutral.
    Activate Wichita feedback possibilities.
    Activate Wichita feedback possibilities.

    That’s it. There’s no voting option for expressing disagreement or disapproval with an idea. “Neutral” is as much dissent as Wichitans are allowed to express in this system.

    On this system that city leaders say they rely on for gathering citizen input, there needs to be a voting selection that expresses disagreement or disapproval with an idea. Otherwise when votes are tallied, the worst that any idea can be is “neutral.”

  • Wichita Water Task Force findings presented

    Karma Mason, President of iSi Environmental, presents the Water Task Force Findings from the Wichita Chamber of Commerce during the Wichita Water Conference on July 17, 2014. Kansas Policy Institute organized the conference as an educational and discussion opportunity before citizens vote on a one cent per dollar sales tax increase to fund water infrastructure and other spending by the City of Wichita.

    Key advice: “Conservation planning is not the same as drought planning.”

    View below, or click here to view at YouTube. The presentation shown is contained within this document.

  • WichitaLiberty.TV: Arrival of Uber a pivotal moment for Wichita

    WichitaLiberty.TV: Arrival of Uber a pivotal moment for Wichita

    In this excerpt from WichitaLiberty.TV: Now that Uber has started service in Wichita, the city faces a decision. Will Wichita move into the future by embracing Uber, or remain stuck in the past? View below, or click here to view at YouTube. Originally broadcast on September 14, 2014.

    For more in this topic, see Arrival of Uber a pivotal moment for Wichita.

  • Stuck in the box in Wichita, part two

    Stuck in the box in Wichita, part two

    Wichitans are threatened with shutdown of the city’s bus system if voters don’t approve a sales tax. We need out-of-the-box thinking here.

    In November Wichita voters will decide whether to create a sales tax of one cent per dollar. Part of the funds would be directed to the Wichita transit system.

    In another example of “either/or” thinking, members of the Wichita Transit board floated the idea that if the sales tax doesn’t pass, we’ll shut down the entire system. The Wichita Business Journal reported “The rhetoric surrounding the November sales tax referendum heated up on Friday, when reports surfaced that some Wichita Transit advisory board members think the system should be shuttered if the sales tax fails.”

    City hall pushed back. The official city position is that without a sales tax, there would be service reductions of 25 percent. But the shutdown threat was made and reported. It will undoubtedly have an effect on some people.

    This is another example of the false choices Wichita city hall presents to Wichitans. Another is either pass the sales tax or we’re going to borrow money for a new water supply and you’ll pay a lot of interest.

    Why does city hall give us such a limited range of choices? Why would members of the Wichita Transit board seed rumors that are so far away from the city’s official position?

    Uber drivers in Wichita, September 18, 2014, 7:06 pm
    Uber drivers in Wichita, September 18, 2014, 7:06 pm
    Aren’t there other ways to provide transit in Wichita? One new choice in Wichita is the Uber ridesharing service. Its arrival increases transit options in Wichita. Will city hall allow Uber to stay in Wichita?

    In some cities so-called “dollar vans” are operated by private industry in competition with city-owned traditional transit. Would Wichita city hall allow such services here?

    Both Uber and “dollar vans” are, in my opinion, not compatible with Wichita’s existing laws and regulations. I fully expect the city to crack down on Uber soon. We’re then left with “big empty buses” and traditional taxi service as our transit choices, and perhaps higher taxes too.

  • Stuck in the box in Wichita, part one

    Stuck in the box in Wichita, part one

    To pay for a new water supply, Wichita gives voters two choices and portrays one as bad. But the purportedly bad choice is the same choice the city made over the last decade to pay for the last big water project. We need out-of-the-box thinking here.

    In November Wichita voters will decide whether to create a sales tax of one cent per dollar. By far the largest intended purpose of the funds is to create a new water supply.

    Set aside for a moment the question whether Wichita needs a new water source. Set aside the question of whether ASR is the best way to provide a new water source. What’s left is how to pay for it.

    City of Wichita information on proposed sales tax
    City of Wichita information on proposed sales tax
    To pay for a new water source, the city gives us two choices: Either (a) raise funds through the sales tax, or (b) borrow funds that Wichitans will pay back on their water bills, along with a pile of interest.

    As you can see in the nearby chart prepared by the city, the costs are either $250 million (sales tax) or $471 million (borrow and pay interest). The preference of the city is evident: sales tax. The “Yes Wichita ” group agrees.

    Here’s what is happening. City hall gives us two choices. It’s either (a) do what we want (sales tax), or (b) we’ll do something that’s really bad (borrow and pay interest). Wichitans shouldn’t settle for this array of choices.

    Are there other alternatives for raising $250 million for a new water source? Of course there are. The best way would be to raise water bills by $250 million over five years. In this way, water users pay for the new water supply, and we avoid the long-term debt that city council members and “Yes Wichita” seem determined to avoid.

    Water bills would have to rise by quite a bit in order to raise $50 million per year. But it’s important to have water users pay for water. The benefit of having water users pay for a new water source is that water users will become acutely aware of the costs of a new water supply. That awareness is difficult to achieve. Many citizens are surprised to learn that the city has spent $247 million over the past decade on a water project, the ASR program.

    It will be easier to let people know how much a new water supply costs and how it affects them personally when its cost appears on their water bills. The money that is collected through water bills can be placed in a dedicated fund instead of flowing to the city’s general fund. Then, after the necessary amount is raised, water bills can be immediately adjusted downwards. That’s more difficult to do with a sales tax.

    If we pay for a new water supply through a general retail sales tax, the linkage between cost and benefit is less obvious. There is less transparency, and ultimately, less accountability. And we need more accountability. Eleven years ago former mayor Bob Knight was assured that the city had adequate water for the next 50 years. Since then we’ve spent $247 million on the ASR project. Yet, the city says there is a water crisis that demands passage of a sales tax.

    Speaking of accountability: Last week the city issued $147,391,828 in long-term bonds to permanently finance short-term bonds used to pay for phase II of the ASR project. That’s right. The ASR project, which by any account has been under-performing, was largely paid for with borrowed funds.

    If borrowing to pay for a new water supply is bad, was it also bad to borrow to pay for ASR? Who do we hold accountable for that decision?