Voice For Liberty

Tag: Wichita Downtown Development Corporation

  • Downtown development chief to address Pachyderms

    This Friday, the Wichita Pachyderm Club presents Wichita Downtown Development Corporation president Jeff Fluhr. The topic is “Downtown Wichita’s Renaissance.”

    All are welcome to attend Pachyderm club meetings. The program costs $10, which includes a delicious buffet lunch including salad, soup, two main dishes, and ice tea and coffee. The meeting starts at noon, although it’s recommended to arrive ten minutes early to get your lunch before the program starts.

    The Wichita Petroleum Club is on the ninth floor of the Bank of America Building at 100 N. Broadway (north side of Douglas between Topeka and Broadway) in Wichita, Kansas (click for a map and directions). Park in the garage just across Broadway and use the sky walk to enter the Bank of America building. Bring your parking garage ticket to be stamped and your parking fee will be only $1.00. There is usually some metered and free street parking nearby.

  • Wichita Downtown Development Corporation and City of Wichita refuse to follow Kansas Open Records Act

    On October 15 I made a request under the Kansas Open Records Act, asking for agendas and minutes of the board meetings of the Wichita Downtown Development Corporation for 2009. The City of Wichita, and later the WDDC, denied this request.

    In its denial, the city stated: “The WDDC is a non-profit organization. Such entities do not become subject to the KORA merely by the receipt of some of their funding from the City, which is used to pay for services from the WDDC.”

    It’s true that the WDDC is organized as a 501 (c)(3) tax-exempt corporation. But this is not relevant to whether the WDDC is considered a public agency as defined by the KORA.

    The statute that makes the WDDC subject to the KORA is KSA 45-217 (f)(1), which states: “‘Public agency’ means the state or any political or taxing subdivision of the state or any office, officer, agency or instrumentality thereof, or any other entity receiving or expending and supported in whole or in part by the public funds appropriated by the state or by public funds of any political or taxing subdivision of the state.”

    The WDDC is wholly supported by a special property tax district. Its only other income listed on its IRS form 990 for 2008 is a small amount of interest income, presumably from investment of unspent funds. (2008 WDDC revenue was $610,214 from the tax district, and $21,953 from investment income on a balance of $530,235 [end of 2008] in savings and temporary cash investments.)

    In denying the request, the city cited two statutes:

    KSA 45-217 (f)(2)(A), which gives criteria under which bodies might not be considered a public agency, states: “Any entity solely by reason of payment from public funds for property, goods or services of such entity.” The purpose of this exception is so that every vendor that sells goods and services to government agencies is not subject to the KORA for that reason alone. For example, if a city buys office supplies, that vendor is not subject to KORA simply for that reason alone.

    But this statute contains an important qualifier: the word “solely.” In this case, the relationship between the City of Wichita and the WDDC is not merely customer and vendor. Instead, the city created a special tax district that is the source of substantially all of WDDC’s revenue. The existence of the district must be renewed by the city soon. The WDDC performs a governmental function (the promotion of the city’s downtown) that some cities decide to keep in-house. The WDDC has only one “customer,” to my knowledge, that being the City of Wichita.

    It’s clear that this exception does not apply to the WDDC.

    The city also cited KSA 45-221 (a)(20) which defines a category of records that a public agency shall not be required to disclose as follows: “Notes, preliminary drafts, research data in the process of analysis, unfunded grant proposals, memoranda, recommendations or other records in which opinions are expressed or policies or actions are proposed, except that this exemption shall not apply when such records are publicly cited or identified in an open meeting or in an agenda of an open meeting.” I’m not sure why the city cited 45-221(a)(20). It doesn’t seem pertinent.

    A few years ago the Topeka Capital-Journal asked for records from Schools for Fair Funding, a non-profit organization established by some Kansas public school districts, and funded by those school district’s tax revenues. SFF claimed that it was exempt from the KORA. In a settlement before trial, SFF agreed to comply with the KORA and to provide the records the Capital-Journal requested. Furthermore, SFF agreed to contribute $12,500 to the Sunshine Coalition for Open Government. (“Paper, group settle lawsuit” Topeka Capital-Journal, March 6, 2007)

    While this settlement is not binding precedent, SFF realized that it was, in fact, a public agency according to the KORA, and it decided to comply with the law.

    The Wichita Downtown Development Corporation would be wise to come to the same realization.

    Larry Weber, Chairman of the WDDC, in what he termed an effort to foster cooperation, stated to me that if I would name a specific issue or item that I want information on, he would be “better able to address my request.”

    But that’s not the way the law works. The citizens of Wichita are entitled to all the records of the WDDC that fall within the scope of the KORA.

    The refusal by the WDDC and the City of Wichita to comply with the Kansas Open Records Act leads me to ask these questions:

    What is the true reason for the refusal of the WDDC and the City of Wichita to turn over the requested records?

    Does the WDDC or the City of Wichita have something to hide from citizens?

    If the WDDC will not follow the Kansas Open Records Act, should we trust this organization with the planning for the revitalization of downtown Wichita?

    What is the position of the mayor and each city council member on this issue? What is the position of each board member of the WDDC? Are they supportive of the WDDC and the City’s refusal to obey the law?

  • Press availability: WDDC refuses to follow Kansas Open Records Law

    Recently Bob Weeks submitted records requests to the Wichita Downtown Development Corporation. While organized as a non-profit corporation, the WDDC, because it receives its funding from property taxes, is subject to the Kansas Open Records Act.

    But the WDDC and the City of Wichita have refused to recognize the fact that the WDDC is a public agency as defined in the Kansas Open Records Act, and therefore must follow that law.

    Weeks will be at a press availability event tomorrow to provide more information and answer questions about his requests. The event will be at 2:00 Tuesday October 27, in front of the offices of the Wichita Downtown Development Corporation at 507 E. Douglas in Wichita.

    For more information, call Bob Weeks day or evening at 316-708-1837.

  • If Wichita truly seeks community input in downtown planning …

    As Wichita begins to plan for the revitalization of downtown Wichita, city leaders say they want everyone to be involved. All ideas are welcome and appreciated, they say.

    In a recent city council meeting, Mayor Brewer said “we need every person’s ideas, recommendations, and their opinion. … Being quiet and then complaining about it later isn’t going to be good for you or the community.”

    Recently Wichita Downtown Development Corporation president Jeff Fluhr said “We want to make sure we do a holistic outreach with this project.”

    I wonder if they — especially Mayor Brewer — really mean it. In the past Brewer said “The naysayers have gotten too much media attention while those who are engaged and do the hard work are too often ignored and criticized.” Just last week he was quoted in the Wichita Eagle as saying this: “We cannot be intimidated. … I know for a fact that the citizens of Wichita believe we should do what we need to do to accomplish this. …We need to take a bold stance. If they’re not right and they’re not telling the truth, then create an environment where we can get the message out.”

    The mayor sends out conflicting messages.

    Here’s what Mayor Brewer and the Wichita Downtown Development Corporation could do, if they’re really interested in public engagement and hearing from all citizens, no matter what their ideas might be: The city could sponsor a one-day forum where alternatives to the top-down, centralized method of government planning are presented. I think we could do this with a budget of maybe $10,000 or so. That’s just two percent of the amount we’re spending on the Goody Clancy plan. When you add the budget of the WDDC and what the staff in Wichita city hall are spending on this effort, it’s a mere pittance.

    There are some very interesting speakers that are willing to come to Wichita and present their ideas. One is Cato Institute policy scholar Randal O’Toole, author of the book The Best-Laid Plans: How Government Planning Harms Your Quality of Life, Your Pocketbook, and Your Future.

    Will those in charge of Wichita’s future consider sponsoring a forum where alternatives are expressed? The answer to this will let us know just how much they value alternative opinions, and if they’re willing to back up their words with action.

  • Wichita downtown Q-Line an expensive ride

    On the first Friday in June — that’s the outdoor music night in Old Town Wichita — I went downtown. One of the things I did was to ride the Q-Line. That’s the free trolley or shuttle bus that provides service in Old Town and downtown, including Exploration Place.

    Wichita Q-Line riders and costWichita Q-Line riders and cost

    I rode the entire route, and I was the only passenger. So I got to wonder about ridership and costs.

    The Q-Line service has been offered three nights per week, Thursday through Saturday. In early October it started operating six nights a week after Sedgwick County added some funding.

    For the May though October season, the City of Wichita committed $66,000, or $11,000 per month, to run the Q-Line. The Wichita Downtown Development Corporation agreed to spend $20,000 marketing the service.

    Considering only the $11,000 per month of operating costs, you can see that the cost per rider is quite high. Most months it’s around eight dollars or so, and much more in some months.

    If two or three people traveling as a group get on the trolley, the cost becomes much more than a taxi ride anywhere in downtown — or across town, for that matter.

    The problem with the high cost per rider on the Q-Line is representative of the high cost of public transit and the huge subsidies it requires to function. According to Michael Vinson, Director of Transit for the City of Wichita, for the city’s regular bus service, fare-box revenue covers 22.5% of operating cost. The remainder is paid for by grants from local, state, and federal government.

    So those who might think that the $1.25 fare to get on a city bus is a good deal might want to realize that their contribution to the fare box is matched by $4.30 from other people.

    And that’s for operating costs only. It doesn’t include capital costs.

    As we move forward in the planning for the revitalization of downtown Wichita, transit is always mentioned as a central component. Hopefully we’ll be able to get the cost per rider down to a reasonable figure. Wichita hasn’t shown the ability to do that so far.

  • Wichita press release mislabels Wichita Downtown Development Corporation

    After selecting a firm to assist with the planning for the revitalization of downtown Wichita, the city issued a press release that contains a mischaracterization of a Wichita institution.

    The press release reads “The City of Wichita has committed $225,000 for a downtown comprehensive strategic plan. The private sector has contributed $275,000, including $175,000 from Wichita Downtown Development Corporation and $100,000 from businesses, organizations and individuals.” (emphasis added)

    Here, the Wichita Downtown Development Corporation is classified as part of the private sector. It’s hard to see how this characterization makes any sense.

    The WDDC is organized as a 501(c)(3) tax-exempt non-profit corporation. But unlike most non-profits — which rely on voluntary contributions from those who support their causes — the WDDC is almost totally funded by a governmental body, the City of Wichita.

    In fact, nearly all the WDDC’s revenue comes from taxation. According to its IRS form 990 for 2008, the WDDC received $610,214 from its public improvement district, in the form of property taxes paid by downtown property owners. According to the form, this represents 98.320% of the WDDC’s revenue.

    So is the WDDC part of the “private sector?” Of course not. It is funded almost totally by government taxation. The City of Wichita calling WDDC “private sector” is like saying the Wichita public school district is private sector.

    You can’t blame the city for trying this sleight of hand. One of the big buzzwords we’re going to hear as part of the coming centralized government plan for downtown is the “public-private partnership.” We can expect the city to do everything it can to pump up the appearance of private sector buy-in to the planning process. This misleading characterization of the WDDC, I suspect, is just the start.

  • Wichita planning firm hopefuls make pitch

    This past Tuesday and Wednesday, the four planning firms that were selected as finalists for the master plan for the revitalization of downtown Wichita made their public presentations. I was able to attend three of the presentations.

    In his opening remarks to the Tuesday session, Wichita Mayor Carl Brewer said that tonight is an important night for our community. He said that the revitalization effort is about more than just downtown, but about all of us. “Downtown is our front porch.” We must come together as a community in this effort.

    Studies of other cities, he said, show that downtown revitalization leads to more jobs, tourism, increased property values, and increased satisfaction and pride in our city.

    “Feet on the street,” the mayor said, means that everything people want can be provided in a walkable area.

    The planning firms and their representatives are all immensely confident in their capabilities and proud of their past achievements. Most use grand language — “dynamic,” “bold plan, “innovative,” “forward-looking.”

    Community engagement is important, all firms said. So is the public-private partnership. Leveraging public investment with private investment was always mentioned.

    Transit — including public transit — was emphasized by the firms. One firm promoted “bicycle-oriented development.” In a nod to the green revolution — whether that’s a good idea or not — “sustainability” was often mentioned, with one firm having an expert in just that on its panel of presenters.

    There was actually some distinction between the presenting forms. One makes use of a charrette, which is a period of intense design activity. Another firm said it doesn’t use this practice.

    For one firm, the presenter said that the firm had been in Wichita for three months gathering information and meeting with Wichitans.

    The presentations and the printed proposals are full of grand and attractive images of the firms’ projects in other cities. One firm, in its presentation, showed several images of parts of downtown Wichita where there was a vacant lot or other empty space. Then, said the presenter, imagine if it looked like this! And the empty space would be filled in with attractive buildings of immense size and scale.

    Sometimes the presenters said things that made me wonder about their actual knowledge of Wichita. One said that because Wichita has such a stable economy, it is attractive to outside investors. While it’s true that our housing market has been relatively stable — we never had the huge run-up in prices and then a crash — it a common compliant that Wichita is too dependent on aviation, and that we need to diversify our local economy.

    Another presenter, and I am not kidding, praised the WaterWalk development as an example of a Wichita success. I also learned that we must prepare — at least according to one firm — for the return of passenger rail service to Wichita.

    I was surprised that most of the planning firms used a variety of experts in different fields — economics and economic development, transit, planning, architecture, sustainability, civil engineering, traffic, and transit are some of the examples. One firm had partnered with local experts.

    Each firm presented for about an hour, with time for just a few questions from the selection committee.

    Going forward, the selection committee will select one firm to recommend to the Wichita city council. The target date for this is tomorrow. Then, it’s thought that on October 13 the city council will make the selection — or maybe choose none of the firms.

    Since the city council has the final say, I was surprised that only council member Lavonta Williams attended, besides, of course, Mayor Brewer.

    After the steering committee makes its recommendation, I plan to examine that firm’s proposal more closely. We also need to take a look at the results of their previous projects. For example, were they financed through tax increment financing (TIF) districts, and how are those districts performing? What other type of public subsidy was necessary to make the projects work (or not)? Was eminent domain used to transfer property from one person to another, just because the new owner would pay more in taxes? If there was rezoning, was it done with overlays that respected existing property use rights?

    These are some of the questions that we’ll want to get answers to. These are the important things I learned about during my trip to Anaheim’s Platinum Triangle development. Will Wichita pursue a freedom-friendly planning process as used there?

    In addition, we need to decide whether we want to plan at all, at least in the comprehensive way that the planning firms are promoting. A book I recently read, The Best-Laid Plans: How Government Planning Harms Your Quality of Life, Your Pocketbook, and Your Future, presents evidence of the harm that centralized government planning causes. Listening to the presentations, I recognized the firms were planning to use many of the dangerous practices and beliefs mentioned in this book.

  • DeBoer plan for Wichita downtown redevelopment largely realized

    The following is a lightly edited version of an insightful comment left on this site by an unknown writer, the “Wichitator.” Since many readers don’t read comments, I’ve promoted this to a post.

    Hundreds of millions have already been spent for downtown redevelopment and what do we have to show for it? In contrast, look at the benign neglect the city has had on the thriving east and west sides of town where projects on Maize and Webb roads have prospered despite heavy property taxes.

    Over 20 years ago the current downtown developer of the languishing East Bank (WaterWalk) project, Jack DeBoer, provided his vision for revitalizing downtown. There was a lot of public discussion about DeBoer’s proposal including front page Wichita Eagle articles at that time. No one in the local news media wants to talk about this now apparently.

    Ironically enough, at that time, DeBoer’s plan did not include the struggling East Bank (Waterwalk) project that he is currently involved in. DeBoer’s vision of downtown projects were largely implemented by taxpayers over time.

    The largest and most expensive of these projects will be the Intrust Arena with its $200+ million price tag. The only one that has been partially rejected was turning the Keeper of the Plains into a 500 foot community version of a Seattle Sky Needle that one might argue was at least partially implemented when this statue was placed on a much higher pedestal at a more prominent point where the two rivers meet at high cost to city taxpayers.

    Lesser downtown projects that were part of DeBoer’s plan and were a lot less expensive than the new arena, were completed years ago. This public infrastructure is now in place at a very expensive cost to taxpayers of the past few decades. Another example, Exploration Place, still has years before its mortgage will be paid off, I believe.

    Where has been the return for this community? It is invisible to this taxpayer. Look at the downtown taxing district. It takes in about the same level of property tax revenues as it has always received. It is clear that there is no private sector growth downtown. So tax revenues are stagnant. This publicly funded but privately selected downtown board operates with almost no media oversight. There is some taxpayer subsidized remodeling going on but outside of that, I can only think of the Garvey Center where significant private funds are being spent on a partial remodel of their downtown property.

    The philosopher George Santayana said, “Those who do not remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” Since the downtown development plans are NOT being made public it looks like we’ll soon have another, 21st century version of the 1980s DeBoer plan that the taxpayers in our community will be expected to fund. In Washington, nothing fails like excess (see GSE’s Fannie & Freddie) and in Wichita we are trying to follow in our federal masters’ footsteps. Since local government can’t print money like the political fools in Washington can through the Federal Reserve Bank, the fiscal chickens will come home to roost a lot more quickly here. Mr. Weeks is right in trying to see the details of these proposals. If we did, the price tag would probably take our collective breaths away. The downtown development folks who want to be the 21st century reincarnation of Mr. DeBoer are just as right in wanting to keep this information hidden.

  • Downtown Wichita presentations: what’s the point?

    As part of its effort to revitalize downtown Wichita, the city wants to hire a planning firm. Four firms have been selected as finalists. Tuesday and Wednesday, (September 22 and 23), the firms will make public presentations as part of the selection process.

    I had thought that it would be great if the public would be involved in this selection process. To that end I asked — first informally, then under the provisions of the Kansas Open Records Act — for copies of the proposals submitted by the finalist firms. My requests were denied. (See Downtown Wichita proposals not available to citizens)

    In the end, the fact that the city won’t let citizens see the proposals probably doesn’t matter. At this week’s planning meetings, citizens will not be allowed to ask questions. There will be a city council meeting where the council will make a decision, and citizens will have an opportunity to provide input at that time. But without detailed knowledge of the proposals, how can citizens ask questions?

    Citizens need to realize that city government and downtown leaders are just not interested in their input in this matter.

    There are a few citizens, though, who do have these proposals. If you’re a member of a select committee, you can have them. Government shouldn’t be allowed to pick and choose which select citizens are allowed to see how their tax dollars are to be used.

    The fact that the city doesn’t want to let citizens — except those in a limited circle of downtown boosters — view these proposals and participate in the planning firm selection process is disturbing. It follows a pattern of stacking committees with people friendly to the desired goal, with no desire for dissent to be heard. It’s a public relations disaster for the City of Wichita.