Here's where KC's fiscal problems startBy Yael T. Abouhalkah, Kansas City Star Editorial Page columnist
Mayor Mark Funkhouser is among the chorus of complainers who think Kansas City doesn’t control its financial destiny.
Instead, a bloc of suburban business and chamber leaders supposedly holds tremendous sway at City Hall.
Sorry, but this contention is flat wrong.
In his prepared remarks for last Sunday’s “State of the City” speech, the mayor said:
“As the financial center of gravity of the metropolitan region shifted to the suburbs, especially to Johnson County, Kan., the power and influence of Kansas Citians over their own government has declined as well. There is no other way to explain the decisions that have been made. The city government has repeatedly funded services in ways at odds with the expressed desires of its residents.”
Now for the facts.
The people who have put together and passed the budgets that fund public services in Kansas City the past two decades overwhelmingly have been … Kansas Citians.
Mayors, council members, city managers, union officials, business leaders and the voters have all played their part.
They include mayors Richard Berkley, Emanuel Cleaver and Kay Barnes; several dozen City Council members; and city managers Larry Brown, Bob Collins and Wayne Cauthen.
And time after time after time, the prime decision makers on how to spend billions in public funds have been the voters of Kansas City.
Time for a roll call:
Start with the city’s huge number of tax increment financing projects and other publicly subsidized projects. They are diverting tens of millions of dollars from the general fund while creating less revenue than once promised for basic city services.
The City Council or city voters approved each and every one of these subsidy deals. Yes, including the huge and costly Power & Light District.
Even when companies led by suburban residents have requested taxpayer assistance for their projects in Kansas City (such as Hallmark or Dunn Construction), the city’s elected officials or voters made the final decision.
Voters on Aug. 7, 1990, approved a property tax increase for a better zoo. Kansas City barbecue magnate Ollie Gates led the cause.
In 1996 Kansas City voters were among those supporting a sales tax for Union Station renovation. The plan was endorsed by a lot of suburban voters, and put together with the help of suburban leaders. But that short tax ended a decade ago.
In 1997 voters endorsed $110 million for better streetlighting, championed by Kansas City mortgage banker James B. Nutter Sr. and City Auditor Funkhouser.
In 1998 voters approved a sales-tax increase to restore the Liberty Memorial. Longtime Kansas City civic leader Anita Gorman helped push that priority.
Voters in 1999 endorsed the first of many tax or fee issues brought to them by Mayor Barnes, this one a sales tax for capital improvements.
Finally — big finish here — Kansas City voters so far this decade have pulled the “yes” lever for more than $2 billion worth of taxes and fees, all placed on the ballot by elected officials.
The elections included sales-tax increases for the fire and police departments; a sales-tax increase for better bus service; $300 million for roads, other infrastructure, the Liberty Memorial and the zoo; higher car rental and hotel fees to build the Sprint Center; and a 10-year capital improvement sales tax with Funkhouser’s full backing.
Even the 2006 Jackson County sales tax for the sports stadiums was tremendously backed by Kansas City voters.
Add in one more fact: Elected city officials consistently have refused to make tough-nosed budget decisions, such as controlling the numbers of employees and their benefits.
Johnson Countians haven’t decided how to use most of Kansas City’s tax revenues. Kansas Citians have, and pointing fingers elsewhere won’t solve the city’s fiscal problems.
Editorial Board member Yael T. Abouhalkah can be reached at 816-234-4887 or at abouhalkah@kcstar.com. Read his blogs at voices. kansascity.com. He appears on "Ruckus" at 7 tonight on KCPT, Channel 19.
Delicious
Digg
90% agreement
I agree with your assessment for the most part. The 10% may be worthy of more weighing but here it is.
For most voters like me, these "in the know" people's support means a great deal. When a Mayor says it won't raise taxes or cost us anything, we believe them unless the media or opposition has enough money to tell us that isn't exactly true. If the media backs them and no opposition communicates widely enough, it passes. Case in point, Clay Chastain’s Light Rail plan passed because no one bothered to communicate its flaws widely enough. They defeated him before with communication.
I have read conflicting accounts of the KC Chamber supporting a ballot issue and then coming back later and chastising City Hall for funding those types of efforts ahead of basic services. Ditto KC Star. Sorry guys, the shoe fits.
The average voter cannot be expected to know the inside scoop of any issue. They should read and watch the news and hope for objective reporting.
To that end, media should not endorse. Their goal should be to list pros and cons as objectively as possible and provide information for thoughtful deliberation by the voter.
good relations
…adding to Yael’s message…
In a time when Kansas City, MO businesses need revenue, this is not the time to marginalize our neighbors. Come on down!
Tom Ryan
The Crossroads
Kansas City, MO