From the Alvin and Rosalie Sara Check studio PBS Kansas Presents Kansas Week a sudden political meltdown.

Three commissioners resign at once, leading a Kansas county government paralyzed.

Plus, a major new entertainment district gets the green light in northeast Wichita.

It promises go karts, mini golf and a surf wave.

But will the hundreds of millions in tax incentives pay off?

But first, the Wichita City Council approves a citywide election for 1% sales tax increase.

It comes with the catch your grocery bill isn't exempt.

Who's behind this plan and why do they think now is the time to do it?

That's what we're talking about right now on Kansas Week.

This is Kansas week.

And I'm Pilar Pedroza sitting in for Jared Cirillo.

Wichita voters will head to the polls in March to decide on a 1% sales tax increase.

And groceries would be included in that tax increase.

The city council voted unanimously Tuesday to hold a special election for the $850 million plan, which would fund a new performance arts center, public safety projects and homeless services.

Criticism.

Critics have blasted the process as rushed, without, residents say, having much of a say.

The city and saying the city most wants voters to shut up and vote.

Despite concerns from some council members about this timeline and the lack of separate ballot questions, the election is now set for March 3rd and will cost the city at least $150,000.

And I maybe need to put some glasses on because I, I struggled a little bit reading that, but this is something that we've been talking about a lot, and we've got some folks here to discuss it.

And along with some of the week's other news, we have Wichita Eagle opinion editor Diane Lefler, publisher of the Cowley Courier, traveler David Seaton, and Harvey County now managing editor Adam Strunk.

Thank you all so much.

And I know this is one that you and I, Diane, have covered quite a bit, and there is a lot of discontent with this decision.

This content doesn't even begin to cover it.

I mean, people are really angry, and in my view, they have a right to be because the way this thing was put together was apparently they've been working on it for months.

And three local chief executive officer CEOs spraying this on the public two weeks before it would have to be voted on.

And basically this past, there was a community meeting that was put on by the supporters.

And then there was the council meeting 13 hours later.

And that's all the input that the public got on this.

And it's just it's just a mess.

I did some vetting on it myself.

Found out that the, the, the portion that would go to from sales tax to offsetting property taxes will send almost exactly as much money out of Wichita as it will bring into Wichita.

I mean, this thing is just it's just a mess.

Everybody's angry.

And, you know, the only people who spoke in favor of it that I saw, were people who basically had something to gain from it.

Yeah.

Well, and certainly given the current economic times, not exactly the best moment to be trying to vote on any sales tax increase.

Well, no, people are vote in school bonds across the state.

People are struggling, groceries are up.

Everything's more expensive.

I don't think a lot of people want to pay a penny extra on every dollar they spend.

But on the other side especially, don't want to do it when it sounds like a shady backroom dealing.

I mean, just from like my like, hackles went up when I just saw how fast the timeline was and I was like, where did this come from?

Because I usually try to follow Wichita news.

And I appreciate the work the Eagle did on vetting this because I had those questions.

It's like, oh, they've got this, but I just don't I don't think people want to support this, especially when they have no idea how this is going to be used.

Like, I want to know what what this homeless services mean.

Like, are they just going to hire more cops to go after homeless people?

Like, what does homeless services mean in that?

Did you find that out?

What they were defining that as well?

I think mostly it's going to go to running the second light, shelter and the multi-agency center.

And that that's, that is that is a good part of this, because what they want to do is build a, and build basically an endowment fund that would generate, okay, it be income on a yearly basis to run that shelter and, and provide, you know, counseling, drug counseling, those kids.

But it is certainly like a strange mix of things they're throwing into one sales tax like support for homeless services, first responder, I guess police and fire, support, and then a convention center and performing arts center.

Right.

So you got entertainment, you got home, you get all this stuff, and it seems like it's there was allegedly a study done that that surveyed the Wichita about what their priorities were, but they're not releasing the results of the study.

And so that it seemed like a real top down effort that was, you know, done by some kind of influential kind of big business types and influential types.

The city commissioners just said, okay, this sounds good.

I guess we'll do it.

But it's off to a pretty bad start, isn't it, with the public.

I mean, they're going to have a lot of ground to make up to try to spin this in a more positive manner.

Yeah, I know the, the hearings that you talked about where or informational meetings, whatever you want to call them, where this Wichita Forward group presented the information.

The folks that went to those that we talked to were like we weren't allowed to ask questions.

We weren't allowed to give our opinion.

It was sit down, listen to what we have to say and approve it.

And they did not like that attitude.

Well, the first the first meeting, people were allowed to ask questions, but they were told no statements, just questions.

And then the second meeting, they were told no statements or questions.

But, and again, you know, you mentioned school bonds.

The guy who's running this campaign is the same guy who just convinced this town to not vote to support public education.

I think he's been a guest on this show a few times.

He has more than once.

Yes.

Yeah.

The smart thing they did was.

And I guess it'll cost them a little more money, but it was put it on a standalone ballot in March by itself because you can have low voter turnout.

Yeah.

Oftentimes the people who are paying attention are the ones that will support these things that, you know, to make the effort to go vote.

So, that gives it a better chance of passing, I think five recent votes on school bonds say otherwise because they when they have stood alone, they have still fallen lately.

Plus, like it works well on low information issues.

If you have an issue, all of a sudden you've got a lot of people who are really upset.

Those people are just as likely the ones to make sure they get a valid to vote something down, so I don't know if that's even going to help them.

It might just waste $150,000 from the city.

Could be an especially if there's an organized campaign against it, to which I fully expect to see soon.

Based on the comments we saw that this week's meeting.

Oh, yeah.

I mean, it's it's I mean.

It's a big waste of money, honestly.

I mean, you're covering it from the city's perspective.

I mean, what are they gaining from this outside of just like a pile of money?

I mean, they've got to know there was going to be some pushback on it.

Well, yeah, I mean, but, you know, most of them, you know, either term limit it out or you don't have to run again for a while.

So it's, you know, it.

Just the whole timeline on this was so frustrating because like, you know, it came out in a week and then we had kind of like a week to look at it.

And then that following Tuesday, you know, they're, they're voting on it.

And then the, the city attorney told him that they couldn't make any, you know, between the first and second reading, the city attorney told them they couldn't make any changes to it without holding.

Yeah.

Well, and just for context, for people watching it, that kind of a rushed motion on something, a big issue like that, that's not something you normally see when you're covering the city of Wichita.

Is it?

I mean, yeah, yeah, maybe more than we would like to say, put it that way, but but yeah, I mean, this was just, you know, I mean, this was this was too fast and too furious because people, you know, I mean, I would I haven't seen a lot of before if ever, I think was people lining up, up the, up the court or up the, stairway in the in the.

Yeah, up the ramp in the, in the city council chambers to to speak on something.

Yeah.

I mean, usually everybody just sits in their chairs and it's like, okay, well, now it's my turn.

Are there any more speakers?

You know, and then they get up and go, but this one they like lined up all the way up to the top of the auditorium.

Well, they could have at least put some money towards the downtown.

So they didn't to charge for, parking there.

Oh.

Popular Wichita issue.

Okay, we're going to leave that one there with the parking.

Moving on.

Talking about major changes, big entertainment complex is one step closer to reality in northeast Wichita after a unanimous green light from the city council.

Same meeting.

This project is called Ignite at Kane 96.

It would feature go karts, an ice rink, and an NCAA tennis complex with Wichita State.

Developers say they plan to invest nearly $120 million, with another 73 million slated from Star bonds.

Now, star bonds are paid off with tax revenue that an attraction like this generates.

If plans hold, construction could start in 2026, just a couple months from now, with developers promising to bring thousands of jobs and new tourists to the city.

I feel like I've heard the story before a few times more than once, I mean, and I obviously I spent a lot of time covering statehouse, and there's a lot of question amongst lawmakers over whether or not star bonds are effective at all, and the number of star bond issues around the city that I have seen passed that kind of either never came to fruition or if they did, weren't anywhere near what was promised.

Yeah, yeah.

Well, I mean, if this thing, if this thing goes off, I mean, it's going to be nice.

Yeah, it's going to be a it's going to be a cool thing.

And, it's, it's, run by the Cornell's, and, you know, they been they got a pretty good track record of doing projects they say they're going to do.

I mean, this is not, you know, necessarily encouraging the usual suspects here that this has taken the, have taken the money and run, but the, but, you know, I mean, you know, I wish them all the best.

I mean, it's going to be a lot better than, all Star sports, but, yeah, no, I, I, you know, if they build it, I think people will come.

Yeah.

It's a, it's easy to have mixed feelings about these economic development incentives that governments use for these big entertainment, especially projects.

It's sort of feels like, well, you got to do something to get things going to generate economic activity, growth because there's so much competition for it too, like between jurisdictions, between states.

But then you know, how much, what is the cost benefit analysis?

You know, there are a lot of promises made.

There are a lot of, big shiny pictures and renderings that look really good, but it doesn't seem like there's always a lot of good follow through, whether they these things actually did pay off.

I think with a lot of incentives especially, I think that, property tax and, industrial revenue bond packages that cities put together a lot the required to do a cost benefit analysis.

I don't know if this was done in this case or not, but but I've, I've taken some deep dives into a couple of those or at least one specifically and you know and and it it makes sense.

I kept asking questions about how did you arrive at this.

And then they changed the numbers.

And they're just right.

And they're arbitrary.

It seems like they're arbitrary.

Yeah.

And they don't they don't have to prove that there actually is a benefit.

No.

They just actually make these that they have to try to do it so government officials can look at it and say, so, so but but you know, if you're a government official, if you're an elected official, you're trying to grow your town, you're trying to get investment, you know, what do you do?

You got to try to use some of these tools, that, they're at your disposal to try to create economic development.

Yeah, yeah.

Well, John one, who is probably the smartest economist that we ever had here with, said something to me, when he was talking about those those cost benefit analysis, he says, I've never seen a I've never seen that model two on a project that didn't like.

Right, right.

And, and and it's true, you know, I mean, but you know, it.

I don't know, these things just.

I am hopeful, I guess.

Yes.

And and the k 96 stuff has pretty much happened, you know, the way that people said it would happen.

So, I mean, why are we subsidizing the most affluent area of Wichita?

I don't know, but, you know, it's it's on the star balance.

I had a question.

Sorry, I well, I was just going to say, I mean, on the upside of all these star bonds, at least it's the people who use it that end up paying for it, you know?

So if you're not using it, then, you know, no harm, no foul, I guess.

Well, but I mean, that money's going to come from somewhere, right?

Otherwise it's being underwritten by the state of Kansas, is it not?

Like if they use the money, they have to be able to pay it back?

Well, isn't the issue.

A lot of times the state will provide them the money and then they're not able to pay it back.

That.

Yeah.

Who's on the hook if they can't pay it back?

Yeah.

It's like a state of Kansas functioning as a bank that doesn't foreclose.

Well, eventually, eventually they get paid, theoretically assuming that something happens.

Yeah, I mean, like, you know.

Yeah, like the water walk, you know, assuming that something happens there, you know, there will be some, some tax income for these incentives.

I think they're originally, you know, designed for job creation.

Right.

Industrial job creation.

Now they've expanded to, you know, golf, mini golf and, you know, entertainment, immersive golf, immersing yourself, whatever that means.

You know, if we're chasing these more retail oriented things with these incentives, and I think that it's it's a real kind of dilemma, I think is something worth really scrutinizing.

If the legislative level probably if these things are worth it.

Yeah, yeah.

We'll talk about dilemmas.

We've got another one going on in Seward County.

A sudden shake up there has left the local government paralyzed as three commissioners resigned, one after another.

On Monday.

All three stepped down amid intense backlash and recall efforts following a controversial property tax hike there.

One commissioner said she had been ridiculed, mocked and even had cartoons drawn about her.

With only two members left.

The board does not have a quorum, so cannot conduct any business or approve future payroll, leaving the county in limbo until the Republican Party can appoint replacements.

And I understand they are moving ahead with that as quickly as they can, because they've got about two weeks leeway because they just just before resigning, they approved the payroll for today.

Yeah.

And it's end of year.

They're not like if they get their main business done.

It's not like it's a busy, busy time.

But I think in the next few days the Republican Party was having a convention to select the replacements.

I'm guessing all three were part of the top three.

They're pushing that forward really quickly.

It's interesting though, because they actually require, in that area a quorum of four to be able to do business because the that's what the commission decided.

And so even if they had to resign, they still would be up a creek without a paddle.

Well this this I think connects to the earlier story about the sales tax and how that proposition is being kind of forced or rushed through top down, not a lot of public comment or input.

And that's apparently how the some citizens of Seward County felt about this tax increase, that it kind of came up.

There wasn't a lot of discussion.

It hit people without them knowing about it, and then they kind of up in arms.

And so there's recall petitions and this and that.

And even though there is a system in place and I assume they filed it system in place now where, counties and cities and all taxing entities have to have these hearings saying we're going to go over.

Yeah, but they exceed revenue neutral or not.

And hopefully people know about those hearings or jokes, though not the Biden name.

They have a hearing.

Someone goes over, is our tax to go?

We hope we're going to raise your taxes.

And then they move on.

Like those hearings don't do anything well.

But they but they have to say, well in advance of the hearing that they're going to have the hearing.

Yes.

So have to give the notice.

They have to have.

So it's something it's more than what it used to be.

That is true.

It where, you know, property values go way up.

They pass the same mill levy, but your taxes still go way up.

And nobody and nobody really ever talked about it.

Yeah.

Now there is a little bit of discussion, but but it's the same kind of thing that.

But about the Wichita's, it's this idea that things are being imposed on people without their input, without a lot of discussions.

It's kind of in the whole political atmosphere of the day, you know, that these kind of elite powerbrokers are making things less affordable for me, you know?

And I think it taps into that national fear about what's going on to.

Yeah, but there's also a lot more anger there because they feel like this commission got itself into this quandary by not handling things with one tax, one property owner properly, and they're about to owe millions and that they have to pay back in over taxation, you know, and that's why a big reason why they had to do this hike was to come up with that money because they had spent that money instead of leaving in the count because they knew it was a dispute.

And so there's a lot, a lot of anger going on there.

It's a mess.

Well, there's a couple of points I'd like to make here.

One is revenue neutrality is probably the worst idea that anybody has ever come up with it.

It basically says, well, we'll spend exactly as much next year as we spent this year, and the year after that, we'll spend the same amount and we'll spend the same amount, and we'll spend the same amount and prices go up.

People need raises, you know, I mean, there's so many things that, you know, cost of gas.

Yeah.

Insurance.

So basically it's just one of those like starve government yes things.

And I get that.

Does it tie it into the CPI though.

Does it tie a percentage or two when the county clerks come up with their revenue neutral rate?

I'm trying to remember.

Well they I don't think so.

They they make up a name.

They make up a CPI rate.

Okay.

I'm not making that up.

The they actually it doesn't it's not, the CPI rate is set by the state.

Yeah.

Rather than by, you know, like, I don't know the economy.

Yeah.

No.

So you know.

Yeah.

Well and the, of course the, the governments can exceed the revenue neutral rating.

They often do, but they have to let the public know, you know what, what's going on.

More I think than probably they used to.

But I think that's probably a decent thing.

But I guess we'll talk about it later.

I was sitting in the legislature when they passed it the first time, and it was straight up, you can't raise it any more than this.

Yeah.

And then they the amendments, they amended it.

Actually I if you're.

Yeah.

Carol again your, yeah.

Your state's a former state or your former state so.

Yeah.

Got it.

You got it.

She got, public safety.

You know, the they could raise money for public safety and then bonded debt was another one.

They tied into it, I think.

But yeah, this is, you know, it's a mess.

Yeah.

I sound like a foreign tax hearing committee here.

Well, we'll talk about it later.

Right.

But property tax is what it has everybody fired up to.

The other point to make is that it's impossible for them.

It would be impossible for people in that town to recall these these officials.

You cannot recall officials because of the way they vote on stuff.

They have to do something bad, right?

Yeah.

You have to remember what I said.

There's those concerns about, the way they handled the the disputed tax situation, basically spending money that they knew they were going to have to pay back, basically, unless they committed a felony.

Yeah.

There's nothing they can do.

Is the recall petition on the actual officials or is it on the tax itself?

I believe there was that was on the officials.

Yeah.

Yeah.

And one of them actually was being led by one of the other commissioners who had voted against the tax hike.

Interesting.

Yeah.

Curiouser and curiouser.

Moving on.

State lawmakers are raising red flags over what they call questionable spending at Kansas universities.

A legislative committee is reviewing dozens of expenditures, including $99,000 spent on an economic development program in Colorado and a bill from Wichita State for tanning salon.

Other items include limousine services, a golf cart for campus tours, and thousands for Grammarly subscription.

While university officials say some expenses may be misunderstood.

GOP leaders are vowing to dig deeper into potential waste when this session starts in January.

And this is one of those things we've been hearing a lot about.

We're looking for waste.

We're looking for waste.

I sat through one hearing of, I believe it's the same committee where they had all these questions about how the different universities reach their budget terms and how they increased, student fees was the big question.

And it came down to the fact that it was the student government and the student organizations that were pretty much in charge of this, not the universities.

Universities will strong arm student government.

So like chaos always threat was to take away seats in the student section for basketball games.

I was always a quiet threat.

Yeah.

You know I mean it's I don't know I mean when you look at the budgets that we're talking about here.

Yeah.

This stuff is pretty nickel and dime.

Yeah.

You know, I mean, oh, yeah, it makes multimillion dollar budgets, and I'm talking like 95,000.

The store bought the Starbucks we just talked about.

We'll be tied to a state.

Yeah, it's like Grammarly.

I mean, like, I think a company Grammarly, it's going to be 100 or $200.

I can't imagine what they would use there.

But I mean, it's a useful tool for copy editing, for checking your emails, for checking stuff.

Like, I didn't seem that weird to me, or a golf cart.

Like how many golf carts is the state probably bought for other programs?

Like it's just, I don't know, it seems kind of odd to me that that's the focus, but maybe you sort of wonder, do they really care about, you know, spending or misuse the tax dollars, or are they just trying to kind of, you know, go after the university is a bit, you know, the kind of the Republican controlled legislature always been had a kind of an antagonistic approach to sort of what they perceive as these sort of liberal places.

So is it that a little bit probably poking at them and seeing what they come up with to maybe embarrassed a little bit, but at least they're holding hearings and talking about it instead of like dodging right in and just cutting stuff.

No, no, you haven't hired.

You want us to come in there?

Yeah.

And just fire people willy nilly.

But, so that's kind of what I thought when I read that story, but but also sort of the journalist in me, like, anyways.

Yeah, it's like, why are they spending money?

I'd like this tanning salon.

I'm like, yeah.

See, even though it's minuscule compared to their overall budget, I'm like, you know, it's kind of it's kind of what does that make of some of these things out?

Because when they, if they spend, misspent on these little things and have kind of loose ideas about what are they doing at the bigger level, too.

Yeah.

Well, well, I would say that the golf carts for the campus tours, I'm in favor of that.

Yeah.

There are a number of reasons why you might.

There are lots of people who might need to tour that university who can't walk all over the place.

So, you know, I mean, that's.

Yeah, that seems like a reasonable expense.

Although since like, golf carts, they've got like 800 cars.

How much are they having to do that?

Okay.

Well we'll have to wait and see this next hearing on this from legislators.

Meanwhile, a new battle is brewing over D-I policies at Kansas universities.

And this time it's targeting what's taught in the classroom.

Republican lawmakers are questioning whether a state law banning D-I should be expanded to regulate academic content.

Legislators point to a K state textbook that asks students to reconsider assumptions about identity and diversity.

And a Ku English program that examines diverse communities.

Well, university leaders say the current law doesn't apply to curriculum.

Representative Kristi Williams of Augusta suggested changing that to stop what she called indoctrination.

Okay, thoughts?

Well, you obviously had a few there.

Now, I went to school with a good friend of mine, and he, he was educated in China, came to the United States to do his student learning.

And he was brilliant, really smart.

We could talk about anything.

You provide really interesting perspectives on things.

Except when we got to Tiananmen Square where he was just like, that didn't happen.

That didn't exist.

It didn't matter how smart he was, it didn't matter.

You could show him the videos in front of him.

Tiananmen square didn't exist.

And you wonder, like, well, what's China's reason to get rid of Tiananmen Square?

Well, because the government doesn't want them to know what's happening.

So anytime I see our legislation work in and start trying to control what we teach, how we teach, how we discuss things, I start wondering, well, what's our legislators interest in that?

And what difference is that from authoritarian China and the United States?

I think we have more and more and more of a bent where our legislators really, really interested in controlling what people are allowed to learn.

That was a long story.

Sorry.

Well, yeah.

I mean, you know, I, I had a friend, her daughter was, doing college tours, so I, I told her if she wanted to, you know, check out Wichita State.

She could, stay with us.

Yeah.

And, she was like, nope, not going there.

And, you know, it's because of this kind of stuff.

Yeah.

You know, I mean, it's it's the whole DEA thing, and it cost the state money, too, because we have out-of-state students that come to our schools that brings in money, that brings in tuition.

These kids live there, that brings in mind the economy, but we can't make our schools so backwards compared to the national conversation that no one wants to come to Kansas anymore.

Why out-of-state students, but also international students?

We've already seen a yeah, plummeting in international students coming to the U.S.

in general, but to Kansas in particular, brings it to the point where we're seeing layoffs and budget cuts at Wichita State right now.

Yeah.

I mean, with Adam, this is seems like useless meddling into the teaching system at higher education, which should be totally hands off, I think as much as possible, you know, I mean, again, I think these folks are sort of, using the anti the I atmosphere that's from the, you know, in Washington coming on down and trying to score political points, with kind of a boogeyman.

You know, the academics have to have the freedom to teach.

I mean, there's I think there's a misconception, too, about the coup, for instance, that all it does is teach people liberal stuff.

I mean, there's going to cut it off.

I'm sorry.

We're running out of time all day.

Yeah, that's a root for this week.

Thanks to cake and CSN for sharing their video with us.

We'll be back next week with a look back at some of the biggest stories of the year.

If you ever drop them, we'll see you then.