From the Alvin and Rosalie Sara Check studio PBS Kansas Presents Kansas Week homeowners.

Brace yourself.

New appraisals are showing double digit spikes across Sedgwick County, meaning a heavier burden when your tax bill arrives next month.

Also, toxic conditions or suspicious timing.

City leaders scramble to close a firehouse, just as a 1% sales tax increase goes before voters.

But first, the battle over bathroom access reaches a tipping point.

The legislature overrides the governor's veto to enforce strict new rules on who can use what bathrooms in public buildings.

Is it a matter of public safety or transphobia?

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

Hello and welcome to Kansas Week.

I'm Jared Zarrella, defying the governor.

Republican lawmakers have enacted sweeping new restrictions on transgender Kansans, threatening fines and even criminal charges for using the wrong restroom.

The veto override requires public schools and government buildings to segregate the use of facilities based on sex assigned at birth.

Supporters say the measure protects privacy for women and girls.

But opponents call it dangerous discrimination.

They warn that it could hurt the economy by driving away major soccer teams like Argentina, who are expected to set up base camps in Kansas for the upcoming World Cup.

The legislation also bans Kansans from changing the gender marker on their driver's licenses and birth certificates.

Here to discuss this, and some of the week's other news is Kansas only transgender legislator, Democrat Abby Boatman.

Republican state Representative Kristi Williams, Sedgwick County Commissioner Stephanie Wise, and Wichita Eagle opinion editor Dionne Leffler.

Thanks to all of you for joining us.

First off, Representative Williams, I'll start with you.

Why why did this have to be pushed through so quickly?

Well, we want the safety and protections for our women and girls.

There are long standing principles that define a woman and a man, and we want to make sure in these places, the safe spaces of bathrooms and locker rooms and girls and women are protected.

And that's fundamentally why this passed so overwhelmingly.

So it started out.

No, as what happened here was this this started out as a measure, I believe, dealing with, bond restrictions for, defendants held in criminal cases.

But it changed very quickly to, transgender restrooms targeting transgender restrooms.

Why did we have to go through it?

So, facetiously is not the right word, but why?

Why couldn't we introduce a bill from the very beginning and let the public talk about it and and do it out front and more transparently?

Well, let's let's just, speak frankly.

The culture and society is changing at a dramatic rate.

And because of that, we have to be responsive.

We want to make sure that our girls in our public schools and our women in public spaces are protected.

They are vulnerable, and we want to ensure that they're not unduly surprised or uncomfortable in situations or threatened in situations that have traditionally been protected spaces.

I would argue that it's always the right time to protect girls and women.

Period.

Okay.

The last question I want to ask you before moving on to Abby is enforcement.

There's been a large question about who is going to enforce this, or how is it going to be enforced at all.

Are we going to have security guards standing in front of or inside of our bathrooms checking people?

How do we enforce this?

Well, certainly that's not necessary.

And certainly that's not the intent of the bill.

The bill clearly, prescribes methods in which there can be judgments made and, processed.

If there's a harms that are violated or an individual feels violated.

There are a series of set steps that they can take.

And so I think this is a common sense.

It's been something that we've been, utilizing since the beginning of time that there are men and there are women and there are often men spaces and women's spaces.

And I think we can respect that.

I don't think it's beyond common sense to think that we can work a logical way through this.

And, it's not as complicated as people would like to make it.

Okay.

Abby Bowman, obviously a unique perspective here.

Tell me your thoughts on what what has happened here.

I think what has happened here is we have wasted tens of thousands of taxpayer dollars on a non-issue that only benefits.

Political campaigns.

It certainly doesn't benefit Kansans.

Even the bill itself, when you talk about the way it came about, it was stuffed in a bill that wasn't germane at all.

And then it was rushed to the floor.

There were over a dozen attempts to try to actually build guardrails and safeguards into this bill that would actually protect women, children, men, everyone, and make restrooms in general more safe.

And all of those amendments were summarily dismissed and turned down.

A number of ones were ruled not germane, which I find incredibly ironic, depending especially how we ended up with the bill on the floor itself.

Do you feel like you are being targeted here specifically?

It's hard not to feel like I'm being targeted specifically as a transgender person who works in a public building, but.

This is not just about me.

This is bigger than me.

This is bigger than just transgender people.

This is about policing women and policing women's bodies and women's rights.

We don't ever see this hysteria when it comes to trans men or trans boys.

And even in that response, you know, what I see online is, people saying that, well, of course, there's no outrage about trans men and trans women or trans men and trans boys, insinuating that, you know, they're quote, really women and women are always weaker and never a threat, which is incredibly sexist argument in my opinion.

Do you think this will hold?

I'm only assuming here.

I have a feeling this may end up in court.

What's going to happen with the state of Kansas?

Going to have to spend more money to defend itself?

If this does end up in court, do you think it will hold up, representative?

I do think it'll hold up.

And by the way, I think it's always important to do the right thing and be on the side of truth.

Regardless of who brings something to court.

Anything can be subject to a lawsuit, anything at all.

And right now, we're in a very Leticia society, so it wouldn't surprise me.

But I will stand on truth.

There are men, and there are women, and we can respectfully disagree, and still maintain, a relationship.

But I will stand on truth, and I will stand on protecting women and girls, period, in those types of, vulnerable spaces.

Diane, let me move over to you.

You've spoken out about this before.

Tell me your thoughts.

Well, I actually have a column on this today, that I put up online, and, in it, I ask the question, what's next?

Because once you go down this path of persecuting a powerless minority for political gain and to maintain power, it's really hard to turn it around.

There's not many.

There's not a way coming back, and there's always a next.

Because what happens is, you know, we started this, we started this path with, with trans girls playing sports and, you know, it was really a non problem, but it was popular to pick on them.

So we did.

And now, you know, we have this because you know, it wears off.

It's like a drug.

And it just you know once once you start down that road, you know you either have to continue down that road because there's always going to be somebody more ruthless and more demagogic than you who will demand it.

Or you have to switch minorities and find a new find a new person to pick on.

Find a new people to pick.

I'll ask you the same thing.

Do you think this is going to hold up in court if it ends up in a lawsuit?

I don't I can't tell you.

I can't tell you how that how a court might rule on this.

It just, you know, it it should never happen in the first place.

Stephanie, why is this?

You're a Sedgwick County commissioner.

This does not apply to the to the county courthouse or county buildings.

I don't believe in my correct there.

No.

I mean, this isn't an issue that the county commission votes on or sets law.

So we're going to look at the state for setting law, and we're going to abide by what they determine is is law.

But but right now the county doesn't have to abide by any of the rulings.

That's or the bill that's been passed in the state.

Yes, the county would.

I mean, the county definitely would.

If it's law, we follow it right now.

We don't have any changes that would have to be made in our buildings.

Okay.

So I was under the impression that this involved state owned buildings and schools.

Am I?

Yes.

Is it wider than the public facilities?

The way that I understand it, it would be public facilities.

And that would include our public schools.

It would include any of our, any affiliates, which would I believe would be our state and local governments as well.

Bottom line, it does not affect any public or any private organizations or businesses.

It only touches public.

So that's an important point.

And that could be the next.

And by the way, I would say I absolutely disagree with how this was framed by, Mr.

Leffler.

And it is not based on political, retaliation or viewpoints that are trying to win popularity.

It's actually the opposite of that.

It's very difficult to stand against the wave of culture.

We are standing against, a wave of culture that is contrary to our religious beliefs and our beliefs about women and men.

That is why.

And that's not easy to do.

Abby, I'll give you the last word here.

Within about 30 or 45 seconds.

But the thing is, is your rights and or mine begin.

And bringing religious mandates into the statehouse and other public buildings that force other people to adhere to your religious beliefs is not freedom of religion.

It's not freedom of speech.

It's demagogic.

It's telling people what they can or cannot do based on your religion and not anyone else's or lack thereof.

And, you know, when Miss White says that, you know, no county buildings need to be changed, I think that is a really good example of how little the trans perspective has been considered in all of this.

We'll leave it at that.

Thank you for the respectful discussion.

Is it a genuine emergency or a political stunt?

Wichita voters are deciding on a 1% sales tax right now that, among other things, would fund fire station improvements.

But now, just as advance voting is beginning, the city suddenly shuts down fire station 15, announcing there is mold contamination in 90% of all of its firehouses.

Critics are highly skeptical of the timing, suggesting that the sudden alarm is being staged to sway public opinion to get the tax increase passed.

But the firefighters union is firing back.

They're standing firm, saying the crews have been getting sick for decades while the city has turned a blind eye.

Dion Lefler, I'll start with you.

We don't have anybody from the city represented today.

We had a great discussion last week.

I would invite people, to go to our YouTube channel, the PBS Kansas YouTube channel, to watch our discussion from last week.

But now the latest development this week is that, suddenly there is, a mold issue that is forcing the shut down of an entire fire station.

Tell tell me your thoughts here.

Well, apparently the fire station that was shut down.

The reason for that was they went in to abate the mold.

So that's part of the.

You know, that's part of the problem here is that, you know, when mold abatement is, you know, is underway, you can't be in there.

But, but the other thing that that kind of struck me as I was pondering this was, you know, firefighters have hazmat suits.

They have disinfecting chemicals.

They have most of them work somewhere in the construction industry.

When they're not on duty as firefighters.

You know, there's some of this they could clean up themselves, frankly.

And it just, you know, I mean, obviously, you know, serious, you know, serious infestation.

Yes.

Obviously, you need to bring in a contractor to do that.

But what I'm what I'm seeing is a bunch of pictures of discolored ceiling tiles.

You know, the city has a warehouse full of those.

You know, they could they could replace those.

You know, I mean, there's there's got to be some responsibility here, you know, for maintaining your own space.

And these people are, you know, they're they're trained to do that.

You know, I mean, when it comes to, you know, decontaminating things, they know how to do that.

So, you know, maybe maybe it's not as, as severe a problem as we've been led to believe.

Yeah, that's an interesting perspective I didn't think about, Stephanie Wise from the county's perspective.

First off, the sales tax issue is a city issue.

It's not a county issue.

But how does it affect you as a county leader and and the county commission as a whole?

How does this sales tax issue affect the county commission?

Well, I mean, I think that with Wichita being as big as it is as one of the 20 cities in our, county, obviously it impacts us.

I think that it's great that people want to invest in the city.

And I think that there's a lot of great things that and great ideas that they want to do with this money.

Sales tax is something that I believe is a good way to make those investments, to have people that are traveling into Wichita or traveling into Sedgwick County to help pay for those road improvements or whatever.

I would think on the county side, maybe different on the city side.

So I don't I don't disagree with their approach.

I think that when, you have turnover in elected, you have turnover.

And, every day there's a new emergency when you're in elected role.

Right?

When you're on the city council or on the county commission, you're making daily decisions on what's important today.

And these fire houses, I agree, should have been maintained throughout all of these years.

But, we need to take care of our firemen, too.

We just need to figure out the best way to do it and whether this is what wins on March 3rd or not.

We'll see.

But either way, they need to fix these firehouses.

And the only other question I was going to ask you is, are county fire stations that bad as well?

Do we have to worry about them too, or.

Oh, I have visited not every single one of them, but a lot of them in our firehouses are, are very nice.

We have some, I would say the one in Bellaire that, you know, I don't know that it's as bad as what we're hearing.

These Wichita ones are that are.

But it's our oldest one, and it's something that we are, looking down the road to see how we need to plan for that.

I'm very proud of how we plan ahead and, the county.

So I have no doubt that we've, We'll see that before it comes to, an emergency shut down for sure.

All right, our next story.

From Wichita neighborhoods to rural farmland, property values are skyrocketing across South central Kansas, and it's likely going to cost you more.

The Sedgwick County appraiser is reporting 88% of all homeowners will see their property values rise.

This year.

Wichita homes alone are rising by an average of 14.5%.

While that builds equity, officials warn it almost certainly means higher property tax bills are on the way.

Appraisal notices go out March 1st, giving you until the end of the month in March to appeal.

Meanwhile, the rural real estate market is also seeing record highs.

A new K-State report shows pasture values saw the biggest jump.

Now averaging more than $2,600, an acre.

The two state lawmakers that are here.

How this is you know, I had mentioned on social media the other day about the mill levy that our local governments are upset.

May not necessarily matter if the county appraiser can raise property valuations, even if the city council or the county commission lowers the mill levy.

People still end up paying more in property taxes because of the higher valuations.

Right.

I think that's something that a lot of people maybe don't understand when they hear confused property tax.

The mill levy especially I feel like is oftentimes not quite understood.

If I were to try to make it really simple, I would say that, you know, property taxes are comprised of basically two cogs.

You have your mill levy cog, which is small, and then you have the property valuation, which is a larger cog.

And so you can turn the mill levy cog, but it doesn't have quite near the same effect as it does when you turn the property valuation cog.

And so we can drop the mill levy by a half a mill or three quarters of a mill and save everybody 12 or $14 on their property taxes every year.

But it's going to just end up costing people more money when the value of their property has risen by $1,000 or more.

You know, pricing people out of their homes.

Representative, moving over to you.

You have a lot to say about this, too, is how how now the state doesn't charge a property tax to homeowners.

Cities and counties do, but the state collects through income, payroll taxes.

But does the state?

Is the state able to govern how cities and counties charge their property tax?

Well, first of all, we we do not have a property tax collection anymore.

We did.

But we we repealed that.

So we do not do that.

We do collect for our local school districts 20 mills.

That's equalize across the state.

But number one, yes, we can keep revamping the system and changing our property tax laws.

But there are two important points here.

Number one is that, on our November election, people have a choice for those local elections.

And when only 11% or 12% come out and vote, that is going to impact your property tax more than any general election, which you elect your state, and your president and your governor.

Right?

Absolutely.

So be cognizant a get out and vote.

Make sure that those local elected leaders are watching their spending and bringing that down.

And number two, if a local leader says we're keeping your mill levy the same and you see assessed valuation go up 9%, then just know that you're getting a tax hike.

But if they say, we're going to drop, then that's a good thing.

You know, that's what I would say.

And the city council and the county commission deal with this every two when we talk about our our revenue neutral rate, and it is so confusing, quite honestly, people just don't understand how it works.

What does revenue neutral rate mean?

Well, that would mean that we have $0 increase to run a budget for 500,000 plus people, public safety, a jail, comm care, all of the things over 46 departments that the county provides that saying we have zero increase in spending.

Well, that's not possible when you have almost 3000 employees that they have step up.

They have, pay increases, insurance goes up, we pay for these are employees that we have to employ and take care of.

So revenue neutral is really impossible at a county level.

And I think that I mean, Christy, you said it right.

This is a matter of if you say you're keeping your mill levy the same, that doesn't mean you're that's not good news.

That means that they're capturing all of that assessed growth and maintaining the same level of your mill levy.

Well, for the third year in a row, the county has reduced their mill levy and have taken less than half of that assessed growth in order to accommodate a reasonable approach in to these increased prices for all of the, uncontrollable, as we'll call them.

It comes down to the electeds.

You have to hold the line.

You have to make sure you take what you need and not what's available.

We don't.

I'm not mad that my house has increased 30%, which is huge in the last three years.

It doesn't make me mad cuz that's my investment for my family.

What I don't want is the government to think that it takes that much more to run government, just because the money's there, available with my increased value.

Diane, how do we move forward from this?

You know, with with skyrocketing valuations, insurance skyrocketing, that's adding a huge burden to the, the, the price that people have to pay.

Well, there's a couple of things here.

One, one that's really funny is that, you know, I go to a lot of government meetings, I've been to a lot of government meetings and, it's really funny because the same people who are complaining about their valuation going up when you want to put in a cell tower or you want to put in a group home, they're the first people to come out and yell, it's gonna lower my property taxes.

It's going to lower my property value.

Yes.

And it would lower their property taxes.

But you know, that's here.

That's a good point here or there.

But, you know, I came from California and I was absolutely astonished at the property tax rates in this state.

I, I had a more expensive house, and I paid considerably less because the way California does it.

And, and, you know, California is supposed to be as high tech state, right?

The way California does it is it's based on the value of your home when you bought it.

And then there's a little there's a small escalator in it.

But I could when I bought my house in California, I could sit down and I could calculate what my property tax was going to be for every year you know, till I either sold the house or died.

And when you go in with that knowledge, the, you know, I mean, okay, so values go up, it doesn't affect me.

It affects the person who's buying a house.

And if they can afford that house and they can afford the property tax, then that's that's great, you know, and and the other thing I hear, I keep hearing this, that people are being taxed out of their homes and everybody who said that, I have asked them, please tell me that person, please introduce me to that person, because I'd love to tell that story.

But, so far I haven't found a single person who was actually taxed out of their home.

All right, a new bill in Topeka could turn state employees into paid whistleblowers.

The Kansas Senate advanced legislation offering a cash reward to workers who expose waste, fraud or abuse in state programs.

Under the plan, whistleblowers would pocket 10% of the money the state saves as a result of their tip.

Supporters say the incentive encourages good stewardship of taxpayer dollars and models it after corporate efficiency rewards, but critics warn that the bill lacks critical safeguards.

Some lawmakers argue it it could weaponize workers into bounty hunters looking to embarrass political rivals.

The measure now faces a final Senate vote before heading to the House.

This was the first item I'd heard of this.

Representative Williams, tell me.

Tell me your thoughts about this.

Is it is it?

So far, what you've seen, it's.

You're a House representative and it's in the Senate right now, so I assume you haven't seen much of it, but are you for or against this bill?

How are you thinking on it?

Well, a couple of things.

We we want to make sure that there's not waste, fraud and abuse.

We have seen that in our state.

We've seen it with a snap benefits.

We our error rate is so high right now that we're on target to pay $40 million in fines in 2028, because our error rate is so high.

We have also seen that through a legislative post audit that, free and reduced lunch, it has between 54 and 75% of its applicants that don't have or don't meet eligibility requirements.

So, the fraud and abuse does exist.

And potentially this could be helpful.

And we definitely want to look for efficiencies, but I'll take a good look at it and make that decision when it comes to the House.

All right.

Representative Bowman, what are your thoughts on this bill?

I think we need to stop coming up with bounty schemes for people in the Capitol.

But for real, I was reading about this and I feel like the 10% is a little misleading, because that's 10% after, you know, the expense of correcting the waste, fraud or abuse.

So it's really after, you know, say the state saves $20,000 and they spent $10,000 cleaning it up, then that's $10,000 that you get 10% off.

So it's not 10% of whatever you have saved, which I feel like was a talking point for some of the proponents here.

But I also think that if you're looking for waste, fraud and abuse in the state capital, you could tune in to any number of committee meetings or floor sessions and people could make a lot of money because there is a lot of wasted time going on and there is a lot of abuse of the system.

I would say.

Diane, with about 30s left, do you think this is going to incentivize people to expose waste, fraud and abuse?

Well, I got I got dibs on the, Chiefs Stadium project.

Yeah, but, well, you know, I mean, I've, I've basically spent the last 28 years of my life exposing waste, fraud and abuse in state government.

And it does exist, but generally it is not so much the the individual, you know, who you know.

I mean, there are individuals who work the system.

We know.

But, you know, it's usually the big boys who are doing it.

Yeah.

All right.

That's a wrap for this week.

Thank you so much to Abby Boatman, Kristi Williams, Stephanie Wise and Dion Lefler for being here.

And thanks also to TV for sharing their video with us.

I'm Jared Cirillo.

We'll see you next week.

Oh.