Toellner Tells it

Thoughts on KCMO's e-Tax

On Tuesday, Kansas City voters will vote on whether or not to keep the city's 1% earnings tax.

If you've been watching the commercials from both sides, you may be unsure of where you stand on the issue. It's fine. It's understandable. Even economists are divided on the merits of city earnings taxes.

The city earnings tax was originally passed in 1963 -- with a 1/2 cent earnings tax.  The tax was increased to 1% in 1970 -- in the desire mostly to increase police officers and provide city-wide tax collection. The tax is applied to incomes of all people who live or work in Kansas City, MO.

If the vote passes on Tuesday, the city will have a 10 year phase out of the earnings tax.

The impact of the earnings tax is debatable.

Since 1970, Kansas City has lost 10% of its population, with 50,000 fewer people living in the city now than in 1970. The city has also seen virtually no job growth, while surrounding communities have seen significant growth.

Those in favor of the eTax note that there are a lot of reasons for Kansas City's lost population, and jobs. Certainly the city's failing school system, and high crime rates are a contributing factor to population loss and poor job growth. Also, most cities endured high levels of flight during the 70s that caused most to have some form of population loss.

However, some have been better at reversing that trend than others.

It is also worth noting that when you look at cities with an earnings tax, most are in a similar situation to Kansas City (and St. Louis) when it comes to struggling to revitalize their urban core. Here's a look at some cities and their city-wide income tax rate. For the purposes of comparison, I'm only using cities with a similar structure to that used in Kansas City and St. Louis, larger cities, and cities that aren't mostly surrounded by other cities without e-Taxes.

Birmingham, AL - 1% income tax rate.  Has also lost a huge amount of their population and jobs. And have a high level of poverty.

Wilmington, DE - has a 1.25% earnings tax rate - and a Household Income 40% lower than the rest of the state of Delaware.

Louisville, KY - 2.2% for Residents, 1.45% fro non residents. Also not the mecca of a developing city.

Baltimore, MD - 3.05% earnings tax. Has lost nearly 30% of its population in the past 40 years, and continues to suffer from very high poverty and unemployment rates.

Detroit, MI - Earnings tax of 2.5% for residents, 1.25% for non residents.

Most cities in Ohio have an earnings tax, but Cincinnati would be notable given its proximety to the state line.

St. Louis right now is among the least safe cities in the country, has lost population and jobs.

There are a few cities that have earnings taxes with some success -- Washington DC has a scaled tax (a higher percent charged to higher incomes), and New York City also has an earnings tax. The entire metro area of Portland has an eTax, which takes away the negative aspects as there are not surrounding areas to move to to avoid the tax.

When you look at this list of cities on the list, it really is the who's who of struggling cities. Cities like Minneapolis, Dallas, Salt Lake City, Charlotte, Atlanta, etc that are going through successful revitalizations of their urban core are not on the eTax list.

Supporters of the tax note that the tax is largely paid for by out-of-town people, and that the city budget is very dependent on the budget. They also say that large companies are likely to choose their location based on other tax incentives vs the eTax.

All are true.

However, it also seems that small companies, and independent workers, tend to choose living outside of KCMO. Realators, personal accountants, investment advisers, etc -- the types of people who are largely self-employed seem to really gravitate toward the Kansas side of the state line because they can mostly avoid paying the eTax -- meaning lost jobs in the city, and lost housing sales, and sales tax revenue.

There is little doubt that long term, keeping the eTax is bad for city business. Yes, it would be great if the foks on the Kansas Side of the state line would pay for regionaly amenities (things like the airport, sports stadiums (and yes, I'm fine with sharing some of this money with KCK for the speedway and LiveStrong stadium), Convention Center, zoo and some key museums, but passing a 1/8 cent sales tax across all 5 metro counties would be a better way to do this -- and would be more palatable for Johnson Countians if we were to get rid of the 1% eTax. However, can we make up the revenue in the short term as we phase out the tax?

I'm not sure.

So here's my thought. Keep the eTax for 5 more years. Over the next 5 years, work with JOCO/WYCO, Platte and Clay and see if we can get a 1/8 cent regional sales tax passed in each county -- that will go into effect contingent upon the loss of the KCMO eTax. Meanwhile, as other taxes come due for renewal, work to move them from being 100% forced allocations, to moving a fraction of those dollars into the general fund to give KCMO more budget flexibility during tough times.  The city also needs to rework its property tax codes and remove some of the significant red tape at city hall to make it easier for small business owners to start up new businesses.

Then, in 5 years, kill the eTax, so we can join other cities in revitalizing their cities.  The new mayor and city council have a lot of work to do between now and then.

 

Are the internet and social media leveling the playing field in local elections?

Four years ago was probably my first real involvement in any ways into Kansas City politics. I made a conscious decision to go out to a lot of the candidate forums, meet the candidates, RSS feed their blogs, etc.  I found many candidates that I really liked, that were really mostly just neighborhood activists that wanted to run for city council and make an improvement in Kansas City. Most were fairly accomplished in their roles in neighborhoods and on city committees.

Most then got few votes in the primaries and few advanced to the general election -- and others got crushed by candidates with a lot of money in the general election.

So this go around, I kind of had a better idea of what to expect.  Small-budget candidates would have a tough road to hoe, would not get a lot of endorsements from large organizations (who I still think are more concerned with endorsing who they think will win so they can then go back and ask favors later vs choosing who will represent their interests the best).

Yet, I was somewhat pleasantly surprised by the election results.

While Mike Burke got the support of virtually the who's who of Kansas City politics and raised nearly 70% more money than Sly James, James, a political outsider (who, admittedly had plenty of support of his own), earned the mayorship in last week's vote.

Meanwhile, some of the neighborhood activists did pretty well in the council races as well. I was pleased to see Jermaine Reed get 75% of the votes in his district in spite of having less money, and less name recognition than incumbant Sharon Sanders Brooks.  I was also impressed that Reverend Brooks won the 5th district seat in spite of having half the money as Ken Bacchus (who also benefited from more name recognition and having had been formerly on the city council.

Even a few other neighborhood candidates ran very tight races in spite of having less money. Brandon Ellington earned 45% of the votes in spite of operating on a shoestring budget that was 25% of that of incumbant Melba Curls and Tracy Ward earned 40% of the vote, in spite of having only raised around $4,000 compared to her opponent, Scott Taylor, who raised $61,000. 

While I was a big fan of both Ellington and Ward, I have to note that I feel a little optimism for "the little guys" of Kansas City politics. Whereas four years ago I think many of these smaller budgeted campaigns would have made little noise in the grand scheme of KC politics, I think the internet and social media have played a vital role in helping these candidates who are not among the political elites in KC to reach out to voters in a more cost-effective way.  And I think their ability to get their stances out on issues, and to reach constituents, in a way that is much more cost-effective than mailings and traditional advertising.

It is also simply amazing that there were many candidates (Sharon Sanders Brooks, Melba Curls, Ken Bachhus) who had no online presence at all).

Having money is still important. The candidate with the most money still won in the majority of cases. But I think the gap is closing....and I think in the long run that will be good for KC politics - so that the people with the best ideas get elected, and not just the person with the most money or endorsements.

Tony actually posted the budgets and the number of votes for each political candidate this morning...which saved me a little work in writing this post, so thanks for that.

85% of Kansas Citians let the rest of us decide who represents them

I've never quite understood how it is that this country LOVES democracy, and yet so few people actually take part in it.

On Tuesday, just over 50,000 voters cast ballots in the primary for who would make it to the general election.  According to census data, there are roughly 330,000 people of voting age in this city.  That's just 15% participation.

Possibly even more interesting is the break out by district. Here are how the votes broke down by district (based on the total vote counts for the in-district races):

2nd: 6,543

3rd: 5,603

5th: 7,651

6th: 9,789

This leaves 21,087 votes for the 1st and 4th (which didn't have contested races) -- so roughly 10,543 votes for each of those two districts.

It's interesting of course that the districts with the most social problems tend to be most under-represented at the polls (including the 3rd, which is the probably the district with the most problems). It may then seem as no wonder that politicians are less likely to consider them when making city policies.

It is also interesting that the 1st District, which represents the Northland, is possibly the most influential district at the polls, is also the LEAST like the other districts in the city because it is much more suburban and does not deal with the same school, crime, infill issues as does the urban core.

It is also interesting that the two most affluent and engaged districts, the 1st and 4th, failed to have competitive council races. 

This isn't an indictment on any of the candidates that advanced -- certainly there were some great new politicians that are political outsiders that have advanced...including folks like Tracy Ward and even Sly James.  However, I still feel that if we are going to get the best out of our city we're going to need competitive council and mayoral races and more citizen involvement in our political process.  Without that, we may all end up being ignored and the political insiders in the city will continue to vote in their own while the majority of the city watches them do it.

Politcian Responses for to Animal Welfare Policy Questionaires

The primary elections are Tuesday, and while many organizations publish their political endorsements, it should be no surprise that animal welfare people would post theirs too.

At first glance, posting rankings on animal welfare policy may seem insignificant; after all, there are a wealth of major problems facing Kansas City. But on the flip side, 60% of the residents in Kansas City own pets and legitimately care about animals in this city. Additionally, as the hub of the Animal Health Corridor, being a pet-friendly city could be beneficial for attracting more animal health businesses to the city.

Meanwhile, the city spends more than $2.5 million a year on animal control and is animal shelter -- so everyone should have a vested interest in this not being yet another failing public service. And unlike many of the problems that face the city, solving many of the problems with animal control are actually pretty easy.

So Kansas City Dog Advocates has put together their rankings of the individual politicians in the KCMO election and their views on animal welfare policies. You can go to the link to read them on their page, but because most people don't click on links, I am posted the comments from their page below:

Mayor

*Mark Funkhouser -- Mayor Funkhouser is a former auditor for the city and is inclined to support fiscally responsible ordinances. As auditor, he was very critical of animal control's poor licensing rates. As Mayor, he is responsible for appointing all members of the KCMO Parks Board.  The current parks board prohibited building a dog park in Waldo where a group of private citizens had raised money (and substantial support) to build it.  While Funkhouser has been vocally frustrated with the Parks board on these decisions, they are his appointees nonetheless. Funkhouser is the owner of a toy poodle and a chihuahua. Funkhouser is open to repealing the city's ordinance mandating the spay/neuter of 'pit bulls', and in general opposes breed-specific laws. He also says he is open to making changes at the shelter. In spite of several conversations about the city's door-to-door sweeps, he still insists (wrongly) that they only existed for a single week. He also insisted there were no quotas although the Animal Control Manager said there were.  He is open to allowing Trap/Neuter/Return programs for cats. And he supports a long term plan for a new shelter.

*Deb Hermann -- Is currently a member of the city council and is now running for Mayor. Hermann opposed making pit bulls automatically dangerous dogs at the committee level and at the council level, but did propose and support BSL mandatory spay/neuter (MSN). Hermann actually sponsored this bill (which directly led to the death of more than 2,000 dogs in the community) based on the recommendations of various staff members. This is particularly concernings she has yielded her opinion to "staff recommendations" in other mayoral forums.  If we are to make improvements to the problems in the city we'll need someone who has an opinion and willingness to impact positive change even in spite of staff recommendations. As for Hermann's questionaire, Hermann has two dogs, a Boxer and a Shih Tzu. She says she is open to discussions about the city's MSN law and notes in regards to breed bans that she would like to see a comprehensive plan that will protect dog owners and the dogs.  She says that she is pleased with the financial savings of the privatized shelter so far but is open to discussions about the shelter operations. She notes that with good planning, dog parks can be successful and would like the issue revisited by the parks board.  She notes that she'd like to see animal control "quotas" for spay/neuter certificates distributed vs the ticket and confiscate quota program that is there now, because we won't ticket our ways out of problems. Hermann is supportive of the door-to-door sweeps because she felt like animal control officers were just enforcing the current law. She is open to allowing those involved in licensed rescues to be temporarily over the pet limit. She would be open at looking into TNR programs that have been successful in other cities and would support the long-term plans for building a new shelter.

Sly James  -- James is the owner of a lab mix, a Minature Schnauzer and a Dachshund/Yorkie Mix (Dorkie).  He also used to own an Irish Wofhound that has passed away. James is not supportive of breed specific laws - and would be open to repealing the city's law mandating the spay/neuter of all pit bull type dogs as he believes that ordinances should not unfairly burden low-income families and individuals.  Instead, laws should be targeted toward owners whose animals are raised for violent, unlawful ends. Generally speaking, James is opposed to privatizing the shelter, however, recognizes that the current shelter privatization is working for the city both in financially and in quality of service.  He would consider re-opening the bid (as a note, this all is a bit of a concern as the likely worst case scenerio for the animals in Kansas City is if the city took back over the shelter operations). James does not support quotas as revenue boosters for the city, but is supportive of performance metrics that ensure citizens are getting the needed results. He also is not generally supportive of targeting "selected neighborhoods" in enforcing laws through door-to-door sweeps. James would be open to laws that temporarily allow residents to be over the pet limit in certain situations and would support laws that allow for the proper care of feral cat colonies. He is also supportive of long-term plans to replace the city's current, outdated shelter.

Jim Rowland  -- Rowland owns a German Shepherd and a cat. He is aware of the complex issues facing 'pit bulls' in this community in regards to the city's law mandating the spay/neuter (MSN) of pit bulls - especially with so many area communities have banned them. He does realize that it's wrong to target low-income families (who he notes make great pet owners too) with the MSN law and especially wrong to seize them because they're not altered where they are too often killed at the shelter.  He instead supports collaboration with low-cost spay/neuter clinics in order to help solve the problems. He also notes that he does not support breed-specific laws. Rowland understands the improvements with the privatized shelter (noting the city does not have the resources or expertise to run a shelter) but also understands that there is a lot of opportunity to make improvements.  He is open to making the changes necessary to fix these issues and notes that working within a budget and providing compassionate care for animals is not mutually exclusive. Rowland is supportive of more dog parks in the city as demand warrants.  He thinks the quota system is mismanagement and rewards negative behavior vs positive outcomes - and worse, has not been used to get rid of bad Animal Control Officers as they were intended.  He also thinks the door-to-door sweeps were an ineffective and inaproapriate use of city resources. He is also open to changing the city's pet limit law as long as people are not causing problems with neighbors and supports the city working with animal welfare groups work with feral cat colonies in the city. He also thinks there are ways to partner with the animal welfare community in order to get resources (like a new shelter) that are badly needed.

Mike Burke -- Mr. Burke has contacted KCDA on multiple occassions after receiving the questionaire...yet, has unfortunately yet to return a completed form or have an opportunity for a live conversation. At this point we do not have information on Burke's stances on these issues, but will update this space if we are able to connect with him.

Henry Klein  -- Klein is an animal lover (he owns a mixed breed dog and a couple of cats) and formerly on the board of directors of the Humane Society of Greater Kansas City. Klein is a strong supporter of low cost veterinarian services, including spay/neuter to help low-income families. However, while he is a proponent of spay/neuter, he is open to the discussion of city's law mandating the spay/neuter of pit bulls and how to amend it to make it workable. He is opposed to laws targeting specific breeds of dogs because it is the owner's responsibility to provide care and control of their pets. He would be in favor of re-opening the shelter contract. Klein is 'huge proponent" of off leash dog parks and thinks neighborhood involvement in the process is essential to making sure everyone is on-board with the increased usage that will come from off-leash dog parks. He doesn't think good public policy is ever served by quotas and also thinks the door-to-door sweeps are another 'really bad idea" that is not the kind of public policy that builds good will between citizens and servants. He is generally supportive of increases in the pet limit and at the very least making reasonable and meaningful exceptions to the policy - -and would support better solutions that would allow for Trap/Neuter/Return programs for feral cats. He is also supportive of moves to create a new shelter and is confident that the city's citizens are highly in favor of efforts to help animal welfare.

City Council

1st District

Dick Davis  -- Davis is the onwer of one cat. He is comfortable with the city's position to privatize the city shelter and that re-opening the contract for new bids would be in order. He thinks additional dog parks and people in rescue being temporarily over the pet limit are reasonable proposals. He also thinks that good animal control officers should not need performance standards and that door-to-door sweeps are an excessive use of police power. He would support laws that allow for Trap/Neuter/Return. He does not support a move to improve the city animal shelter unless the city's financial position improves. There are several other issues (including Breed-specific legislation and the law mandating spay/neuter of 'pit bulls" in which he says he has no strong feelings and would be open to discussions. Mr. Davis is running unopposed.

1st District At-Large

Scott Wagner  -- Wagner is not currently a pet owner, but has been recently. He recently had his adopted Lab mix escape from his kennel/groomer for the second time and she was never able to be found - -and also recently had an elderly cat that had to be euthanized because of health issues. He does not support the city's law requiring all pit bulls to be spayed or neutered because he thinks laws targeting single breeds are not effective and this law particularly increases the burden on low-income families.  He instead, favors cooperation with the animal welfare community to create a comprehensive plan to help people alter their pets with deferd costs for low-income households. He is generally supportive of allowing a private organization with expertise to run the city shelter and but does not favor immediate changes at the shelter as he thinks shelter contracts should run for 3-5 years so contractors have adequate time to make investments, hire staff etc. He is generally supportive of more dog parks in the city, preferring that new parks be evenly dispersed throughout the city and in larger parks so dog owners and non dog owners may be evenly accomodated. Wagner had his own neighborhood targeted by door-to-door sweeps and doesn't they they solved anything - and thinks the city quotas are 'completely counter-productive'. Wagner is supportive of allowing pet limit variences for pet fosters, and is open to solutions that will help the management and prevention of growth of feral cat colonies...while acknowledging that the current city laws preventing TNR programs are unenforceable. Wagner would support a public/private partnership for building a new shelter - as he realizes that it may be unrealistic for the city to come up with the full amount for the shelter on its own in the short term.

Daina Kennedy -- KCDA has sent questionaires to Ms. Kennedy on two different occassions and have yet to hear back from her. We will update her profile if more information becomes available. 

2nd District

*Russ Johnson -- Mr. Johnson is a very data-driven guy and is set on making decisions based on data, not emotions. This is usually very good for dog people, as bad animal policies are the ones made based on fear, not facts. He sat down with KCDA and went through a lot of information, and asked for even more. He'll make fact-based decisions on most subjects. He is running un-opposed in 2011.

2nd District At-Large

*Ed Ford -- Ford has previously owned two dogs that have passed away after living long, happy lives - both of which were adopted from animal shelters. Ford says he does not support breed specific legislation as he thinks the an animal's aggressiveness is based on how it is treated or trained.  He is aware that Kansas City has formed partnerships with spay/neuter clinics that target low-income households and would be open to the repeal of the city's law mandating that all pit bulls be altered. He says he would be open to re-opening the animal shelter contract up for bids and is a supporter of dog parks. Ford does not favor the door-to-door licensing checks (and notes that in 1994 was given a ticket in such a sweep), and is open to creating a permit for rescue organizaitons to exceed the pet limit. He also would be supportive laws that allow for the proper care of feral cat colonies - noting that when he was growing up, his mother would often feed neighborhood cats. Ford would very much support long-term plans for a new shelter and notes that the city manager has assured the council that the next bond issue in the city would include a new animal shelter and has also been working with NAWS (Northland Animal Welfare Society) to help  them find a location for their no-kill shelter.

Allen Dillingham -- KCDA has sent questionaires to Mr. Dillingham on two different occassions and have yet to receive a response.

3rd District  - We'd like to note that the majority of animal control calls come from the 3rd District.  It is dissappointing that the candidates running for 3rd In District are either unreachable or non-responsive.

Sharon Sanders- Brooks -- KCDA has sent questionaires to Ms. Brooks on two different occassions, and have yet to get a response. KCDA also received no response from her in 2007 when she was running.

Michael Fletcher -- Due to lack of an online presence, KCDA has been unable to get a questionaire to Mr. Fletcher.

Jermaine Reed -- Mr. Reed has a campaign website, but does not have a way of contacting him on the website. So we have yet to get a questionaire to him for this campaign.

3rd District At Large 

 *Melba Curls -- In 2007 when Curls ran for city council, she did not respond to KCDA questionaires on three different occassions. After sending questionaires to her on two different occassions in 2011, she has yet to respond. This lack of response actually is a good representation of the type of response we have gotten from her while she has been in office.

Durwin Rice -- Rice is an animal-lover and a friend of KCDA. He owns two large mixed-breed dogs and one cat. All three were adopted. He strongly thinks that the law mandating the spay/neuter of 'pit bulls' should be repealed because it targets people and dogs in poor communities, and opposes any form of breed-specific legislation because it promotes ignorance against certain types of dogs and ignorance about the proper care and training of dogs. He supports opening the current shelter contract up for bids. He supports the creation of a large dog park in every district in the city, as well as smaller fenced areas for dogs and dog owners that are appropriately sized for smaller neighborhood parks. Rice does not support the use of quotas for animal control and doesn't think door-to-door licensing sweeps are an appropriate use of city resources. Rice would also support making changes to the city's pet limit law that would allow for a permit system for people to be over the limit if they are fostering animals for rescues.  He supports making it legal to care for properly care for community cats and would support a plan that would  build a new shelter in the city. We feel that Rice would actively advocate for animals if elected to the council.

Brandon Ellington  -- Ellington is the owner of a 'pit bull terrier mix' that he adopted from Wayside Waifs. He is opposed to the city's mandatory spay/neuter law because it not only targets low-income households but also infringes on owners rights to whether or not they would like to breed their pit bulls or not (even though we at KCDA would hope most people would elect to have their pit bulls altered, we do support Ellington's view that mandating that they do so is unnecessary government over-reach). Ellington does not support any type of breed-specific laws because he remembers a time when people used to target Rottweilers and Doberman Pinchers as being aggressive  - noting it is neglected or mishandled dogs that are aggressive, not breeds. He is open to putting the animal control contract up for bids. Ellington supports dog parks because it is good for dogs to be able to run and get exercise, and because they bring dog lovers together. Ellington supports getting rid of the quotas and against the door-to-door sweeps. He would support temporarily lifting pet limits for people rescuing (although he notes that he is supportive of the idea of pet limits) and would favor laws that would allow for Trap/Neuter/Release programs.

4th District

*Jan Marcason  -- What a difference 4 years makes. Four years ago, while running for office, Ms. Marcason sat down with KCDA prior to discuss animal welfare issues. Since that time, her stances have changed pretty dramatically, and not in a favorable way...in fact, many of her answers were quite concerning (thus her current ranking). Jan is not currently a pet owner. She says she does favor breed specific legislation when it can be statistically shown that it is necessary for the safety of all citizens. (We'd like to note that BSL has been proven, irrefutabley to be ineffective and a waste of resources. *See Topeka, KS recent repeal.) Thus, she says she is in favor of the current mandatory spay/neuter law for pit bulls because "in terms of citizen safety, the research showed the need for the legislation". (Never mind that 5 years later there has been no change in the number of dog bites in this city, but literally at least 2,000 dogs are dead directly because of the ordinance). She notes that having a private entity run the municple shelter appears to have been a good decision for the city financially (no comment that it has been better for the animals too), and notes that she is in favor of more dog parks as she believes that they enhance the quality of life for our citizens. She says that without sufficient data, she is withholding an opinion on the city's quota system and the door-to-door sweeps (although she does note that there seems as if there ought to be a less invasive way to encourage compliance with pet registration). She is open to suggestions for allowing people to have more than 4 pets without having to apply for a "Hobby kennel" permit. She says she gets phone calls complaining about feral cats in neighborhoods and is sympathetic toward that problem, and wonders if Trap/Neuter/Release programs would satisfy the concerns of these citizens. She does think it would be a good time to start long-term planning for a new shelter, although notes that financing would be a challenge.

4th District At-Large

John Crawford -- We have spoken to Mr. Crawford during the campaign and he has received our questionaire, but he is yet to respond.  We will update this space if we ever receive a completed questionaire from Mr. Crawford.

Anne McGregor -- We have spoken to Ms McGregor during the campaign, and she has receiver our questionaire, but has yet to responde. We will update this space if we receive a completed questionaire.

Ed Pace -- Pace is the onwer of an American Staffordshire terrier that he calls the 8th addition to the family. Pace rightly calls the city's law mandating the spay/neuter of pit bulls "Institutionalized discrimination" that targets predominently Black and Brown communities and low-income families in general. Pace says that he would lead the discussions about repealing these types of laws, not just be a participant. He understands that breed-specific laws are not a viable solution and would not support them in any form. Pace would like to see an organization in charge of the shelter that was not a for-profit organization because he feels that life should come befor profit. He would support the the building of new dog parks in the city because the public obviously wants this kind of amenity and believes the department heads need to be held accountable. Pace opposes both the quotas and the door-to-door sweeps, and also would support a proposal that would allow more than the city limit of pets for people involved in rescue efforts. He would support laws that allow for the care of feral cat colonies and a long-term solution to building a new shelter.

Annie Presley  -- Presely has written a series of children's books about her rescue dog Sam who they had to euthanize a year ago. The first book "Sam Gets Adopted" is due to be published sometime this year. Obviously Presley is a pet lover -- and has two dogs, a Miniature Schnauzer and a mixed breed they recently adopted from Wayside Waifs. While Presley is opposed to breed-specific legislation, she does talk some in her survey about some dogs being "more aggressive than others". This doesn't mean that she supports breed-specific laws, but does seek good education for owners of particular types of dogs to create a safer environment for pet owners and citizens. She supports opening up the shelter contract for bids. She says her dogs love the Penn Valley dog park and has recommended to the Director of the Parks Department that there should be a dog park in every corner of town. She thinks the door-to-door sweeps seem expensive and impractical and thinks that working with non-profits and veterinarians would create opportunities to license pets in a far more practical way. She is open to discussions on raising the city's pet limit law and supports changes to laws that allow for the proper care of feral cat colonies.

Jim Glover  -- Glover was on the Neighborhoods Committe that originally recommended the now-approved mandatory spay/neuter law for 'pit bulls' in 2006. Glover has yet to respond to our questionaire.

5th District

Ken Bacchus - Due to lack of an internet presence, KCDA was never able to get a survey to Mr. Bacchus.

W. Ruth Turner - Due to lack of an internet presence, KCDA was never able to get a survey to Ms. Turner. 

Michael Brooks  -- We don't know know Rev. Brooks stance on any of the issues, but he did send a representative to the Spay Day event before elections in 2007 (the Rev. had to host church on Sunday morning).  Taking an interest in animal welfare issues is important. The more education people have on these matters, the better.  Due to lack of an internet presence, we were unable to get a survey to Mr. Brooks for the 2011 election.

5th District At Large

*Cindy Baker Circo  -- Circo is almost single-handedly to credit for moving the city shelter operations under private control - a move that saved the city money and has saved animal lives. Circo has become a bit "more political" in her views since the previous election. She is a dog owner, and has helped change some policies regarding the city's law mandating the spay/neuter of all 'pit bulls' to where owners are now given warnings for non-compliance and information on free clinics to have the surgery done.  She does not favor breed-specific laws. Circo realizes that the shelter has made a lot of progress but that much more progress is needed and due to massive budget cuts, creativity and collaboration will be needed to make more progress. Circo has funded the priority dog park in Swope Park (although there is still need for a sponsor of it). Circo is supportive of the city's door-to-door sweeps as an effort to increase licensing. She is supportive of possible increases in the pet limit and would be supportive of a badly needed new shelter.

Mahlon Davis Jr  -- (Note: due to some paperwork isssues, Davis' name will not appear on the primary ballot - so will be a write-in candidate. If he gets enough write-in votes, his name will appear on the ballot for the general election).  Davis is a dog owner and the proud owner of a Miniature Pincher. Davis does think that the city law requiring 'pit bulls' to be spayed/neutered should be repealed and does not support breed-specific legislation in any form. He is supportive of the privatized shelter and does think opening the shelter bid would bring out the best of the best in different private organizations. Davis is not a huge fan of dog parks because he doesn't believe everyone is training their dogs properly but is open to more dog parks and citizen's ideas and concerns. He does not support quotas in the city's animal control and thinks it could lead to animal control being a bit "unorthodox" and potentially writing tickets for things that are not there.  He also thinks door-to-door sweeps are "over the top" and could lead to animal control performing unconstitutional acts. He is open to some adjustments to the city's pet limit, but does have some concerns if not done smartly that animals could be harmed. He supports a long-term solution to the city's aging animal shelter and would listen to citizens on the issue of TNR for feral cats.

6th District

* John Sharp  -- Sharp is the owner of a German Sheperd/Norwegian Elk Hound Mix. He notes that he was not on the council when the ordinance requiring the spay/neuter of all pit bulls was enacted, but if he had been, he would have voted against it. While he strongly supports efforts to spay/neuter, he does not support mandatory laws unless the subsidies are available to help low-income households. He also does not support breed-specific legislation. While he does think privatizing the animal shelter has been an improvement, he knows more improvements are necessary and there could be benefits of more city council supervision. He thinks the city's one dog park has been a success and that more are needed in other areas of the city. Sharp thinks the city's performance standards were designed as a "quick fix" to management problems and believes that animal control should devote more time to educating and working with pet owners vs punitive legislation...and also feels that the door-to-door sweeps are counter-productive if not used in this way.  Sharp would support allowing for a special license to be over the city's pet limit and for laws that allow for Trap/Neuter/Return for feral cat colonies. He also would support a long-term approach to replacing the city's outdated animal shelter while acknowledging that budgets are tight.

Terrance Nash -- KCDA sent Mr. Nash surveys on two different occassions but he never responded. It has been our experience that if officials have not been responsive prior to elections, they are seldom more responsive once elected.

6th District At-Large

Chuck Eddy  -- Eddy is no longer a pet owner, but used to own a Peek-A-Poo. He does believe that we need additional dog parks in order to meet current and future needs. He does not believe in the cities quota system and thinks there are better ways to evaluate the performance of staff. As for the rest of the questions, Eddy seems open to discussing them all, but does not seem to have enough information to have an opinion on them at this point.

Tracy Ward  -- Ward is a vocal proponent of less government - and this is usually beneficial when it comes to preventing unwanted laws that target pet owners. Ward has three pets, a Great Dane/Anatolian Shepherd Mix and two cats (one of which turns 20 this summer).  Ward believes that laws such as the city's law mandating the spay/neuter of pit bulls are designed to punish a few irresponsible owners and doesn't believe in punishing all dog owners based on the actions of a few. Ward 'absolutely' does not favor breed-specific laws. She, in general, believs that privatizing the shelter opens the door for competition and leads to higher quality services at a fair fee - and thus, would be open to making changes at the shelter if workers/volunteers at the shelter believe that is what would be best. Ward is supportive of more dog parks in the city and would benefit Kansas City by making it more "pet friendly". She is not a fan of quotas because they can lead to unethical practices by law enforcement and thinks the "knock and talk" type of law enforcement violates the Constitution and favors education over punishing and profiting from it. She would support raising the pet limit - particularly for people fostering for rescues, and does not support punishing people for feeding feral cats (although she does see the need for managing colonies to keep them from getting out of control). She also supports long-term plans for a new shelter but realizes that Kansas City is facing tough economic times and that the private sector and charitable money may need to be sought to help build one in a more timely manner.

Scott Taylor - No rating - Taylor is not currently a pet owner, but does note that some of his fondest memories as a child are with his dog, Teppy. Taylor says it is important for homeless pets to have the opportunity to be adopted and likes city partnerships that would help more animals get adopted...and is interested in hearing more about other options for shelter partnerships. Taylor is open to more discussions and exploring additional options with regard to breed specific legislation, the city's mandatory spay/neuter law for pit bulls, dog parks, trap/neuter/release policies for cats, pet limit laws and the city's door-to-door sweeps. Because of the lack of positions on many of the issues, we have elected to give no rating to Mr. Taylor at this time - but do appreciate his time in returning the questionaire.

Michael R. Brown - Due to lack of an internet presence, KCDA was unable to find contact information for Mr. Brown and thus, he never received a survey.

Delmira Quarles - Due to lack of an internet presence, KCDA was unable to find contact infrmation for Ms. Quarles and thus, she never received a survey.

Is the Star determining who is, and is not a viable candidate based on $$$?

Earlier today, Steve Kraske wrote an editorial about the quality of candidates in this year's version of the mayor's race?

But it was interesting that his column essentially eliminated two candidates from the start.

While his column features nice words to say about candidates Deb Hermann, Mike Burke, Jim Rowland and Sly James (along with current mayor Mark Funkhouser), he essentially never mentioned two other candidates in the mayor's race, Henry Klein and Charles Wheeler. 

But what makes these two candidates lesser candidates than the ones who are getting the press? 

The simple answer:  Money.

While the 5 candidates mentioned by Kraske have higher overall donations, neither Klein nor Wheeler had earned major donations as of a month ago. 

Sadly, it's not experience, smarts, or ideas that is keeping them from being mentioned by the city's leading news outlet as being legitimate contenders, it's simple money. Both have been regulars at the forums. Wheeler is the only candidate other than our current mayor who actually has experience being the mayor of this city. Klein lacks the political experience, but certainly doesn't have less political experience than Burke or James. Both have been active in all of the forums -- and Klein has brought a lot of unique thinking to the table with talk of improving public transit by partnering with private entities such as Zip Cars and in pushing green initiatives.

Sadly, it doesn't matter. Apparently only money matters to the city's newspaper of record...allowing the city's political insiders who collected early donations to continue to rule the roost in city politics.  The Star should report on the issues, and the ideas the candidates bring to the table to address the issues, and let the people decide who is worthy to be our mayor based on those ideas; instead of letting money decide who's viable and who's not.  

It's unfortunate that not being part of the political elite in the city doesn't warrant even consideration from the Star -- our citizens deserve better, and the city needs better than that.

Politics on the Boulevards

 Must be political season. Yesterday, I took a bit of a drive through Kansas City enjoying the nice weather -- and taking note of which candidates seemed to be getting support in which areas of town.

Not unlike a good many elections, supporters of a lot of the candidates are putting signs up illegally in public areas -- including in the center grassy areas of many of the boulevards in town.  I don't really intend to call out Jim Rowland with the photo because there are several candidates who have the same problem, but the 15 or so signs (there are 3 visible in this one photograph) that one of his supporters put up in a 4 block stretch of Paseo between 10th and 14th was the more egregious examples of the signs popping up on our city boulevards. 

This isn't legal, of course, and I wish more of the candidates would be very clear with their supporters to not put the signs up on public property. It's really not fair to the people who really do want to play by the rules.

Musings from the Midtown neighborhoods Mayoral Forum

Tuesday night, 8 midtown neighborhoods hosted a mayoral forum. The forum for the candidates was hosted by Hyde Park, Old Hyde Park, Southmoreland, Squire Park, Longfellow, Center City, Ivanhoe and Manheim Neighborhoods.

There was a pretty good attendence at the forum and I think, for many, it was the first time for them to get to see/meet some of the mayoral candidates. I thought about doing an overview of everything that was said, and I may later on, but I really wanted to start on giving my overall opinion of the forum, the mayor's race, and my impression of some of the candidates.

The Forum

First of all, I want to note that I think the forum format is probaby an impossible thing to do well in a 7 candidate race. In order to include a variety of topics to discuss, and give each candidate time to answer, each candidate is so limited on the amount of time they can use to answer questions that they can really only gloss over their responses. As such, the forums are not a great way to share in-depth ideas of how to address issues. Everyone agrees that crime is an issue that needs to be addressed, but what are the best ways to solve it?  It's pretty complex issue. Everyone also agrees that we need to fix schools, and increase jobs. But what are their solutions? 

Sadly, when candidates only have a 3 minute answer, they aren't able to dive into specifics and if they try to, they end up not making a lot of sense because the answers are too abreviated to really get across complex ideas.

The Issues

For this forum, each candidate got a few minutes to express their platform. Then, there were 8 questions asked (one by each neighborhood involved and then one from the audience) and each candidate got a chance to answer. So while the issues may be slanted a bit based on the questions asked by the neighborhoods, I also think the key campaign issues are becoming pretty clear. 

Some of the primary issues appear to be:

Crime

Fiscal responsibility

Housing policy (or lack thereof)

Jobs

Education

Lack of civility at city hall

Some specific question coming out of the neighorhood questions were:

The possible changes to the Plaza Plan based on Highwoods' proposed demolition of the Neptune Apartments

Vacant Properties

Low Income Housing

The E-Tax

One thing that is striking about topics is that I think a lot of the election issues seem to be focusing on fixing things we've been screwing up in this city (that should have been fixed a decade ago) vs ways to move the city forward into a new generation.  A couple of the candidates (Henry Klein & Mike Burke) did talk about some visionary thinking that involved moving the city forward to a new generation, and a couple (Sly James & Deb Hermann) did note that Kansas City is, in spite of all of these issues, a pretty great place to live still.

But an awful lot of focus seems to be on fixing what's wrong with the city. While there is no doubt that many of the things holding this city back things like crime, vacant housing, jobs and education -- it isn't a strong endorsement for the folks that have been leading our government for the past decade (and yes, many of the candidates fit that definition) who have had the opportunity to make improvements to these things -- but haven't. It was just a bit sad to see so much emphasis on fixing what's wrong instead of looking for ways to move the city forward.

Outside of Burke talking a bit about transit, and Klein talking transit and various green initiatives, there was little talk of "what's next".

The Candidates

This really is a pretty diverse group of candidates and each of them provides their own sets of strengths and weaknesses. But I do think that even though they have similar stances on a lot of the issues (no one is pro crime or anti education) I think we could be seeing all of them get a pretty substantial number of votes next month. Thoughts on each coming out of the forum:

Mike Burke - As I noted before, he was one of the few candidates that talked much about things to move the city forward. He talked about the need to improve transit, about bringing and keeping young people in Kansas City and about the opportunity to make Kansas City into the Arts capital of the Midwest.  Burke is definitely a part of the establishment in KC politics.

Funkhouser - At some point I'm going to do a profile on Funkhouser's 4 years as mayor. In many ways I agree a lot with his stances on a lot of issues and think he has some pretty solid ideas on how to fix them....but because he (and his wife) has continued to make a spectacle of themselves at city hall, they have shattered any political clout they could have had. I think in a lot of ways KC was lucky that they ended up with Funkhouser as mayor during the recession, because his focus on keeping a responsible budget has probably put the city on stronger financial footing than we otherwise would have been. But it's troubling to see so much division at city hall....and while Funk isn't completely to blame for this, he seems unwiling to even acknowledge it's a problem or that he has played a role in it.

Deb Hermann -- Deb seems to be relying on her being on the budget committee a LOT when it comes to her campaign.  Deb seems to be running on a platform of being the candidate that can build consensus at city hall -- and that will work with neighborhoods and city hall to all come up with a solution together. However, maybe one of the scariest answers given on the night was her response to the question about adjusting the Plaza plan based on Highwoods' desire to build a new building at 47th and Main and she said she wouldn't support a plan unless it had a staff recommendation. While I acknowledge that staff recommendations are important, this seems like a pretty big issue to not have a position on.  This, along with the consensus builder position, doesn't make her seem like a terribly strong leader. 

Sly James -- I have to say that Sly came out looking great in this forum. He was funny, relaxed and engaging. He ran on the platform of the 4 E's: Efficiency in government, Education, employment and enforcement of the law. He seems to really want to bridge the issue with issues with Johnson County to try to focus on building the metro economy vs stealing from each other. At this point, I'm not 100% sure how open JOCO is to this, because the state's PEAK program seems like it's given JOCO and WYCO free reign to target jobs in KCMO to get them to move across the state line. However, Sly seems like a strong enough leader and charismatic enough to do it if it can be done. James was also pretty strong on crime (focusing on post-crime re-entry programs), acknowledging the issues within our prosecution of known criminals (a court issue, not a police issue). He was also pretty strong on the housing issues.

Henry Klein - I first met Henry when he ran for mayor four years ago...and I have to say, I'm a little puzzled by the lack of campaign contributions he seems to garner vs what he brings to the table. He has a solid business background (which is good) and talked a lot about green initiatives (when it came to improving the current sewers plan) and also talked about the city's energy needs when it comes to solar. He was also solid on housing issues and vacant lot issues as he works on the Board of Habitat for Humanity and has worked not only with low-income individuals who are working to get back on their feet, but also has used vacant lots and turned them into homes. Henry doesn't have any political experience -- which may or may not be an advantage for him.

Jim Rowland -I have to confess, I kind of left the forum without much of an opinion on Rowland.  I liked that he talked about the need for reducing red tape for small businesses (a HUGE issue in KCMO) and he gave a very passionate voice to the Plaza topic (it's our showpiece, the signature for our city, it's where I proposed to my wife, it's more than a collection fo buildings).  He also took a couple of well-time shots at Funkhouser on the lack of professionalism at city hall.  But there wasn't a lot for new ideas presented on his part -- which could have been that he was next-to-last in the order.

Charlie Wheeler - He's pretty entertaining to listen to and I'd love to have coffee with Charlie sometime and discuss KC's history....but at this point it is hard to invision him as a major part of KC's future.