Now what?

By Mark Forsythe The Kansas City Post Last Friday night I attended a meet and greet for Mark Funkhouser. Mark arrived late, having been held up on the radio. He got around to making his stump speech, stopping to take a cell phone call from his wife. Normally a gigantic no-no but it only served to endear him to the obviously partisan crowd. Near the end, he took questions. He felt supremely confident about an upcoming victory. He joked that he would end up being like the dog that caught the car. Now what? Today will be a busy day for Mark Funkhouser. He'll receive hundreds if not thousands of congratulatory phone calls and emails. Many of them will be from Alvin Brooks supporters desperately trying to carve out a place for themselves in a Funkhouser administration. There will be a quite a few power brokers stopping by, checkbook in hand, looking to show there are no hard feelings. The one common denominator that all these people will share is the willingness to offer advice. In a couple of days, things will calm down enough that Mark will be able to sit back and ask the question to himself. Now what? These next thirty days are crucial for his new administration. Does he have a transition team in place? Mark has been very critical of TIF and tax abatements. Will he come out of the gate strong and promote a progressive slate of appointees to those commissions? There are many questions but few answers. At least for today. There can be no more generalities. Mark Funkhouser is no longer a candidate. He is the Mayor-elect. Now is the time for specifics. Definitive statements. An honest to goodness action plan. We're all watching. Let's hope we like what we see. Congratulations to Mark and the rest of the newly elected council. Now it's time to get to work.

Mayor Barnes Has Damaged Her Legacy

By Mark Forsythe The Kansas City Post Leadership is a an elusive quality. Some are born with it. Some struggle to learn, but master its nuances. Others never attain it. The one common thread about the quality of leadership is how quickly it can be lost. I understand that the Mayor is very passionate about the downtown revival that her administration has overseen. If it works, if all the numbers add up, history may give her a place alongside H. Roe Bartle and Ilus Davis as one of the more noteworthy leaders of our city. If it doesn't work, if the Power & Light District fails to meet expectations, if the Sprint Center is plagued by vacant dates and unforeseen design problems, Kay's legacy may be that of the Pied Piper who led us all to our financial downfall. It's no secret that Mayor Kay Barnes has an intense dislike of Mark Funkhouser. She has clashed with him both publicly and not so privately over his audit recommendations for years. It's not uncommon for people to disagree. In fact, it's one of the strengths of a democracy in my opinion. It's the way people handle those disagreements that distinguish the leaders from the rest of the pack. In the last few weeks the mayor has shown herself to be vindictive, temperamental and at times outright hostile. Her latest As I See It column in The Kansas City Star is the final lashing out that leaves me perplexed. She takes issue with Mark Funkhouser's "Pigs at the trough" television commercial. She criticizes the ad for "not naming names" yet returns the favor by "not naming names" in her editorial. She uses vague pronouncements to imply anyone disagreeing with her views is anti-Kansas City. The local equivalent of the "if you don't agree with us the terrorists have won" tactic. The mayor could have been gracious in her support of Alvin Brooks. She could have expressed concern about the intentions and ideas of Mark Funkhouser, yet done so in a dignified manner. She could have endorsed Alvin Brooks, yet pledged to do everything in her power to help whomever the voters select transition into the office and remain an advocate for the projects which she cares so deeply for. She could have risen above all the petty sniping that happens in any campaign. Setting an example of grace under pressure, she might have held far more sway with those she wants to influence. Instead, Kay Barnes has chosen to hold not so secret meetings with wealthy and powerful individuals, not so much to rally support for Alvin Brooks, but to generate angst towards Mark Funkhouser and his supporters. She has held press conferences in which she has shown a side of her personality that few have seen. She has lashed out in print, insulting our intelligence by deigning to "take great offense" "on behalf of the citizens of Kansas City." I need no such spokesperson Madame Mayor. I know whom the "pigs at the trough" are. I'm not one of those pigs. The good people whom I've met going door to door aren't those pigs. I choose to remove myself from the group which you so pretentiously defend. In this case, I have to say Madame Mayor, speak for yourself.

Kansas City should encourage charter schools

By Mark Forsythe The Kansas City Post Education. It was the primary topic during this last council campaign. Every forum, every questionnaire had a question about education. The question would always be prefaced with "we know city government has no control over public education but..." It was always the "but." But please fix it anyway. The voters have long since given up on the Kansas City School District Board. The anger and frustration shown at some of the candidate forums made that quite evident. Creating commissions or advisory boards seemed to be the answer that pacified people. This makes no sense to me. Just more do-nothing political pandering from politicians desperate for a vote. We already have a commission. It's called the Kansas City School District Board! We don't need a board to advise a board, reporting back to a councilperson, reporting back to the full council. In the end a giant report will be produced. A reporter or two might read the executive summary, and then everybody will break their arms patting themselves on the back. Of course the problems with our public education system will remain. But we can say we tried. Charter schools work. This was not a popular position on the campaign trail. The fact of the matter is they work because they are not encumbered by a blanket district policy that does not address the specific needs of each individual school. Do some charter schools fail? Absolutely. Which is why the concept works. If a charter school is not meeting the expectations of its customers (the parents and students) it closes. Students go elsewhere. What happens if a KCSD school fails to meet expectations? Nothing. It continues to operate. The new mayor has a chance to provide some radical changes to our educational system. We already know that the KCSD is a sacred cow and having the City step in and assume control would be a monumental task. Monumental in both logistics and legality. What we can do as a city government is elevate the profile of charter schools. Give them a seat at the table, so to speak. The mayor should create an education cabinet. Call it a committee, a commission, call it whatever you want. Rather than a do-nothing advisory group, this organization would serve to strengthen the charter schools, rather than isolate them as pariahs and "detriments to our public education system." Each charter school that chooses to participate would have one board member as a representative. A chance to have the undivided attention of the mayor. Best practices could be exchanged. What is working, what isn't? How can the City help? By bringing charter school leaders together and giving them the full attention of the mayor, the City would in a sense be creating its own public school district. Voluntary. Nimble. Not mired in the age old traditions of silos and empire building. Charter schools have chosen to control their own destiny. Rather than try and work with a school system that is collapsing under its own bureaucracy, they have broken free so they can react quickly to changing demographics and educational needs. If city government is serious about helping our educational system, it should choose the path of least resistance. Welcome the charter schools. Foster their growth. Make a difference, one school at a time.

The Battle of the Sexes

By Mark Forsythe The Kansas City Post On KCPT's Kansas City Week in Review this past Sunday my wife and I got a good laugh out of an exchange between KMBC's Mike Mahoney and The Star's Lynn Horsely. Mr. Mahoney brought up in passing that there is a potential this year to have Kansas City's first female majority city council. Ms. Horsely promptly chastised him, taking offense that gender has anything to do with coping with bad roads or tax incentives. She went on in a cynical manner and stated that women are "just as likely to be influenced by special interests as men." It's obvious Lynn has been around City Hall for a while! We found it pretty amusing to watch Mike Mahoney back pedal so quickly. He made some comment about "just bringing it up because it was interesting" or some such comment, but Lynn was having none of it. I doubt he'll be bringing up gender issues around Ms. Horsely any time soon. Then on Tuesday night our phone rang. The Caller ID said "Friends of Beth Gottstein." Having no interest in listening to a volunteer read a script to me I let it ring through to voicemail and promptly forgot about it. Later that night as Nicole checked messages she exclaimed "Oh my god!" in a perturbed manner. With a disgusted look on her face she handed the phone to me. The following is an exact transcript of what I heard. "I am a volunteer calling to encourage you to to help us elect the first ever Kansas City, Missouri woman majority city council by supporting Beth Gottstein for 4th at-large and Cindy Baker-Circo for 5th at-large. I want you to know why I'm supporting Beth and Cindy. They'll both bring new ideas and fresh leadership to the council and will work to improve basic services that we need so bad[sic] throughout the city, leading us with honesty and fiscal accountability. They will both put the interests of Kansas Citians, and women especially first. Thank you and remember to vote for Beth Gottstein for 4th at-large and Cindy Baker-Circo for 5th at-large on March 27th. If you have any questions please feel free to call us 931-5209. Thank you and have a wonderful day." First of all, does this mean that every other woman in the race is a lock? Why are just these two candidates the key to a majority? Having had a pleasant meeting with Jan Marcason who is running for the 4th in-district I can tell you she doesn't consider herself a lock in the general. Quite the opposite. She's campaigning like she's far behind, leaving nothing to chance. What do you have to say faithful readers? Does gender matter on the city council?

Don't Ignore Alternative Energy

By Mark Forsythe The Kansas City Post For too long Kansas City has sought a singular industrial identity. In the late 60's it was steel. The Armco plant was one of our town's largest employers. The 70's brought Marion Labs and the promise of being the pharmaceutical supplier to the world. In the 80's, Sprint was going to make us the telecommunications capitol of North America. More recently, it seems we have decided that life sciences will be the economic engine that propels Kansas City. Ignoring the conventional investment wisdom of diversification we always seem to race forward with singular purpose. All or nothing. So far that philosophy has not paid the dividends for which we have hoped. President Bush will be in Kansas City today to visit GM Fairfax and Ford Claycomo plants to discuss his plan to reduce overall gasoline consumption by 20 percent over a ten-year period. In all the excitement that accompanies any presidential visit, a landmark event will probably be lost amidst the sound bites and gratuitous shots of whatever protesters manage to assemble. Ford will showcase the world’s first drivable fuel cell hybrid electric plug-in vehicle at the Claycomo plant during the president's visit. The vehicle combines an onboard hydrogen fuel cell generator with lithium-ion batteries to deliver more than 41 MP(hydrogen)G with zero emissions. For all the naysayers and ethanol advocates who say hydrogen is not a viable fuel source or at best, years away from reality, here in our very city will be a living, breathing, zero emissions hydrogen vehicle. This is no mock-up. If there was just one hydrogen fueling depot in Kansas City, you could hit the road with this vehicle today and never burn fossil fuel again. Kansas City cannot afford to be left behind in the coming alternative energy revolution. Even if the naysayers are right, and alternative fuels are at least a decade away, isn't now the best time to position ourselves to benefit from that industry? We have the geographic advantage of a central location. We are a major air and rail transit hub. Our cost of living is low. We are surrounded by excellent universities with highly regarded engineering programs. Even our weather is desirable by offering temperature extremes that allow for real world testing in both blistering heat and freezing cold. Today was a golden opportunity to put the full court press on Ford Motor Company executives to "Consider Kansas City" for their future commercial hydrogen plans. I doubt economic development officials will take advantage. We should not miss such an opportunity again.

Justus For All?

By Bethanie Lundy The Kansas City Post Senator Jolie Justus of the 10th District has introduced a bill that would expound upon current anti-bullying legislation by adding enumerated categories such as race, sexual orientation, disability, etc. In a post on her blog Fresh Meat, she opines that her biggest hurdle to getting this legislation to the floor is the addition of “sexual orientation.” Jolie has impressed me in her year as a freshmen senator, so I have to ask the obvious question, “Why pick this fight?” First and foremost, no enumerated categories are needed in this legislation. As we all know, kids bully and tease for any number of reasons, and none of them are reserved for any specific category or special attention. Growing up an obvious homosexual in a very small conservative town, I was not subjected to nearly as harsh treatment by classmates as my aunt, who was painfully overweight. Enumerated categories, if they were to cover even the top tier of reasons kids are bullied, would number in the dozens. That aside, when faced with incessant teasing and brutal bullying, what difference does it make the specific rib the bully is jabbing? While I understand that it is difficult to grow up “gay” in school, it is just as difficult to grow up poor, to grow up overweight, to grow up physically unattractive, to grow up...well I could go on and on. There is no single “worst” thing to be as a kid if you are singled out for razzing. As a kid who endured “dyke” for the better part of my school career, I can assure you that it is no picnic, but I am still glad I wasn't the “fat” kid. It occurs to me that Jolie is focusing this argument because of the sexual orientation issue and not the other way around, as she muses that the other senators have issue with sexual orientation added into the categories. I think the categories, all of them, are of issue, because they are completely unnecessary and inappropriate for the reasons I have stated in this editorial. I would like to see Senator Justus approach this situation with more care and reflection. Do we want to champion gay rights or do we want to champion civil rights? Including all kids and their respective issues is championing civil rights. There is a time and a place for the sexual orientation argument, in places where we are treated differently and denied our civil rights, on the basis of our orientation. I don't see this as one of those times or one of those places.

The TIF Commission Has Failed Us All

I'm old school. While most finance wonks have moved on to far more powerful calculators and computer programs, I prefer to dig out my trusty old Texas Instruments BA II. It has served me well over the years and I know my way around its keyboard. Sometimes out of either pure laziness or extreme obsessive-compulsive behavior I skip the shorthand and enter the full amounts when I'm calculating something. Instead of '167.9' I punch in 167,900,000. That's one hundred sixty seven million, nine hundred thousand dollars. Why that figure? That's the latest estimate put before the TIF Commission for the City's share of the Power & Light District. When I look at that many zeros cascading across my little calculator I begin to get queasy. This is an increase of $36,900,000 from just a little over a year ago. In reading the article in the Kansas City Star about the latest financials for the Power & Light District there are so many figures and quotes from TIF Commissioners that I don't know where to stop being outraged. I finally settled on this. "Some members of the TIF commission expressed surprise at the amount of the cost increases for the city's share of the project." Probably the single most important and risky investment in our City's history and the TIF commissioners were surprised?! Dear TIF Commissioners. Step into my office. You're fired. There should be no surprises, especially with regards to the Power & Light District. This plan was analyzed by you. Approved by you. That makes it your responsibility. Your baby. If I had my professional reputation tied to this deal you can bet I would be obsessing the details to the point of night sweats. I don't like surprises. Especially $37 million surprises. I know the TIF commission is considered a cherry mayoral appointment because you get to sit behind a table once a month and say "yes" to every rich and powerful developer who comes before you. I'm sure there's a lot of good will generated amongst the developers and attorneys in this town. Is it any wonder that our current mayor is a former TIF Commissioner? Our TIF Commissioners need to be gatekeepers, not ushers. Somewhere along the line the charter of the TIF Commission has gone from stewards of the public trust to conduits to the public funds. This has to change. With new leadership about to take over at City Hall, my greatest hope is the new mayor will be very critical with his appointments. Critical in his selections, and critical in his evaluations of their performance going forward. We can no longer afford to have surprises with our tax dollars.

The Time Is Right For Funkhouser

After losing in the primary for City Council my initial reaction was to stay out of the general elections. I felt like my judgment was clouded by disappointment and didn't want to say or do anything rash. Enough time has passed however, for me to see clearly with regard to the mayor's race. There is only one candidate I am comfortable with running my city for the next four years. That candidate is Mark Funkhouser. I am not a fanatic. Frankly there are some things Mr. Funkhouser has said and written during this campaign that have given me pause. There are those who support him with whom I am diametrically opposed. But as with any political candidate, you weigh the good with the bad and in the end my list of "good" far outweighs the "bad" as far as Mark is concerned. In business, a faltering corporation will bring in what's known as a "turnaround" specialist to right the ship. The strong and successful businesses do so before the company becomes irretrievably damaged. I believe Kansas City is in that position. We are not irretrievably damaged, but the potential is looming on the horizon. Our veneer looks promising enough; a new arena, a downtown entertainment district and even a new convention hotel. The danger is the mounting debt and financial risk we are assuming for that beautiful exterior. The gaining momentum of runaway economic development incentives will ultimately eviscerate Kansas City's tax base leaving the burden on small business and private citizens in the form of skyrocketing property taxes. Mark Funkhouser can right the ship. He has shown the willingness time and time again to call into question our economic development policies. He has not only questioned them, but provided clear policy recommendations that have been summarily ignored by our current mayor and council. No candidate for mayor in the history of this city has more intimate knowledge of not only our economic concerns, but city departments in general. That's the kind of knowledge we need on the 29th floor. That's the kind of expertise we must have to pull us back from the brink of financial ruin. As Editor of The Kansas City Post, as former candidate for the 4th in-district City Council, and as private citizen, I urge you to vote for Mark Funkhouser on March 27th.

Release the TIF Audit

The City Council’s finance committee was set to discuss a new audit of tax increment financing, or TIF, way back on January 31st. The study is a follow-up to a 1998 report that was critical of the use of TIF and made recommendations for improving, and in some cases eliminating its use. It was reported by the Kansas City Star that Committee chairman and then mayoral candidate Chuck Eddy delayed the release of the report. Eddy said he wanted the Economic Development Corporation and the TIF Commission to comment on the audit’s contents first. Councilman Fairfield, also a mayoral candidate at the time supported Eddy's position. “As soon as the report’s complete, we’ll listen to it,” Eddy said. Since when is an audit not complete until the very groups critiqued by the audit get to comment on it? I have the same complaint about that kind of logic that I did when the Mayor's Environmental Policy wasn't released until the Chamber of Commerce was allowed to "make some changes." Government should not fear the light of day. Release the audit. Then we can all comment on it. The TIF Commission, the EDC. The Mayor and the City Manager can write another scathing critique to be published in the Star. And the rest of us, the unwashed masses, the proletariat can put forth our ignorant opinions on topics our leadership feels we're too simple-minded to comprehend. In the interest of full disclosure, I support Mark Funkhouser for mayor. I told him this in person several weeks ago. But this audit goes far beyond the mayor's race. It goes to trust in our government. Ironic that the two principal players in this, Chuck Eddy and John Fairfield finished so far down in the mayor's race they barely even warranted a mention. Also ironic that both have been tied to pro-TIF stances. This leads me to two logical conclusions. 1. The audit is once again critical of TIF. It has numbers and examples that show the previous audit's recommendations have gone largely unheeded. 2. The pro-TIF groups; The EDC, the TIF Commission, The Downtown Council and the Mayor's office do not want their credibility damaged before they can get a friendly candidate elected to the mayor's office. In the absence of information, people will naturally assume the worst. I call upon the members of the Finance Committee to remember whom they work for. Us. All of us. Every taxpayer. Every citizen dependent on their leadership, yet bestowed with their servitude. Release the TIF Audit.

Brookside Transit Corridor

The project management firm that will be in charge of replacing the Brookside Interceptor sewer line has been presenting two alternatives. The new line will run from approximately Meyer Boulevard all the way down to Brush Creek. The first alternative is they can follow the original route of the current storm sewer which pretty much runs under Brookside Boulevard. The second alternative is to dig up the Trolley Trail and run the new line under it. There are advantages and disadvantages to either choice. Tearing up Brookside Boulevard would have it closed in sections for extended periods of time. Tearing out the Trolley Trail, while an inconvenience to a much smaller amount of people, would also involve tearing out the parking lots in the Brookside Shops. In my opinion this would result in lost revenue to the Brookside Shops, which also means lost tax revenue to the City. What to do? How about both? One of the comments made during the presentation got me to thinking. The engineer said that if they use the Trolley Track route, they would have to backfill and make sure the path would have the structural integrity to support light rail. This makes sense. The Trolley Trail is the ATA right-of-way and would most likely become a light rail route once again if and when we implement a transit plan. So if we're going to rip everything out, this is our one chance in a generation to make Brookside Boulevard into something special. Starting at Volker Boulevard we should use the combination of the ATA right-of-way which runs the eastern length of Brookside Boulevard to our advantage. Widen the whole thing, expanding to the east and run a transit-only corridor right down the middle. Also put a bike/ped path too. I envision it to look something like this: With BRT or light rail running right down the center of the Boulevard, it would raise the perceived level of importance we put on transit. Also, by using a combination of traffic calming devices, the speeds on Brookside Boulevard could be greatly reduced. Anyone who has ever walked the sidewalks along that street can tell you it is not the grand, meandering boulevard it was intended to be. It's a super-highway. Finally, at 59th St is where the ATA right-of-way slips behind a row of homes all the way to Meyer Boulevard. Without the additive width of that right-of-way, the transit corridor would have to be necked down to one lane. It could still come right through the heart of the Brookside-63rd St intersection. If all the politicians who say they are for transit really want to do something, they can start with a project that's already in the works. This is an incredible opportunity that we should not let become a victim to apathy.

The Powerful Citizens Association - Part III

In yesterday's installment I looked at the finances of the Citizens Association. Specifically how it appears the CA is no more than an intermediary that funnels campaign dollars into the business of one of its board members. Today, in the final installment I'll connect a few more dots. Shine some light in a few more dark corners, and see what scurries out from this poor little grass roots organization, marching in the streets with brooms in hand, demanding integrity and transparency in city government. In Part I a picture was painted of politicians dancing before the king and his court. So.... How does one get to be the king? The one lesson that was driven like a spike into my skull during this last election is he with the most money wins. Period. So lets go back to 2003 again and see who is giving money to the Citizens Association. First there's the usual suspects. Endorsed council candidates providing their reimbursements. Nothing new there. We've been told that's okay so we'll just accept it. Who else is chipping in? Who else is taking a stand for good government, integrity, transparency and an end to influence peddling? 2-18-03 Ameristar Casino $1000.00 Maybe "integrity" means excluding casinos from the smoking ban? 2-18-03 Renaissance Plaza LLC $1,000.00 A northland developer who within a year and a half of the CA Slate being elected will receive a favorable ruling from the Planning, Zoning & Economic Development Committee and the council for some eminent domain. Nothing to see here folks. Move along. 2-18-03 Heavy Constructors Assn PAC $5,625.00 A PAC to a PAC. Twice the level of money laundering. We don't care what you build (TIF projects), or how you pay for it (TIF & tax abatement), just make sure you use one of our union contributors. 2-18-03 Hallmark Global Services $10,000 3-6-03 Hallmark Global Services $10,000 When you care enough to send the very best they can afford to give the very most. 2-18-03 James Nutter $5,000.00 2-18-03 DLS Real Estate Inc. $5,000.00 Principal Dale Schulte would go on to be involved with several TIF projects including the Chambers Building, Hanover Building and the Finance Building. He was also present at Kay Barnes' so-called Breakfast of Champions. 3-4-03 RECON HISTORIC DEVELOPERS, LLC $5,000.00 SOLO Lofts Developer Now let's jump ahead to 2007. Surely all these civic-minded developers, casinos and PACs will once again pony up for integrity and good government? Nope! There's only one familiar name that appears in both the 2003 and 2007 8 day reports. 2-2-07 James B Nutter Sr. $10,000 2-2-07 Mrs. James B. Nutter Sr. $10,000 2-2-07 James Nutter Jr. $10,000 Big day at the Nutter household! Which candidate or candidates are so important that Jim Nutter is willing to kick in thirty large? Who knows but I think it's safe to say "It's good to be the king." So the Citizens Association takes in thousands of dollars from the likes of the Heavy Constructors, Casinos, and James B. Nutter and turns around and spends it with board member Pat O'Neill's company. I wonder who some of O'Neill Communications clients are? Nahhhh. I'm done for now. If I keep digging I'm afraid of what I might turn up!

The Powerful Citizens Association - Part II

Yesterday I rehashed the Citizens Association's pay for play endorsement process. On the surface it seems innocuous enough. The CA does send out mailings with sample ballots to registered voters. Printing, mailing and maintaining a voter database of addresses isn't cheap. The CA argues that they are a humble little organization without the funds to do such things on their own so they rely on candidates reimbursing them for all that marketing expense. Fair enough. Let's say I accept that premise (which I don't). Why does the CA feel they need to be in the marketing/publishing business in the first place? If it's such a financial hardship to mail bomb every voter in the city, why not just allow endorsed candidates to place the CA's ubiquitous "Sweep 'em out" broom logo on their own literature? Let the candidates deal with their own printing/mailing expenses. No need to funnel all that money through a third party, right? Wrong. Let's dig back into the CA's 8 day report again. This time class, I want you all to turn to page 8. This begins the Expenses section. 1-23-07 O'Neill Communications Postcards $275.74 Hmmm. Couple hundred bucks for some postcards. Not too exciting. Let's turn to page 9. Hey, there's that name again. 1-29-07 O'Neill Communications Billboards $8000.00 2-13-07 O'Neill Communications TV Ads $19,000.00 Wow! In less than three weeks O'Neill Communications racked up $27,275.74 in business from the Citizens Association. Not a bad gig. I wonder how you get a hookup like that? Maybe it's just a one time thing. Maybe it's the lowest bidder? Being such stewards of integrity and reform, I'm sure the CA shops around for the best possible value for their hard earned contributors' money. Let's check the 2003 city elections and find out who the CA used last time. Uh oh. I'm seeing a pattern here. 2-18-03 O'Neill Communications Postage $10,764.03 2-25-03 O'Neill Communications Brochure & Postage $17,171.35 3-10-03 O'Neill Communications Consulting $3,500.00 3-10-03 O'Neill Communications Postage $10,764.00 $42,199.38 in business! Once again, nice gig if you can get it. Probably just a coincidence. At the most there's probably some good old boy connection with some of the power brokers on the Citizens Association board and one of the principals with O'Neill Communications. Just friends doing business with friends. Happens all the time. No big deal. Probably untraceable, right? Ehh, just for fun let's run over to the Citizens Association website and see if any names pop out. It's a long shot, but what the heck.... Uh oh. Citizens Association Board Members: Jerry Adriano, Norine Accurso, Thomas B. Becker, Cheryl L. Bisbee, Janet Blauvelt, Meghan Badwey Conger, Richard G. Cushon, Billy Cutchlow, George Eib, George E. Hicks, Richard Holwick, Jonathan Kemper, Robert V. Lewellen, Kelley M. Martin, Hila "Dutch" Newman, Pat O'Neill, James D. Rice, Michael Short, Mike Sturgeon, Kevin Thomas Draw your own conclusions. It's often said that perception is 90% of reality. The owner of a communications company sits on the board of an organization that does thousands of dollars in business with his company. Tomorrow, the final installment of this three part series. More money and more connections than you can shake a broom at!

The Powerful Citizens Association - Part I

On election day Jim Glover showed up at my polling place to shake a few hands. I had run to my car to retrieve something and when I got back Jim informed me that I had just missed a friend of mine who was inside voting. "I was telling him you should lighten up on the Citizens Association" Jim said to me. I think that's when my eyelid began to twitch. Even on a good day I would have lit into someone for giving me that kind of unsolicited advice. I let him have it. I won't go into the specifics of what was said, but in the end Jim backed down and said "Hey it was only a suggestion!" Now I can look at the irony. Jim was loyal to the end, even glad handing with CA Board Member Pat O'Neill before I could take no more and left the scene. But how much did the Citizens Association do for Jim's mayoral aspirations? Not much. Yet still, the remaining two candidates for mayor, Alvin Brooks and Mark Funkhouser went before the same organization once again to beg for their indulgence. I'm particularly disappointed in Mark because I think he could have taken the opportunity to show some leadership instead of dancing before the king's court like a jester. Not a trait I like to see in my leaders. Still the Citizens Association seems to be doing much better in the council races. As David Martin and the Pitch pointed out, $2500 will get you an in-district council seat and perhaps the real bargain, $5,000 will get you an at-large seat. How do you find this out? What most people don't realize, or care to investigate, is that when you're a candidate for office or a Political Action Committee you have to file frequent disclosures with the Missouri Ethics Commission. These disclosures detail all your financial dealings. Whom you're getting money from, and whom you're giving it to. It's all online! Here's the breakdown of endorsed candidates' reimbursements to the CA in the 8-day report filed on February 15th: The At-Large Gang District 1: Ed Ford - $2,500.00 District 2: Deb Herman - $5,000.00 District 3: Melba Curls - $2,500.00 District 4: Beth Gottstein - $5,000.00 District 5: Cindy Circo - $2,500.00 District 6: Cathy Jolly - $5,000.00 The In-District Bunch District 1: Bill Skaggs - late with the check. Pay up Billy! District 2: Russ Johnson - $2,500.00 District 3: No endorsement. But Teola Powell chose to buck up $1,500 just to show she's a good sport. So I guess we're to believe that college student Brandon Ellington (smart) with no political background (uncorrupted) and a belief that talking about issues (sounds familiar...) has no integrity? No integrity? Or no money? I think the CA's definition of "integrity" includes the ability to write a hefty check. District 4: Jan Marcason - $2,500.00 District 5: Terry Riley - also late with the check. Maybe incumbents get a free endorsement? Or maybe Terry had another giant cell phone bill to pay. District 6: Darrel Curls - $1,500.00 Draw your own conclusions from this tidy little setup. Tomorrow in Part II I'll follow the money again. Who is the King? Who else is donating to the Citizens Association? Where is that money being spent? Stay tuned....

Welcome to The Kansas City Post

Today is the inaugural edition of The Kansas City Post. What else is a failed politician to do? I still love my city and I still loathe the special interests and powerful individuals who have a stranglehold on it. With this venue I will sit back and say what's on my mind. Unvarnished opinions. It is my hope to engage, outrage, instigate and influence. You won't always agree with me. In fact, after looking at my performance in the last election I'd say a BIG majority of you will not agree with me. But that's okay! Along the way I'll be adding regular columnists with their own spin on Kansas City issues. From potholes to panhandlers and everything in between. To begin with I'm allowing anonymous comments. I only ask to keep the comments reasonable. Profanity is okay if you must, but please try and stay on topic. I'm obviously still tweaking the graphic design so bear with me. So sit back, subscribe to my feed and let's see where this takes us.