Is The Kansas City GO Bond Infrastructure Program In Disarray? Sure Seems Like It.
Today the there was a joint Transportation & Infrastructure and Finance City Council Committee meeting today to discuss the GO (General Obligation) Bond Infrastructure projects for the upcoming fiscal year.
This year’s allocation of the bond money and projects were pulled back to committee after concerns raised by 4th District Councilperson Eric Bunch and others about the necessity and prioritization of projects.
The GO Bond is a $800 million infrastructure financing package passed by Kansas City voters in 2017. The plan was to repair city buildings, existing roads and bridges, build and repair sidewalks, put in ADA accessibility throughout the city, and support flood control.
The committee meeting was intended to further discuss the projects, process, and implicitly the program as a whole.
I was able to listen to most of the meeting and it became very clear the program is in disarray and lacking clear leadership and connection to voters’ priorities.
The central problems included:
A lack of a clear list of projects from the previous city manager, who received a buffet of underhanded criticism throughout for using GO Bond money for economic development interests and haphazard projects across the city.
This was expressed most clearly on the $3 million (one of 3!!!! payments for a total of $9 million) Arlington Road creation in the northland, which is a new road and serves a tax incentivized economic development project. The Council were contractually obligated to fund this project someway.
The Mayor has called this “the road to nowhere.”
It was noted that the development would probably be a net positive in terms of revenue but was creating new roads for tax incentivized businesses what voters actually approved?
We have consistently over allocated the funding each year. 6th District Councilperson Kevin McManus pointed this out and it was confirmed.
This wouldn’t be an issue if people were satisfied with the projects since it would mean things were just getting done quicker in say 15 years instead of the 20 years the program advertised.
There could be other funding. One of the new projects added was a $5 million bike and pedestrian bridge where the new north extension of the streetcar to Berkeley Riverfront is going in.
There was discussion that because the federal government actually gave the streetcar more than it was expecting that could free up some of the city’s funding to fund this additional and really unexpected project.
Leveraging other funds is becoming problematic. While it normally makes sense to do projects that can use other funding sources, this seems to be leading the program away from its core purpose of rebuilding infrastructure.
This process appears to be adding “nice to have” projects in the place of “need to fix this damn road” type of projects.
And more importantly, this inherently favors more well off parts of the city where development is occurring in greater numbers. Of the millions of dollars in funding, only $600,000 is allocated for the 3rd District in east Kansas City.
Projects are not timed and coordinated. Staff was able to articulate why certain projects would be coordinated at times but some projects seemed to just be included without this consideration.
The reconstruction of Linwood and Main intersection for $1.75 million was one example.
The utility work and future streetcar expansion does not necessitate a reconstruction and repaving for a few years and yet it was included.
The project was cut from this year’s list.
Some projects are just silly. And there were some projects that were just plain ridiculous.
There is $800,000 for Ward Parkway traffic signals. The wealthy neighborhoods around Ward Parkway have resisted normal traffic signals because of the beauty of the parkway.
So they have deferred maintenance, made the streets less safe, and if you live near there, you know the signals get run over monthly.
Oh and the kicker is that they are decorative traffic signals, which would be cool if other parts got that same consideration.
Lastly, there is $2.1 million to make a small part of Charlotte Street downtown a two-way street. Charlotte street is a two-way street everywhere else and this would correct that and help out the new bus station.
But the street is in failing condition and the project seemed like someone who was just annoyed that this didn’t match the rest of the street. I believe it was pulled out of this year’s plans.
The meeting was productive but the root issues were troubling considering the amount of money being spent and how critical this is for Kansas Citians and those who work and visit here.
The program needs strong guidance from the new city manager and the new public works director to give the best professional advice and work with the mayor and council.
Side note: We should probably do smaller and more integrated bond packages in the future, for example combining housing, infrastructure, transit, etc. and making it a smaller dollar amount and shorter timeframe. It’ll be a potential political headache going to vote every few years but it’ll be easier to manage and more transparent.
Elected officials and staff also need to not be distracted by leveraging funds for projects that teeter on not being in the scope of the GO Bond program’s priorities or chasing economic development deals that should find their own funding.
We already have our state legislature not fulfilling the will of the voters, we don’t need our city elected officials doing the same.
It’s the biggest bond package issued by Kansas City. It needs to be treated with tremendous care.
With an $800 million program, being in disarray is not good. Let’s fix that.
But in the meantime, I’ll be counting down the days until 75th street by my house gets repaved so I don’t have to drive (or bike or ride the bus) over this every day.
If you’re interested in local Kansas City politics and other random musings, please considering subscribing. I won’t fill your inbox, I promise, because only publish infrequently because man…after this last year I’m tired and need a vacation.
Thanks for reading.
James