CORRECTION: A previous version of this story inaccurately stated the way in which contradictory results could stem from the two government related petitions if they make it onto the ballot. This story has been updated to clarify information about the contradictory nature of the two ballots pertaining to city governance. If one petition is approved and another is denied, then they could yield contradictory results, according to Prairie Village’s city attorney.
Prairie Village’s city attorney has concluded that three petitions that aim to put initiatives related to rezoning and city governance on November’s ballot should not be validated.
Now, the fate of the petitions lies in the hands of the Johnson County Election Office, which Prairie Village’s city attorney said, is the final authority on determining the legality of two of the measures for the Nov. 7 general election.
If the election office validates the petition that is related to rezoning, then it could return to the Prairie Village City Council for further action before it could make it on the ballot.
What you may have missed
On Monday, supporters of the Stop Rezoning PV group that has been collecting signatures for the petitions turned out in force once again to voice their opposition to the city’s housing recommendations.
For months, the group has been circulating three petitions, one of which would limit the use of accessory dwelling units in single-family neighborhoods, one of the points addressed in the recommendations.
The other two petitions seek broader changes to city government, including cutting the city council in half from 12 to six members (and shunting off six current councilmembers mid-term) and limiting the power of the city’s “strong mayor” form of governance.
Some current Prairie Village councilmembers cast the petitions as a power grab by a contingent of residents unhappy with recent election results in the city.
Leaders of the Stop Rezoning PV group have said they represent homeowners worried that the housing recommendations could usurp the rights of individual homeowners and open the way for more development — including apartment complexes — in single-family neighborhoods.
A Stop Rezoning press release shared with the Post last week said the group had collected 3,707 resident signatures for the rezoning petition and 2,176 signatures for each of the government-related petitions.
City attorney picked apart petitions during Monday’s meeting
City Attorney David Waters outlined in a letter to Johnson County Election Commissioner Fred Sherman several reasons why the petitions should be invalidated.
Waters said the main issue is that all three petitions appear to be unchanged from the time the county’s legal counselor rejected them on May 1 to when they were submitted to the city and election office on Aug. 1.
When it reviewed them earlier this year, the county’s office of legal counsel found none of the three petitions complied with statutory requirements, Waters said.
Waters said Monday that the rezoning petition lacks statutorily required language stating the person witnessing the signature knows the person signing it is in fact who they say they are.
The two other government-related petitions are legally concerning, Waters argued, because they aim to abandon the current form of government and adopt a different form separately, which — if one is approved at the ballot box and the other one is not approved — could yield results that contradict each other.
Waters’s letter to the county election office:
Loading...
Reload document 
Open in new tab Most commenters Monday supported petitions
Seven of the 10 public commenters Monday voiced sentiments in support of the Stop Rezoning PV group and the petitions, frequently garnering cheers from the packed crowd inside the council chambers.
Resident Pam Justus said the city council continues “to circumvent issues that you found to be extremely unpopular” with residents, a reference to the city’s housing recommendations.
She added that if the city council had truly met all of the group’s demands, then they would not have turned up for Monday’s meeting.
“Concerning the petitions, the bottom line is, thousands of homeowners have spoken — are you still not listening?” Justus said.
In respond to the pushback from the Stop group, the city council over the past year has altered the initial versions of the housing recommendations, including the removal of single-family housing from the planning commission’s purview and prioritizing neighborhood design guidelines and short-term rental research.
Two commenters opposed the petitions and the Stop Rezoning group, including a man named Paul who did not disclose his last name.
He said Stop Rezoning PV’s movement is rooted in NIMBYism, “not in my backyard” mindsets.
“At its foundation — and I can’t help it but I’m gonna say it — this Stop Rezoning is about racism and bigotry,” Paul said. “This is ugly. It [the petitions] doesn’t follow statute, or policy or compliance. There’s ways to get this done and you are doing it all wrong.”
Councilmembers blast the petitions
Ward 5 Councilmember Greg Shelton said he believes Stop Rezoning PV leaders are “so loosely” aware of how city governance works that they have “mismanaged … over-promised and under-delivered” on their petitions’ language.
Either that or, Shelton said, the group’s leaders have used the housing issue as a “political ploy to sow discord and discontent” in an attempt to “regain some political power after their preferred candidates were defeated in the past two elections.”
Councilmember Ron Nelson suggested there are “other reasons” behind the petitions that were not well-written or publicly shared, noting that some of the same residents who have been pushing the petitions have also tried and failed four times to recall Mayor Eric Mikkelson, who ran unopposed for reelection last year.
“If you want to run against somebody then you run against them, you don’t do it the chicken way and then file a petition after somebody’s been elected to either remove them from office or just take out six of us,” Nelson said, a reference to the government-related petition that would halve the size of the city council.
“It seems to be sour grapes. Nothing else, or a political ploy. It’s a sad political ploy,” he added.
What could happen next?
- Waters said the election office, not the city, is in charge of “determining whether the petitions are sufficient.”
- This includes verifying signatures and ensuring the petitions meet technical legal requirements, he said.
- As of Monday, Waters said the city had yet to hear back from the election office regarding the petitions’ legality, and it is unclear how long the city will wait to hear back from the election office on its review of the petitions.
- The Johnson County Election Office did not immediately respond to the Post’s request for comment for this story.
- Prairie Village created a webpage dedicated to information about the petitions here.
Go deeper: Watch the entire petition discussion on the city website here.
Editor’s note: In the spirit of transparency, we will note that Prairie Village City Councilmember Greg Shelton is the husband of Post publisher Jay Senter’s sister whenever Shelton is a quoted in a story.
