Earlier this summer, the Post asked our readers what issues you wanted to hear candidates running for Prairie Village City Council to address leading up to the Nov. 7 election.
Based on that feedback, we developed a five-item questionnaire centering the issues most important to Prairie Village residents.
Each day this week, we’ll publish the candidates’ responses to one question.
Today, we’re publishing candidates’ responses to the following question:
Though they will not appear on the Nov. 7 ballot, a group of residents did put forward three petitions this summer, two of which proposed remaking city government, including abandoning the current form of government and adopting a new form of government with a city council half the size of the current 12-member body. Do you support exploring these ideas more in the future and potentially putting them on a future ballot? Why or why not?
Below are the answers the Post received from candidates on this issue:
Ward 2
Edward Boersma (write-in)
Yes, over 2,000 residents signed each of the two petitions to vote on changing the government of Prairie Village.
The city council should have a conversation with residents and develop a plan to put these questions on the next ballot and implement them if they pass.
Inga Selders (incumbent)
First and foremost, the actions taken by PV United regarding the “adopt” petition seeking to remove half of the council before their terms are up is extreme and undemocratic to say the least.
Residents were completely misled and flat out lied to about what the intent of the petitions were. I have had multiple residents specifically tell me that PV United told them that the petitions were created to prevent five-story apartments from being built in our single-family neighborhoods and that their homes could be taken from them through eminent domain. This is ludicrous and has never been considered.
It is incredibly important to note that multifamily housing in single-family neighborhoods has been completely off the table for consideration for over a year now. ADUs have also been off the table since April.
Aside from these red flags, the Johnson County election commissioner informed PV United on May 1st that the petitions didn’t conform to state statues and needed to be reworked. PV United ignored this and proceeded to collect signatures on the flawed petitions. Given this fact alone, it was absolutely necessary to seek a declaratory judgment regarding the legality of the petitions.
Shockingly, ethical accusations were hurled at both the election commissioner and district judge by PV United. They also asked the election commissioner to “Please, make the determination of the sufficiency of the Abandon and Adopt Petition a priority.” Make of that what you will.
Ahead of council voting on anything regarding the petitions, PV United made a public post urging the council to let the courts decide the fate of the petitions. They have since done a 180-degree turn on this position.
Ward 3
Lori Sharp
When between 2,000 and 3,700 voters sign a petition demanding change, the city council should listen even if they don’t agree. The three petitions should have been allowed on the ballot and voted on by the residents.
After exploring other cities around the state, it was found that almost all the cities of the first class and cities in our surrounding area did not have the strong mayor form of government. The cities that did, were much smaller and didn’t have the resources to hire outside professional staff.
It was also painfully obvious that our city council was super-sized. To have twelve elected members for a small city of 22,000 is seriously unbalanced. This bloated number has caused chaos, confusion, long-drawn out meetings, too many expensive “pet projects”, too many wasteful committees, and many uncontested elections. Indeed, a majority of the current city council were unchallenged!
At this time, there are two councilmembers per ward, with six wards. A ratio of 1:6. By moving to one councilmember per ward, the representation ratio remains 1:6.
I feel strongly that a smaller council will be more responsive, less expensive, more efficient and better for running the business of the city. But most importantly, I think the residents should have to right to vote on it. I can live with what the residents want. I can’t live with silencing the citizens. That’s not a democracy.
Bonnie Limbird (incumbent)
In regards to the zoning petition, the council has consistently listened to residents and made concessions multiple times to the recommendations so far (some against the wishes of other residents in our city), so in effect we are already exploring these ideas more. The crux of the matter with zoning is that it requires expert knowledge to write language, and a ballot measure written without city staff or expert input isn’t the appropriate way to make that change, hence the administrative ruling from the bench. We need to be having these conversations about housing costs and how to make adjustments to our zoning and ordinances so they work for all residents, not just those with means. I look forward to allowing this discussion process to continue working the way it’s meant to with planning commission guidance, public input and several back-and-forths before anything — whether it’s adopted or dropped — is final.
Regarding the form of government, I have said even before I was initially elected that I would be open to this discussion, but not a full 50% reduction. That would not be fair representation for our residents. Keeping a two representatives-per-ward system would be key, and I’d be open to other ideas for discussion too. However, it’s important to note that it costs Prairie Village taxpayers nothing to have a larger council since we are not paid, and they get better response times, more experience and perspective “at the table” and more frequent opportunities to have their voice heard at the voting booth every two years instead of just every four years. If we reduce the size, we would also have to consider paying our councilmembers for their time like every other Johnson County municipality. That is not something I would support for myself but for future candidates.
Ward 4
Tyler Agniel
One of the most important characteristics of a quality leader is the ability to attentively listen.
More than 16% of passionate Prairie Village residents went out of their way to sign the rezoning petition initiated by a grassroots effort, yet their voices are not being heard.
I do not believe the council requires a legal mandate to listen to those they represent. I believe Prairie Village residents deserve the right to vote and the right to be heard.
Piper Reimer (incumbent)
Petitions are a valuable tool for residents to utilize to shape their community and government. I applaud the residents who engaged in this process and put so much work into creating them, gathering signatures and signing these petitions.
The petitions communicated loudly to me as an elected official that the community is concerned about the possibility of changes in the city that they understood to be in conflict with what they value about the community. Following the upcoming elections, I am eager to hear if the changes proposed by the petitions continue to have the support of the community. If so, I would support exploring the changes to the governmental structure and the number of councilmembers representing the community. I do not believe the petition regarding restrictions to rezoning would be beneficial to the future of the city.
Ward 5
Nick Reddell
I believe the council should be an extension of the people’s will. I would be in favor of putting the zoning issue on the ballot that has a largely divided opinion. Rezoning can directly affect the largest single asset that most residents own. I think that decisions and ideas like zoning need to be clear, transparent and with public input as a priority.
I believe more discussion should take place regarding the government petitions. As I stated previously, I am always for letting the people decide. Prairie Village has the same size city council as Overland Park, which has twelve members. We have the same size city council as Kansas City, Missouri. Most cities the same size or larger than Prairie Village have around six or seven members. I am not saying that is exactly how many councilmembers we need, but it might be something to look at.
I do believe we need to consider term limits for our councilmembers. I am not sure if two or three terms should be the maximum, however I believe we need to keep fresh ideas and people on the council.
Ciara Chaney
Our community is facing generational challenges related to cost of living, reducing carbon emissions from our city’s operations and important investments in making our city operate more efficiently and effectively for our residents. So we need to keep our focus on these pressing needs and not get distracted by these types of political games.
Practically speaking, most councilmembers have full-time jobs in addition to working on the city council and happily are giving up a large portion of their time — usually spent with their families and loved ones — to support our community. Getting rid of councilmembers would likely mean that certain committees and community events would need to be cut from the city due to time constraints with less councilmembers.
I am opposed to adopting a new form of government, especially with the lack of due diligence that seemed to have been put into such a significant change to our city. All previous and current elected officials have worked hard to make Prairie Village into what it is today. Dismantling the form of government that has served this community for nearly 75 years is significant and disruptive, so any change like this should be done in a thoughtful, deliberate and transparent process. Only then can we put forward a thorough, legal proposal that our residents can read and understand before it’s put on a ballot.
Above all this, we need more people to vote in municipal elections to ensure our community continues to move in a direction that the majority of our residents wish to see it go, regardless of the form of government we have.
Ward 6
Kelly Wyer
The current city council has spent over $93,000 suing a nonprofit group of Prairie Village citizens to keep these initiatives off of the Nov. 7 ballot. The Prairie Village city attorney, David Waters, (interesting fact: he is also the mayor of Westwood) found some technicalities on the petitions even though they had been approved by the county before circulation.
A judge ruled that the people cannot vote on the rezoning petition because rezoning our neighborhoods is part of the city’s comprehensive plan (a.k.a. Village Vision 2.0). I prefer to describe the other two common-sense petitions as “strong mayor” and “reducing council size.” Our mayor currently has veto power. The form of government used in Kansas City, Missouri, does not have a strong mayor, for example. Overland Park has a population of 195,000 and has a council size of 13 people. Prairie Village has a population of 22,000 and has the same city council size as Overland Park so reducing council size should be considered.
The citizens have often packed into overflow rooms at the council meetings to protest and the council still refuses to remove rezoning from the city’s comprehensive plan. Did you know that 95% of Prairie Village is made up of R-1 (residential one house on one lot) zoned neighborhoods? The council says they have “tabled” rezoning in R-1, but unless they remove rezoning R-1 from Village Vision 2.0, they’ve done nothing but confuse their constituents.
Yes to future consideration of all three initiatives. Let the people vote!
Ian Graves (incumbent)
I’m not opposed to exploring any reasonable modifications to our local government to increase representation and make government more responsive to citizens. That said, these petitions are not it.
Prairie Village has a modified mayor-council form of government that functions like a mayor-council-manager form of government already — the arguments behind the government petitions centered on eliminating a “strong-mayor” system we don’t have. I’m opposed to arbitrarily shrinking the size of the council and have seen no good arguments in favor of this. Reducing the size of a representative body is highly suspicious to me without a justification.
Changes to local government need to be made through a deliberate, thoughtful process. The public should have adequate time to scrutinize and debate such proposals and their impacts on the city. Statutory standards must be met, at minimum, and the public should be assured that proposed changes to our form of government comply with Kansas law.
Though I’d never rule something like this out completely, I see no reason to put anything like this on the ballot now or in the near future.
Tomorrow, we will publish candidates’ responses to the next question:
The city is moving forward with exploring the idea for a new city-run community center on the site of the aging Paul Henson YMCA near 79th and Mission. Exact cost estimates and specific plan designs remain up in the air at this point. Do you support the idea of a new city-run community center? Why or why not?
