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. 4 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’re publishing the candidates’ responses to one question.
Today, we’re publishing candidates’ responses to the following question:
“Abandoning” city government: Prairie Village voters this November will also see a ballot question asking if they want to “abandon” the city’s current form of government. If voters approve “abandoning” the current governmental structure, no new structure would immediately be put in place. The next city council could be in the position of having to vote on a new form of government. Do you support “abandoning” Prairie Village’s current form of government? If so, what would you like to see replace it?
Below are the answers the Post received from candidates on this issue:
Ward 1
Daniel Garrett
Did not provide the Post with a response.
Cole Robinson (incumbent)
It is an absolutely wild reality that Prairie Village voters will have a choice to abandon the city’s current form of government on their ballot in 10 days. We live in one of the best, safest, most well-run communities in America, and the proponents of this abandonment effort are asking PV residents to jump off a bridge and just trust them that everything will be fine.
No thank you.
Listen, we can have political and policy disagreements. Our system is built to allow for robust debate and oversight. However, for one of our city councilors and for PV United to say we need to abandon everything, predominantly because they have been unable to build coalitions, find compromise and work towards finding solutions for residents — that is simply a bridge too far and absolutely not one worth jumping off of.
Prairie Village’s 74 for years of success, and the fact that all of our neighboring cities around us have similar, successful forms of government, should be all a resident needs to consider when making a decision on this question. We have council races this year for our government. Next year, we have a mayoral election. Differences could and should be settled at the ballot box by voting for elected officials, not by ripping up the city’s foundation.
Stop this drama and vote no.
Ward 2
Edward Boersma
I’m running for City Council to address rising property taxes, to protect zoning in our single-family neighborhoods and to give the people of Prairie Village a vote on the city hall project. When people ask about the ballot question, I remind them that I always favor civic participation. This vote is the result of thousands of good people in our community signing a petition to put the question on our ballot. Now every resident has the opportunity to be heard.
In that spirit, I believe voting on whether to change the city government structure in Prairie Village is a positive and important step. This vote provides residents with direct input on how their city is governed and that feedback is invaluable.
Here’s the actual question from my sample ballot:
“Shall the City of Prairie Village, Kansas abandon the mayor-council form of government?”
The word “abandon” unfortunately carries a negative connotation. Prairie Village residents are being asked to consider whether to transition from the current strong-mayor system to a different, potentially more effective form of governance. Many cities across the country have modernized their structures to adopt more professional management systems that minimize political influence, and this vote gives Prairie Village an opportunity to consider the same.
Ron Nelson (incumbent)
I strongly oppose the move to abandon the current city government and strongly support the current Mayor-Council-Administrator governement of Prairie Village. The move to abandon the current form of government is born of disinformation and anger rather than any plan to improve Prairie Village or resolve any issues there may be with its government. The plan appears to be more focused on “burning down” the city rather than any considered discussion and collaboration with others having differing views. It is notable that the drafters of the petitions aimed at Prairie Village City Government did not include one petition to abandon one form of government and institute a new one. My view is that was because the intention was more to create chaos and emotion rather than dealing seriously with the issue. The proposal for replacement by those supporting abandonment of the current form of government would provide privileged residence with last rather than more input—fewer elected representatives (1 elected member per ward rather than 2 chosen in alternate even years), and a non-elected head of government than the the current city-wide elected mayor with a Council appointed professional administrative staff. Their plan is antidemocratic and contrary to Prairie Village residence interests.
Ward 3
Amy Aldrich
Did not provide the Post with a response.
Shelby Bartelt
I do not support abandoning Prairie Village’s current mayor and council form of government, and residents deserve to know why this question is even on the ballot.
It was not initiated by the city or through a resident-led effort to improve our government. This ballot measure exists because PV United, represented by Rex Sharp, the husband of Councilwoman Lori Sharp, sued the city to force three petitions to be on the 2023 ballot. Two years later, here we are in 2025 still dealing with the confusion that lawsuit created.
Two of those petitions were rejected by a district court judge for not complying with Kansas law, including one that would have removed six sitting councilmembers halfway through their elected terms. The only petition that qualified for the ballot, the “abandonment” question, does not propose a new form of government.
That means even if it passes, nothing changes. Prairie Village would continue to operate under the same structure it has today, creating confusion and instability for no reason. This is not about reform; it is about using lawsuits to strong-arm outcomes when you do not agree with an election result.
I am not opposed to reviewing whether a different form of government could someday better serve Prairie Village, but abandoning our current structure without a clear alternative is reckless, not reform. Prairie Village deserves thoughtful leadership that strengthens trust and communication, not chaos disguised as “choice”.
Ward 4
Kelly Sullivan Angles
Our current strong-mayor form of government is outdated and has been abandoned by most other cities of our size across Kansas. I fully support modernizing our city government with an approach that respects the councilmembers voted in by the residents and the residents’ priorities. This is representative democracy in action, whereas the current strong mayor form of government favors the mayor’s agenda at the expense of residents’ representative votes.
Nathan Vallette
I do not support “abandoning” Prairie Village’s current form of government. Our council-manager model works. It allows elected representatives to set policy while a professional city administrator manages daily operations — providing expertise, accountability, and consistency.
The proposal on the ballot doesn’t say what would replace that structure, and that’s a real concern. Abandoning the system without a clear plan would create confusion, risk service interruptions, and make it harder to recruit and retain the talented staff who keep the city running smoothly. Prairie Village needs stability, not chaos.
I’m running as an independent candidate because I believe local government should be about people, not factions. The focus should be on improving communication, not dismantling the system. We can be clearer about how decisions are made, more proactive in sharing information, and more intentional in creating opportunities for residents to engage. The solution isn’t to burn down the house — it’s to fix what’s inside it.
Our form of government gives us the tools; we just need to use them better. I’ll work to make city government more open, responsive, and trustworthy — ensuring residents feel informed and included without upending the structure that keeps Prairie Village stable and well-run.
Ward 5
John Beeder
Yes, I support replacing the current “strong mayor” form of government. Prairie Village is one of only two large cities in Kansas that still uses this structure, which concentrates too much power in a single office. The result is that our cost to run the city on a square-mile basis is the highest in Kansas … 42% higher than Overland Park and nearly double Olathe, both of which are at least ten times larger in size than Prairie Village. The other “strong mayor” city, Leawood, is the second most expensive. Most peer cities use a council–manager model, where a professional city manager runs daily operations under the direction of the full council. This structure brings more checks and balances, professional oversight, and greater efficiency. If voters approve the change, I would work to ensure any new system delivers accountability, spending discipline, and lower taxes.
Betsy Lawrence
I am voting NO on the abandon Prairie Village question. I encourage every Prairie Village voter to reject PV United’s effort to dismantle the form of government that has served Prairie Village since 1951 and made our city what it is today. The public safety, parks, streets, sidewalks, and quality services we all value are quite literally the direct result of that form of government.
The new form of government proposed by PV United would eliminate 6 of our 12 elected representatives, cutting our voices in half. While it may be easier for PV United to control 6 council seats, I believe it is the wrong direction for our residents. I also think claims that the mayor has too much power are exaggerated. Agenda items can be offered by any council member and the mayor does not even vote on the city budget or mill levy rates unless there’s a tie.
From my perspective, PV United has strayed pretty far from what many of us understood were concerns with potential rezoning in our neighborhoods. It now operates as a 501(c)(4) political lobbying organization, which means it can lawfully avoid contribution limits and public disclosures while still playing an active role in our local election. I believe it would be better for voters and more consistent with PV United’s own calls for transparency if it voluntarily disclosed its contributions and expenditures, just like the candidates. Without voluntary disclosure, I have a hard time assessing the weight or credibility I should give to the communications I receive from this organization.
Ward 6
Dan Prussing
Did not provide the Post with a response.
Jim Sellers
I do not support abandoning city government. On all relevant measures of quality of life outcomes, Prairie Village is a superior place to live. Our community is safe. The police come quickly when needed. The school system is superior. Our roads, sidewalks, and parks are clean and well-maintained. Our roads are plowed in the winter. There is high demand for housing stock because of this quality of life. I don’t believe Prairie Village is broken, so there’s no need to break it. We can and should improve, and I see no evidence that it’s our form of government which prevents us from getting better.
