Prairie Villagers may feel a sense of deja vu as yard signs riddle neighborhoods and flyers appear in mailboxes.
Two years ago, those yard signs and mailers called on the city to “Stop Rezoning.” Now, the same resident-led group is once again sharing yard signs calling on the city to let residents vote on a new $30 million municipal complex that includes a new city hall and expanded police headquarters.
Critics of the proposal mostly oppose building a new city hall, currently planned for 7820 Mission Road, citing concerns over what they see as unnecessary spending. Some have called for putting the issue to a public vote.
The city says an existing ordinance allows the Prairie Village City Council the power to issue bonds for the project without a public vote. More than that, the city says even if the city council repeals the ordinance, the city no longer has time to take the matter to a ballot this year.
Has the city hall project already been approved?
Yes, the city council has already approved the municipal complex project that includes a new city hall building and a renovated and expanded police department.
Now, the city council faces a vote on June 16 to kick start the process of taking out debt in the form of municipal bonds so work can begin. Some residents and at least two councilmembers have made an 11th-hour plea in recent weeks for the city to take the bond issue to a public vote.
City leaders insist the project doesn’t need to be voted on by residents because of a charter ordinance that authorizes Prairie Village to issue bonds for infrastructure projects without voters’ approval.
Even so, Councilmembers Lori Sharp and Inga Selders tried but failed last week to gain support from their fellow councilmembers to revise or even repeal that charter ordinance.
A motion by Sharp to direct staff to draft language to repeal the charter ordinance failed in committee by a 9-2 vote, with only Sharp and Selders in favor. Councilmember Nick Reddell was absent.
What’s the plan for Prairie Village city hall and police department?
For years, the city of Prairie Village has been discussing and developing plans to upgrade its aging municipal complex at 7700 Mission Road, which comprises city hall, the police department and municipal court.
All in all, the city studied a total of 18 different options for reworking the municipal complex, including 11 options for city hall and four for the police department.
The city ultimately landed on a $30 million project that includes building a new city hall on the site currently occupied by Mission Road Bible Church just to the south of the current municipal complex and expanding the existing police department into the existing city hall space.
In a May interview with the Post, Public Works Director Keith Bredehoeft said the current plan addresses staffing needs for both city hall staff and the police department.
“The option of just expanding the police department with nothing else being done, I don’t think there’s adequate space to do that or that it makes sense to do that,” Bredehoeft said.
He added that scenarios for renovating the existing municipal building or the church building would have cost almost as much as constructing a completely new city hall and that “just didn’t seem like the right thing to do.”
Who is behind the ‘Let PV vote’ signs?
In recent weeks, signs — colored blue with red and white script — have begun popping up in yards across Prairie Village bearing the message, “Let Prairie Village Vote.”
The signs are put out by PV United, the same resident-led group that spearheaded the opposition to the city’s attainable housing efforts in the past few years and distributed signs calling for the city to “Stop Rezoning.” (PV United also goes by the name Stop Rezoning Prairie Village.)
PV United argues that the municipal complex project needs to be taken to a public vote.
“The estimated project cost of $30 million for municipal buildings is extreme for a small community of less than 6.2 miles and a population of 23,000,” the group’s website says, adding that the landlocked city is not seeing a drastic increase in population.
Additionally, another dark money group (which has not revealed the source of its funding) called Preserve Prairie Village has started sending mailers to residents encouraging them to “demand input” on the municipal complex project.
What does the message on the signs mean?
The signs’ messaging is a reference to the two aspects of the proposed municipal complex project: a new city hall and an expanded police HQ.
The signs specifically say, “Yes for police dept renovation” and “No $23 million new city hall,” signaling PV United’s support for police department renovations but opposition to a new city hall, a sentiment which residents have shared in city council meetings since at least January.
The brunt of the $30 million cost for the project would go towards a new city hall. The cost breaks down with about $23 million going to a new city hall and the other roughly $7 million slated to pay for expanding and renovating the police department (The city already set aside $4 million to purchase the church, which is figured in the $30 million overall price.)
PV United’s website states its “current priority issue” is the “mega $ city hall proposal.” The only mention of the police department is to argue that a renovation over new construction would result in a “sizable investment in our police and public safety personnel.”
Sharp, at the June 2 meeting in which she also brought forward the item attempting to repeal the city’s charter ordinance, said she is advocating for residents she hears from who want to vote on the project.
“I’m not saying that this project is a good one or a bad one, I think it has merits, good and bad,” Sharp said. “What I’m saying is, I keep hearing from residents, and I’m just trying to represent them the best I can and advocate for them, and that’s all I’m doing.”
Councilmembers Dave Robinson and Ron Nelson countered Sharp’s points, saying she has declined to add some Ward 3 residents to a regular newsletter she emails to residents.
Nelson also said Sharp is the one demanding a public vote on the city hall project: “It’s you who’s doing it, not your constituents.”
Prairie Village says they don’t have to take it to a public vote. Why?
City Attorney Alex Aggen, an attorney at Hunter Law Group, told the city council in May that funding the project by taking on municipal bond debt is a decision the city council can make.
That’s because of a city ordinance that has been in place for more than a decade, Charter Ordinance 28, which exempts the city from a specific state statute and allows the city to issue bonds for a variety of infrastructure-related needs, including street improvements, public building construction, parking and even airports.
Councilmembers Ian Graves and Greg Shelton in recent council meetings have pointed out that Prairie Village has used the same charter ordinance in recent years to issue bonds to finance the new public works building and Meadowbrook Park. (Shelton is the husband of Post Publisher Jay Senter’s sister.)
“This is in line with what we’ve done in the past,” Graves said on May 5, after noting that the projects the city issued bonds for between 2016 and 2025 in today’s dollars come to roughly “north” of $30 million.
But proponents of putting the issue to a vote say the municipal complex project is different, due to its scope and cost.
“This is the biggest expenditure that we’ve had in Prairie Village history,” Selders said on June 2, adding that she believes smaller expenditures like streetlights can be decided on solely by the city council.
“Bigger things like city hall I think should be going to a public vote,” Selders added.
Is there still even time to vote in 2025?
City leaders say no.
City Administrator Wes Jordan told the Post that even if the city council makes a recommendation at its next meeting on Monday, June 16, to repeal the charter ordinance, that only would kickstart a months-long process that would push the issue past the county election office’s deadlines to get an item on November’s ballot.
Even if the council approved repealing the charter ordinance (and a majority currently does not support that), the earliest such a change could be approved is likely Aug. 4, Jordan says.
Then, a 60-day public comment period begins before the repeal could actually take effect, which would be Oct. 4.
Then, the city council would have to draft and approve ballot language, but that would already be more than a month past the election office’s deadline for a November ballot measure to be submitted.
The charter ordinance currently in place gives the governing body the power to issue bonds on its own, leaving an advisory vote — or a non-binding vote — the only option for a ballot question.
But the Secretary of State’s office directed the Johnson County Election Office to not put an advisory question on a ballot, Election Commission Fred Sherman told the Post.
This story was originally published by the Johnson County Post.
