|
|
|
Local legislators aren’t buying a Kansas City senator’s ideas to downsize the Kansas Legislature and consolidate towns, cities and counties in an effort to save money.
Sen. Chris Steineger, R-Kansas City, sent out a letter this week, asking people, during the current budget crunch to consider what he called “a once in a lifetime opportunity” to redesign state and local government to make it more efficient.
“All businesses small to large readjust their business model every few years,” Steineger wrote. “They go through mergers and consolidations and they adapt to changing times. Churches and non-profit groups do the same. Yet Kansas government has not made similar improvements and adaptations.”
Steineger wrote that the state still operated on a model put forth in 1861, when there were 105 counties so that each county courthouse was never more than a day’s horseback ride away. Also in that year, state officials decided to have 40 Kansas senators and 125 state representatives, for similar reasons, Steineger said.
He followed that up with two suggestions, the first of which was to downsize the legislature by at least 30 percent. Steineger suggested knocking the number of senators down 10 to 30, while reducing the 125 state representatives down to 90.
“The timing is perfect for this idea as the legislature will redraw the district boundary lines in 2012,” Steineger wrote. “Legislators with larger districts out west should be given extra compensation for mileage they incur.”
He also advocated for consolidation of rural counties, in favor of “fewer but stronger counties,” that he said could better compete with urban areas in terms of development. Steineger’s proposal called for the analysis of a Kansas map which had 36 counties.
“This map is not mandatory but is an attempt to create a modern management structure where each new county has at least one "economic development engine" such as a university, county courthouse, or regional hospital,” Steineger said. “I suspect a thorough study will show: cost savings through economies of scale; technology will help with access and deliver services; and more effective economic development.”
But Rep. Bob Grant, D-Cherokee, said he didn’t think it was a good idea.
“Maybe if (Steineger) wants to volunteer to give away his job, then it might be fine,” Grant said. “It’s tough to sit here and say I want to give my job away. I would say not only no, but hell no.”
Rep. Julie Menghini, D-Pittsburg, said it seemed like a sound idea fiscally, but said it would be a bad choice from a representation standpoint.
“I think when you have more and more people as constituents, you’re not as effective and you’re less accessible,” Menghini said. “Especially with representatives, a lot of time, people will contact their reps rather than their senators or their representatives in congress because we’re closer to home and we’re easier to talk to about individual issues.”
Sen. Bob Marshall, R-Fort Scott, said it would be difficult to make Steineger’s change.
“The more you do something like that, the less each individual county feels like it’s represented,” Marshall said.
He added that going to 30 senators would likely cut down on senators from rural districts, while keeping Kansas City, Wichita and Topeka’s numbers in tact.
“You could see all 11 southeast Kansas districts represented by one person,” Marshall said. “Right now, I represent two and a half counties, and anything more than that would make me feel like I was representing fewer people, not more.”
Menghini said she appreciated Steineger’s efforts, but said she thought there were probably better solutions to the ailing budget.
“There are a lot of good things that can save the state money that people aren’t willing to do,” Menghini said. “I would be willing to bet that there are a good number of folks out there who want to go along as is.
“But I’m certainly interested to hear what constituents have to say about it,” Menghini said.
Kevin Flaherty can be reached at kevin.flaherty@morningsun.net or by calling 231-2600 Ext. 134
Local legislators aren’t buying a Kansas City senator’s ideas to downsize the Kansas Legislature and consolidate towns, cities and counties in an effort to save money.
Sen. Chris Steineger, R-Kansas City, sent out a letter this week, asking people, during the current budget crunch to consider what he called “a once in a lifetime opportunity” to redesign state and local government to make it more efficient.
“All businesses small to large readjust their business model every few years,” Steineger wrote. “They go through mergers and consolidations and they adapt to changing times. Churches and non-profit groups do the same. Yet Kansas government has not made similar improvements and adaptations.”
Steineger wrote that the state still operated on a model put forth in 1861, when there were 105 counties so that each county courthouse was never more than a day’s horseback ride away. Also in that year, state officials decided to have 40 Kansas senators and 125 state representatives, for similar reasons, Steineger said.
He followed that up with two suggestions, the first of which was to downsize the legislature by at least 30 percent. Steineger suggested knocking the number of senators down 10 to 30, while reducing the 125 state representatives down to 90.
“The timing is perfect for this idea as the legislature will redraw the district boundary lines in 2012,” Steineger wrote. “Legislators with larger districts out west should be given extra compensation for mileage they incur.”
He also advocated for consolidation of rural counties, in favor of “fewer but stronger counties,” that he said could better compete with urban areas in terms of development. Steineger’s proposal called for the analysis of a Kansas map which had 36 counties.
“This map is not mandatory but is an attempt to create a modern management structure where each new county has at least one "economic development engine" such as a university, county courthouse, or regional hospital,” Steineger said. “I suspect a thorough study will show: cost savings through economies of scale; technology will help with access and deliver services; and more effective economic development.”
But Rep. Bob Grant, D-Cherokee, said he didn’t think it was a good idea.
“Maybe if (Steineger) wants to volunteer to give away his job, then it might be fine,” Grant said. “It’s tough to sit here and say I want to give my job away. I would say not only no, but hell no.”
Rep. Julie Menghini, D-Pittsburg, said it seemed like a sound idea fiscally, but said it would be a bad choice from a representation standpoint.
“I think when you have more and more people as constituents, you’re not as effective and you’re less accessible,” Menghini said. “Especially with representatives, a lot of time, people will contact their reps rather than their senators or their representatives in congress because we’re closer to home and we’re easier to talk to about individual issues.”
Sen. Bob Marshall, R-Fort Scott, said it would be difficult to make Steineger’s change.
“The more you do something like that, the less each individual county feels like it’s represented,” Marshall said.
He added that going to 30 senators would likely cut down on senators from rural districts, while keeping Kansas City, Wichita and Topeka’s numbers in tact.
“You could see all 11 southeast Kansas districts represented by one person,” Marshall said. “Right now, I represent two and a half counties, and anything more than that would make me feel like I was representing fewer people, not more.”
Menghini said she appreciated Steineger’s efforts, but said she thought there were probably better solutions to the ailing budget.
“There are a lot of good things that can save the state money that people aren’t willing to do,” Menghini said. “I would be willing to bet that there are a good number of folks out there who want to go along as is.
“But I’m certainly interested to hear what constituents have to say about it,” Menghini said.
Kevin Flaherty can be reached at kevin.flaherty@morningsun.net or by calling 231-2600 Ext. 134
