South Wichita park explanation worse than I thought, due to City Hall ‘right-sizing’ | Opinion
After watching the City Council’s decision-making process Tuesday on the plans for Clapp Park in south Wichita, all I can say is that it went about the way I expected.
On Sunday, I raised the question whether it’s really necessary to spend about another half-million dollars in consulting fees — on top of the $206,000 of taxpayer money the city’s already spent on consulting for Clapp — to accomplish some fairly routine improvements consisting of a dog park area, a disabled-accessible playground, evaluating and removing some unsafe golf-cart bridges and building a parking lot.
Before the council asked its first question, City Manager Robert Layton jumped in to say that I had unfairly mischaracterized the scope of the contract, because not only does it include the planning for the improvements, but also oversight of the engineering work and management of the construction.
That explanation actually tells a sorrier story than I did in the first place.
Essentially, we hire city officials, they hire a landscape architecture firm to hire an engineering firm, a PR firm and whatever construction firm will ultimately build the $5 million project.
Seems like there might be an extra step or two in there.
Now, I wouldn’t question hiring expensive consultants if it was for the water-treatment plant or the air-traffic control system at the airport. Those really are complicated and people could get sick or die if it’s not done absolutely right.
But Clapp is just a park.
Layton said the city hasn’t had the capability to handle a project like Clapp on its own since about 10 years ago, when the engineering department was “right sized.”
One could argue that if right-sizing the department means it can no longer handle a relatively simple park project without spending $736,000 on consultants, maybe it’s not the right size after all.
It seems pretty ironic, coming as it does a couple of weeks after a court case where City Hall successfully argued that the voters can’t decide whether to tear down Century II, because they lack the city government’s “particularized knowledge in matters of city operations.” Ordinarily, I’m a big fan of irony, but this is kind of an expensive brand of it.
And Clapp would probably still be a golf course if the golf system hadn’t been grossly mismanaged for years.
Part of that was expensive overstaffing at Clapp itself and part of it was the creation of the “country club atmosphere” at Auburn Hills, the city’s newest and, for the average duffer, least enjoyable course.
Auburn Hills was built on a developer’s unbuildable scrap land — an expensive city-funded amenity to facilitate private development of golf-course-fronting luxury homes. It saddled the city golf system with debt for years and nearly crashed the entire system.
The city’s original plan for Clapp was to sell it off in pieces for private development.
A 2018 economic study found it was the only course in the system that could be easily redeveloped for private use, because the others lacked good commercial frontage and/or were protected by land-use covenants.
The city initially envisioned a big bar and grill at Clapp, with a large enclosed space for people to let their dogs run loose while they had a few drinks, but it didn’t work out.
Former Mayor Jeff Longwell proposed cutting the course from 18 to nine holes, with some space to be redeveloped as senior housing. Clapp sits alongside the Georgetown senior-living community owned by Ascension Via Christi.
Then, there was the “community engagement” phase where residents said pretty much to keep it a golf course, or make it a pastoral park with lots of trees and trails.
Then came the $206,000 consultant-prepared master plan that envisioned $28 million of improvements including a bistro, indoor-outdoor farmer’s market, performance stage, BMX bike track, sports courts and a big mound for watching planes from the airbase fly overhead — I swear I didn’t make that up.
The city can’t afford to do most of that, so now we’re back to open space, dog park, accessible playground and bridge removal and/or repair, which the city doesn’t have the capability of doing on its own.
In other news, the City Council also voted Tuesday to spend up to $125,000 for rebates to help city residents buy water-saving appliances and cut their water bills.
So, $125,000 for the people, $530,000 for a consultant.
Par for the course.
