By Damon Grosvenor
Landmark reporter
As Parkville residents prepare to weigh three proposals for new property tax levies, Mayor Dean Katerndahl says opponents are lying about the city’s intentions.
Voters will decide on Nov. 3 whether to approve or deny what amounts to an 88% increase in city property taxes.
“The proposals are atrocious,” said Tom Hutsler, a Parkville business and property owner, in an interview on Monday.
He said after last year’s defeat of a sunsetted property tax levy that drastically dropped city property taxes, the city was looking for ways to trick voters into supporting an increase.
“They divided it into three categories thinking the general public is uneducated or stupid,” Hutsler said. “They are hoping that by throwing three things up, something will stick.”
Proposition P would add a levy of $0.179 per $100 of assessed value. According to public city documents, the levy would be used to pay for public safety services.
Proposition I would add a levy of $0.128 per $100 of assessed value. This levy would pay for transportation and infrastructure needs.
Proposition F would add a levy of $0.082 per $100 of assessed value. This levy would pay for the maintenance, repair, improvement and replacement of city facilities.
According to the city’s website, the estimated monthly tax rate on a $400,000 home would increase from about $28 to $52.
Hutsler said the website was deceptive for several reasons. First, the average home price in Parkville was well above $400,000. Second, presenting the cost as a monthly expense obfuscated the fact people pay their taxes annually.
Katerndahl said the monthly estimation was his idea.
“I like to view taxes like you are buying something,” he said.
Most bills are monthly, so he thought people would better understand how much their taxes would actually be increasing.
“I thought it was more comparable,” he said. “If you want to buy these services, it is about $25 a month.”
He said Parkville residents were smart enough to be able to see how much their tax bill could be by simply multiplying the monthly cost by 12.
For his part, Hutsler said the city may as well show the daily cost.
“It is a bait and switch,” he said.
Redefine Route 9 and Proposition P
Hutsler said he was a firm no vote on each of the propositions, but went further with his criticisms of the city.
He said the city was really trying to raise even more funds for the Redefine Route 9 project.
“They want to divert funds through rent for the police department,” he said.
If Proposition P is approved, the department will have more money to pay rent, which goes directly to the general fund. And the general fund can be used for anything the Board of Aldermen wants, he said.
Katerndahl said that was flat-out wrong.
“More money actually goes from the general fund into public safety than the other way around,” he said.
According to the proposed 2027 budget, more than $1.5 million will be transferred from the general fund to the public safety fund.
However, the Parkville Police Department only pays for utility usage and maintenance services. According to Parkville Communications Coordinator Kristiana Sanford, the total city hall monthly electric bill is around $5,000 and all departments housed within city hall pay for their part of the bill.
“The police department pays their share of that bill based on square footage used,” she said in an email to The Landmark. “Similarly, they pay a portion of the monthly janitorial bill on that same space usage. There is no ‘rent’ paid, just their portion of the shared service use.”
The budget does contain a $30,000 rent line item for Public Safety, but that is only for the department’s Creekside police station.
Proposition P funds will primarily be used for implementing a 12-step salary schedule for police officers.
Katerndahl said the goal is to improve retention in the police department by paying veteran officers more based on their years of service.
“We did a good job raising the base pay for our officers, but we want to also pay those with more experience,” he said. “If you think that is worth paying ($136) a year, then vote for it.”
The funds are not going to be paying for the downtown renovations, he said.
“We have a source of funds for Route 9,” he said. “So take these proposals at face value.”
Although Hutsler was against Proposition P, he said he had nothing against the police.
“I support the police, but they are fully funded,” he said, pointing to the $.05 sales tax.
The property tax proposals and the downtown renovations were a recipe for bad business, he said.
Hutsler owns several downtown businesses and properties, and he said he knew firsthand how property taxes affected landlords and businesses.
“Any time property taxes go up, it means raised rent for businesses,” he said. “And business is good right now. So why do anything to affect that? The benefit will not outweigh the cost.”
Even if the proposals fail, Katerndahl said the city would still operate at the pace it does today.
“It does not mean we cannot fix your curb,” he said. “It means that instead of fixing it this year, it may be a year or two before we can.”
