Candidates Doug Rempp, Jak Keller and Keith Cooper are pressing a series of budget and oversight criticisms aimed at city hall, responding to recent campaign mailers and city actions that they say warrant closer public scrutiny. Their concerns focus on property taxes, legal spending, large capital contracts and redevelopment deals. Below is a concise, factual summary of the claims and the public records and project figures cited in debate.
Taxes and the mailer claim: Lower Property Taxes?
The mailer circulating in town claims lower property taxes under the current commission. Campaign figures and public discussions from the candidates counter that residents have seen notable year-to-year increases — in some cases 20–30% — and say the mailer’s message is misleading. The candidates urge voters to inspect official city budget documents and commission minutes for the exact numbers.
Legal bills and a mural dispute: Support Small Business?
Candidates point to ongoing litigation and legal fees related to a dispute over a mural at a longstanding downtown restaurant, and say the tab so far has reached more than $700,000. They highlight that those costs are paid from taxpayer funds and say the scale of the legal spending shows a need for more cautious oversight on controversial decisions that can trigger lawsuits.
Smoky Hill River log-jam cleanup — how the price changed: Cut Wasteful Spending?
City engineering staff and contract documents show an initial emergency contract to remove a log jam in the Smoky Hill River near Bill Burke Park originally bid at roughly $411,231. Subsequent storms, additional access work and rebuilding of a temporary rock access pad increased scope and cost. Staff later presented cost estimates that raised the potential total to roughly $1.21 million for the full cleanup and related work. City staff also reported disaster-recovery estimates from state/federal reviewers totaling about $714,330 for the July and September events; under the usual formula the city expects to recover a share of eligible costs but the exact reimbursement remains subject to state and federal review.
Redevelopment and incentives: Cut Wasteful Spending?
The candidates also question the city’s approach to large redevelopment plans. They cite a proposed transformation of the Central Mall into an outdoor shopping district and note the city is negotiating with an out-of-town developer who has faced litigation in other municipalities. Campaign material cites a past North Kansas City dispute involving the same developer that resulted in a settlement reportedly exceeding $1 million. The candidates argue that such history deserves careful vetting before local officials approve significant incentives or enter into large contracts that could risk local taxpayer funds.
The River Renewal Project
On river restoration, the candidates say: “We all agree that the current cesspool needs to be cleaned up. Keith would like to be able to fish along it. I would like the recreational opportunities that a revived river through Salina would bring. Am I concerned about costs? Absolutely — it’s a major undertaking. Could it transform our city? Absolutely, as long as we take a measured, methodical, and calculated approach. Leadership has done this so far, but I’m just not sure they have been as transparent as I would like.”
(That passage was provided as the candidates’ statement about the project.)
Voters and the record
The candidates note that a version of the River Renewal Project was previously rejected by voters and warn that elements of the plan appear to be returning piecemeal through smaller funding decisions. They say that prior public votes and past budget decisions should inform any future approvals and that large deals deserve full vetting to avoid costly legal and financial exposure.
What to check in the public record
The candidates encourage residents to review city commission minutes, staff reports and budget documents for exact figures on:
- Legal fees tied to specific disputes and ongoing litigation
- The log-jam contract(s), amendments and staff cost estimates
- Any incentive packages or redevelopment agreements and their projected cost/benefit
Meeting packets and staff reports are the primary sources for the numbers cited in public discussion.
Bottom line
Rempp, Cooper, & Keller are asking voters to weigh recent city actions against campaign claims and official records. They say that while some progress and investments are needed, the city should avoid large, high-risk deals without full transparency and stronger financial safeguards. They also argue that voters should not accept partisan mailers as definitive — instead, examine the public record to verify claims.
Paid for by Doug Rempp for Salina City Commission.
Paid for by Keith Cooper for Salina City Commission.
Paid for by Jak Keller for Salna City Commission
