Out here in blog land, a story is circulating that Dan Cofran has been given the hook as the “main debater” for the Save Kansas City Committee, which is pushing for retention of the earnings tax.
The implication is that Cofran has been reined in because of a statement he made to a woman who asked him what her options were if she worked in Kansas City and paid the E-tax but didn’t live in the city. “Then don’t work here,” was Cofran’s, sharp-elbowed response.
E-tax opponents have jumped all over it, featuring it in two TV ads.
And now, says a local blogger whose first name happens to be Tony, Cofran has been “sacked.”
Not exactly. Here’s the full story.
First, a disclosure: I am a member of the Save Kansas City Committee’s steering committee and have spoken to two groups, urging retention of the E-tax.
Cofran
Cofran, a lawyer and former city councilman, indeed has been the main speaker on behalf of the campaign, although other officials, including civic leader and campaign co-chairman Anita Gorman, have also appeared.
Cofran has made a dozen or more appearances on behalf of the committee and represented the committee in a Kansas City Star debate, published last Sunday.
Cofran is not getting paid; he is volunteering his time.
The main spokesman for the opposition, a nebulous group called Freedom PAC, which has an address in Kansas City, North, is Woody Cozad, a former Missouri Republican state chairman.
He is getting paid.
The problem that has crept up on our side is that Cofran, while representing Save Kansas City, has also been working — for pay — as chief opponent of the proposed Polsinelli, Shughart building on the Plaza.
He and lawyer Dave Fenley of the Husch Blackwell firm debated the Polsinelli issue on KCUR yesterday.
Steve Glorioso, a consultant to the Save Kansas City Committee, said that even before Wednesday’s debate, “we’d been a little concerned about him (Cofran) mixing the two issues.”
“It’s confusing to people,” Glorioso said, referring to Cofran being perceived as a “swivel top,” that is, pitching retention of the E-tax one day and opposing the Polsinelli building the next.
Glorioso said he asked Cofran early this week if he could postpone Wednesday’s debate with Fenley, but Cofran said he couldn’t do that, primarily because a City Council committee is scheduled to consider the matter next Wednesday, the day after the E-tax election.
On Tuesday, Glorioso said, he learned that Cofran planned to debate not one but both issues on this week’s edition of KCPT’s Week in Review, which will be taped tomorrow morning.
Glorioso said Week in Review moderator Nick Haines had set up the show so that Cofran and Fenley would debate the Plaza building for 15 minutes and then Cofran would square off against Cozad on the E-tax for the remaining 15 minutes. Cofran agreed to the format.
That was way too much swiveling for Glorioso and other Save Kansas City officials.
Glorioso said he called Haines and said, “This thing on Friday just won’t work.” He told Haines that the committee would be sending Dianne Cleaver, a committee co-chairman, in place of Cofran.
Glorioso said he then sent Cofran an e-mail, laying out his concerns and telling him about the change of plans. He said Cofran sent him a response, essentially saying, “That makes sense.”
A group of ministers with the Metropolitan Organization for Racial and Economic Equity (MORE2) appeared today outside City Hall with Mayor-elect Sly James to endorse the earnings tax, which will be on the ballot Tuesday in Kansas City. More than 90 groups have endorsed the tax. (Photo from Save Kansas City Committee.)
With just four days left before the election, only one more event is scheduled — on Monday — and Glorioso said Cofran had not been in line to be the speaker.
So, yes, Cofran got reined in, but not because of the “Don’t work here” comment.
And, by the way, I can’t see that comment persuading a large number of Kansas Citians to vote against the E-tax. Half the people who pay the tax live outside the city. And don’t you know we Kansas Citians just love having our friends who live outside the city help us pay for the streets, parks, entertainment venues and arts facilities that our “visitors” regularly use and enjoy?
JimmyCsays: At the juncture of journalism and daily life in KC 
I can’t believe the b.s. going on with Tony’s site. I knew there was another story to be told on Dan. I’ve known Dan for quite a while. Met him when I worked at City Hall and he was on the council…I couldn’t believe that they would create this so-called problem about Dan.
In a city of almost half a million population, it’s hard to believe that the same names come up over and over again. It’s no wonder they bump into themselves on a disappointingly regular basis.
And it’s not because they’re so civic minded; in fact many of them like Glorioso are “consultants” to about every issue or candidate that comes along.
Meanwhile the voter turnout in KCMO is pathetic, because regular residents have pretty much decided that what goes on in what passes for their municipal government doesn’t have much to do with them, either during setting of priorities, elections, or how their tax money is spent.
You have to hope that the new administration makes a very concerted effort to actually involve many more of the people who live here instead of constantly being surrounded by the same old crowd. Mr. James ran without pandering to individuals and groups. Now we’ll see if he plans to govern the same way.
Jack — Dan has done a good job on this campaign, and I believe the E-tax will pass in no small measure because of his fine effort. The bare facts of the revenue and how much damage would be inflicted on the city by failure of the proposal will carry the day.
Maybe, as Sly James said, “don’t work here” wasn’t the smartest thing to say, but the people who don’t live here (and, consequently, don’t vote here) are about the only ones who would take offense.
Never underestimate the influence of Jeff Roe and the other regional right-wing operatives, who I suspect are behind a lot of these attack ads and mailings that we have been subjected to this week. I say “suspect” because this shadowy group called Freedom PAC won’t reveal its donors or officers.
Just like Karl Rove and the liars at Faux News, these folks will say anything and twist as many facts as they can to get what they want. Their motive in this campaign is not the betterment of KC or a better business climate for small businesses. Their motive is power. Sadly, they have been successful way too many times. And if the proponents of this e-tax do not fight back harder, Roe, Cozad, Cashill, Thomas and that St. Louis billionaire will be victorious on Tuesday. Let’s hope I am wrong.
This election is not only about the financial stability of this city. It is about whether we will be able to ward off right-wing influences from City Hall. We have seen their influences on our state governments and it has not been a pretty sight. I don’t want the same thing happening to our municipalities.
i find this interesting..here in St. Louis there has been little to no campaigning against the e-tax, there are yard signs all over town in favor of the tax and i can’t recall seeing one against it..in fact i haven’t seen any tv ads or heard and radio traffic at all on the subject, except for the insipid talking heads on talk radio..but yet now we have to vote on tuesday on the subject because a guy who doesn’t live in either city decided to flex his muscles (money) and sit back in his home in the lake of the ozarks and laugh at us all…