Get ready to mark your ballots, Kansas Citians. Voters could face a slew of tax, bond and fee issues later this year, part of a plan by City Manager Troy Schulte to improve basic services.</p><p>Added up, Schulte has proposed asking voters to endorse at least $600 million in new bonds plus higher utility taxes and a renewed motor vehicle tax. <span class="italic">Whew</span>.</p><p>Don&#x2019;t worry yet: No election dates are set. Mayor Sly James and the City Council have to weigh in over the next few months on which ideas go before voters.</p><p>One question looms over all others: Can Kansas City better use existing funds to provide the highest priority services without asking voters for millions of extra dollars? Elected officials should pressure Schulte and the staff to furnish compelling evidence that more money would deliver real benefits at a reasonable cost to taxpayers.</p><p>In addition, the Citizens Commission on Municipal Revenue needs to endorse or reject Schulte&#x2019;s ideas at some point. This group, appointed by James, is still working on an improved, fairer plan to finance local government.</p><p>Among the potential ballot items:</p><p> <span class="bold">Authorize $500 million in sanitary sewer revenue bonds.</span></p><p>The money would pay for the first 10 years of a federally mandated and worthwhile $2.5 billion sewer upgrade. The bonds would require steeply higher rates touching hundreds of thousands of people and businesses in Kansas City, parts of Johnson County and other municipalities that depend on the city&#x2019;s sewer services. Schulte is asking the council to approve a 17 percent boost in the sewer rate in 2012, partly to finance already existing bonds. </p><p>He says later rate increases might not have to be as high if bonds are issued and paid for over a number of years. But if voters reject the bonds, even higher sewer rates would be required to make improvements on a &#x201C;pay as you go&#x201D; basis every year.</p><p> <span class="bold">Authorize at least $100 million in general obligation bonds.</span></p><p>These funds could be used to build an animal shelter, repair bridges and help the city comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act. Schulte properly recommends using a property tax increase to pay for the bonds, which could make them a tougher sell for voters.</p><p> <span class="bold">Reinstitute the &#x201C;emergency&#x201D; portion of the utility tax.</span></p><p>It would raise up to $13.5 million a year to fight urban core blight, which is a reasonable yet still undefined goal. City Council members may indeed want to knock down a lot more dangerous buildings to encourage new investment. But more proof needs to be offered that demolition really would lead to positive results. </p><p>And while Schulte says the tax might be needed for just five to seven years, the first &#x201C;emergency&#x201D; utility tax lasted more than 50 years until the council killed it a decade ago. Asking voters to approve a regressive tax increase on electricity, natural gas and landline phone bills is a dubious idea at this point.</p><p> <span class="bold">Renew the license fee of $12.50 a vehicle.</span></p><p>The fee creates $3.4 million annually for the Parks and Recreation Department, which uses the funds to help operate community centers and maintain parks. Both are needed services in a city that prides itself on its parks and boulevards. </p><p>However, the vehicle license fee along with the other parts of Schulte&#x2019;s wish list must be further scrutinized by elected officials before anything is placed on the ballot. Only then will voters have the final say.