Why is it a secret which Kansas City small businesses are getting PPP loans?

Kelly Wilson runs two small businesses in Kansas City — home decoration and clerical garments — with about 25 employees, many of them single women who had faced tough obstacles in their own lives. When the coronavirus hit, her orders evaporated, and her workers faced joblessness.

So Wilson turned to the Paycheck Protection Program, the federal effort to loan small businesses enough money to cover payrolls for about eight weeks. Wilson applied for two PPP loans, worth $120,000, and received them both.

“We would not have made it to the other side” without the money, Wilson said.

The Paycheck Protection Program, part of the coronavirus relief bill passed by Congress in late March, has been plagued with problems. Some businesses found it hard to apply, and some are now worried about spending their loans. The PPP ran out of money for a time. Some funds have gone to businesses that didn’t need help.

Yet it has been a lifeline for some entrepreneurs and employees. Under the program, federal loans are forgivable if the employer spends at least 75% of the cash on wages and salaries for workers.

“Once we received the PPP funds, it was VERY helpful to me and my staff that we knew we had at least two more months of runway,” said an email from Clifton Alexander, a design studio owner in Kansas City.

“The PPP will greatly help us as we charter these unknown waters over the next few months,” said Keli O’Neill Wentzel, who runs an events and marketing firm in Kansas City.

Greg Trees runs a local engineering firm. He, too, sought a loan.

“The PPP is a brilliant way to cover the financial gap we all have to deal with,” he said in an email.

These success stories illustrate the necessity of the $660 billion PPP. And that, in turn, shows why it’s essential that the government makes the names of loan recipients public, in real time, as the money is handed out.

Transparency and trust are critical. That trust will disappear if the public believes the funds are going to undeserving businesses, or that companies that get loans aren’t actually protecting their workers.

There’s already talk of awarding more PPP loans. That will never happen if the public doesn’t believe the first two rounds were on the up-and-up.

In a letter to the U.S. Treasury Department, U.S. Rep. Sharice Davids, the Democrat representing Kansas’ 3rd Congressional District, urged full publication of the names of PPP recipients. She said many small businesses in her district have been unable to get loans and are worried big businesses are getting them instead.

“Companies that cannot withstand public scrutiny of their businesses’ dealings while receiving federal taxpayer-funded loans should not be receiving them at all,” Davids’ letter reads. “Congress’s ability to conduct proper oversight of this program is critical and impossible without full transparency.”

There is bipartisan support for this idea. “The public has a right to know how this program is being implemented,” Republican Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida said in a tweet.

Rubio said Congress may consider legislation requiring disclosure of PPP recipients. It’s a good idea, and local lawmakers should pursue the issue when Congress reconvenes.

The next stimulus bill should include transparency requirements.

Not everyone agrees that recipients’ names should be made public. “I think there could be a stigma that companies that apply for and receive PPP funds are in bad financial shape, which isn’t necessarily the case,” Alexander, the design studio owner, told The Star Editorial Board.

His concern is noted. On balance, though, the public must know where taxpayer dollars are going and how they’re being spent. Public disclosure of PPP loans is essential.