← Back

Ballot / Capital Improvement & Financial Review · April–May 2025

2025 Independence GO Bond Review

Completed / Follow-up documented

Conducted a detailed citizen review of Independence's first general-obligation bond package rather than treating the April 8, 2025 vote as a simple yes-or-no election result. The work broke apart the three questions, the $197 million total request, the proposed public-safety and justice-center spending, the $55 million transportation question, parks and historic-site work, property-tax consequences, project alternatives and the difference between capital improvements that improve conditions and investments that may generate future City income. The review continued after Election Day so the public record could show what happened to the successful transportation authority after voters approved it.

Learn More

The April 8, 2025 ballot asked Independence voters to decide three separate general-obligation bond questions totaling $197 million. Leigh reviewed the ballot language, public presentations, project descriptions, tax implications and the individual uses proposed under each question instead of judging the package only by the headline dollar amount. Question 1 sought $130 million for public-safety facilities, including a justice-center concept and acquisition of the animal shelter; Question 2 sought $55 million for streets, roads, bridges, culverts and sidewalks; Question 3 sought $12 million for parks, recreation and historic facilities. Only the transportation question passed.

The review focused on questions a Council member should be able to answer before asking residents to take on long-term debt: What exactly is being purchased? What alternatives were studied? Which costs are estimates and which are commitments? What is the taxpayer exposure? What work is deferred maintenance versus new construction? What will the City own when the debt is paid? And how should a non-revenue-producing infrastructure project be evaluated differently from an economic-development proposal that is sold partly on future revenue?

Leigh did not stop reviewing the issue when the ballots were counted. Twenty-seven days after the April 8 election—May 5, 2025—her follow-up records review identified what she documented as a transfer or appropriation connected to the Street Department. That post-election finding is part of this record because accountability includes following approved money after the campaign ends. The exact City source, account language and amount should remain attached to the timeline as evidence; the public record should distinguish the documented source from interpretation.

The official City GO-bond page remains useful evidence because it states that approved GO-bond funds must be spent on the projects identified in the ballot question and identifies Question 2 as the $55 million transportation authorization. The record should also retain the later Council/finance document that Leigh used for the 27-day follow-up finding once that source is linked in the archive.

Timeline

Apr. 8, 2025

GO bond election

Tracked the $55 million transportation question that passed and the two other bond questions that failed.

April 8, 2025

Voters decide the three-question GO Bond package

Leigh's review tracked all three questions separately. The $55 million transportation question passed; the public-safety and parks/historic-facilities questions did not meet the required voter threshold.

27 days later — May 5, 2025

Follow-up records review identified Street Department funding action

Leigh's post-election records review identified what she documented as a transfer or appropriation connected to the Street Department 27 days after the vote. Preserve and link the exact City agenda, ordinance, account and amount as source evidence; this timeline intentionally distinguishes the underlying document from later interpretation.

My Reporting on This Work

No public linked articles yet.

Sources & Documents