kensington (Neal Kingston)


Comment history

City explains why abandoning old bid process may be good for some projects; 3 examples of bids that saved Lawrence millions

Lots of trees being cut down and ground leveled in what I thought was the McGrew nature preserve, but probably is just west of it. Quail Crest Place seems to end well before it. Does anyone know what is going on there?

December 5, 2017 at 6:09 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Faculty group says morale among KU professors at all-time low; low pay, 'bloated' administration, concealed carry among factors

Bob, I have nothing against KSU, but according to the Fulbright Website ( in 2016-17 KU had 4 Fulbright Scholars and KSU had one.

October 7, 2017 at 7:03 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Brownback budget relies on borrowing idle funds, continued raids on highway money; critics call it 'delusional'

I was particularly intrigued by the following quote, "Sullivan said the $317 million loan would be repaid over the next seven years with payments of about $45 million a year." Given that 7 times $45 million = $315 million that is one heck of a loan deal the state is expecting in order to balance the budget.

January 11, 2017 at 1:42 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

A look at the 10 Kansas inmates on death row

If your concern is cost you are on the wrong side of the argument. The majority of studies indicate it is less expensive to incarcerate someone for life without chance of parole than to execute them.

Add to that the more than 151 people condemned to death and later proven innocent.

June 11, 2016 at 2:12 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Brownback undecided about proviso on KU, K-State budget cuts

Apologies to Pittsburg on the misspelling!

May 11, 2016 at 9:58 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Brownback undecided about proviso on KU, K-State budget cuts

No assumptions made. Just clarifying the difference between the base used for the cuts.

May 11, 2016 at 9:57 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Brownback undecided about proviso on KU, K-State budget cuts

I could be wrong, but I do not think this issue has been explained clearly. All numbers are made up in this example, but the general principle holds.

Let's say KU gets $1,000,000 from the state of Kansas and $200,000 in research grants from any of variety of funding agencies. The legislature says they want to take a 3% cut of the $1.2 million, or $36,000. The agreements with the research funding agencies do not legally allow any reallocation of the monies they provide, so KU has to cut all $36,000 from the support of the education of students. That is, the percentage cut from student education is 3.6%

Meanwhile Pittsburgh gets $500,000 from the state of Kansas and has no research funding. Their 3% cut is $15,000, but is a true 3% cut.

Moreover, this approach sets a precedent that penalizes KU and K-State and any other public Kansas university that strives for excellence in research. The more success you have in bringing in research dollars, the more your educational programs are penalized. This is particularly problematic given the strong evidence that research productivity translates into economic benefit (start-up companies, jobs, etc.) and so this approach penalizes one of the most powerful economic engines in the state.

May 11, 2016 at 2:28 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Effort by Kansas lawmakers to repeal Common Core standards could end AP, IB programs

Impressive. The legislature managed to find as their sole speaker an assistant professor (lowest rank of professor) from a third rate university in another state (University of Wisconsin - Oshkosh) to tell them what they wanted to hear.

February 18, 2016 at 2:25 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Kansas Senate panel puts brakes on KU Central District project

If Arpke showed up for work maybe he would have a better idea of what was going on.

February 8, 2016 at 6:25 p.m. ( | suggest removal )