Rapid population growth is reshaping Parkville and North Kansas City  and raising costs 47%

By Steve Kraske0% Zach Wilson0%

6/3/2026, 9:00:00 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 26 faulty reasoning types, including Halo Effect, Recency Bias, and Post Hoc (False Cause), with Ambiguity (Equivocation) as the most egregious example at 44.6% saturation with 260 hits. Analysis detected 1,302 faulty-reasoning hits from 583 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 48.7% and a BS Rank of 47% (11,654 of 21,887 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 53.20% of the article peer group.

The Kansas City metro has been growing: Since the 2020 census, over 75,000 more people have moved to the region. 
But that doesn’t mean the population increase has been experienced evenly across communities. 
Two cities north of the Missouri River stand out dramatically when you look at the numbers. 
A recent Kansas City Star article highlighted North Kansas City and Parkville as cities growing at rates higher than 20% since the last census. 
North Kansas City Mayor Jesse Smith cited the city’s location and its public services as reasons why people are choosing to make his city their new home. 
“You can access anywhere in the metropolitan area. 
I can be downtown in eight minutes, I can be at the airport in 10, which is a huge draw,” Smith explained. 
“Our police and fire are second to none. 
That bears out on every survey we put out (with a) 98 to 99% approval rating. 
Four minute response times on average, so people feel extremely safe in North Kansas City." 
Parkville Mayor Dean Katerndahl says his hometown has been experiencing a growth in population for decades. 
He points to its charming small-town feel and recent housing developments. 
“We're a little farther up river, so we're kind of a small town, but we're still close to all the amenities in the metro area. 
We have these large subdivisions that have been very successful,” Katerndahl said. 
“And then most recently, I think a lot of what accounts for our last surge here, the last five years, is we have a new development out west called Creekside. 
They're in the process of adding over 1,000 housing units and they have a ball field. 
They attract over a million visitors every year to their ball field complex.” 
While both Katerndahl and Smith are glad to see new residents, this kind of sudden population hike can also strain on resources. 
“I hate to say it because we love the new people moving in, but residential development is a money loser for local government," Katerndahl said. 
"They don’t produce enough income. 
We get property tax off of them, but that’s not enough to support the police and the parks and the public works. 
So, you do depend a lot on commercial, you know, especially sales tax." 
In 2023, Parkville voters passed a public safety sales tax, which Katerndahl told KCUR was necessary to be able to fully fund its police department. 
Over in North Kansas City, Smith says there has been a noticeable increase in housing costs for residents in recent years as demand goes up. 
“You used to be able to buy a two bed, one bath bungalow, which is kind of our bread and butter in the Avenues neighborhood of North Kansas City, for about $150,000. 
It's now at about $250,000 and on the way up,” Smith said. 
“Now, compare that to a similar house in Brookside or Waldo. 
Those are $400,000, so we're still cheap compared to other parts of the metro with comparable services, comparable vibes. 
So I think there's actually room to run. 
But people, when they see those prices though, it's eye-popping.” 
Smith also pointed to limited parking in North Kansas City as an unintended consequence. 
Overall though, both Smith and Katerndahl are thrilled that their cities are viewed as places where people are eager to live. 
“There are challenges, but it is a happy problem (to have),” Katernhdahl said. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 9.1%Steve Kraske: 3.3%Columbia Missourian: 1.7%Confirmation Bias9.1%This article: 7.5%Steve Kraske: 1.5%Columbia Missourian: 0.8%Anchoring Bias7.5%This article: 5.0%Steve Kraske: 3.6%Columbia Missourian: 2.7%Availability Heuristic5.0%This article: 0.0%Steve Kraske: 0.9%Columbia Missourian: 0.9%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Steve Kraske: 0.4%Columbia Missourian: 0.4%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Steve Kraske: 2.4%Columbia Missourian: 1.3%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 8.6%Steve Kraske: 6.0%Columbia Missourian: 5.5%Framing Effect8.6%This article: 0.0%Steve Kraske: 1.8%Columbia Missourian: 1.0%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Steve Kraske: 0.6%Columbia Missourian: 0.7%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 4.3%Steve Kraske: 0.9%Columbia Missourian: 0.3%Sunk Cost Effect4.3%This article: 8.9%Steve Kraske: 8.1%Columbia Missourian: 4.5%Optimism Bias8.9%This article: 0.9%Steve Kraske: 2.5%Columbia Missourian: 1.6%Pessimism Bias0.9%This article: 9.8%Steve Kraske: 7.8%Columbia Missourian: 5.4%Negativity Bias9.8%This article: 10.8%Steve Kraske: 4.2%Columbia Missourian: 1.7%Self-Serving Bias10.8%This article: 0.0%Steve Kraske: 0.7%Columbia Missourian: 0.6%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Steve Kraske: 0.2%Columbia Missourian: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 3.6%Steve Kraske: 1.3%Columbia Missourian: 1.6%In-Group Bias3.6%This article: 0.0%Steve Kraske: 0.2%Columbia Missourian: 0.4%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 15.1%Steve Kraske: 3.8%Columbia Missourian: 2.4%Halo Effect15.1%This article: 0.0%Steve Kraske: 0.0%Columbia Missourian: 0.0%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Steve Kraske: 0.0%Columbia Missourian: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 12.9%Steve Kraske: 2.6%Columbia Missourian: 0.9%Recency Bias12.9%This article: 0.0%Steve Kraske: 0.3%Columbia Missourian: 0.3%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Steve Kraske: 0.1%Columbia Missourian: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Steve Kraske: 0.1%Columbia Missourian: 0.5%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Steve Kraske: 0.2%Columbia Missourian: 0.2%Straw Man0.0%This article: 11.1%Steve Kraske: 4.6%Columbia Missourian: 2.9%Appeal to Authority11.1%This article: 2.2%Steve Kraske: 2.1%Columbia Missourian: 1.1%False Dilemma2.2%This article: 0.0%Steve Kraske: 0.7%Columbia Missourian: 1.0%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 4.3%Steve Kraske: 0.2%Columbia Missourian: 0.1%Circular Reasoning4.3%This article: 5.7%Steve Kraske: 5.5%Columbia Missourian: 3.6%Hasty Generalization5.7%This article: 0.0%Steve Kraske: 0.0%Columbia Missourian: 0.2%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Steve Kraske: 1.2%Columbia Missourian: 0.7%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 9.8%Steve Kraske: 7.4%Columbia Missourian: 5.2%Appeal to Emotion9.8%This article: 9.4%Steve Kraske: 1.3%Columbia Missourian: 0.6%Begging the Question9.4%This article: 12.0%Steve Kraske: 3.7%Columbia Missourian: 2.0%Post Hoc (False Cause)12.0%This article: 0.0%Steve Kraske: 0.0%Columbia Missourian: 0.0%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 6.5%Steve Kraske: 0.5%Columbia Missourian: 0.4%Burden of Proof6.5%This article: 0.0%Steve Kraske: 0.3%Columbia Missourian: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Steve Kraske: 0.1%Columbia Missourian: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 11.3%Steve Kraske: 3.5%Columbia Missourian: 2.6%Anecdotal11.3%This article: 0.0%Steve Kraske: 0.0%Columbia Missourian: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 44.6%Steve Kraske: 3.1%Columbia Missourian: 1.3%Ambiguity (Equivocation)44.6%This article: 0.0%Steve Kraske: 0.0%Columbia Missourian: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 1.9%Steve Kraske: 0.1%Columbia Missourian: 0.1%Middle Ground1.9%This article: 0.0%Steve Kraske: 0.0%Columbia Missourian: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Steve Kraske: 0.1%Columbia Missourian: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Steve Kraske: 0.2%Columbia Missourian: 0.1%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 1.4%Steve Kraske: 0.9%Columbia Missourian: 0.8%Unattributed Quote1.4%This article: 0.0%Steve Kraske: 0.7%Columbia Missourian: 0.7%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 2.4%Steve Kraske: 1.8%Columbia Missourian: 2.9%Biased Writer Voice2.4%This article: 0.0%Steve Kraske: 1.2%Columbia Missourian: 1.3%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Steve Kraske: 1.6%Columbia Missourian: 0.7%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Steve Kraske: 0.1%Columbia Missourian: 0.2%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 4.3%Steve Kraske: 1.1%Columbia Missourian: 1.7%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…4.3%

583 words analyzed.

Speakers

3speakers80%attributed speech119writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 14 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageKansas City Star • 24 words • 0.0% coverageJesse Smith • 27 words • 0.0% coverageJesse Smith • 8 words • 100.0% coverageJesse Smith • 22 words • 0.0% coverageJesse Smith • 8 words • 0.0% coverageJesse Smith • 16 words • 0.0% coverageJesse Smith • 15 words • 0.0% coverageDean Katerndahl • 16 words • 0.0% coverageDean Katerndahl • 11 words • 0.0% coverageDean Katerndahl • 25 words • 0.0% coverageDean Katerndahl • 12 words • 0.0% coverageDean Katerndahl • 30 words • 0.0% coverageDean Katerndahl • 16 words • 0.0% coverageDean Katerndahl • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 0.0% coverageDean Katerndahl • 25 words • 0.0% coverageDean Katerndahl • 5 words • 0.0% coverageDean Katerndahl • 22 words • 0.0% coverageDean Katerndahl • 13 words • 0.0% coverageDean Katerndahl • 25 words • 100.0% coverageJesse Smith • 25 words • 0.0% coverageJesse Smith • 32 words • 0.0% coverageJesse Smith • 12 words • 0.0% coverageJesse Smith • 11 words • 0.0% coverageJesse Smith • 19 words • 0.0% coverageJesse Smith • 8 words • 0.0% coverageJesse Smith • 10 words • 0.0% coverageJesse Smith • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Dean Katerndahl

100%flagged-word coverage
213 attributed words46% of attributed speech89% writer coverage
0%7.5%15.0%Biased Writer Voice-11.8 ptsWriter: 11.8%Dean Katerndahl: 0.0%0.0%Attempt to Sell a Product +11.7 ptsWriter: 0.0%Dean Katerndahl: 11.7%11.7%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.