Is KC Tenants destroying the development future of downtown KCMO?

[grovester]

I'm going to throw in the internet, algorithms, and hedge fund/out of town ownership.

Particularly with rental prices.

[Anthony_Hugo98]

"What they are is angry, and anger often drives people to behave irrationally and with a punitive intent."

I don't agree with everything you said, Fang, but this is exactly why I'm extremely wary of KCT. They've gotten the most press from their more outlandish outbursts, so they double down on that rhetoric and get more clicks/traffic/"engagement"/whatever. Seems like they've lost their own plot.

This is the crux of the issue, and one that I think is repeatedly lost when we engage in discourse here. I haven’t met a single person who disagrees with KCT in their mission to protect tenants from wrongful eviction, substandard living conditions, or predatory landlords.

The issue any of us ever have is when they have signs at a council hearing for a project that’ll infill a parking lot on a high frequency transit line, with signs saying “we won’t subsidize our own displacement”, while their very actions are actually expediting the displacement they so vehemently oppose. The genie has been released from the lamp, Kansas City is on the map, it’s becoming a destination for relocations, and we’re expanding things like transit connections through a historically poorer and less economically well off area in recent history. Without new construction, even if subsidized by abatements or other incentives, the displacement is going to be quicker, and have significantly less regard for the lowest on the economic ladder.

Without a paradigm shift in even regional economic conditions, that would require a buy-in at a regional governance level, things like social housing, rent control, subsidies, or any number of quasi socialist programs simply won’t come anywhere close to solving housing insecurity.

Then we need to ask ourselves why now has housing become unaffordable. I rented apartments in the 1980's comfortably with my earnings from being a waiter an could also afford a car, college tuition and annual ski trips. I have my own ideas and most of them go back to 2009 when the supply of money dried up and getting loans became much more difficult. That hurt the SFH market demand with the lack of supply gradually pushing prices up and a lot of would-be home buyers into apartments. The relatively recent urban living trend has put much higher demand on housing in the city where historically (since the 70's at least) little had been created and the area was pretty limited to a few niche developments surrounded by lower middle class to poor housing. And short term rentals absolutely do not help the situation.

This mostly; for context were the light blue line.

We lost millions of housing units from urban renewal, but replaced a lot of them through the 80’s and 90’s with sprawl. Population growth, refocusing on cities, underbuilding (by over 11 MILLION units in the past decade), and STR have all come together to create the perfect storm of unaffordability.

Losing development proposals now because of incentives requests, when the macro economics of this issue are the same or similar across the nation (labor, materials, even acquisitions) but the returns are DRASTICALLY different, as midwestern rents still aren’t competitive in the national market for most developers, you get an disproportionately worse effect of rental increases and unaffordable housing in our region.

Building out of this problem will be solved either with a better economic environment, with interest rate reductions and a stabilization of local housing markets (perhaps with the collapse of STR empires) or with larger incentives acceptance by our leadership. Until those give, we’re not at the critical mass of migration, nor rental level to attract deep enough pockets to absorb the cost of development compared to the return. It sucks, but it’s the reality right now. 5 years down the road? Who knows.

[Highlander]

This is the crux of the issue, and one that I think is repeatedly lost when we engage in discourse here. I haven’t met a single person who disagrees with KCT in their mission to protect tenants from wrongful eviction, substandard living conditions, or predatory landlords.

The issue any of us ever have is when they have signs at a council hearing for a project that’ll infill a parking lot on a high frequency transit line, with signs saying “we won’t subsidize our own displacement”, while their very actions are actually expediting the displacement they so vehemently oppose. The genie has been released from the lamp, Kansas City is on the map, it’s becoming a destination for relocations, and we’re expanding things like transit connections through a historically poorer and less economically well off area in recent history. Without new construction, even if subsidized by abatements or other incentives, the displacement is going to be quicker, and have significantly less regard for the lowest on the economic ladder.

Without a paradigm shift in even regional economic conditions, that would require a buy-in at a regional governance level, things like social housing, rent control, subsidies, or any number of quasi socialist programs simply won’t come anywhere close to solving housing insecurity.

Then we need to ask ourselves why now has housing become unaffordable. I rented apartments in the 1980's comfortably with my earnings from being a waiter an could also afford a car, college tuition and annual ski trips. I have my own ideas and most of them go back to 2009 when the supply of money dried up and getting loans became much more difficult. That hurt the SFH market demand with the lack of supply gradually pushing prices up and a lot of would-be home buyers into apartments. The relatively recent urban living trend has put much higher demand on housing in the city where historically (since the 70's at least) little had been created and the area was pretty limited to a few niche developments surrounded by lower middle class to poor housing. And short term rentals absolutely do not help the situation.

This mostly; for context were the light blue line.

We lost millions of housing units from urban renewal, but replaced a lot of them through the 80’s and 90’s with sprawl. Population growth, refocusing on cities, underbuilding (by over 11 MILLION units in the past decade), and STR have all come together to create the perfect storm of unaffordability.

Losing development proposals now because of incentives requests, when the macro economics of this issue are the same or similar across the nation (labor, materials, even acquisitions) but the returns are DRASTICALLY different, as midwestern rents still aren’t competitive in the national market for most developers, you get an disproportionately worse effect of rental increases and unaffordable housing in our region.

Building out of this problem will be solved either with a better economic environment, with interest rate reductions and a stabilization of local housing markets (perhaps with the collapse of STR empires) or with larger incentives acceptance by our leadership. Until those give, we’re not at the critical mass of migration, nor rental level to attract deep enough pockets to absorb the cost of development compared to the return. It sucks, but it’s the reality right now. 5 years down the road? Who knows.

Thanks for the links. The graphs are educational and again reinforce the concept of supply and demand.

Lets not forget that much of Kansas City's urban core now looks like area I've selected on google maps (link). Many blocks have more empty space than they do homes.

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.0653988 ... ?entry=ttu

[dukuboy1]

It was said before but what has KCT done for the people the are advocating for? Their heart is in the right place, and it is good to know that there are some people in this world to stand up & help those without a voice or a voice that is muted in world of shouting from the extremes of left & right and no real volume in the middle. Thus far I have not seen them offer solutions, just to do everything in their power to tear down ideas, delay development, and play to the political/PR chaos to help push their agenda. But are they doing anything to help people? Are they working with non-profit developers, if there is such a thing, to build projects? Are they working with politicians to provide solutions on projects to get built and help the people they advocate for? Thus far I have not seen anything useful they have proposed to provide solutions. They seem to enjoy being the fly in the ointment so to speak but offer zero substance to problem resolution.

[im2kull]

It was said before but what has KCT done for the people the are advocating for? Their heart is in the right place, and it is good to know that there are some people in this world to stand up & help those without a voice or a voice that is muted in world of shouting from the extremes of left & right and no real volume in the middle. Thus far I have not seen them offer solutions, just to do everything in their power to tear down ideas, delay development, and play to the political/PR chaos to help push their agenda. But are they doing anything to help people? Are they working with non-profit developers, if there is such a thing, to build projects? Are they working with politicians to provide solutions on projects to get built and help the people they advocate for? Thus far I have not seen anything useful they have proposed to provide solutions. They seem to enjoy being the fly in the ointment so to speak but offer zero substance to problem resolution.

I don't even think their heart is in the right place. I brought a cut and dry issue to KCT twice this past year that they could have jumped on, that would have easily gained them critical acclaim, but instead they didn't just turn the other way.. they explicitly refused to get involved because the issue didn't include the demographic that they *use* for their politicizing, and instead had to do with wealthy tenants in affluent areas and nice buildings. The hypocrisy is unreal, and fueled by their agenda of rent control and socialized housing.

[phuqueue]

lol, imagine being flabbergasted that an organization made up mainly of low income volunteers was not interested in spending its limited resources helping "wealthy tenants in affluent areas and nice buildings." Maybe the wealthy tenants should consider pooling their resources to hire a lawyer.

[Sirius_Blue]

lol, imagine being flabbergasted that an organization made up mainly of low income volunteers was not interested in spending its limited resources helping "wealthy tenants in affluent areas and nice buildings." Maybe the wealthy tenants should consider pooling their resources to hire a lawyer.

Why should a tenants' rights organization discriminate?

[MidKC]

They absolutely should focus on the people that are actively being displaced. Why would they not focus on their own members’ communities?

[phuqueue]

lol, imagine being flabbergasted that an organization made up mainly of low income volunteers was not interested in spending its limited resources helping "wealthy tenants in affluent areas and nice buildings." Maybe the wealthy tenants should consider pooling their resources to hire a lawyer.

Why should a tenants' rights organization discriminate?

Would you also be offended if the food bank declined to give you a can of soup even though you missed breakfast?

[DColeKC]

You got me. I am actually DCole's sockpuppet.

I couldn't even pretend to be as pompous as you. All your responses are pie in the sky.

[Anthony_Hugo98]

You got me. I am actually DCole's sockpuppet.

I couldn't even pretend to be as pompous as you. All your responses are pie in the sky.

There’s only one person on this forum I’ve ever felt the need to not associate with. Definitely keeps me sane. Pedants can only be entertained for so long

[mean]

phuqueue: "Um, so where are these welfare queens actually?"

kcrag: "Shut up, they are real, I feel it in my bones."

God I love dropping back in here and catching up on this shit, you guys are the best.

[Jblanco]

All one need to do to see a real live welfare queen is to hang out in front of Aldis on Paseo for a minute. Their cart will be full of 'shKrimps on sale' and a few cans of Chef-boi-ardee fo da kids.

[DColeKC]

phuqueue: "Um, so where are these welfare queens actually?"

kcrag: "Shut up, they are real, I feel it in my bones."

God I love dropping back in here and catching up on this shit, you guys are the best.

I believe that the majority of individuals seeking housing assistance or better affordable housing options are hardworking, decent people who, often through circumstances beyond their control, struggle to advance to higher income levels. Some may also face limitations in terms of skills or opportunities that make it challenging for them to escape their current economic status. However not everyone falls into this category; there are individuals who take advantage of the system and could improve their lives but choose not to. Unfortunately, discussing this reality can be a touchy subject, and if you broach it, you may be labeled as inconsiderate or even a MaGa RePubLicAn. Talking about these issues honestly is crucial for finding effective solutions.

[Anthony_Hugo98]

phuqueue: "Um, so where are these welfare queens actually?"

kcrag: "Shut up, they are real, I feel it in my bones."

God I love dropping back in here and catching up on this shit, you guys are the best.

I currently work at a multifamily development in JOCO, and it’s not affluent by any means but also not low income. We’ve had three eviction/abandonment units within the past 4 months, and every single one of them left behind thousands of dollars worth of goods, and had things like new game console boxes, new phone boxes, large TV boxes. Things that are very much not necessities.

Pretending that every single instance of eviction is some evil landlord who is preying on lower and lower middle class is a completely disingenuous stance, and the majority of us calling that out is somehow frowned upon? Okay.

[Sirius_Blue]

I thought we were discussing KC Tenants and debating their methods. Mean took quiet a left turn up there.

[TheBigChuckbowski]

phuqueue: "Um, so where are these welfare queens actually?"

kcrag: "Shut up, they are real, I feel it in my bones."

God I love dropping back in here and catching up on this shit, you guys are the best.

I currently work at a multifamily development in JOCO, and it’s not affluent by any means but also not low income. We’ve had three eviction/abandonment units within the past 4 months, and every single one of them left behind thousands of dollars worth of goods, and had things like new game console boxes, new phone boxes, large TV boxes. Things that are very much not necessities.

Pretending that every single instance of eviction is some evil landlord who is preying on lower and lower middle class is a completely disingenuous stance, and the majority of us calling that out is somehow frowned upon? Okay.

I own just a few units but the only tenant I've ever had that skipped out on paying rent drove a Mercedes and allegedly co-owned multiple mutli-unit buildings in another city. She lied constantly so I don't really believe it but she never said she didn't have enough money to cover rent, it was always random excuse after random excuse.

I agree with the thread that most people getting assistance or facing eviction are good people that are facing money issues but so much of the infrastructure of property management unfortunately has to be set up to deal with the scammers.

[DColeKC]

phuqueue: "Um, so where are these welfare queens actually?"

kcrag: "Shut up, they are real, I feel it in my bones."

God I love dropping back in here and catching up on this shit, you guys are the best.

I currently work at a multifamily development in JOCO, and it’s not affluent by any means but also not low income. We’ve had three eviction/abandonment units within the past 4 months, and every single one of them left behind thousands of dollars worth of goods, and had things like new game console boxes, new phone boxes, large TV boxes. Things that are very much not necessities.

Pretending that every single instance of eviction is some evil landlord who is preying on lower and lower middle class is a completely disingenuous stance, and the majority of us calling that out is somehow frowned upon? Okay.

I own just a few units but the only tenant I've ever had that skipped out on paying rent drove a Mercedes and allegedly co-owned multiple mutli-unit buildings in another city. She lied constantly so I don't really believe it but she never said she didn't have enough money to cover rent, it was always random excuse after random excuse.

I agree with the thread that most people getting assistance or facing eviction are good people that are facing money issues but so much of the infrastructure of property management unfortunately has to be set up to deal with the scammers.

My family in Texas owns numerous rental units, and they're truly wonderful people. However, they've had to be vigilant in safeguarding their investments due to past experiences. Often, they've had to deal with challenging situations, such as frequent evictions and tenants leaving units in deplorable conditions, far beyond what a modest security deposit can address.

The notion of "income source discrimination" seems unreasonable. Not every aspect of property selection should be labeled as discriminatory. In reality, property owners should exercise caution when assessing potential tenants. Factors like race, age, and gender should never be used as criteria for evaluation. Nevertheless, it's entirely reasonable for landlords to consider practical factors like a history of frequent job changes or a lack of traditional employment, as these can significantly impact the landlord-tenant relationship. Most landlords aren't rich developers either.

[TheSmokinPun]

America mostly runs on the citizens consuming products & anything at all times, we hardly use our hands these days. We teach people to consume non stop but people also get mad that they can't make rent because "WHY AREN'T YOU BUYING THINGS TO STIMULATE THE MARKET!"

It's kind of a catch 22: stop spending money on treats but then the retail market collapses or make that rent so the landlords stop getting villainized but we have big box stores & all the way down to mom & pop's yelling that people are being greedy & not spending enough money.

You can get mad at them for buying tons of consumer goods but that's the most popular thing among every demographic in America right now & truly has been since the end of WWII. We really need to move beyond the consumer nation if we really want to fix this.

[herrfrank]

One way to handle potentially "problematic" tenant applicants is an independent review before tenancy. Nicer buildings in big cities/ resort areas have this in the form of COOP or Board interviews of tenants before approval of the landlord-tenant contract. Potential issues like presentability, compatibility, and suitability are then out of the landlord's hands (and therefore legal actionability.)

My building rejects more tenants than it approves. Fortunately, they are lined up by the dozens to rent anything, so it doesn't really impact the landlords' income except perhaps a month or two delay between tenancies.