KCRag Forum

With the recent Mac Properties vote, it seems the KC Tenants group is starting to really gain steam. Is anyone else concerned with the way they seem to think they’re securing victories, while actively stifling development in the DT area? They’re actively fighting against they things they claim to support. Clean, Safe, and well maintained and managed housing most often (not always, looking at you UMKC) comes from new construction. Without a paradigm shift in the economic system of the U.S., and most of the western world for that matter, the only thing this group will accomplish is destroying the viability of KC for development in the future.

I’d love to hear everyone’s thoughts, as maybe I am missing something in their messaging.

Anthony_Hugo98 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 20, 2022 7:06 pm Is anyone else concerned with the way they seem to think they’re securing victories, while actively stifling development in the DT area?

yes. they will only be happy with free or near-free housing. Even the affordable developers I know can't make the 20% incentive rule work let alone the levels KC Tenants truly want.

normalthings wrote: ↑Thu Jan 20, 2022 7:53 pm

Anthony_Hugo98 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 20, 2022 7:06 pm Is anyone else concerned with the way they seem to think they’re securing victories, while actively stifling development in the DT area?

yes. they will only be happy with free or near-free housing. Even the affordable developers I know can't make the 20% incentive rule work let alone the levels KC Tenants truly want.

What can be done to reverse some of this damage? Or at least to prevent this group from damaging the little bit of momentum we had going towards the end of Mayor James administration.

No. This debate over incentives in the city will have to play itself out and I believe we will find a détente politically that will be acceptable to both sides. I know and have talked to some involved in the group. Most, at least that I have talked to are young people who really are struggling with bad housing, low wages, high precarity and neglectful or even malignant landlords combined with increasing prices. They have a lot to be legitimately angry about. I think their anger at incentives is misguided and lacks a full understanding of what is actually wrong with housing in this country overall and this community. Throwing our hands up isn't going to do any good. That being said, this will be one of the biggest local political issues going forward but we will find a way forward IMO.

FlippantCitizen wrote: ↑Thu Jan 20, 2022 7:58 pm No. This debate over incentives in the city will have to play itself out and I believe we will find a détente politically that will be acceptable to both sides. I know and have talked to some involved in the group. Most, at least that I have talked to are young people who really are struggling with bad housing, low wages, high precarity and neglectful or even malignant landlords combined with increasing prices. They have a lot to be legitimately angry about. I think their anger at incentives is misguided and lacks a full understanding of what is actually wrong with housing in this country overall and this community. Throwing our hands up isn't going to do any good. That being said, this will be one of the biggest local political issues going forward but we will find a way forward IMO.

I can absolutely understand, and relate with the subpar housing issue. I don’t understand what their end goal is though. The group and members of it seem to decry there isn’t enough housing, and the housing that exists is poor and not well managed, but then in the same breath they will oppose new development of affordable units that would’ve been well managed in comparison. The site for the most recent development is what? Three empty grass lots? I fail to see how those contribute more positively to the tax base than the development would have. Is the issue messaging with the incentives? Do they not understand what the incentives packages actually consist of? I don’t foresee this issue merely blowing over, I foresee this group gaining more inroads with council members, and more legislation being passed that is actively hostile towards development, to the point that nothing in KC will be growing but fringe suburbs. All the DT developers will look to other cities in the region if this group continues its run.

Developers will just bite the bullet and propose projects with higher rents and no tax abatements. This will anger people like KC Tenants & Co, but they would have no basis to oppose projects then. So, I say let them have their screwed-up fun now so that in the future when only really high-priced residential buildings with no room for affordable units go up without incentives, they can scream and kick like a 3 year old who didn't get the toy they wanted at Target.

Chris Stritzel wrote: ↑Thu Jan 20, 2022 8:11 pm Developers will just bite the bullet and propose projects with higher rents and no tax abatements. This will anger people like KC Tenants & Co, but they would have no basis to oppose projects then. So, I say let them have their screwed-up fun now so that in the future when only really high-priced residential buildings with no room for affordable units go up without incentives, they can scream and kick like a 3 year old who didn't get the toy they wanted at Target.

I mean multiple developers have retreated to the suburbs already. Some groups put forward a proposal to tax all new construction so they will try to mess with non-incentivized projects too.

It seems like any win they take is never enough, they want to socialize housing, which isn’t a good thing when you’re surrounded by suburbs that’ll incentivize developments with 100% tax abatements for 20 years and developers will break down the door to put up low rise stick framed apartments.

normalthings wrote: ↑Thu Jan 20, 2022 8:14 pm

Chris Stritzel wrote: ↑Thu Jan 20, 2022 8:11 pm Developers will just bite the bullet and propose projects with higher rents and no tax abatements. This will anger people like KC Tenants & Co, but they would have no basis to oppose projects then. So, I say let them have their screwed-up fun now so that in the future when only really high-priced residential buildings with no room for affordable units go up without incentives, they can scream and kick like a 3 year old who didn't get the toy they wanted at Target.

I mean multiple developers have retreated to the suburbs already. Some groups put forward a proposal to tax all new construction so they will try to mess with non-incentivized projects too.

Something like that wouldn't pass unless City "leaders" loosen all the remaining screws in their head. Even the dumbest elected officials should know that taxing new construction for the hell of it is a bad policy, but maybe I shouldn't underestimate the power of stupidity.

Chris Stritzel wrote: ↑Thu Jan 20, 2022 8:28 pm but maybe I shouldn't underestimate the power of stupidity.

It beith a powerful force in this world. Whole wars have been fought because of it. I don’t doubt it’s powerful enough to kill downtown development in KCMO

The stubborn myths of rent and gentrification

The law of supply and demand also applies to housing

https://theweek.com/articles/896451/stu ... rification

Eric Bunch and Andrea Bough bending over backward multiple times for them is more concerning to me than the group itself. Bunch especially seems to have been poisoned by Twitter rose brain.

Jesus. This was a massive project for Midtown. Any chance it is revived?

GRID wrote: ↑Thu Jan 20, 2022 9:59 pm Jesus. This was a massive project for Midtown. Any chance it is revived?

They said Katz was dead for a second and then Bunch changed his mind. Could always happen again. I just think it sad that Heather Hall voted for development in Midtown while the rest didn't. I have to say, I need to take back some of the bad things I said about Shields. She's changed this term for the better.

GRID wrote: ↑Thu Jan 20, 2022 9:59 pm Jesus. This was a massive project for Midtown. Any chance it is revived?

I think it’s revived but without incentives and with higher rents. It might also be shrunk. It’ll still be transformational

Wow they are getting bold. Attacking the Katz project now, trying to get it killed

This will have implications for the former Trinity Lutheran Hospital site as well. I have a feeling nothing will happen with that site without incentives, and it will continue to be a blight.

I just don’t understand the logic of it all. More density reduces overall tax burden, while also providing increased housing stock. That lowers the amount of overhead for landlords, and will also lower rents. KC Tenants is literally falling, face first, into the very things they are saying they’re trying to prevent.

Anthony_Hugo98 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 20, 2022 10:57 pm I just don’t understand the logic of it all. More density reduces overall tax burden, while also providing increased housing stock. That lowers the amount of overhead for landlords, and will also lower rents. KC Tenants is literally falling, face first, into the very things they are saying they’re trying to prevent.

I say let them make themselves look like the jackasses many of us know they are. And let their antics sink some politicians in the process.

Chris Stritzel wrote: ↑Thu Jan 20, 2022 11:08 pm

Anthony_Hugo98 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 20, 2022 10:57 pm I just don’t understand the logic of it all. More density reduces overall tax burden, while also providing increased housing stock. That lowers the amount of overhead for landlords, and will also lower rents. KC Tenants is literally falling, face first, into the very things they are saying they’re trying to prevent.

I say let them make themselves look like the jackasses many of us know they are. And let their antics sink some politicians in the process.

What if not enough people see the writing on the wall until KC has sunk to the likes of Indianapolis? Hard to recover once a metro area hits a death spiral