KCRag Forum

You don't have to live in the urban core to be committed to the urban core.  Ask Cyclops.

Anybody in the metro, ANYBODY that lives in metro KC, its suburbs or even rural exurbs can be downtown in 15-40 minutes.  By far and large it's under 30 minutes.

As soon as you move to 119th and Metcalf, you now put half the metro over 30 minutes of you which means this company probably is and for sure will be 90% JoCo residents.

It has nothing to do with the KCMO school district.  Chances are that even if the schools in the city were top notch (and they are not top notch in any major urban city), they "might" get 1-2 of the 50 employees that don't live in the city to choose the city over the burbs.  I honestly doubt they would get 1-2.  I think the numbers wouldn't change.

This is all about taking advantage of KS incentives and moving a company closer to where employees live.  Now they can live in Gardner or further and have the same commute.

highly unfortunate. 

This is all about taking advantage of KS incentives and moving a company closer to where employees live.

sadly, in this case I think you are correct.  Whatever economic incentive were given were even mentioned in the article.  Subsidizing office tenants at this location just goes to show what an uphill battle the urban core has at attracting and retaining companies, and especially generating new corporate development. sad..

LenexatoKCMO wrote: The QT move is not insignificant since it is largely motivated by wanting to pay KCMO taxes rather than WyCo.  I wager the city of KCMO sees more economic benefit from the QT moving a few feet to the left than OP sees from the 50 architects - half of whom probably already live there. 

What is the basis for thinking the architects already live in OP?

You really can't see the difference between a QT moving w/o incentives, for a business purpose vs. an architectural firm being poached with incentives from the state?

This certainly sucks, it would be interesting to see what the exact incentives were.  They had to have been significant since they apparently outweighed the cost of doing the renovation they did on the building.

Did OP actually put something into this or was this more a state official thing?  Or was it the OP folks asking the state to help out (but then why wouldn't the OP folks throw something in?)

Also, do we need two threads discussing the same thing?  how about merging them?

Be cool for the star to do an indepth analysis of these deals and the extent of poaching....nah they will probably just do another 'which is the best suburb' fluff piece...wonder why their readership is dying?

I'd guess the owner of the company lives in Johnson County.  I've found that the incentives sometimes aren't the issue, it's the personal situation of the decision maker.  They will make a decision based on what would be best for them.

Yep, just found him:

**** W 150th St
Overland Park, KS 66221-8214

Don't let the incentive talk pull you in.  This firm left for one reason...the President didn't want to drive so far to work.


redacted part of the address.  might be public info, but no need for that kind of stuff here.

GRID wrote: As soon as you move to 119th and Metcalf, you now put half the metro over 30 minutes of you which means this company probably is and for sure will be 90% JoCo residents.

It has nothing to do with the KCMO school district. 

My office moved across state line several years ago, from KS to KCMO, but maybe 3 miles away.  We're approximately 80 employees.  Schools were absolutely NOT a factor in the decision.  What was a large piece of the decision was where all employees lived at the time.  Finding a relatively central location was a factor along with the obvious other factors (size, quality, price, etc).  I'm very willing to bet that many of their employees will have a shorter commute with the new location.

I think its crazy that a company would base a decision on where it should be based on where its employees live at a certain point in time. Isn't that just a snapshot? Whose to say the employees five years from now won't live somewhere different? Seems extremely short-sighted to me.

KCPowercat wrote: What is the basis for thinking the architects already live in OP?

You really can't see the difference between a QT moving w/o incentives, for a business purpose vs. an architectural firm being poached with incentives from the state?

I think you misunderstand my point - My point is that if you are evaluating these two "gets" side by side (albeit a somewhat stupid exercise, but hey that was apparently the point of the thread), I would argue that KCMO is gettng the far better deal.  The QT will bring in a major chunk of transactional tax revenue with no incentives or concessions from the city.  The architects on the other hand will likely bring next to nothing in revenue to OP in exchange for some degree of incentives being doled out.  My point with bringing up where they live, is that most of the kansas side financial justification in these office job grabs relies on the notion that these folks will move there and pay property tax.  Architects don't bring in tranaction tax revenue, Kansas doesn't have an e-tax, the potential for local income tax revenue is nill - the only hope is that these guys buy big houses in OP.  Which in my mind is just silly - a decent chunk already probably live there, and it is doubtful more than a couple relocate their homes because of the move. 

albeit a somewhat stupid exercise

This. Although, I'd get rid of "somewhat".

KCMax wrote: I think its crazy that a company would base a decision on where it should be based on where its employees live at a certain point in time. Isn't that just a snapshot? Whose to say the employees five years from now won't live somewhere different? Seems extremely short-sighted to me.

Not really.  It would be if it was an extreme change, like moving from Olathe to Independence.  But looking at your current population's home addresses is as good of a predictor of where your future recruits will come as any.  It isn't off-base.  Also, consider that your future employees will be aware of the office location at the time of interview/hire, so it's a non-issue for them.  It is a very big issue for current employees to know there is an office move coming and how it will impact their lives. 

The other thread mentioned the firm's president lives at 150th and something.  If he didn't consider other current employee's home addresses he's a jerk, but again, I'm willing to be he did and that it won't have much impact on future employees.

GRID wrote: As soon as you move to 119th and Metcalf, you now put half the metro over 30 minutes of you which means this company probably is and for sure will be 90% JoCo residents.

You seem to forget that for people in south KCMO this move should put the workplace closer to home than having it in the Uptown.  And include those who live south of KC, like Belton and Raymore, and to the southest, like Lees' Summit, this move would make for a closer workplace.

KCPowercat wrote: Be cool for the star to do an indepth analysis of these deals and the extent of poaching....nah they will probably just do another 'which is the best suburb' fluff piece...wonder why their readership is dying?

the star would never do a story like this because it hits too close to home.

LenexatoKCMO wrote: I suspect the sales of tobacco, booze, and gasoline alone at that location probably yield a very eye-popping tax base.  Volume probably stands to improve that much more when the missouri gas prices start popping up on the sign.

An estimate greatly reinforced by KCMO's 7+% sales tax!  That QT will probably generate more money for the city off Cigarette sales alone than those architects earn in a year.  Never underestimate the power of an addicted customer base.

No kidding!  QT generally doesn't NOT make well thought out business decisions.  If they see $$$, then KC will see $$$

im2kull wrote: An estimate greatly reinforced by KCMO's 7+% sales tax!  That QT will probably generate more money for the city off Cigarette sales alone than those architects earn in a year.  Never underestimate the power of an addicted customer base.

Of course, much of that addicted customer base already live in Missouri so you are just extracting more tax from those who are probably least able to afford it. 

I would much rather have an architecture firm with 50 employees rather than a Quick Trip.  My reasoning is that QT is going to go wherever they are likely to make a profit; so no net gain in getting one in KC.  Losing an architecture firm is significant beyond the 1% earnings tax.  The employees will shop in Missouri, they may end up living in Missouri (and god knows KC could use more higher income residents), they contribute to the vitality of the local area simply by being there, and they take up office space which contributes to the need for more office space.  It's the overall contribution to the critical mass that matters. 

KC's development people need to be ever vigilant regarding protecting what it already has.  Personally, I think it is simply pathetic and just plain wrong that incentives can be used to draw tenants from the midtown to the burbs; in my opinion, central cities are the only places that should be allowed to offer financial incentives for relocation but that's the hand we are dealt for now and KC needs to play the game too.  The burbs have a huge advantage over central cities and they play their hands well; there is no need for incentives and private-public partnerships.  In the final analysis, scattering our job base in low density areas is going to cost us all and we will indeed be paying the piper in a few years (we already are).

Lenexa...ok I get what you are saying.  Stupid tax question....live in one state, work in another....who utimately ends up with the income tax.....I assume its the state the person 'lives' in?

I talked to someone at that firm a couple months ago.  He said the roof leaked and the building was horrible.  That does not explain the move to the burbs, but does explain what they wanted out of the Uptown Theater building. 

My experience has been that 90% of the architects I've met live in a teardrop shaped zone that includes Brookside/Waldo and NE JoCo as far south as I-435 and not west of Metcalf.  Some of the newer grads gravitate to the funkyness of Downtown/Midtown, but just as many land in apartments in Mission or Olathe.

Of the design professionals that I know that lived in Brookside/Waldo....almost every one of them hopped over the state line when thier kids got close to school age.  Some of them said they'd never leave....but most of them did.

State income tax goes to the state where it is earned. If you work in Kansas and live in Missouri, Kansas gets your income tax.  Missouri then gives you a credit on the tax paid to Kansas so you aren't double taxed.  And vice versa.

So the location of the jobs is very important for tax revenue.  That's why tax breaks for hopping the state line are usually so much bigger than for moving to a new city within the same state.

No matter how you spin it, this is yet another loss for the urban core and the MO side and a gain for JoCo and the KS side.  That simply can not be disputed.