KCRag Forum

johnmatrix wrote: ↑Thu Apr 04, 2019 8:42 am

chaglang wrote: ↑Wed Apr 03, 2019 6:36 pm

johnmatrix wrote: ↑Wed Apr 03, 2019 4:06 pm

No need to tear eachother down over a mayoral race. Give me a hug ya big lug!

Can I ask, in all the sincerity that can be offered by an anonymous internet message board, would you give some examples of her voting against what you’re calling pigouts?

Giving 17 million for a garage for one.

You have one example? An example that the majority of the council was puffing up about affordable housing grandstanding? An example that's already a signed agreement with the developer?

Wow. What a Maverick.

KCPowercat wrote: ↑Thu Apr 04, 2019 9:55 am

johnmatrix wrote: ↑Thu Apr 04, 2019 8:42 am

chaglang wrote: ↑Wed Apr 03, 2019 6:36 pm
Can I ask, in all the sincerity that can be offered by an anonymous internet message board, would you give some examples of her voting against what you’re calling pigouts?

Giving 17 million for a garage for one.

You have one example? An example that the majority of the council was puffing up about affordable housing grandstanding? An example that's already a signed agreement with the developer?

Wow. What a Maverick.

We get it dude you're a fan of corporate handouts.

Shields isnt your girl if you are worried about corporate handouts is my point.

johnmatrix wrote: ↑Thu Apr 04, 2019 8:42 am

chaglang wrote: ↑Wed Apr 03, 2019 6:36 pm

johnmatrix wrote: ↑Wed Apr 03, 2019 4:06 pm

No need to tear eachother down over a mayoral race. Give me a hug ya big lug!

Can I ask, in all the sincerity that can be offered by an anonymous internet message board, would you give some examples of her voting against what you’re calling pigouts?

Giving 17 million for a garage for one.

I was happy to see the City Auditor come down in the city’s lack of planning on parking garages generally. But I know of at least one example where Shields forced more parking in to a project, which resulted in greater incentives requests. Those requests were approved. Because that was her revision, to me she’s responsible for that “pigout”. Do you agree? What do you think of her vote on the convention hotel?

I opposed it on the idea of giving a handout. The convention hotel was needed though.

Does anyone think Lucas's ideas regarding affordable housing are realistic or just trying to get votes?

johnmatrix wrote: ↑Thu Apr 04, 2019 11:26 am Does anyone think Lucas's ideas regarding affordable housing are realistic or just trying to get votes?

https://quintonlucas.org/blog/2018/11/2 ... ber-update

1. No longer will $2,000 be considered “affordable housing” in Kansas City. I’ve cut that number by more than half.
2. It’s time city government lend a hand towards progress. Permits from the city will be on a less-than-60 day timeline.
3. Affordable housing near public transportation lines will receive additional incentives – so we can fight emissions and promote inclusive communities development.
4. Establish the Housing Trust Fund. This will bring millions of dollars to see that initiatives are brought forward and completed.

1. This one is the hardest one. $1000 per month is below what it costs to build new.

2. This one is doable as long as the input is good and there's an effort to reduce an existing backlog. A process where an application isn't accepted without items X, Y, Z and then there's a good procedure for approval is what's needed. If it's realistic depends on who is managing the process and if there's an incentive for them to make it work.

3. This one is absolutely doable. The bonus model for certain actions is a good one.

4. The idea is valid, the implementation will matter. This one depends on where the money is coming from.

And don't take my word for it. Items 2 and 4 have already been implemented. So he's not waiting to make some of these changes.

https://www.kcur.org/post/first-big-dea ... d#stream/0

So what's newer?

https://www.kshb.com/news/kcmomayor/cof ... nton-lucas

If elected mayor, his next step would be identifying funding for the affordable housing trust fund. Lucas would use the $8 million in federal funds the city receives annually in connection to housing policy, plus the one-eighth cent sales tax for east side revitalization.

That he's starting with existing funding is a great first step towards it being realistic. So many projects begin with "let's implement a new tax" and then gets hung up waiting several years on this piece. I would like to see more about what he thinks should be done with the money. Like what incentives should look like and how to have a real impact. Should there be a focus part of town and think big in it or try to support the best projects across the city?

I don't like him arbitrarily determining what is to be considered affordable housing - that just seems like pandering. And maybe there's more to it than I'm reading, but to use the sales tax meant for east side revitalization for housing in other parts of the city doesn't sit well with me.

Seems like a percentage of the region’s AMI is a number that makes sense. Maybe that’s the plan already. IIRC 30% of income going toward housing is a recommended max.

Reducing the permit time is great but I’m curious to know how he’s going to do that- fewer regs or more staff or both seem to be the obvious options. The quality and training of permitting staff probably needs to be addressed also. The 60 day clock needs more fleshing out. I can see it not being realistic for large or complex projects. Tangentially - the city needs to acknowledge that CompassKC is a gigantic mess.

At one point I think he had a rule that housing receicving incentives having to have 20% affordable units. That probably needs a small project exemption because it makes sense on a 100 unit development but not so much on a 4-plex or a duplex.

My biggest concern is that I don’t know if Lucas is looking at strategies that work in other cities or if he’s just winging it. I’d love to see him post references to successful strategies from other cities.

Also someone needs to address job sprawl and the spatial miamatch between where we give incentives for housing vs businesses. Otherwise we are just relying on the KCATA to make this lack of policy work for citizens.

kcjak wrote: ↑Thu Apr 04, 2019 1:21 pm I don't like him arbitrarily determining what is to be considered affordable housing - that just seems like pandering. And maybe there's more to it than I'm reading, but to use the sales tax meant for east side revitalization for housing in other parts of the city doesn't sit well with me.

The current standard is likely arbitrarily determined. Oh, and it was already changed and not to his number. I think it's around $1500 now.

I wouldn't read much into using a tax for the east side as being anything more than focusing on housing on the east side over other options that are available. Using it as a local match for federal wouldn't be the worst thing. I like the idea more than sinking it into 18th and Vine or some other pet project.

I swear there used to be a way to block people so that you didn't even have to see people that reply to them for some unknown masochistic BDSM internet fetish.

Can someone point me in the right way?

chaglang wrote: ↑Wed Apr 03, 2019 1:44 pm I know a few people who have been friendly with her for decades and are having a hard time with her performance this council term. The changes in the city in the last 5-10 years seem to have opened quite a generational divide.

I have a lot of respect for her politically, and as a savvy and capable person. But her record as a councilperson has been horrible for the urban core and the concerns and desires of most of her nominal district. Her policy mind seems very, very locked in the 90s, but she seems to have missed the part where the 80s and 90s were an absolute low-water mark for urban KC.

WoodDraw wrote: ↑Thu Apr 04, 2019 3:13 pm I swear there used to be a way to block people so that you didn't even have to see people that reply to them for some unknown masochistic BDSM internet fetish.

Can someone point me in the right way?

"Add Foe" in a person's profile hides their posts.

chaglang wrote: ↑Thu Apr 04, 2019 3:47 pm

WoodDraw wrote: ↑Thu Apr 04, 2019 3:13 pm I swear there used to be a way to block people so that you didn't even have to see people that reply to them for some unknown masochistic BDSM internet fetish.

Can someone point me in the right way?

"Add Foe" in a person's profile hides their posts.

irony would be if wooddraw did that to you already. I generally find blocking people doesn't work. you post something, they respond to you with possibly good points, but not so much when you actually look into the topic, and through your inaction their point can be seen as validated

WoodDraw wrote: ↑Thu Apr 04, 2019 3:13 pm I swear there used to be a way to block people so that you didn't even have to see people that reply to them for some unknown masochistic BDSM internet fetish.

Can someone point me in the right way?

Sup dude?

flyingember wrote: ↑Thu Apr 04, 2019 4:21 pm

chaglang wrote: ↑Thu Apr 04, 2019 3:47 pm

WoodDraw wrote: ↑Thu Apr 04, 2019 3:13 pm I swear there used to be a way to block people so that you didn't even have to see people that reply to them for some unknown masochistic BDSM internet fetish.

Can someone point me in the right way?

"Add Foe" in a person's profile hides their posts.

irony would be if wooddraw did that to you already. I generally find blocking people doesn't work. you post something, they respond to you with possibly good points, but not so much when you actually look into the topic, and through your inaction their point can be seen as validated

Ftr, I had not. I've only blocked Darlene and whoever this douche here is in this thread.

I am open to counter points and embrace them, as long as they are productive and not trolling.

WoodDraw wrote: ↑Thu Apr 04, 2019 11:10 pm

flyingember wrote: ↑Thu Apr 04, 2019 4:21 pm

chaglang wrote: ↑Thu Apr 04, 2019 3:47 pm
"Add Foe" in a person's profile hides their posts.

irony would be if wooddraw did that to you already. I generally find blocking people doesn't work. you post something, they respond to you with possibly good points, but not so much when you actually look into the topic, and through your inaction their point can be seen as validated

Ftr, I had not. I've only blocked Darlene and whoever this douche here is in this thread.

I am open to counter points and embrace them, as long as they are productive and not trolling.

Your fountain of knowledge and holier than thou attitude will be missed.

johnmatrix wrote: ↑Fri Apr 05, 2019 8:48 am Your fountain of knowledge and holier than thou attitude will be missed.

Ummm....he can’t hear you.

WoodDraw wrote: ↑Thu Apr 04, 2019 11:10 pm
Ftr, I had not. I've only blocked Darlene and whoever this douche here is in this thread.

I am open to counter points and embrace them, as long as they are productive and not trolling.

I didn't figure that you did. The Darlene person is fun since I can be sarcastic and just a little bit of a jerk in response knowing they do it on purpose.

beautyfromashes wrote: ↑Fri Apr 05, 2019 9:24 am

johnmatrix wrote: ↑Fri Apr 05, 2019 8:48 am Your fountain of knowledge and holier than thou attitude will be missed.

Ummm....he can’t hear you.

They can when quoted beautiful