KCRag Forum

wut

I don’t think they’re aiming to be everyone’s buddies.

chrizow wrote:

I'm paging chrizow here specifically because they've claimed to be fairly left wing, but I'm also interested in hearing opinions from any other progressives who might be hanging around this board, what do you all make of this issue? Discourse on this subject is way more one-sided on here than I'd expect from a supposedly pro-urban forum, so I'm wondering if anyone else is willing to speak up from a leftward perspective?

kenrbnj wrote: ↑Tue Sep 20, 2022 10:55 am Just noticed this.

Their KC Tenants propaganda is steeped with "BLM" reference. The fist-in-the-air imagery used repetitively.

After the fall of BLM (donations directed to Los Angeles upper-bracket real estate, "defund police" baloney, violence, undisputed links to Marxist doctrine), clearly KC Tenants would be well served to employ a marketing strategy which doesn't alienate the masses.

Their advert is speaking directly to the violent Marxist continent within KC.

Good. KC Tenants is a group of zeros. Let them lose the last thread of public support they enjoy.

I don't think the raised fist is associated with Black Lives Matter. Sure, it became part of that, but I've always seen it as the fist of solidarity, which is what it is. It's been used for years going back even before Black Lives Matter became a real thing.

As for the group speaking directly to the Marxists, that carries some weight to it, but only up to a point. Some of the stuff KCTenants wants are good and agreeable, but their actions about going about getting those things is where their image and cause is ruined. Shutting down proposed projects, protesting the Mayor at events, trashing people on Twitter like the former President, and seemingly not wanting to have a genuine, and vicil, conversation all hurt their cause and therefore its a cause I can't get behind.

I think we all agree that slumlords can be held accountable for their actions, that people deserve a safe place to sleep at night (even if it is affordable/cheap housing), and that maintenance should always be maintained. But, as I said, KCTenants takes it way too far and turns it into a wet dream of "wants" with very little "able to accomplishes".

If KC Tenants had been a force for good, basic economic theory should be consulted.

Demand for below-market rate apartments simply discourages investment. Discourage investment, supply is constrained. When supply is constrained, prices rise.

Furthermore, the basic premise of "Tax Incentives" is not just misunderstood; it is patently *misrepresented* in the KC Tenants manifesto. Tax Incentives are breaks afforded to the developer on the tax GAIN after the improvement of the property. As represented by the manifesto, the developer is taking a tax break on the whole bill.

Ongoing discussion of "Gentrification" is also detailed throughout the KC Tenants propaganda. An interpretive approach is "this group must rally against white people".

Within the text of the KC Tenants, an excerpt:

It is important that we recognize that these problems are neither natural nor accidental, but rather the product of the City’s longstanding prioritization of profits and private property over people. The root cause: racial capitalism. Racial capitalism is a system built on race and class in which wealthy people, who are overwhelmingly white, gain wealth, profit, and power from the exploitation and oppression of the working class and poor people. This theory suggests that race and capitalism are not separate systems, but that race is fundamental to capitalism and vice versa.

TheLastGentleman wrote: ↑Tue Sep 20, 2022 10:02 pm

chrizow wrote:

I'm paging chrizow here specifically because they've claimed to be fairly left wing, but I'm also interested in hearing opinions from any other progressives who might be hanging around this board, what do you all make of this issue? Discourse on this subject is way more one-sided on here than I'd expect from a supposedly pro-urban forum, so I'm wondering if anyone else is willing to speak up from a leftward perspective?

to be honest, i have not paid attention to any specific actions of KCT and have never interacted with them. generally, i share their stated concerns with housing opportunities in the city as well as landlords/slumlords and others in the real estate field whose actions harm vulnerable people. while i think KC's "gentrification" is relatively tame when compared with hotter or larger markets, it is real and impacts poor people more than others. the fastest rising rents in the city are often in the poorer areas--when a $600/mo home becomes $1,000/mo overnight, that can be catastrophic for low-income folks.

all that said, the "KCRagger" in me wants to see KC reach its potential in terms of development and vibrancy, balanced with strategies which keep our neighborhoods organic and diverse as much as they can be. i also recognize that increased market-rate housing can take pressure off prices for existing housing which should help the cause.

overnight is a huge over statement. one could literally predict this was going to happen 7 years ago... natural inflation and a desirable urban center finally investing in itself will do that EVERY time.

I'm pretty sympathetic when it comes to all the points about bad landlords, lazy and unresponsive property managers, lack of legal protections for tenants, substandard conditions, large rent increases one cycle to the next; yes, I know people who are facing 20-30% increases. I worry about the ownership of property consolidating and I want more people to have more equity (ownership) in the community. The KC Tenants folks are basically responding to their general experience of feeling screwed by our completely broken housing policy (at a national level). But in my opinion the housing crisis is a supply problem and I'm also an urbanist. So I want to see more units and denser, less car-centric cities. The net outcome of KC Tenants actions are the same as NIMBYism and frankly I don't think there is a single one of them whom I've met that really understand policy. They are great activists but terrible policy thinkers. I don't cosign them torpedoing the building of new housing units, whatever the price. I think they have a fundamental misreading of how incentives work. But the villainization of them is overblown. I went to a small event of theirs hosted by someone I know and at their best they were just good people who wanted to help others who were struggling to understand their rights.

As a lefty, it sounds like I'm not alone in being sympathetic to their concerns while disagreeing with their specific approach. It's cold comfort for people being priced out of their housing that KC is on the low end of cities being impacted by gentrification, but the details of how and why gentrification is happening have been completely lost or ignored. So I can't fault KCT for being advocates for lower income Kansas Citians, but I will absolutely blame them for poisoning the conversation to the point that nuanced discussion is unwelcome.

Where was KC Tenants when Warner Plaza with its 150+ affordable homes was demolished in 1990?

For that matter, where was KC Tenants when Twin Oaks with its 300+ affordable homes was demolished in 2006 for low-density (poorly constructed) student housing?

These people have not shown any interest in preserving the vast amounts of affordable housing lost over the past fifty years, which is after all what they say they want. Instead they seem primarily interested in blocking new housing. Counterproductive.

City Manager incentive program discussion at City Council pushed into October it appears. I worry it either won’t happen or the qualified incentives will be too little to make it worth it

herrfrank wrote: ↑Wed Sep 28, 2022 2:55 pm Where was KC Tenants when Warner Plaza with its 150+ affordable homes was demolished in 1990?

For that matter, where was KC Tenants when Twin Oaks with its 300+ affordable homes was demolished in 2006 for low-density (poorly constructed) student housing?

These people have not shown any interest in preserving the vast amounts of affordable housing lost over the past fifty years, which is after all what they say they want. Instead they seem primarily interested in blocking new housing. Counterproductive.

KC Tenants was founded in 2019. They were not at these events because they didn’t exist.

^Thank you. The question was largely rhetorical. The politics and the people that are presently known as KC Tenants were certainly around since at least the Johnson Administration.

herrfrank wrote: ↑Thu Sep 29, 2022 4:42 pm ^Thank you. The question was largely rhetorical. The politics and the people that are presently known as KC Tenants were certainly around since at least the Johnson Administration.

Not sure what you mean; could you elaborate?

KC Tenants gaining national attention. Front Page Sunday Business section NYT.
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/10/15/busi ... ivism.html

KC Tenants has targeted Clemmons after its recent acquisition of the historic Residences at West Paseo senior apartments (27th Street). It appears they stirred up the residents with fears of gentrification to get them to unionize. Instead of focusing on what are recent property management concerns, KC Tenants talks about the building possibly becoming luxury housing. With its historic detailing and the quality of the apartments, RWP could easily be converted. Demonstrating their disregard for facts or just not doing the research, KC Tenants doesn't note (or care) that the building was financed with LIHTC from MHDC and carries a recorded land use agreement that requires the property continue to be affordable under the same restrictions that have existed since 2006 and extend until 2036! No conversion is possible for 13 years. KC Tenants may have an honorable mission but their disregard for facts and preying on the fears of vulnerable seniors are not honorable traits.

Never been inside the former Christian Hospital, but that west facade is as fine as any in KC. Sure some of the tenants have luxury views of DT and Crown Center. The new residential mens' drug rehab facility is going up to the south, and there is additional land developable to the north. The homes on West Paseo are post war and it was considered a high quality street for black professionals for decades.

Listed on the National Register. Terrazzo floors in all halls, marble wainscoting in the 2nd floor hallways. 10' ceilings, big windows. Two, 2-bedroom apartments on the north end of the 5th floor are in the former surgical rooms and have enormous skylights (visible from West Paseo) from the wall into the ceiling. Two rooftop patios with some of the best views in the city. Great, affordable, senior housing. And it's going to stay that way for 13 more years. It's a tragedy if Clemmons isn't maintaining it.

19 people with KC Tenants spoke in opposition to Main and Armour. If there is any hope of a project going forward in this city without being murdered by KCT then people have to actually make it to these meetings and speak in SUPPORT of these projects. It doesn’t help that these meetings are midday.

Anthony_Hugo98 wrote: ↑Wed Feb 22, 2023 5:27 pm 19 people with KC Tenants spoke in opposition to Main and Armour. If there is any hope of a project going forward in this city without being murdered by KCT then people have to actually make it to these meetings and speak in SUPPORT of these projects. It doesn’t help that these meetings are midday.

Exactly my thoughts as well. We might as well just a make pro-development group at this point that can stick up for & explain the benefits of these projects.