TIF and Planning Commission Meetings This Week--Please Read

That's cool. I was wondering when that would happen.

(reminds me of the fan-designed RSL windmill stadium)

 

So is all of this out of Funkhousers hands now? He's moved it forward and out of his step of the approval process?

His slap in the face to voters who approved the Light Rail initiative by essentially killing it to make his own, makes me think several of his other initiatives will come under fire pretty soon here. There's talk that he way overstepped his authority on that one and may be facing litigation. He's claiming it's buried in a constitution/charter type byline. Hence the age old quandry do these guys lead the voters or do they enact/represent what the voters want.

 

As I recall, the Light Rail Initiative (LRI) had no price tag associated with it, which to someone from JoCo is absolutely incredible. There is NO WAY that an initiative could conceivably come to the table in JoCo without a pricetag on the ballot. It would seem to me that alone would make the entire thing constitutionally questionable to start with, although Missouri law may allow for voter mandates with an unlimited budget, scope or plan. If I'm wrong and there was some dollar figure on the ballot, then you are absolutely right, the city should respect the voters wishes and start building a rail system until the approved funds are exhausted. Maybe the resulting useless hulk could be passed off as some kind of modern art.

 

It would be great if they could get this light rail project done. Maybe by the time the stadium is built, they might think to extend it even further south to the Three Trails area. At the rate this thing is moving (how many times was it on the ballot before being approved?), the Three Trails area might be at least halfway done.

 

I stand corrected. The voters have spoken; they want the system, they have stated clearly they will accept the tax hike required to pay for it. So do it already, sheesh. What is this crap about a shortfall we keep hearing, and the handwringing about breaking the city budget? The required funding has been approved, unless they're saying the cost figures are bogus.

 

There is no tax increase.

1/2 comes from eliminating the bus subsidy, meaning no more public buses and the other 1/2 comes from the federal government which will not fund without new net dollars.

And the estimate of under a billion is way way low.

And remember the gondola's.

 

So we can fill them up with tomatoes and throw them at people in the streets.

 

What? Are we a talent agency now?

 

How soon until we know when this shows up on the city council schedule?

 

http://cityclerk.kcmo.org/liveweb/D...3NfpQlHbErvFvvc2PA93RdpPvb9QL0uFdPEz56+AjZ3PV

The public docket is now up.

http://cityclerk.kcmo.org/liveweb/D...akl/C63TghfgDxeTcAV579Zs5hbXRyus2Kb4vc2UT2A==

Per the Advertisement The City Planning Council will hold its public hearing for approval November 28th @ 1:30 PM. We are the last item on the agenda. This is for Zoning.

I bring this up because...


http://cityclerk.kcmo.org/liveweb/D...iPKlqaBJojnae1Q7LmXhUGZb9Q50MZGZQqkinszT1jFG1

...The TIF district map is now up...

http://cityclerk.kcmo.org/liveweb/D...2yFGfNnI4rntuG5WzwMpzDALnfSyjmC/o3o1x8rNPjqSq

...and the staff report is up with fascinating little insights on the plan. Such as...

- Hillcrest Road is a Right of Way street.
- Modern Roundabout on 87th street. Spot for fountain?
- Existing New Fire Station on 93rd & Hillcrest to remain.
- The Super 8 & Days Inn will be redeveloped with new hotels.
-

-

- Note the comments on Temp seats and expandable to 27,000.
-

Of course this is some city officials note. So FWIT.

The Finance and Audit committee, where TIF's go, sits on November 19th but we are not on the docket. The next date and agenda is not yet set.

 

Commentary piece on the TIF plan for Bannister/Three Trails.
Person is not against it but feels that it doesn't quite meet the guidelines for TIF in a few areas. Pretty well written I think.

Bannister Mall TIF plan can be much better

 

And the first negative article is out.

http://www.kansascity.com/274/story/361424.html

You might say it's not really negative, but a substantial reduction in TIF dollars will probably make this plan die just as quickly as if they said they just didn't want it. It just won't be feasible.

He does make a few good points though, and I'm sure they will be considered by the Council.

Yael also opposed the Overland Park project quite loudly. I've conversed with him in the past and got the impression soccer isn't real high on the list of things he'll ever likely support, especially if it means subsidies are involved.

 

Well written to an extent, as I had discussed in an horrifically long comment I posted to the site, I feel that the author misrepresented parts of the report and even the the extent of being dishonest, in my opinion. Truly, it wasn't until I read the report while making my response that I really realized what had been left out.

 

I think this is a very poorly written piece.
Also shows why journalism is on the wane these days.

First TIF is not technically public funding. It is money that does not exist and will never exist unless these plans go through. Not a dime of this money will come from the public. To not make this clear and repeatedly use the 'public funding' term shows the bias the reporter is now laboring under.

The city council as such can only reduce the TIF money. Keep in mind that Super TIF requires that a certain amount come from the local body. So reducing city council funding puts that at risk.

As far as the economically distressed formula, this is complete BS.
- First it is based on the 2000 census. So long ago that Bannister mall was actually thriving back then.
- Also the West side and North side ARE considered economically distressed. And this area has spread in the past decade, which the reporter completely ignores.
- It does not show up on the map because this area is not residential. How hard is it to get this??
- They appear not to meet the guidelines because the city could not be bothered to update their own data records. This is exactly how neglected areas get neglected.

And his definition of 'Improvement' to the plan is to cut the TIF money (Sorry, Public Assistance). Reducing the level of investment is NOT improving the plan.

Again this is not tax payer assistance and to call it that is a complete lie.

All he has done is take the task forces own observations, put them in a negative light and said OK lets cut the investment level.

The task force recommendations are a means to an end. To develop distressed areas of the city and not spend TIF on the Plaza for instance. To now turn it into a 'Bible' for development is very poor thinking. I doubt any plan that comes up will fulfill every criteria, does that mean every plan should suffer cuts?

Very asinine bureaucratic thinking. This is what got us Katrina and FEMA.

 

Can you please send this to the city council and post it on the Star website as well? We need to get Wizards fans directly answering these challenges in public when they come up.

I've felt all along that it was going to be Funkhouser that would be the hardest to convince, and Dave Helling posts this on the Star's new blog.

http://primebuzz.kcstar.com/?q=node/8228

 

Done.

Anyone know if The Funk has a Veto or just a tie breaker.

 

Are we sure it's bias and not just ignorance/laziness?
I mean, I didn't go read the whole plan - mostly because I am at work.
If he didn't really read it, then I can see the bad conclusions drawn.

either way, I take back that it was well written, but only because I didn't take the time to read the plan myself.

 

First there will be many many meetings before this thing is through.

There are two seperate processes going on, One is the planning to work out how the site gets developed, Second is the TIF process to work out the financing.

Zoning approval is required. In fact zoning now has 12 pages of requirements/changes for the developers.

The TIF is under the Finance Council which has not been set yet.

 

I have to say that the points I put down have to be bias, mostly because he would have to skip sentences inbetween what he had obviously read to get the conclusions he came up with. Additionally, he has a responsibility to read the report if he's going to write an article about it...

I don't know if you really have to take back the well written part - it _was_ well written, and for the most part we do not have issue with the writing itself but more the content and misrepresentation, whether through intentions or incompetence. You were correct in saying it was written well, but this itself is a testiment to just how dangerous the problems within the article are - the public is going to trust a well written article more than a poorly written one.

 

OK, now I'm confused...I thought the TIF part had been approved last week. Are you now saying that the financing has not been approved yet? If not, what was the approval that moved this to the council's office?

 

I think he's talking about the Finance and Audit committee. It is made up of the KC City Council. I believe they will look at the proposal and TIF Commission's recommendations prior to it coming to the full council. If the TIF Commission hadn't given its approval, it would never even get to the City Council.

Finance and Audit Committee - (target these people in your emails)

Hermann, Deb Chair Marcason, Jan Vice Chair Sanders Brooks, Sharon Member Gottstein, Beth Member Johnson, Russ Member

 

more interesting stadium details are available on grathoff's blog.