The Time Is Right For Funkhouser
| After losing in the primary for City Council my initial reaction was to stay out of the general elections. I felt like my judgment was clouded by disappointment and didn't want to say or do anything rash. Enough time has passed however, for me to see clearly with regard to the mayor's race. There is only one candidate I am comfortable with running my city for the next four years. That candidate is Mark Funkhouser. I am not a fanatic. Frankly there are some things Mr. Funkhouser has said and written during this campaign that have given me pause. There are those who support him with whom I am diametrically opposed. But as with any political candidate, you weigh the good with the bad and in the end my list of "good" far outweighs the "bad" as far as Mark is concerned. In business, a faltering corporation will bring in what's known as a "turnaround" specialist to right the ship. The strong and successful businesses do so before the company becomes irretrievably damaged. I believe Kansas City is in that position. We are not irretrievably damaged, but the potential is looming on the horizon. Our veneer looks promising enough; a new arena, a downtown entertainment district and even a new convention hotel. The danger is the mounting debt and financial risk we are assuming for that beautiful exterior. The gaining momentum of runaway economic development incentives will ultimately eviscerate Kansas City's tax base leaving the burden on small business and private citizens in the form of skyrocketing property taxes. Mark Funkhouser can right the ship. He has shown the willingness time and time again to call into question our economic development policies. He has not only questioned them, but provided clear policy recommendations that have been summarily ignored by our current mayor and council. No candidate for mayor in the history of this city has more intimate knowledge of not only our economic concerns, but city departments in general. That's the kind of knowledge we need on the 29th floor. That's the kind of expertise we must have to pull us back from the brink of financial ruin. As Editor of The Kansas City Post, as former candidate for the 4th in-district City Council, and as private citizen, I urge you to vote for Mark Funkhouser on March 27th. |
Comments on "The Time Is Right For Funkhouser"
-
brent said ... (9:21 AM) :
-
Michelled said ... (10:23 AM) :
-
IDan said ... (9:28 PM) :
-
IDan said ... (6:52 PM) :
post a commentI'm feeling Funky.
I agree Mark, about Mark. I'm not his biggest fan, but for countless reasons the idea of Alvin Brooks being our mayor for the next four years makes me ill.
I think the sky is falling, there will be no development in KC under Funk people are chick-littles. There will be development, but it'll be development that makes sense for the city and the taxpayers.
Isn't that what we all should want?
My neighbors taxes went up by $1000 in one year! While home prices in my area dropped 24% and millions in TIFF are being given away to developers...I want a revitalized city probably more than the next person. We chucked our worry free JOCO suburban life to be a part of it, (LOL). I'm willing to suffer thru a few growing pains but we can't build this city on the backs of the lower and middle class.
I hope everyone realizes that TIF (and Tax Abatement) does NOT reduce the tax base. Properties that receive TIF still pay the "base" tax amount that was assessed on the property prior to receiving TIF. It is the "tax increment" (that amount of assessed tax above the original assessment) that is used to finance the project. In reality the tax base is not going down.
The real issue is whether The City is being judicious about the "but for" test in issuing TIF, which says "But for this TIF incentive, would this project occur?" The answer should be "YES" before TIF is approved. I think a lot of people are concerned that "no" the city is NOT being very judicious about applying this test to proposals. The City may very well be giving away new property and economic activity taxes that it should be putting in our tax coffers.
As I understand it, one of The Funk's worries is that The City is financing TIF by issuing bonds to fund projects, then using the "tax increment" to pay off the bonds. Well guess what, if the projects don't generate the projected tax increment to pay off the bonds you and I will be footing the bill. Therein lies the long-term risk.
In my opinion, the pioneer developers in Downtown deserved the help. They were taking the risk. What if the thing didn't take off? But the new developements are riding the coat tails of the pioneers but still getting the same great deal, minus the huge risk. Doesn't seem fair.
Why can't there be a reduced incentive? Maybe a shorter TIF period or lower % of a project financed now that there is momentum in the area.
Michelle, I think the main reason your neighbor's property tax went up $1,000 was because Jackson County changed the way property values were assessed. Many of the homes in the 4th district had a dramatic increase in "assessed value" two years ago.
Mark, I like your recommendation. Funk worries me a bit but it might be the right time for him.
Mark,
I met Mr. Funkhouser today in a small group and he really impressed me. He seemed to have a very good handle on that state of the city and what it is going to take to make the KC Live a success. He didn't promise a success but spelled out what needed to be done.
I like your recommendation even more now.