Video follow-up on an important story from yesterday . . .
Wall Street Journal Video: Prospects Dim for Kansas City Complex
Youtube description: "The tab is mounting for Kansas City, Mo., on a bet it made during the real-estate boom on an $850 million downtown entertainment district."
Again, let's not forget that building The Silly Downton Toy Train represents the same kind of thinking that gave way to this budget hold disaster.
This was apparent from the beginning to those that were not making money off the project or benefiting from it politically. Duh.
ReplyDeleteWhich local eco-dev attorneys, architects, engineering firms, construction companies, etc. made money on this deal? More insiders and usual suspects?
ReplyDeleteIt's obvious that Kansas Citians don't want very much. I happen to a native of one of the most progressive cities in the country. Evidently, it's the mindsets of the people that make the difference.
ReplyDelete8:32- While I agree that mindset is important, Kansas City is a town run by a consortium of insiders- Development attorneys, architectural and engineering firms, general contractors, organized labor.
ReplyDeleteThese projects are packaged and sold to the public by insiders that stand to make a lot of money. And they'll say whatever is necessary to get the public to accept the deal.
The difference is what is delivered in the fine print of the written agreements. The elected officials are wholly unprepared to critically examine these deals, and rely on the advice of the extended network of insiders to drive their decision-making. The politicos are so eager for a trophy, and they are so pressured to sign off now, they accept shitty deals. So it's less about mindset than it is about the greed of those who run these jobs.
And yeah, there are some legitimate reasons why P&L isn't meeting projections. But the City should never have back stopped this deal.
But that's what happens when you let the fox into the hen house. And I assure you, it will appen again.
Of course, I wonder what the WSJ would have to say if they examined The Citadel project, the Jazz District, or any one of a number of smaller projects where the public gets raped for the benefit of a few well positioned, amoral grifters.
If the city had not backed these bonds they probably could never have been sold. Even securities brokers could see how the P&L District was doomed to fail.
ReplyDeleteBingo, 8:25.....
ReplyDeleteThe city is backstopping $10 - $12 million a year on a bond debt that they should have taken out to clean up the urban core anyway. God knows how many business locate in or stay in the metro because our urban core now has a true cool factor. Without this revitalization, the city would have continued to rot out from the core. Besides, the city has a budget of over $1 billion – that is one thousand million, if you can’t comprehend a billion, so, they are on the hook for a 1.2% budget fee to have a downtown that is at least presentable. Just had a friend in from Texas who was truly impressed enough to send his kid to a local college. Never would have happened if downtown was rotting still.
ReplyDeleteThe point is, these private enterprises are sucking from the public trough. They should make it or break it on their own merit with their own money, not with MY tax dollars that were intended for the public projects. If I wanted my money to back the P&L, downtown hotel, toy train, etc. I would invest in those enterprises. But our city leaders took that choice away from us. Vote the bums out.
ReplyDelete1:36 is dead on- since 1968 the City had hoped for something to happen downtown south of 12th street. Nothing happened until H & R Bloch ageed to move- but only if the area was cleaned up. Cleaned up it is- safe to walk for dinner or a concert. 11 blocks of downtown were revitalized - a pretty good investment after 35 years of no investment. What we have is far better than the transvestite bar, strip club, haunted houses and decreit parking lots that were the mainstays before the redevelopment. Did you dare take a walk downtown in 1970? 1980? 1990? or 2000? You can now- safely.
ReplyDeleteWorst of all. The place is totally lame. That's a big complaint. Maybe they could earn more revenue if there were better entertainment options.
ReplyDeleteThe reason that area deteriorated in the first place is because the City let it be known that they were going to redevelop it. Then they sat on their hands for 25 years before doing anything. What property owner would invest in an area slated to be torn down? It might have developed like the crossroads if not for the threat of eminent domain.
ReplyDeleteAnon 2:47, Ex-fucking-actly! Declared blight zones slated for future redevelopment have been self fulfilling prophecies all over the country. End the god damned central planning!
ReplyDelete