A controversial project that awards taxpayer subsidy to a MILLIONAIRE and one of this town's most prominent power players. Take a look:
"The Kansas City Council voted 9-1 Thursday to give final approval to a tax increment financing plan to support redevelopment of a vacant building in the Crossroads Arts District slated to become architecture firm BNIM’s new headquarters."
What this story doesn't report is a great deal of community and school district opposition to the plan along with an online petition that earned more than 700 voter signatures to oppose the deal.
Councilman Scott Wagner was the lone no vote and Councilman Lee Barnes, Jr. abstained.
You decide . . .
Just keep in mind that what goes on at 12th and Oak has nothing to do with education, public safety, decent streets and sidewalks, well-run water and sewer systems, the maintenance of much of anything, spending and investing taxpayer money wisely, or what the actual residents or businesses in KCMO want or need.
ReplyDeleteThe priorities are what the insiders, contractors, campaign contributors, developers and their attorneys, urban futurists and planners, Chamber swells, and endless other grifters who view the general fund as a bottomless trough of money to be distributed to themselves and their cronies.
That environment supports the local D-list celebrity political class to play endless musical chairs and go from elected, to appointed, to employee jobs in government or nonprofits, keeps unaccountable nonprofits like Aim4Peace funded, and creates new opportunities for elected losers to hope they can get hired by private corporations once term limits finally get rid of them.
What are you going to run for next?
Crony Capitalism
ReplyDeleteWagner's no vote was probably his announcement that he's running for mayor next time around.
ReplyDeleteYeah those online petitions stop everything just like you promised, lol. Go progress.
ReplyDeleteWhy is a successful architectural firm needing tax support to build a new headquarters? Or, maybe, are they not doing all that well financially and just don't want their clients to know. The subtle threat to leave KCMO is troubling in that they claim to be a big supporter of urban development. Why not finance this move like everybody else, through traditional mechanisms.
ReplyDelete