Comments on: Wichita makes case for tax credits

By: Mike

Mike — Mon, 18 Jan 2010 20:57:40 +0000

Hi, while there is not proof of corruption in the whole downtown deal, it smells bad anyway. Why does the whole city council care only about downtown? We must have a downtown waterwalk, we must have a casino downtown, we must have an arena downtown, what’s next a Wichita Space needle? It would at least lessen the finger pointing if the city council actually tried to put something nice (like a library, park or baseball diamonds) somewhere in Wichita other than Downtown.

Mike

By: Larry Weber

Larry Weber — Mon, 18 Jan 2010 18:41:20 +0000

I think that John Sommers article is really dealing with the issue of a property owners rights as it deals with Historic Preservationist and not so much as the use of Tax Credits. This seems to be the gist of the quote that was used in the article here but if you read the entire text Sommers gives examples of where progress is stopped due to preservation of historic buildings (Dallas Texas ‘“Terry Maxon, “Landmark Panel Stymies Skyscraper,” Dallas Times Herald, April 14,1982.). As to the statement made by Richard that the City accepted a lower bid because of campaign contributions. I would remind you that price paid is not always the final determination in accepting a proposal. Ability to perform, jobs, neighborhood concerns, and historic preservation are all additional issues that come into play. So don’t be so quick to slander others efforts.

By: Pat

Pat — Sat, 09 Jan 2010 17:35:40 +0000

Richard, I understand what you’re saying and he’s saying but to make baseless charges of corruption is slanderous. Point is corruption is serious and felonious and when someone starts making accusations then they’d better have evidence. I would agree that there needs to be transparency in government affairs and that it always hasn’t been the case in a number of instances. Too often, misinformed citizenry cry foul but don’t take the time or are too d*mn lazy to become objectively knowledgeable of the facts. In this town, it’s becoming epidemic of the later case.

That said, not everyone who submits a proposal is capable of delivering. If someone who had no experience as an auto mechanic offered to tune-up your car for $60 versus a full service auto repair’s estimate of $450, would you choose the $60 option? Of course not.

All proposals have to be based and evaluated upon a group of criteria and parameters. Unfortunately, too often it’s difficult to get an apple to apple comparison of proposals because either the criteria hasn’t been established up front, or the proposals are often based upon proprietary and competitive knowledge.

The process of awarding tax credits is done at the State of Kansas level and the state has a fairly objective process. It can be researched under the Kansas Department of Commerce’s website.

By: Richard

Richard — Fri, 08 Jan 2010 23:24:07 +0000

Pat, while Bill is a little strong in his comments, it doesn’t mean that he is not correct. The old library building (next to Fidelity Savings Bank) was sold to the Bastian for a lower amount than a competing proposal for development that offered more money to the City (the City also supported the tax credits). If you check the contribution campaign report of Mayor Brewer, you will find several contributions from the Bastian family members. Coincidence????????

By: Pat

Pat — Fri, 08 Jan 2010 20:22:41 +0000

Geez Bill, you’re not anywhere in the ballpark with your comments about how tax credits are awarded. Furthermore, it’s ridiculous to suggest that there is corruption involved in the awarding of the tax credits; especially when you understand how they are awarded. (BTW, elected officials have very little to say about the awarding of tax credits.) Suggest that you and/or anyone else who continually (and I do mean continually) make assertions that our elected officials are corrupt, then bring the evidence or just shut up about it. That said, yes, transparency and knowledge of the process is important. Yes, we as citizens should be concerned about the use of tax credits.

By: Bill_McKean

Bill_McKean — Fri, 08 Jan 2010 18:45:46 +0000

HEY BOB – I agree with your basic point that the federal & state government should try to influence its citizens behavior by issuing tax credits (even if it is for a noble cause such as encouraging energy efficiency in homes or trying to reduce the number of gas guzzling clunkers on the road or subsidizing 1st time homebuyers) . However you miss the bigger point that tax credits (like TIFs) invariably lead to corruption & influence peddling by good old boy attorneys or lobbyists that are former office holders. Because the amount of low income housing & historic preservation tax credits is limited by the state legislature or US Congress, they must be awarded by commissions made up of good old boy appointees. When writing future analysis, please consider how government accountability & transparency is affected. The bipartisan corruption in Wichita is out of control because good old boys from across the political & racial spectrum have their snouts in the government trough. Ideally both small government conservatives & big government liberals should be able to agree that accountability & transparency are essential unless of course they want to be part of the good old boy network. Why don’t you write a follow up column describing how credits are awarded? Bill McKean 316 293-6079